Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
DuckyShot

Comparing builds from old to new and examining WG logic.

33 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

7,898
[GGWP]
Members
7,308 posts
17,198 battles

I'm sitting on call today and bored right now, so I want to look at what WG exactly said about this rework, price increases, etc and compare builds in the old skill tree to builds in the new skill tree.

I'm going to start with my European gunboat build. This is a build I used between Smaland, Friesland, Orkan, Blysk:

Spoiler

 

with the old tree here is how I had it set up:

PT

LS

SE, SI, BFT, DE

CE

If I want to set up that exact build in the new skills, here is what I have to do:

PM (already a departure from my build cause not great T1 skills)

LS, PT, Pyro

Main battery and AA, SI, SE

CE

I can do pretty much the same build for 20 points. I'd probably throw the last point into Liquidator. But the build is not the same. Pyro and BFT (Main battery and AA) have been nerfed by 50%. I only get 1% more fire and 5% extra reload instead of 2% more fire and 10% extra reload. I mean, I could drop the Liquidator and Main battery skill and run Fearless Brawler which gives me the same reload as BFT while being more expensive, lowering my concealment and having it wrapped up in a condition of me having to be spotted to be active. So in the new skill tree the same build is not possible, it is nearly possible, but slightly worse.

 

Lets look at a standard survival build with a BB:

Spoiler

in the old tree I would run

PT

EM, AR

SI, BOS

FP, CE

In the new tree, the closest build to that now looks like this:

ERS (another level 1 skill that I take because there are no comparable skills in level 1)

GTG, PT

BOS

ERE, CE, FPE

So we can almost get to the same build with 20 points with the exception of AR. We are left with one point and that would go into either GF or PM. So this build is not possible in the new tree.

And you know what, I am totally fine with not being able to get exactly the same builds. The rework is what it is, everyone is dealing with the same garbage. But the major problem I have is how WG portrayed moving to 21 points and why. So lets look back at the dev blogs and see exactly what they said about it.

Quote

Dev blog: September 1st:

Have you always wanted to pick just a few more skills? Now, as skills are becoming more specialized and their total number increasing, the maximum number of commander skill points is also being increased from 19 to 21.

Quote

Dev blog: November 30th: 

  • As skills have become more specialized, and their total number has increased, the maximum number of skill points was increased from 19 to 21

So WG recognised that to run similar builds when they split and rearranged the skill tree, it would require more points, which they gave us. And upon implementation, things are definitely close, and on the couple examples are just lacking in the 21 point tree. There may actually be some builds that are still possible in the 21 point tree, I haven't done extensive research. 

So here's my problem. If they recognise that they are just splitting up skills and such to make specialisation more of a thing and realised that to make things similar, they would have to add more points to the system, why are they hosing us with the XP increase from 19-21 points? I don't think there would be nearly the uproar over this if the increased the price on the final 2 skills a bit and reordered everything. Maybe change the XP required for a fully trained captain from 2.9M XP to 3.3M or 3.5M XP and just make the XP between each point scale like before. But no, WG decided to hose the player base while offering nothing more in the rework. We aren't getting 21 points, we are getting 21 points in a new system where 21 points doesn't give you the same builds as a 19 point captain did in the 19 point system, but for some reason its more expensive.

And this doesn't affect me too much. I have enough ECXP to train my favorite captains, this affects the more casual players and the new players to the game, and its pathetic of WG to screw them over.

Edited by DuckyShot
  • Cool 17
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
827
[-Y-]
Members
843 posts
61 battles

well this is yet another explanation to add to the pile of why the Skill Rework is failure and significant step backward from the player point of view. Improvements in the UI do not make up for increased costs for less efficient gameplay results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,026
[KWF]
Members
5,584 posts
6,878 battles

It's just moving the grind goalposts farther.

At the same time having long time players to use their huge ECXP stashes, which WG's torrent of economic signals and camos has facilitated...

Then they are opening another method of monetization by having people sell their excess Commanders with doubloons to get 100% of the points back.

Meanwhile if not wrong, it was calculated that based on the old system, a 19 point commander would need 700k ECXP  to get to 21 instead of the 1.2mil. 

Bottom line, it doesn't even matter now. I'm pretty sure most of the broken skills will be turned into trash, and we will be back to the same cookie cutter builds; only now it will be harder to get them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
322
[GGWP]
Members
205 posts

Completely agree. Coming into the rework, I also had thought about these issues. They gave us more points, but made many skills cost more points, effectively making it so that we would need 21 points to recreate pre rework builds. A glaring example of this is BB builds, in which they made PT, SI, and AR cost one more point, while making joat cost 1 point less, which effectively meant we had to grind 1.2 million commander xp to get the exact same pre rework build! Thats complete [edited]!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
381
[XXX]
Members
658 posts
1,620 battles
8 minutes ago, rhulkb27 said:

Completely agree. Coming into the rework, I also had thought about these issues. They gave us more points, but made many skills cost more points, effectively making it so that we would need 21 points to recreate pre rework builds. A glaring example of this is BB builds, in which they made PT, SI, and AR cost one more point, while making joat cost 1 point less, which effectively meant we had to grind 1.2 million commander xp to get the exact same pre rework build! Thats complete [edited]!

Not to mention you literally can't get the same build anymore. Super Intendents replacement is now a 4 point skill, instead of a 3 point, Priority Target is now a 2 point skill with most of the 1 point skills being meh to situational. Whereas before on a Survivability build you'd be able to have Fire prevention, Concealment Expert, Super intendent all for 14 points...meanwhile the same build now costs 18 POINTS AND it isn't as effective because it only buffs repair party and damage control, meaning ships who have other consumeables like Speed Boost, Main Battery Reload, Hydro etc. have all lost out because in order to get the additional one of THAT you have to get a 2 point skill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
607
[PEED2]
Beta Testers
2,102 posts
28,405 battles
45 minutes ago, DuckyShot said:

I'm sitting on call today and bored right now, so I want to look at what WG exactly said about this rework, price increases, etc and compare builds in the old skill tree to builds in the new skill tree.

I'm going to start with my European gunboat build. This is a build I used between Smaland, Friesland, Orkan, Blysk:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

with the old tree here is how I had it set up:

PT

LS

SE, SI, BFT, DE

CE

If I want to set up that exact build in the new skills, here is what I have to do:

PM (already a departure from my build cause not great T1 skills)

LS, PT, Pyro

Main battery and AA, SI, SE

CE

I can do pretty much the same build for 20 points. I'd probably throw the last point into Liquidator. But the build is not the same. Pyro and BFT (Main battery and AA) have been nerfed by 50%. I only get 1% more fire and 5% extra reload instead of 2% more fire and 10% extra reload. I mean, I could drop the Liquidator and Main battery skill and run Fearless Brawler which gives me the same reload as BFT while being more expensive, lowering my concealment and having it wrapped up in a condition of me having to be spotted to be active. So in the new skill tree the same build is not possible, it is nearly possible, but slightly worse.

 

Lets look at a standard survival build with a BB:

  Reveal hidden contents

in the old tree I would run

PT

EM, AR

SI, BOS

FP, CE

In the new tree, the closest build to that now looks like this:

ERS (another level 1 skill that I take because there are no comparable skills in level 1)

GTG, PT

BOS

ERE, CE, FPE

So we can almost get to the same build with 20 points with the exception of AR. We are left with one point and that would go into either GF or PM. So this build is not possible in the new tree.

And you know what, I am totally fine with not being able to get exactly the same builds. The rework is what it is, everyone is dealing with the same garbage. But the major problem I have is how WG portrayed moving to 21 points and why. So lets look back at the dev blogs and see exactly what they said about it.

So WG recognised that to run similar builds when they split and rearranged the skill tree, it would require more points, which they gave us. And upon implementation, things are definitely close, and on the couple examples are just lacking in the 21 point tree. There may actually be some builds that are still possible in the 21 point tree, I haven't done extensive research. 

So here's my problem. If they recognise that they are just splitting up skills and such to make specialisation more of a thing and realised that to make things similar, they would have to add more points to the system, why are they hosing us with the XP increase from 19-21 points? I don't think there would be nearly the uproar over this if the increased the price on the final 2 skills a bit and reordered everything. Maybe change the XP required for a fully trained captain from 2.9M XP to 3.3M or 3.5M XP and just make the XP between each point scale like before. But no, WG decided to hose the player base while offering nothing more in the rework. We aren't getting 21 points, we are getting 21 points in a new system where 21 points doesn't give you the same builds as a 19 point captain did in the 19 point system, but for some reason its more expensive.

And this doesn't affect me too much. I have enough ECXP to train my favorite captains, this affects the more casual players and the new players to the game, and its pathetic of WG to screw them over.

Ducky, I believe you are correct.  Many of my old builds will cost one point more as you point out (and some 2).  I believe the exorbitant cost of going from 19 to 21 is purely for trying to soak up all the elite captain's experience (ecxp) that players have.....there is no other logical reason given how the points progress as you go from 15 to 17 to 19.  And the reason for this is that we could use the ecxp for retraining captains as we get new lines or ships.  Now the alternate value of the excp is so high given the cost of going from 19 to 20 to 21 that using it for retraining will be really "expensive".......so that means dubloons will be use rather the ecxp. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
515
[A-D-F]
Members
1,290 posts
12,103 battles

No more AFT for Krispy Kreme. 

Even russian donut boat cannot have 'fun and engaging' game play.

Doubtless there will be other loopholes through which one may find some hilarity, but I do not know if I have the enthusiasm to go looking for them any more.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
140
[DOG]
Members
722 posts
13,045 battles
1 hour ago, DuckyShot said:

But no, WG decided to hose the player base while offering nothing more in the rework. We aren't getting 21 points, we are getting 21 points in a new system where 21 points doesn't give you the same builds as a 19 point captain did in the 19 point system, but for some reason its more expensive.

This was my big concern prior to the rework and is my yard stick for whether or not the rework would be a success.  It's very disappointing, and like many times in the past - the claimed reasons for making a change (i.e., some deficiency to be corrected or some new desired goals/capabilities) don't seem to be realized in the subsequent implementation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
140
[DOG]
Members
722 posts
13,045 battles
16 minutes ago, Curly__san said:

No more AFT for Krispy Kreme. 

Interesting that the Atlanta got a main gun range buff (to account for the loss of AFT) but the Flint didn't.  I'm sure that there are other ships that are adversely affecting by not being able to use AFT any more that didn't get a range boost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,020
[PVE]
Members
4,988 posts
22,007 battles

Guys !  This isn't an "innovative idea" they used.......  It's an old industry standard for mature games.  I've talked about this several times.......  It's an economy restructuring to squeeze out the last revenue from a stagnant or no growth game population.  The growth curve flattened six to 10  months before Update 8.0.   They realized that "profit" wasn't going to grow and...........here we are.

The games that have done this before mostly imploded or outright failed.   This game has several other titles to rely on..........!   Our host is beyond caring; beyond even considering new content; beyond expanding gameplay.......  Doubt this?  Look at what really went on at the Vendor Supported eSports event.  You would think that something like that would have been a huge thing !!............it wasn't and it really didn't work as planned I suspect.   WHY?  Because the game population has been "thinning" out since the Cruiser Line Split and Update 8.0; and, the ratios between veteran players and new players is widening......  Stomps are the norm now.  A lot of veteran players have switched to PVE..........and that, is what is seriously challenging our host's future for this title..... 

Quality, First World content of new and larger maps; new modes of historic play and involvement (the North Atlantic Campaign ideas); the return and expansion of new PVE Scenarios at multiple tiers; and, new content that focuses on WW1 and the Washington Treaty era simple COSTs TOO MUCH now......  And, if I remember correctly, the R&D team our host had was released recently......  I could be mistaken and please correct me if I miss spoke....  But, if they did, isn't that like the scene from the Monte Python Movie where someone is collecting the dead from the Black Plague............"bring out your dead, bring out your dead...."

This was an economy change and had nothing to do with quality in any form:........it's just a simply a way to make more profit, by providing more options of less value, that increases grind requirements.......   It will out right compromise new player retention.  

This is just my opinion and a guess.  I will still play this game P/T and see what history reports of these past few years........

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
158
[WOLF9]
Members
183 posts
2,292 battles
What did Tom Sawyer (WEEGEE) get for whitewashing the fence?
On Saturday morning, Aunt Polly sends Tom out to whitewash the fence. ... Tom(WEEGEE) convinces Ben that whitewashing a fence is great pleasure, and after some bargaining, Ben agrees to give Tom his apple in exchange for the privilege of working on the fence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
140
[DOG]
Members
722 posts
13,045 battles
20 minutes ago, Merc85 said:

Now the alternate value of the excp is so high given the cost of going from 19 to 20 to 21 that using it for retraining will be really "expensive".......so that means dubloons will be use rather the ecxp. 

Well I suspect that's what WG is hoping for (more dubloon sales) but maybe with the exception of whales (who will spend actual $ regardless) I can't imaging myself spending actual money (on dubloons) to be able to boost captains (or to extract the captain XP on lower valued captains during their dismissal).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,020
[PVE]
Members
4,988 posts
22,007 battles

Now, if we use movie analogies, I would have like "wax on, wax off" a lot better because that helped create muscle memory to better the individual...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
515
[A-D-F]
Members
1,290 posts
12,103 battles
1 minute ago, dashtardly said:

Interesting that the Atlanta got a main gun range buff (to account for the loss of AFT) but the Flint didn't.  I'm sure that there are other ships that are adversely affecting by not being able to use AFT any more that didn't get a range boost.

Atlanta is less of a threat at range than Flint, due to Flint having longer range torps and her own smoke.

An Atlanta that lives past her opening salvo is going to be behind an island, or possibly in someone else's smoke. 

Also my favorite tin foil hat theory is that WG just wants to devalue older premiums like Flint, which rather quickly went from steel to coal to nerfed.

It makes the newer premiums seem more attractive. 

The cycle from:

Shiny OP-->Meme_Worthy-->Peak $ extraction-->Makaroved into oblivion, is old hat by now.

Hence the complete aft-hattery of resource shafting via the skills rebork.

I don't think WG cares unless you're spending money and if you've gotten wise? 

No to worry; there are more being born every minute. . .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RVNHQ]
Members
372 posts
11,025 battles

Before the update I preferred a more generalist/hybrid cruiser build ( PT, PM, EL, AR,  JoAT, EM, SI, DE, and CE ) so I could make use of Lutgens. Sure DE wasn't that great of a skill on Siegfried but having access to PM for the torpedoes was nice.

Now I'm forced to take either subpar or conditional skills. I can bump Lutgens to 21pt but no matter what a good chunk of his skills will not transfer over across my multiple German premiums. Heavy AP is inactive if I want to slot Lutgens on Mainz, so basically I'm left with an 18pt commander that earns full ECXP.

If players are forced into certain builds then that's not adding variety. Bring back the old JoAT and give cruisers PM.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,015
[SYN]
[SYN]
Beta Testers
2,356 posts
13,545 battles

WG Logic: Higher costs and smaller portions with lower quality equal better profit.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
137
[ECOM]
Members
44 posts
8,662 battles
1 hour ago, DuckyShot said:

I'm sitting on call today and bored right now, so I want to look at what WG exactly said about this rework, price increases, etc and compare builds in the old skill tree to builds in the new skill tree.

I'm going to start with my European gunboat build. This is a build I used between Smaland, Friesland, Orkan, Blysk:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

with the old tree here is how I had it set up:

PT

LS

SE, SI, BFT, DE

CE

If I want to set up that exact build in the new skills, here is what I have to do:

PM (already a departure from my build cause not great T1 skills)

LS, PT, Pyro

Main battery and AA, SI, SE

CE

I can do pretty much the same build for 20 points. I'd probably throw the last point into Liquidator. But the build is not the same. Pyro and BFT (Main battery and AA) have been nerfed by 50%. I only get 1% more fire and 5% extra reload instead of 2% more fire and 10% extra reload. I mean, I could drop the Liquidator and Main battery skill and run Fearless Brawler which gives me the same reload as BFT while being more expensive, lowering my concealment and having it wrapped up in a condition of me having to be spotted to be active. So in the new skill tree the same build is not possible, it is nearly possible, but slightly worse.

 

Lets look at a standard survival build with a BB:

  Hide contents

in the old tree I would run

PT

EM, AR

SI, BOS

FP, CE

In the new tree, the closest build to that now looks like this:

ERS (another level 1 skill that I take because there are no comparable skills in level 1)

GTG, PT

BOS

ERE, CE, FPE

So we can almost get to the same build with 20 points with the exception of AR. We are left with one point and that would go into either GF or PM. So this build is not possible in the new tree.

And you know what, I am totally fine with not being able to get exactly the same builds. The rework is what it is, everyone is dealing with the same garbage. But the major problem I have is how WG portrayed moving to 21 points and why. So lets look back at the dev blogs and see exactly what they said about it.

So WG recognised that to run similar builds when they split and rearranged the skill tree, it would require more points, which they gave us. And upon implementation, things are definitely close, and on the couple examples are just lacking in the 21 point tree. There may actually be some builds that are still possible in the 21 point tree, I haven't done extensive research. 

So here's my problem. If they recognise that they are just splitting up skills and such to make specialisation more of a thing and realised that to make things similar, they would have to add more points to the system, why are they hosing us with the XP increase from 19-21 points? I don't think there would be nearly the uproar over this if the increased the price on the final 2 skills a bit and reordered everything. Maybe change the XP required for a fully trained captain from 2.9M XP to 3.3M or 3.5M XP and just make the XP between each point scale like before. But no, WG decided to hose the player base while offering nothing more in the rework. We aren't getting 21 points, we are getting 21 points in a new system where 21 points doesn't give you the same builds as a 19 point captain did in the 19 point system, but for some reason its more expensive.

And this doesn't affect me too much. I have enough ECXP to train my favorite captains, this affects the more casual players and the new players to the game, and its pathetic of WG to screw them over.

According to the Spreadsheets, this is not garbage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,489
Members
2,288 posts
52 battles

Lets face it, this rework wasn't done to promote build diversity or whatever other hilarious excuse WG has given us aside from making it easier to shove subs down our throats.

It was done for $$$.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
515
[A-D-F]
Members
1,290 posts
12,103 battles
8 minutes ago, Beleaf_ said:

Before the update I preferred a more generalist/hybrid cruiser build ( PT, PM, EL, AR,  JoAT, EM, SI, DE, and CE ) so I could make use of Lutgens. Sure DE wasn't that great of a skill on Siegfried but having access to PM for the torpedoes was nice.

Now I'm forced to take either subpar or conditional skills. I can bump Lutgens to 21pt but no matter what a good chunk of his skills will not transfer over across my multiple German premiums. Heavy AP is inactive if I want to slot Lutgens on Mainz, so basically I'm left with an 18pt commander that earns full ECXP.

If players are forced into certain builds then that's not adding variety. Bring back the old JoAT and give cruisers PM.

Forced Homogeneity is not 'diversity' despite what Spreadsheet, or other schools of "thought" might believe.  

54 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

Guys !  This isn't an "innovative idea" they used.......  It's an old industry standard for mature games.  I've talked about this several times.......  It's an economy restructuring to squeeze out the last revenue from a stagnant or no growth game population.  The growth curve flattened six to 10  months before Update 8.0.   They realized that "profit" wasn't going to grow and...........here we are.

The games that have done this before mostly imploded or outright failed.   This game has several other titles to rely on..........!   Our host is beyond caring; beyond even considering new content; beyond expanding gameplay.......  Doubt this?  Look at what really went on at the Vendor Supported eSports event.  You would think that something like that would have been a huge thing !!............it wasn't and it really didn't work as planned I suspect.   WHY?  Because the game population has been "thinning" out since the Cruiser Line Split and Update 8.0; and, the ratios between veteran players and new players is widening......  Stomps are the norm now.  A lot of veteran players have switched to PVE..........and that, is what is seriously challenging our host's future for this title..... 

Quality, First World content of new and larger maps; new modes of historic play and involvement (the North Atlantic Campaign ideas); the return and expansion of new PVE Scenarios at multiple tiers; and, new content that focuses on WW1 and the Washington Treaty era simple COSTs TOO MUCH now......  And, if I remember correctly, the R&D team our host had was released recently......  I could be mistaken and please correct me if I miss spoke....  But, if they did, isn't that like the scene from the Monte Python Movie where someone is collecting the dead from the Black Plague............"bring out your dead, bring out your dead...."

This was an economy change and had nothing to do with quality in any form:........it's just a simply a way to make more profit, by providing more options of less value, that increases grind requirements.......   It will out right compromise new player retention.  

This is just my opinion and a guess.  I will still play this game P/T and see what history reports of these past few years........

So much this.^

I have seen games that have a 'lot' better rapport with their customers than this one go belly up due to a lack of meaningful new content.  

The lack of Halloween games and the April Fools event last year were definitely "signs and portents" of things to come. 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
522
[NSEW]
Members
2,231 posts
11,770 battles

We can surmise that this game has reached its final product end design (the main foundation that is). 

We are now experiencing the meta changes the company is doing to squeeze as much as possible avenues to profit.  

 

What we should be cognisant of is this question: "What other changes are in their pipeline?"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
140
[DOG]
Members
722 posts
13,045 battles
1 minute ago, LowSpeed_US said:

What we should be cognisant of is this question: "What other changes are in their pipeline?"

Well, for one you have submarines.  To be introduced AFTER everyone has redone their captain skills for surface ships.  I HATE the idea of adding submarines (unless it's in its own game mode and those who want to play them/with them are free to choose it - I won't).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,272
[-K-]
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,630 posts
9,959 battles

Good thread, Ducky. I'll add.

 

Let's look at my Massachusetts secondary build in the old system - I love brawling in this game, and Mass was excellent at that role, which is why I want to concentrate on this. But this is also how I built my KM secondary BBs btw, just replaced SI with BFT.

1 - PT, EL (I ran Halsey and had an extra point, thus EL, it was useful in certain situations; without Halsey the better choice is PM)

2 - AR

3 - SI (extra heal is great on Mass, better than BFT bonus)

4 - AFT, ManSec, CE (many people ran FP instead of CE, but I value concealment more, and extra heal from SI somewhat negated the extra fires)

 

Let's see what a similar build has to be now (assuming a 21 point captain):

1 - Pyro (best choice, but they're all underwhelming)

2 - PT (I'm seething that I seemingly will have to choose between this and turret rotation on other BB builds, btw)

3 - AR

4 - ERE, CE, ISBA

 

Let's summarize the changes:

  • pros:
    • +1% fire chance for secondaries
    • 1111 extra HP per heal
    • 2.8 seconds of extra DCP time (I have the DCPM1 in slot one, without it this bonus is 2 seconds)
    • Not related to captain skills, but a pro nonetheless: you can fire on both sides even with ManSec skill. Not super useful though, situations where you have enemies within range on both sides and yet live long enough to pummel them with secondaries are not common at all
      • Mass secondary range remained the same even after rework, from what I can tell, 11.3 km
  • cons:
    • Instead of 60% dispersion buff to secondaries I just get 35%. To all the people saying "you don't even need the extra dispersion on Mass" -- you're wrong, can explain why if you want me to. This is a huge nerf even to US secondary BBs with their baked-in accuracy buff.
    • lose the extra fighter consumable from old SI (this came in handy when a T8/T10 CV focused you)
    • lose AA bonus from old AFT (+15% damage per second within the explosion radius of shells)
    • lose Halsey's Expert Loader because I don't have the extra point to spend anymore (folks without this captain lose PM)

So, 1.2 million CXP buys me a secondary build sidegrade with worse AA -- all in a meta where other battleships will want to kite me so their Dead Eye is active, where cruisers are encouraged to spam HE from max range, and where CVs are as annoying as ever. Thanks, WG, very cool.

 

I also looked up the CXP numbers for the last major skill rework, in 0.6.0. If my math is right, total grind back then changed from 1,540,000 (18 points) to 1,708,000 (19 points) - increase of about 10%. Now, the CXP increase for a full build is about 40%.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
607
[PEED2]
Beta Testers
2,102 posts
28,405 battles
10 minutes ago, vak_ said:

Good thread, Ducky. I'll add.

 

................................................................

So, 1.2 million CXP buys me a sidegrade -- in a meta where other battleships will want to kite me so their Dead Eye is active. Thanks, WG, very cool.

 

I also looked up the CXP numbers for the last major skill rework, in 0.6.0. If my math is right, total grind back then changed from 1,540,000 (18 points) to 1,708,000 (19 points) - increase of about 10%. Now, the CXP increase for a full build is about 40%.

vak, I agree with your analysis....I saw it on the ships I play as well given the increase in points needed for some key skills like AR and PT, both of which I use on many ships.  So there goes a bunch of my elite commander xp just to stay "even". 

And the increase for a full build is a lot more than 40%.   Going from 1,540,000 to 1,708,000 is 11%.  But going from 1,708,000 to 2,908,000 is 70%!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,272
[-K-]
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,630 posts
9,959 battles
1 minute ago, Merc85 said:

And the increase for a full build is a lot more than 40%.   Going from 1,540,000 to 1,708,000 is 11%.  But going from 1,708,000 to 2,908,000 is 70%!!!!

Ah yeah you're right, I calculated percentage from the new total, but if you count up from old total, then it's indeed 70%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×