Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Slimeball91

Russian CV game play in Flamu video.

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

4,017
[PVE]
Members
7,478 posts

I didn't see anyone post this yet.  This is a Flamu video going over the stats for the new test ships, including the Russian CVs.  In the video there is a replay of someone playing against the new T10 Russian CV.  It's interesting.  Here's the video time stamped to the replay.  The video has a lot of other stuff, and as usual Flamu is being Flamu.  You can mute the sound if you don't want to hear him.  If the time stamp isn't working jump to 1:22:18 for the replay.

https://youtu.be/a_QLr4fwQCk?t=4938

  • Funny 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,780
[CLUMP]
Members
2,051 posts
2,424 battles

You were expecting something from Russian CVs :Smile_teethhappy: Me watching this been a CV main :Smile_trollface:

HcxHANE.gif

Especially liked the fact CVs planes didn't have to get too close to attack the targets :Smile_popcorn: But remember just dodge :Smile_veryhappy:

t9rPjAB.gif

Edited by LastRemnant
  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,194
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
15,544 posts

Interesting, though it looked like the defending team was pretty good at ameliorating the damage potential, and sank the CV to boot. Those torps would be killer on an unwary ship that stayed broadside though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,017
[PVE]
Members
7,478 posts
13 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

Interesting, though it looked like the defending team was pretty good at ameliorating the damage potential, and sank the CV to boot. Those torps would be killer on an unwary ship that stayed broadside though.

It kind of seems like a CV player without a lot of experience.  Rocket attacks that mostly missed, lining up bow on drops.  The lack of plane losses, even going against good AA, is the more interesting thing.  I agree, the torps look good if you can catch someone broadside, but also nice that you can get some hits even bow on.

Edited by Slimeball91

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,358
[SALVO]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,494 posts
7,123 battles

Anyone surprised? I'm not. Wargaming wanted us mains to learn how to lead with rocket planes. 

Now we know why.

5eqyap.jpg

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
513
[THICC]
Beta Testers
1,109 posts
7,302 battles

So it did 16k to a des moines that sailed flat broadside then 11k with skip bombers to a Vermont?  I'm not terribly impressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
950 posts
220 battles
16 minutes ago, Dr_Venture said:

Anyone surprised? I'm not. Wargaming wanted us mains to learn how to lead with rocket planes. 

Now we know why.

 

Newsflash   - Mainz is a Cruiser and doesn't have rocket planes

 

image.png.f7248dfde6b4dd38adebc45954aad404.png

 

:Smile_trollface:

Edited by Laser_Beam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
92 posts
3,437 battles

More gameplay would be required to really get a good idea of just what soviet CV's can do, especially curious about the aiming reticle, how long it takes to fully aim, and what the "I botched the run" ordenance spread looks, because if you need to trench run your strike to have those kind's of brutal torpedo spread's, making it necesary to either pop your plane heal, or having to lead your target well in advance to suffer as minimal plane and ordenance loss as possible, then soviet CV's might be actually unironically kind of "balanced"(ignoring the fact that it's a CV and all the problems with the class which have been elucidated a quadrillion times or so already)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,780
[CLUMP]
Members
2,051 posts
2,424 battles
2 minutes ago, Gellurt_T said:

More gameplay would be required to really get a good idea of just what soviet CV's can do, especially curious about the aiming reticle, how long it takes to fully aim, and what the "I botched the run" ordenance spread looks, because if you need to trench run your strike to have those kind's of brutal torpedo spread's, making it necesary to either pop your plane heal, or having to lead your target well in advance to suffer as minimal plane and ordenance loss as possible, then soviet CV's might be actually unironically kind of "balanced"(ignoring the fact that it's a CV and all the problems with the class which have been elucidated a quadrillion times or so already)

 

Soviet class in wargaming games don't require more skill only for you to have really go rng :Smile_teethhappy: World of tanks there is saying aiming with a soviet tank is a waste of time just point and shoot you will hit most of the time :Smile_smile: That's unless of course if you have rng on your side :Smile_sceptic:   Or so the story goes :Smile_hiding: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,203
[HINON]
Members
9,164 posts
13,743 battles

all i saw was your average rocket planes, torps with a rather insanely tight spread but are offput by theyre slow speed and need to be dropped further out because of insane arming times, and skip bombers that become useless the second your target starts turning if you drop them far off

am i supposed to be threatened by that? although, seeing as i play Coop only now, no matter how these CVs turn out, they wont be a threat to me, Bot CVs are by far the most useless bots on ANY team, they can only hit once in a blue moon and the rest of the time they miss by insane margins

Edited by tcbaker777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,017
[PVE]
Members
7,478 posts
21 minutes ago, LuckyStarFan said:

So it did 16k to a des moines that sailed flat broadside then 11k with skip bombers to a Vermont?  I'm not terribly impressed.

It looks like maybe half of the rockets missed to the rear of that DM.  It would be interesting to see a full hit.  11k damage on both a Petro, and then a Vermont.  Both with good AA, only shot down what looks like one plane each.  On other CVs that would be a good trade, we don't know if its good or not for the Russians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,460
[SR-_-]
Members
4,966 posts
46,534 battles
3 hours ago, LastRemnant said:

You were expecting something from Russian CVs :Smile_teethhappy: Me watching this been a CV main :Smile_trollface:

HcxHANE.gif

Especially liked the fact CVs planes didn't have to get too close to attack the targets :Smile_popcorn: But remember just dodge :Smile_veryhappy:

t9rPjAB.gif

Just watch, next update, all CVs that attack will signal with a cowbell, then a buzzer and pink streamers before a torpedo drop or bomb drop to inform the intended target. Then a 7 second delay from firing to actually firing, then the warning, then the actual firing after 2.77 seconds. This will allow the vic--intended target to dodge. 

But Russian CVs, another story. Just point and click, ship sunk. Ivan Drago saying in background: "I must break you."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,958
[SALVO]
Members
9,060 posts
6,732 battles
13 hours ago, Slimeball91 said:

The lack of plane losses, even going against good AA, is the more interesting thing.  

I agree, that's the fundamental piece of balance needed. Planes loses is what determines a good portion of the damage mitigation against this breed of CVs, as is the sustainability for continuous attacks. At first sight looks like plane loses are too low but I might be wrong, it needs to be correlated against hard data. I don't find preliminary damage numbers too appalling and spotting looks definitively more "under control". The CV player was strongly focused on a restricted area of operations and didn't wandered too far from it, I'm assuming due poor plane speed after the initial boost.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[WGF]
Members
95 posts

The reason the CV player wasn't losing planes to AA was because they were dropping from outside AA range and when they were forced to come in they were burning through the heals, of which there is a limited number.

The one thing that Flamu said that I do agree with is this would not only be frustrating to play against but also frustrating to play because a fudged drop will hurt a lot more, so it'll be all or nothing strikes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,958
[SALVO]
Members
9,060 posts
6,732 battles
4 minutes ago, diain said:

The reason the CV player wasn't losing planes to AA was because they were dropping from outside AA range and when they were forced to come in they were burning through the heals, of which there is a limited number.

Ok but that number needs to be balanced very carefully, imagine you have 4 on every squadron, that means 12 almost full damage attacks, in game time terms it means you won't be worrying about plane losses for over half the match. 

13 minutes ago, diain said:

so it'll be all or nothing strikes.

I see that as a positive with a lot of added value... no more gamey exploits, limited spotting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,719
[S0L0]
[S0L0]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
5,201 posts
8,192 battles

Hard to tell much from this short look.  My first impressions, the torps look fun to play.  spread on that drop looks pretty dangerous.     Skip bombers are already fun with Immleman.. Looks like these have a bit more range to the drop(skips).. couldn't tell much at all about the rockets.. but trying to use those with the new delay mechanics, seems like it could be difficult,  if they are indeed being fired from further out?    This CV definitely seems like a BB/CA hunter....  Going to be tough on slow less maneuverable ships. Bow tanking against a team with one is going to probably get punished pretty hard.  So pretty much exactly at it was described in the dev blog.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,664
[USRUS]
[USRUS]
Members
1,781 posts
22,421 battles

My dream became reality

rucv.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×