Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan



About Thyaliad

Recent Profile Visitors

1,050 profile views
  1. Thyaliad

    Interesting stuff from the RU forums

    I guess WG really hates CVs.
  2. Thyaliad

    CV Rework (SEA)

    This has always been the case for RTS CVs as well. But history has shown that Random players seldom have the required level of teamwork and coordination, so I don't think the rework is going to change anything on that front.
  3. Thyaliad

    CV Rework (SEA)

    Haha yup. That's why I am wondering why WG is calling it a beta test when imo it is still alpha. The mechanics still need a lot of tweaking and refining. For the AA reinforcement I agree, it is not very engaging. Just put it up on one side and leave it there. I was expecting to be changing it on the fly as the planes fly over and attack from different sides. But since it takes too switch sides you can't really do that. So this new AA is not really that much different from the old in terms of player interaction.
  4. Thyaliad

    CV Rework (SEA)

    Double post, but I was invited to the beta test, so here are my initial thoughts on the rework. I am not going to talk about balance; this will mostly be about the gameplay. I am going to start with the good first. I must admit, the gameplay is pretty fun. Dodging flak clouds and flying into position to get a drop off is great. I can see a lot of people getting into CVs with this rework, so that good work there WG. It is pretty easy to pick up and play, though there are intricacies that a player can learn in order to excel, such as your plane's turning radius, aiming time, torpedo arming distance etc. So there is a bit of a learning curve. If you are experienced in the current RTS system, the good news is that some skills do carry over, such as knowing how to approach your target and anticipating their movement. Most players are probably going to enjoy this rework, regardless of whether you played the RTS CVs or not. Now the bad news is, while the gameplay is fun, it is pretty shallow. The iChase video posted earlier in this thread sums it up nicely. The reworked gameplay is almost entirely focused on dealing damage. There is almost zero teamplay element present, apart from dropping fighters or coordinating with players to try and fires and flood. There is little to no interaction with the enemy CV, nor is there any interaction between you and your team. I feel the fighter system needs to be tweaked, so it is not just a consumable. At the very least, give infinite charges on the fighters, so CVs can still protect teammates better. The reworked CV gameplay is too one-dimensional, and I actually got bored with it after a few games. That is not a good sign. Edit: Here is the 2nd part of my post. The new AA mechanics also need a bit of work. The reinforcing of AA sectors is nice, but imo it needs to be done faster. It only really helps against the initial approach, once the planes are overhead it is not much use to switch because it takes too long. Also it needs to have dedicated keybinds, the current method of pressing the O or tilde key to bring up the interface and using the mouse to click on a sector is just too clunky. Also like iChase said, the long range AA is still reliant on RNG. Sometimes the AA creates a wall of flak that your planes have no choice but to fly through. Other times there is plenty of space between flak clouds so dodging is easy. Short range AA does flat damage but the range is usually not not enough. Of course, there are several other glaring issues. There needs to be an abilty to switch between plane control and direct CV control. Far too often I see players grounding themselves or failing to dodge simple attacks. And yes, CV sniping is a thing now. With unlimited planes, the question is not whether you can snipe the enemy CV, but rather how long will it take for you to do so. Although I said I am not going to talk about balance, I do need to mention that the IJN and USN CV loadouts need to be looked at. Currently, IJN have both AP bombs and deepwater torps, making them overly specialised in killing BBs but near useless against DDs. Imo even their rockets are not as effective against DDs compared to USN's. They shouldn't have both AP bombs and deepwater torps. Perhaps give USN CVs AP bombs like they have now in the RTS version, IJN can have HE bombs and deepwater torps. Talking about bombs, the camera for divebombing should pull back a little. Right now when divebombing it is very easy for the target to move out of your screen entirely causing you to lose track of it. And that sums up my initial impressions. TL;DR: The rework is far from ready. New gameplay needs to be more engaging and less one-dimensional. CVs need direct control toggle. AA and fighter mechanics need further tweaking.
  5. I am pretty sure that the Legendary Upgrades will be changed accordingly to fit the new gameplay. Some of the upgrades and Captain skills have already been tweaked in the CV test server. Otherwise just ask for compensation I guess. WG has said there will be compensation for players unhappy with the CV rework.
  6. Thyaliad

    Concealment Expert

    Ouch. This is straight up going to hurt my playstyle. I like using CE on my BBs and utilising islands to sneak in closer and ambush unsuspecting enemies. Same for some of cruisers. Plus I am quite liking my Massachusetts with CE. With AFT + CE + Secondary range upgrade my Secondary range is almost as much as my Concealment, so if a ship spots me chances are it is going to be within my Secondary range. While I am can see where WG is coming from with this change, I am thinking to may encourage BBs to camp in the back more. But perhaps this can solve the issue of radar having a greater range than some ship's concealment. Will have to see how it goes.
  7. The Ranger also has a 5 million credit servicing cost. I think it is to encourage players to play the surface ships too and not just play the CVs all day, since there is a quest that rewards 5 million credits each time you play a surface ship.
  8. Thyaliad

    CV Rework (SEA)

    The only people insisting that RTS games are dead are the "triple A" devs and publishers. You know, the same people that keep insisting that single-player games are dead, despite all evidence to the contrary. The RTS scene is fine, even moreso if you include its subgenres of RTTs and Mobas. And I am pretty sure people were asking for CVs to be fixed, not to be made into some budget knockoff of Battlestations Pacific. Don't conflate the two, which is the mistake WG seems to be making. Heck, even Battlestations allowed you to control multiple ships and planes via RTS interface. Blaming the RTS style for everything wrong is incredibly silly and just goes to show how little WG understands about the problem.
  9. Thyaliad

    CV Rework (SEA)

    This. So much this. I really don't get the reason why WG decided to remove the current RTS system when they never even bothered to try and rebalance it in the first place. There are so many things they could have tried tweaking testing. Like you said, some aspects like the new AA and unlimited planes could have easily been integrated into the current RTS system. Instead WG tries to present the RTS system as some sort of bogeyman that is the root cause of all CV woes. When anybody who bothered to play CVs for any decent amount of time knows that is not really the case. The real problem has always been the amount of influence CVs have on the game, followed by the skill-gap problem (which stems from said influence) and buggy UI, among other things. The fact that WG never even bothered to teach players how to play CVs is just icing on the cake. God, watching that Waterline video where WG talked about this really triggered me so much, I felt like punching a wall. It confirmed my suspicions that WG has no idea whatsoever on anything related to CVs. Seriously, watch Farazelleth's first response video to see what I mean. One funny thing is WG said the RTS style is too different which is why they are removing it. And yet flying a plane as opposed to a ship is not different enough? Being unable to control directly control you ship in a ship game is not different enough? And yeah the worst thing is WG is acting like everything is done and dusted, like they have done a good job, and now they are proudly showing off submarine gameplay and their intent to bring submarines into WoWs. Come on WG, you have showed that you were unable to handle CV gameplay, and yet want to introduce another class on top of that? This is the very epitome of putting the cart before the horse.
  10. Heh I am the complete opposite. Haven't gotten an invite for the CV beta test, and didn't get any RN DD mission except the Acasta a couple of days ago, which at that point of time was more or less useless.
  11. Thyaliad

    Technical issues found.

    Checked for file integrity. That seemed to do the trick for now.
  12. Don't like this change. I personally hope it doesn't go through. I would rather WG just solve the double-dipping problem where a shell can sometimes do both normal pen and overpen damage on a single target.
  13. Thyaliad

    100% WG Made up

    Actually you may both be right. Iirc the hobbyist magazine's design was simply their take on the Type A cruiser design, which WG then adapted. Like you said, the spec calls for 12 203mm guns, that much we know. But it could have easily been a 6x2 design rather than a 4x3 design. Looking at the IJN's previous CA designs I am actually inclined to think the former is more likely. But then again I am no naval engineer.
  14. Thyaliad

    Hiding Profile

    I see this happening a lot in the WoWs portal as well. People getting downvoted for answering game mechanic questions. Really boggles the mind. Just because people don't like the answer doesn't mean it is not true.
  15. Thyaliad

    Do you think Ise will be OP?

    Let's not put the cart before the horse. Until WG decides to put in direct ship control for the CV rework, I think we can forget about Ise or any of the other hybrid CVs making their way to WoWs.