Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
yansuki

say goodbye to your AA. here comes another CV exploit.

37 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
2,373 posts
7,238 battles

after "enlighten drop" patched. here comes another BS.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
398
[LBAS]
Member
1,387 posts

a skilled player WILL always find a hole in system and exploit it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,165
[TDA]
Super Tester
4,787 posts
5,664 battles

From a what I see you preserve plane health at the expense of multiple drops.    So Rather than getting a few swipes at a ship in short succession you can sustain it but the drops are not as often. 

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[WWS]
Member
88 posts
1,750 battles

With this, WG might remove the immunity period. That means planes will get shredded more thus another CV nerf. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,373 posts
7,238 battles
31 minutes ago, RalphTheTheatreCat said:

From a what I see you preserve plane health at the expense of multiple drops.    So Rather than getting a few swipes at a ship in short succession you can sustain it but the drops are not as often. 

high cv has lots of them. in fact good cv player drop planes at the beginning  just to preserver more planes for later

Edited by yansuki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
321
[SH0T]
Member
1,509 posts
9,103 battles
37 minutes ago, RalphTheTheatreCat said:

From a what I see you preserve plane health at the expense of multiple drops.    So Rather than getting a few swipes at a ship in short succession you can sustain it but the drops are not as often. 

its a good trade. you prob can only do avrg of 2 strikes, before your aircraft health bar full of yellow and red. 

usualy there enough aircraft in 1 squadron for 3-4 runs. but from experience after 2nd run its hard to go for decent trade.

if you jettison 1 strike at begining. you can sustain losses and keep spaming 1 type of planes at almost full squadron. 

im only at mid tier CV, and they not "slinged" far enough,  need T8  to made full use of it😕

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
398
[LBAS]
Member
1,387 posts
6 minutes ago, yansuki said:

good cv player drop planes at the beginning  just to preserver more planes for later

ah ha!? so THAT'S why!

I didn't play CV so I don't understand why many CV drop their payload very first min after launch.

at first I thought it was some noob who press wrong button or that CV doing some practice drop.

now I see why.... huh... clever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
916
[CLAY]
Member
1,502 posts
9,320 battles

Hmmm, now the questions is... Is this an advanced tactic that is intended for skilled players to use against those 'AA Blobs'.

Or an unintended and 'unfair' exploit which WG will be expected to fix because AA ships will cry foul over why their fully-AA-spec-with-def-AA-running-in-overlapping-AA-bubbles isn't working like it should?

I'm not having a go at anyone, I'm generally curious as to which way this will be taken. :Smile_hiding:

Edited by Grygus_Triss
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,083
[MRI]
Member
2,227 posts
11,881 battles
1 hour ago, Grygus_Triss said:

Hmmm, now the questions is... Is this an advanced tactic that is intended for skilled players to use against those 'AA Blobs'.

Or an unintended and 'unfair' exploit which WG will be expected to fix because AA ships will cry foul over why their fully-AA-spec-with-def-AA-running-in-overlapping-AA-bubbles isn't working like it should?

I'm not having a go at anyone, I'm generally curious as to which way this will be taken. :Smile_hiding:

Pretty sure this is unintended. 

The immunity zone is meant to prevent planes fron getting shot down in that brief window after a drop when the camera leaves the planes to follow the bomb drop, ie when players can't actually see where their planes are going and thus cannot avoid flak. I am quite certain it is not meant for planes to run headlong into AA without a care.

The question is how is WG going to fix this. Are they going to remove the immunity zone, or are they going to change the slingshot effect?

With that said though, doing this kind of drop effectively is actually a lot harder than it looks. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,261
[TLS]
Member
2,106 posts
17,786 battles

All these are harder than it looks but it gives ammunition to the detractors and complainers. Eventually with practice people are going to get skilled and it will shift the balance.

Basically all these exploits are coming out in live guinea pig testing rather than being picked up in PTS/dev testing. Whatever happens now I don't care anymore but all this serves is to reinforce my position that the rework was poorly tested and should not have gone live yet. Nothing is going to change that because it has already be done. C'est la vie.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
916
[CLAY]
Member
1,502 posts
9,320 battles
2 minutes ago, Thyaliad said:

With that said though, doing this kind of drop effectively is actually a lot harder than it looks. 

Yeah, WGs best approach would be to wait and see. They have stated that they want CVs to haver a chance against AA ships, if this requires a high amount of skill, should only be seen by some of the best. And its not without its drawbacks.

Of course, if I could copy what I saw Yuro do, I'd have become a unicum long ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
278
[SMOKE]
Member
831 posts
11,593 battles

really there should be no immunity zone, do surface ships got any of immunity when they fire and get themselves revealed in smoke , or do they got immunity when they launch torp and then need to turn to avoid incoming ... you get into a position to fire , you do risk some .. and you take damage period ; planes already enjoy unfair advantage in AA in that faulted AA that not only not do proper AA, but actually decrease in efficiency , intensity and damage when planes close in ( dare to figure if this work surface ship vs surface ship fire )

WG's problem lies in their inability to see the whole picture ... you want i a game, then you need to made it a game , fair and square for everyone and that mean all whether is air vs sea, sea vs sea, DD vs CV or BB vs CA ....and there need to be game mechanism that made them work their own ... CV, Radar, game mode specifics pretty much ruined a whole lot of it, this exploit just happen to be one extra ... and WG is still in the mindset of BALANCING game play for CV ... no the should be making change so that each and every ship type can work theirs and counter play vs any others ...

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,083
[MRI]
Member
2,227 posts
11,881 battles
1 hour ago, Mechfori said:

really there should be no immunity zone, do surface ships got any of immunity when they fire and get themselves revealed in smoke , or do they got immunity when they launch torp and then need to turn to avoid incoming

Firing the guns on a surface ship doesn't force your camera to follow the shell after every shot.

If WG removes the immunity, then the camera must stick to the planes and short range AA be rebalanced.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
88
[AMPOL]
Beta Tester
281 posts
7,251 battles

Kewl to know I thought they must drop them for a speed increase or something.

I figured that was why they can cross the map, strike you and be gone within the first 2 mins of the game.

Good to see its just for another CV exploit :) Granted playing a CV at all makes you a griefer and exploiter regardless :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
434
[PATEN]
Video Contributor, Clantest Coordinator
2,501 posts
12,273 battles

OwO what is AA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,373 posts
7,238 battles
10 minutes ago, Onlinegamer said:

OwO what is AA?

just flashy fireworks, for the celebration of CV rework.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
398
[LBAS]
Member
1,387 posts

AA & DFAA : "are we a joke to you!?"

CV : "Yep❤ reeeee"

Edited by PGM991

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
252
[ULAG]
Member
905 posts
8,731 battles

This is what happens when WG treats low tier vs high tier poorly... a T10 CV won't need this 90% of the time but a T8 CV in a T10 match will be forced to use such exploits most of the time due to imbalances in AA tiering...You simply can't blame the players

IMO this should remain as it is because the CV player is sacrificing all of the attack wave opportunities to perform just one attack and it also requires a lot of skill. Until WG fixes the MM for CVs to +/-1, tricks like these will be used to keep CVs viable below T10

Edited by _TAMAL_
  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
252
[ULAG]
Member
905 posts
8,731 battles
1 hour ago, Thyaliad said:

Firing the guns on a surface ship doesn't force your camera to follow the shell after every shot.

If WG removes the immunity, then the camera must stick to the planes and short range AA be rebalanced.

Pretty much this^^^

People talk about balancing CVs without looking at what CV players are actually facing when playing the class. If balance needs to happen, it should happen to AA as well...

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
88
[AMPOL]
Beta Tester
281 posts
7,251 battles

I just played a T7 Match in a cruiser fitted with all the AA I could mount, the 2 T6 CV's on the other team just kept coming back, again and again, the def fire and fighter did nothing to stop them dropping, even ganging up didn't help, and I was 1 Tier higher then the CV's :) In T8 games its see planes, run, you have no chance.

Did someone take the old Torp Warheads and graft them onto the new Rockets and Bombs? I see Torp bombers coming and figure ok I can take some torp hits, but rockets and bombs, HELL NO :) Whats in those things?

If CV numbers are increased to help prevent the hiding and camping meta, OK, I guess, I always thought having enough sense to fire from cover was smart or as some might say good tactics, but OK, so thats fine, just reduce damage from CV weapons to be annoying, stuff that takes time to really do much damage.

A couple games back a T8 CV hit me with 1 rocket attack less then 2mins into the game, I used def fire, fighter and speed boost on my T7 Cruiser, I only took 7k in the one attack with no way to do anything more or shoot back, that's just wrong.

If hiding camping is an issue aren't the worst people doing this the CV's? Shorten their plane range, make then go close to the front line and risk return fire :) 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
278
[SMOKE]
Member
831 posts
11,593 battles
13 hours ago, _TAMAL_ said:

Pretty much this^^^

People talk about balancing CVs without looking at what CV players are actually facing when playing the class. If balance needs to happen, it should happen to AA as well...

Both way ... the AA should deal real damage consistently not RNG, and just like any type of damage deal and fire upon the AA should increase in intensity and accuracy as planes close in , s long, mid and short range AA will all work when planes choose to enter the range, just as any surface ships closing in on another surface ships ... the sentiment is corret but also its incorrect in that it does not take into consideration of how AA basically do not wok for most surface ships and practically useless in mid tier , so yes the exploit need to be balanced to give the CV player a fair chance to control the plane but also the surface ships should be given proper AA that actually do AA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Administrator
373 posts

Hello commander!

We would like to inform you that using it in this way is indeed possible, and FOR NOW we don't think it should be considered a bug or error.

This mechanics is there to prevent losses when a squadron is not controlled by a player.

It's a trick that requires some timing skill, and it does not magically allows super drops - it's just a tradeoff of 1 attack for saving some planes.

So we will watch how it's used, and IF we see it as an exploit - it will be nerfed. but for now it's fine 😅

Thanks!

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 2
  • Angry 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
141
[ANZAC]
Member
451 posts
15,213 battles
8 minutes ago, GOMBEE8626 said:

Hello commander!

We would like to inform you that using it in this way is indeed possible, and FOR NOW we don't think it should be considered a bug or error.

This mechanics is there to prevent losses when a squadron is not controlled by a player.

It's a trick that requires some timing skill, and it does not magically allows super drops - it's just a tradeoff of 1 attack for saving some planes.

So we will watch how it's used, and IF we see it as an exploit - it will be nerfed. but for now it's fine 😅

Thanks!

Pushing out the company line I see. Well, Ive been seieing it a lot more in game. Its certainly not a bug, but most definitly is an exploit. 

But to act like this some sort of working as intended thing is disingenuous. I find the commment about this only working for high skilled playes very ironic, after all this CV rework was pushed hard as LOWERING the skill ceiling for CV players.

Make up your minds.

Where did ytou copy and paste this from? 😉

Edited by j0e90
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23
[HMAS_]
Member
40 posts
6,542 battles

That he laughs at the end just shows how out of touch he is.  Keep up the good work admin.  Have a one handed clap from me.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


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

×