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

Post CV rework issues, and suggestions to improve the game for all.

15 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

498
[AUSNZ]
Beta Tester
818 posts
8,023 battles

There are a lot of players dissatisfied with the game since the CV rework was introduced.  There has been an upheaval of the meta, and for many the game meta they really enjoyed was removed and replaced with game play they struggle to enjoy, despite many of them putting plenty of time into relearning the game post-rework.

I personally have had a lot of fun playing CV's and DD's since 0.8.0, but I can certainly see that there are significant problems with the game, and I honestly believe the game shouldn't be in a situation where many people are not enjoying themselves - the health of the game will suffer, and I suspect is already suffering.

So how to change the game to improve it for all?  Let's have a look at the positives and negatives of where we are now, and then try and decide on a direction that would bring a more enjoyable meta.

The positives:

  • CV's have been severely limited in their ability to outplay their opposing CV.  This has meant they are much less likely to dominate and carry, and is reflected in the win rates of the best CV captains being very similar to the win rates of the captains of other ship classes.  Mission accomplished with one of the primary reasons for the CV rework.
  • CV's are much more fun to play for the majority, and much more intuitive and easy to pick up for poor to average players.  This is subjective no doubt, but I believe the sheer popularity in numbers of CV players compared to pre-rework bears out my point.  Mission accomplished for the other primary reasons for the CV rework.
  • There are less lone BB snipers at the back.  BB captains are understandably scared to be alone, so they tend to move up with the team much more now.  The ones that do stay back get punished by the CV's.

 

The negatives:

  • DD's lives are harder.  You can still be very successful as a DD, but the poor to average players struggle more and die earlier.  This isn't good for the game, and it's slightly ironic that as the CV rework closed the skill gap for CV's, it opened it for DD's.  The fact that they buffed radar ranges and durations pretty much at the same time as reworking CV's was a double blow to DD players.
  • The entire flanking play style which many ships were designed to do is countered hard by CV's.  This is a huge negative to the game, because it takes a play style that requires skill and awareness to be successful at, and that was very enjoyable for many people, and nullifies it.  This creates the more static game play that many are complaining about.  I honestly believe for a ship designed to do so, it should be viable to work around the flanks solo well away from friendly AA. The game needs this play style to return.

 

So, given these points, how do we retain the positives while mitigating the negatives?  Note that CV's are here to stay, so just saying "remove CV's", "go back to RTS CV's", or "give CV's their own queue", are pointless arguments that quite simply aren't going to happen.  Try to work with what we have.  I'd love to hear people's suggestions, but here are mine to start us off. 

I think we need to make DD's lives easier.  The target should be at mid-high tiers to have on average three DD's per team (anywhere in the 2-4 per team should be common), and they should be able to do their job of capping, spotting, and working the flanks looking for weaknesses.  We also need to make flanking cruisers more viable as well - all ships should still be able to do their job in a post-rework game.

The specific changes I would make are these:

  • I would remove the Smoke Screen Expert two point commander skill.  I would replace it with a skill called "Flanking Expert" which only works on cruisers and destroyers, and reduces air spotting range by 20%, reduces max AA range to air spotting range for cruisers only, and increases both continuous and burst AA by 10% while more than 7km away from a friendly ship.  This will make flanking ships harder to target for CV's and enable their job to be more viable again.
  • I would add an effect to Basic Firing Training - "guns of 139mm or less have 20% reduced gun bloom duration".  This makes a gunboat DD's life a bit easier.
  • Nerf all radar ranges.  11km for Russian ships, 9km for US and UK ships, this is across the board.  Radar ships also tend to be very strong AA ships, and they are extremely popular and have too much going for them in the current meta.  A mild nerf to them and a decent buff to DD's by these range changes is exactly what is needed to promote DD game play.

I think these targeted changes would push the game back towards it's previous meta, while still retaining the positives of the CV rework changes.

  • Cool 9
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
174
[SMOKE]
Member
562 posts
9,759 battles

Ranging the whole meta is about ranging if you force the game to be play at range that further each other ( teams ) and force people to stay as close formations at those distance then all ships and type of ships must be made to be able to attack and do their part at that distance  ; the primary is DD and CL ... and I would say

  • for all CL, they should have their gun range buffed and dispersion to be adjusted to reflect ( individual ships would differ )
  • for all DD, their gun range should get a 10 to 20% range buff ( again individual ships differ )
  • Torp on all ships and not just CL and DD should get ranging by introducing torp calibration in that player should be able to hot choose between default range / default speed and longer range / lower speed ( +20% range , -5 knot ), and shorter range / higher speed ( -20% range, +5 knot ) and this should be across all tier , this allow the DD and CL a more liberal positioning that they can actually engage now that they are forced further and give the CA some defense as well as offense possibility
  • AA should be reworked to reflect the fact that closing in the planes will be subjected to ever increased intensity, accuracy and damage, so long range will work all the way to near limit, so do mid and close range AA and the near limit should not be 1KM but something like 250m ( period AA typical ), the RNG co-efficient ( if WG insist on RNG ) should increase for the mid and long range continuous damage when the plane choose to enter mid range and then close range
  • Due to the prior the commander skill torpedo acceleration should be reworked to torpedo ranging which give +10% range -2 knot and this can stack with the prior calculated always on base speed and range so choosing increased range / lower speed coupled with the skill would give + 30% range -7 knot or with the decreased range increased speed to give -10% +3 knot ( this is historically true for all period torp they were almost always possible to made run faster / run slower that range lower / range further and even true today )
  • Radar should be made unable to penetrate landmass
  • CV commander skill Aircraft Armor should not be a damage reduction co-efficient but a HP increase co-efficient
  • AFT should have 20% increase range for all types of guns effected , not just main gun 139mm or under, and AA should effect ranging instead of flak damage; if WG insist on flak damage then the co-efficient need to be minimal +25%
  • Commander skill Adrenaline Rush should had the numbers adjusted to +/- 0.3% for said effected
  • Commander skill Basic of Survivability should give -20% to said effected
  • Commander skill High Alert should give +20%
  • Commander skill Manual AA should have the numbers adjusted to 25% +/- for BB, 30% +/- for CA, 40% +/- for CL and 50% +/- for DD, CV do not need changes , they have their own fighter cover ( most light ships AA can be swayed to fire upon the other side and fast cuase they do not have much of super structure to be speak of )
  • all ships should have their firing from smoke detection range increased to 80% ( or more if current is more than that ) of their normal firing detection range but should have that 20 sec cool down on concealment reduced to 8 sec, it should not be people can machine gun from smoke and yet remain concealed
  • DFAA should function to 55 sec but cooldown need to be 150 sec

IMHO the CV only part of the problem the larger one always been in-balance introduced through introduction of features, ships and more ships and these create new possibilities without giving proper counter play and defense ... so until counter play introduce, the main change need to be for all type of ships to be able to stand defended, ships should not be so easy to get killed , whether its HE boom or HE shell spamming or continuous aerial harassment from  CV or Smoke firing

Edited by Mechfori

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
343
[REPOI]
[REPOI]
Member
452 posts
9,491 battles

Very good analysis, I came to same conclusion that CV rework has reduce skill gaps for CV player but widen skill gap for surface ship players. I had a conversation with a member here 10 days ago.

20190418_120259.thumb.jpg.6a5c9d5264a7eae511cef97afda9d16f.jpg

Yuro at some point point also said that the CV rework is not about the CV but it is playerbase rework. He probably joking at that point however that comment actually hold some truth, maybe a hunch some of us felt along the way.

But people just would not accept the fact that their own success in game or their level of enjoyment, are their own responsibility, to a certain large degree. 

As I said many times in forum, I can do well in multiple CV games. Probably even better than pre CV rework, because when most people don't have the understanding of how CV operates. It open up even more opportunities for those people who knows. I can still play aggressive, I can still play flanking to an extend. Well not in the sense of complete isolation but just effective enough crossfire is still possible in multiple CV games.

The problem is you need to know squadron's characteristics, their attack angle, pattern, rhythm etc. And the only way to know all that is you also have to be a competent CV player.

 

As for the suggestion that you propose. I think if you reduce DD air spotting range by 20% it will be not be realistic to counter DD at all, what if DD decide to hunt for CV? Some DD will be into sub 2km range which is even less than proximity spotting.

For CL, if some AA ship ie mino and Worcester taking those skills, they will murder planes before they got spotted, which is the situation before 0.8.1

I think AA in general need to rework. To give isolated ship a bit more capability or teeth to defend themself, but overall level of AA remains similar. That mean some ship will get buff and some will get nerf to level them out. And also skill base AA also can be consider.

Btw, people think spotting is oppressive, that stop people flanking or move up. I think that is only psychological. I mean I don't care if I spot in first 30 sec near spawn, those are low risk spotting, however if I making a move on  the flank, or in front-line approach cap etc. I will pay extra attention on CV squadrons.If I don't think I can make it to objective, then I will just abort and wait for next opportunity. Be patient and vigilant, and it will pay off.

Edited by sunlo2013
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
498
[AUSNZ]
Beta Tester
818 posts
8,023 battles
54 minutes ago, sunlo2013 said:

I think if you reduce DD air spotting range by 20% it will be not be realistic to counter DD at all, what if DD decide to hunt for CV? Some DD will be into sub 2km range which is even less than proximity spotting.

It will be impossible to do a RF attack on an unspotted DD for many CV/DD combinations.  As a CV you would have to drop fighters to spot, predict the DD's position after a spotting pass, or attack while the DD is spotted by something else.  I don't think this is unreasonable to be honest.  DB's would still be able to be used on the first attack.  The idea is to make this exchange further weighted in the DD's favour than it is now.

58 minutes ago, sunlo2013 said:

For CL, if some AA ship ie mino and Worcester taking those skills, they will murder planes before they got spotted, which is the situation before 0.8.1

No they won't, for cruisers part of the skill reduces the AA range to the air spotting range.  So they will be stealthier to planes but have much less ability to cover the fleet with AA cover.  I think it would be a relatively unattractive skill to Mino's and Woosters because it reduces significantly a primary strength.

1 hour ago, sunlo2013 said:

Btw, people think spotting is oppressive, that stop people flanking or move up. I think that is only psychological.

I couldn't agree more.  It's like people complaining about being spammed by low calibre HE, where the actual damage done is significantly less than a well aimed AP shot every 30s, but the continual HE shells landing on their hull apparently puts them off.

 

@Mechfori that's a long list of changes!  I'd be very concerned at introducing a spate of changes like that, as often changes have unintended negative consequences.  Exhibit A, the very popular and very much community requested decision to soft cap T10 CV's to one per battle, and the corresponding massive increase in double T8 CV games for T6-9 ships.  This is why I had a relatively short list of targeted suggestions.  What I mean by targeted, is that if you want to make a change, first you have to identify the problem (often a difficult thing in itself!), then where you would like the game meta to end up, and only then can you work out the most effective and minimalist changes to achieve the desired aim.  You then have to do your best to consider what unintended side effects the changes might have, and then if those are acceptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
174
[SMOKE]
Member
562 posts
9,759 battles
17 minutes ago, Moggytwo said:

@Mechfori that's a long list of changes!  I'd be very concerned at introducing a spate of changes like that, as often changes have unintended negative consequences.  Exhibit A, the very popular and very much community requested decision to soft cap T10 CV's to one per battle, and the corresponding massive increase in double T8 CV games for T6-9 ships.  This is why I had a relatively short list of targeted suggestions.  What I mean by targeted, is that if you want to make a change, first you have to identify the problem (often a difficult thing in itself!), then where you would like the game meta to end up, and only then can you work out the most effective and minimalist changes to achieve the desired aim.  You then have to do your best to consider what unintended side effects the changes might have, and then if those are acceptable.

Humbly I disagree .. the game as it is now exhibit multiple issues , its not just the DD and your proposal is only about making it possible for DD to live ( or rather live that tiny bit longer ) and that is not enough, CV can perform, BB can perform, CA can perform, CL had difficulties but still can somehow perform but DD ... they cannot , just as I've stated, RANGE ... if the game need to be fair the DD and CL must be allowed to perform at the current forced upon ranging meta and all that stated do not ...it do not take into account the AA still not working for many a BB , CA, and CL .. it do not take into account of spotting mechanism that pretty much made concealment nil ... that had to be given back or given new alternate mode that allow the said ships to perform whether its the DD, or the BB ... then there's the HE Spamming, Aerial harassment and etc etc ... my proposed changes are many but in the end its down to only several ... made ships of all type resilient especially for those unable to conceal so that ships really need to engage and fight, made light force able to perform even now that range is forced upon them, make AA counter play possible  and effective

Until there is real better suggestion and reasoning behind, I see that just by giving the DD some more possibility to just stay alive is not enough .. because the game do not reward for just staying alive ... and you cannot made this post rework issues go without taking on the ISSUE(S) and I must say those issues , well plenty of them is not about the CV rework cause they are there before that they just got worse and over the edge coupled wit the CV rework .. and many had be spoken then and yet not deal with ..

As for the DD game play , a critical part of that must be that WG need to go off and be clear with it, if they are after no concealment ( with CV, Radar, no smoke for French DD etc etc ... ) then they had to come up with a mechanism that let DD perform without concealment and a lot of DD rely on concealment ( not just the IJN ) .. this is coupled with the spotting , and lack of HP / armor of how a DD spec(ed) right now ... basically WG screw a whole class of ships and not giving any counter or alternative play. My suggestion thus is only at best to allow that .. yours is only about making it less hard to die , but yet its still easy to die after all that ( still no dealing with AA that do not work, still no dealing with Radar that irrationally penetrate landmass so, cruiser can immunity Radar everyone in range , and DD that cannot shoot back because they are practically all out of range ) 

There are actually other changes I can think of but in the end WG must come off clean and let us know how they want the game be play and play out .. right now they are still saying playing DD as they were 3 years ago, no that is not the case ... unless they give Shima and Kita's 20KM/12KM/8KM torp to every DD and the fast 127mm ( and the range ) on US DD too ... cause then they can spec either for gun or for torp and start dealing damage ( which then they got rewarded ) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
245
[ULAG]
Member
891 posts
8,284 battles

I proposed some simple solutions before and am posting them again...these should solve majority of the issues :

1. Make CV spotting similar to Cyclone spotting or at the very least add a delay like the recent Radar change. This will keep ships from getting under unnecessary focus fire and no ship will have issues with positioning. In compensation, they can give CV some Alpha strike back.

2. Implememt +/-1 MM for CVs(and if possible for all ships at all tiers). I don't think anybody would doubt the potential of this implementation. Automatically solves a plethora of issues. Also helps balancing ships in the future very simple because you are not forced to balance something across two tier spread. 

btw nice thread. Nice to see some positive approach to this issue.

Edited by _TAMAL_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
343
[REPOI]
[REPOI]
Member
452 posts
9,491 battles
54 minutes ago, Moggytwo said:

It will be impossible to do a RF attack on an unspotted DD for many CV/DD combinations.  As a CV you would have to drop fighters to spot, predict the DD's position after a spotting pass, or attack while the DD is spotted by something else.  I don't think this is unreasonable to be honest.  DB's would still be able to be used on the first attack.  The idea is to make this exchange further weighted in the DD's favour than it is now.

If with fighters to spot, if DD have very small air detection range, it can get out the fighter spot very quickly. Every pass take time to turn around and lineup. So, in optimal situation fighter plane will grant you one attack, after that it rocket will be unusable. I am talking competent CV player here, now imagine average CV players. 

I will also argue that DB will not be able to line up first attack neither for some high concealment DD. DB in general need 3km range to line up proper attack when ship coming toward you and need 1.5 km if ship going away, so those DD just need to turn toward DB or slow down as soon as spot to cause fail drop. Of course planes can release payload as soon as recticule turn green, so technically they can drop with less distant but the chance of hit small target like DD is very slim.

You are right about Mino and Worcester, I forgot about cruiser's air detection was tie to their AA range. However, people will still complain about being spotting, oppress and can't not flank because of it, as mention above these are psychological perception not based on reasoning. On CV point of view, increase slight AA damage probably wont matter much if the ship is too isolated or poorly positioned. Nevertheless, this is up to player's choice to suit their play style. So I have nothing against it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
343
[REPOI]
[REPOI]
Member
452 posts
9,491 battles
2 hours ago, _TAMAL_ said:

I proposed some simple solutions before and am posting them again...these should solve majority of the issues :

1. Make CV spotting similar to Cyclone spotting or at the very least add a delay like the recent Radar change. This will keep ships from getting under unnecessary focus fire and no ship will have issues with positioning. In compensation, they can give CV some Alpha strike back.

2. Implememt +/-1 MM for CVs(and if possible for all ships at all tiers). I don't think anybody would doubt the potential of this implementation. Automatically solves a plethora of issues. Also helps balancing ships in the future very simple because you are not forced to balance something across two tier spread. 

btw nice thread. Nice to see some positive approach to this issue.

1) I think I would prefer cyclone or radar spotting rather than reduce air spotting range any further, at least CV can protect themselves if DD got close to snipe them. However, downside is that mean further reduce CV interaction with own team thus even less team work from CV. Up side is no one will ask me to spot this or spot that. :)

2) +/-1 MM for CV would help with balancing, but I don't think it is possible as of now due to players number. Also we only have even tiers, it might be viable if we have a introduce odd tier, a full line should allow more option and variety in ship tiers combination. Downside would be possible CV anchoring ie 677 788 division, but given capability of new CV, these division probably won't be as game breaking as old CV.

 

Edited by sunlo2013
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
174
[SMOKE]
Member
562 posts
9,759 battles
55 minutes ago, sunlo2013 said:

..

2) +/-1 MM for CV would help with balancing, but I don't think it is possible as of now due to players number. Also we only have even tiers, it might be viable if we have a introduce odd tier, a full line should allow more option and variety in ship tiers combination. Downside would be possible CV anchoring ie 677 788 division, but given capability of new CV, these division probably won't be as game breaking as old CV.

 

saying that it would help balancing but because it would increase queue time ( possibility ) equate that fairness is not being respected here ... if we know its not fair to a fair population of players in this +/- 2 MM and the solution is there in +/- 1 then it should be implemented regardless. Division its not like its not having this now ... I see people division 688 , 678 forcing CV to be super tier , you will not solve any of the division issue unless division require +/- 0 or exclude CV from divisions. People complain about a lot of changes in game , many dealing with balancing ( whether right or wrong ) and WG introduce them .. so why not introduce a +/-1 MM knowing it will improve balance and take away many of the problems. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
245
[KGHSF]
Member
3,452 posts
7,551 battles

I'm think I found best CV for my type 

European CV take a nicest things 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
70 posts
3,841 battles

In my honest opinion, as a Battleship and Cruiser main, the CV rework is manageable. It is not without its flaws, but at least you can still do things that you are used to prior to the rework. (I also played a bit of CV's so there's that). That being said, here are the things I think are the issues that still plague the rework:

1.) Fighters. Or rather the lack of an active role by said planes. The decision to make them a consumable was dubious at best, and that removed a key aspect of a Carrier's role: to provide CAP to teammates. With them severely restrained by 'push button to only put fighters here',  this cause what is now seen as Carriers just doing damage, nothing more. Speaking of damage;

2.) Cycling of Planes. When a Carrier is done doing one strike, they can immediately send out another in just seconds. This is annoying and psychologically stressful to practically everyone since there seems no end to this strikes in the horizon. The fact that there are also planes ready to go on the deck of carriers is also a factor, and finally;

3.) Anti-Air Firepower. Now, I get what WarGaming is thinking with the air sector mechanic. If you fly into this zone, your planes will take more damage than the other. The thing, ships of different nations, types, and tiers have vastly different AA ratings that either it does virtually nothing, or it's practically god-like. 

So what are the possible solutions to these problems? There is not one solution, as the answers to them are complex at best. That being said, here are my suggestions:

1.) Return of Fighters. Now I'm not saying that fighters should be done in a similar manner as the strike crafts. That could be a solution, but that would be boring and not really helping the team a lot outside of taking down the enemy carrier's planes. I think a workable solution is to merge rocket attack planes with fighters. Since the R.A.P are just fighters repurposed into strike craft by literally strapping a number of rockets into them, once their ordinances are expended, they automatically become fighters, flying overhead of a given sector(a wide one at that) to provide CAP friendly ships;

2.) Delayed Cycling. This is inspired by Flamu's recent video. Instead of an instantaneous switch between one type to another, there should be a delay between the cycling of aircraft. For example, if you want to use a dive bomber squadron after you've expended your torpedo bomber squadron, there should be a delay by giving a set time between the arming of aircraft and their take-off, more so if the planes are either damaged(since they need repairs) or outright annihilated by enemy AA firepower. And finally;

3.) Sector Switching. This is also inspired by Flamu's recent video. Giving a DFAA-like sector switch by an instant switch with a push of a button, like DD captains, some Cruiser captains, and a few BB captains with the 1-2 and 3 buttons is interesting. If you want to reinforce a sector, set it immediately and go back to whatever you're doing. Within that sector, that squadron is 80-100% dead guaranteed. Outside of that sector, sure some planes might get shot down but at least Carrier players still do damage. Another solution might lie on the '3' key for torpedoes. Push a button, and AA bubble will be wider, dispersing the damage in a wide area, and push the button again, and the bubble will be narrower, maximizing the damage output of your ship's AA. The former can do damage, but don't shoot down a lot of planes, while the latter also does damage, but plane casualties will be much higher.

 

Of course, these are just my take on the topic this thread is discussing. It might be workable, or not at all.

-cellum95

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
262
[LBAS]
Member
2,148 posts
10,432 battles
On 4/18/2019 at 10:33 AM, Moggytwo said:

 

TLDR; 

 

Bastion Mode definitely needs to return, aside from all these CV warmongering.

 

And yes, bring back Fighters.

Edited by BIGCOREMKP0I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
578
[TLS]
Member
1,119 posts
16,493 battles
3 hours ago, BIGCOREMKP0I said:

Bastion Mode definitely needs to return, aside from all these CV warmongering.

YES INDEED. Screw the haters.

@cellum95The problem is the main CV complainers do not even touch CV. Once you play CV, you will know their weakness and accordingly adjust your non-CV playstyle to exploit that weakness. However, the main CV complainers refuse to touch CV for a variety of nonsensical reason.

The best CV players have decent/good non-CV ship records. They know what non-CV ships strengths and weaknesses are and adjust accordingly.

Edited by dejiko_nyo
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
155
[AMPOL]
Beta Tester
1,578 posts
14,207 battles

Here's the thing about CVs

Yes they are OP everyone now knows they are OP, WG knows they are OP, WG wants CVs to be OP, so they can get sales on the premium CVs that are all on sale right now.

lets face it, players don't buy rubbish ships ok

So WG made CVs OP to get everyone talking about them as they are doing now,  so those who like CVs will play them more and see how OP  they are and go out and buy the premium CVs that are on sale right now.

WG are not dumb, the only thing they care about is making money and they will pull any trick they can to get that money from players.

so once they get the sales they want, they will fix the issues with the CVs.

it is the player base who has created this problem buy throwing money at WG all the time instead of saying no to WG and not spend cash until the game is fixed and reduce the affect of RNG as well on the battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
455 posts
1,474 battles
On 4/21/2019 at 11:10 PM, yobbo1972 said:

Here's the thing about CVs

so once they get the sales they want, they will fix the issues with the CVs.

it is the player.......。

Are you talking about another case of Bait and Switch?

And then the one who paid now got the blame for the problem. The one selling the problem will eventually "fix" the problem while keeping the money?

Share this post


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

×