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

0.9.9 CV nerf

63 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

799
[BLESS]
Member
1,461 posts
12,809 battles

Respectable sources on Reddit report the update stealth nerfs CVs by changing the way the plane acceleration boost is implemented (slowing down the boost ramp time), and allowing the squadron to take AA damage while on an attack run.

CVs now lose a lot more planes when they attack you, apparently.

Edit: Having just played a few mid tier games, in DDs with not great AA, I can testify CVs are still be able to hit you pretty easily but I do feel I'm shooting down a few more planes than before.

Edited by Rina_Pon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
270
[NZAUS]
Beta Tester
370 posts
8,571 battles

This could be really good for the game if handled properly. If the CV was given more XP for spotting and was less a damage dealer (that everyone hates) it would become more a team asset rather than a selfish damage ship.

IF

 

IF

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,347
[TLS]
Member
4,857 posts
21,287 battles

Less incentive on already very little incentive to play cv for me. What was one of the things they were trying to do? Encourage more cv play?

My 2 cents: 22 months of work flushed down toilet.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,230
Member
5,692 posts
9,502 battles

Me think this is likely unintentional and would be fixed in due time, because not in patch notes.

 

Also,

CV haters coming in 3... 2... 1... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10
[FISH]
[FISH]
Member
47 posts
10,611 battles
41 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

Me think this is likely unintentional and would be fixed in due time, because not in patch notes.

We just came off a patch where EM was broken for an entire patch cycle, rendering most of the balancing data from this patch useless. The concept of QA - or caring about your code - does not seem to be present in St. Petersburg nowadays.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33
[POIBC]
Member
93 posts
9,011 battles
33 分鐘前,Reinhard_of_Avercland 說:

So what was nerfed on Kremlin? Right, the hp of the AA mounts.

But what if there are no CV?:Smile_trollface:

Make Soviet Navy Great Again!

Wait, why am I saying like Soviet navy is not great.

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28
[LAL]
Member
84 posts
12,654 battles

playing 0.9.9 right now,

new changes are really stupid and unneccesary

how many player want to see bombs hit the deck or water in the hit of the battle,

got to say, does the developer just weak up in the morning, open  the PC and change the aspects appeared in his dreams last night?

PLZ, grow a brain before you touch this game!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,230
Member
5,692 posts
9,502 battles
1 hour ago, leops1984 said:

We just came off a patch where EM was broken for an entire patch cycle, rendering most of the balancing data from this patch useless. The concept of QA - or caring about your code - does not seem to be present in St. Petersburg nowadays.

Noice. Just WG doing WG thing - being bad :Smile_Default:

Edited by Paladinum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
79
[ANZAC]
Beta Tester
638 posts
4,457 battles
3 hours ago, Rina_Pon said:

Respectable sources on Reddit report the update slealth nerfs CVs in a pretty big way, by changing the way the place acceleration boost is implemented (slowing down the boost ramp time), and allowing the squadron to take AA damage while on an attack run.

End result: CVs now lose a lot more planes when they attack you.

 

good , about time

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
831
[SMOKE]
Member
2,504 posts
18,035 battles

I mean why should they not take AA damage when on an attack run , just counter to all logic and pretty much not inline as gaming fairness goes , do DD got immunity when YOLO charge , do BB got immunity when straight charge ... well you know what I mean .. you push into close range of enemy, enemy will shoot back and you will take more damage is this not obvious ...

Edited by Mechfori
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
799
[BLESS]
Member
1,461 posts
12,809 battles

No clue why it was the way it was. Combined with the change to the acceleration boost, however, the new attack run vulnerability makes a real difference. Yes, CV can still attack and yes he can still do damage, but at least now he has to factor in plane reserves .. meaning his tolerance to sustain attacks, especially on cruisers which cost a lot of planes to attack, is much reduced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,406
[151ST]
Member
3,555 posts
11,945 battles

Ok...

The problem here isn't anything other than if there are some silly damage immunity times or boost issues, they should have been fixed a long time ago, before AA/everything else.

First the mechanics and ruleset needs to be nailed down, I just assumed that the way it has been is the way it's supposed to be.

The fact the the mechanic functions like this and wasn't supposed to means they didn't finish the rework properly in the first place.

At this point I'm not holding high hopes for the spotting rework.

Also complete egotistical note, number 1 Ragnarok player on Asia now, right here. (got there this arvo)

(Yes I know, completely pointless and boastful but I still can't believe it myself...)

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,061
[LBAS]
Member
2,062 posts
3,738 battles
45 minutes ago, S4pp3R said:

 

Also complete egotistical note, number 1 Ragnarok player on Asia now, right here. (got there this arvo)

(Yes I know, completely pointless and boastful but I still can't believe it myself...)

YES

 

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,061
[LBAS]
Member
2,062 posts
3,738 battles
46 minutes ago, S4pp3R said:

 

At this point I'm not holding high hopes for the spotting rework.

I AM WAITING FOR THIS

 

WG sell Orkan and advertise it as AA ship in exchange losing one torpedo....

later in the WoWs-Wiki, they said Orkan AA suck and non existent.....

 

i really need this Spotting half air concealment buff since Orkan dont have smoke.... 

Orkan is cool.... but wrong advertising is simply WRROOONG

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,406
[151ST]
Member
3,555 posts
11,945 battles
48 minutes ago, Skarhabek said:

I AM WAITING FOR THIS

 

WG sell Orkan and advertise it as AA ship in exchange losing one torpedo....

later in the WoWs-Wiki, they said Orkan AA suck and non existent.....

 

i really need this Spotting half air concealment buff since Orkan dont have smoke.... 

Orkan is cool.... but wrong advertising is simply WRROOONG

Yeah don't even get me started on WoWS marketing... ... ERGH!

TBH I'm surprised someone in Australia hasn't sued them yet, there's been enough false advertising, 'not performing to specifications' that if it was anything other than a game, they'd be done by now.

And to those thinking about giving me that nonsense about EULA or any of the 'you agreed to' stuff.

You can't sign away rights, same as it's still illegal to be a slave, even if you signed the contract yourself (in most countries at least).

I do worry about the game we love, they work on so much cool stuff but they can't just let it be, they've gotta stuff something up in the process.

Also, thanks...

Fire!? Gooood, let it burnnnnn!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
206
[MALD]
Member
443 posts
36,231 battles

Right. My advice for CV players sad about this is:

JuSt dOdG3 aNd p0$iTiOn b3tt3R, M8!

 

r/WorldOfWarships - BB, CA/CL, and DD players right now

Edited by Pervis117
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
799
[BLESS]
Member
1,461 posts
12,809 battles
52 minutes ago, Pervis117 said:

Right. My advice for CV players sad about this is:

Whatever, but for them to push through a big change affecting an entire ship class like with no mention in the patch notes is totally unfair to CV players, whatever you think about the changes themselves.

This is a competitive game. Advance warning of balance changes, even small ones, is an unwritten part of the rules.  

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
206
[MALD]
Member
443 posts
36,231 battles
6 minutes ago, Rina_Pon said:

Whatever, but for them to push through a big change affecting an entire ship class like with no mention in the patch notes is totally unfair to CV players, whatever you think about the changes themselves.

This is a competitive game. Advance warning of balance changes, even small ones, is an unwritten part of the rules.  

I an agree with you on principle while simultaneously also taking pleasure in CV players being subject to a gross injustice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,230
Member
5,692 posts
9,502 battles

While I'm indifferent about reworked CVs, I'm bothered because this is changes being released without timely, public, official documentation.

Unacceptable :Smile_izmena:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,673
[-CAT-]
Member
3,409 posts
13,592 battles

My reaction everytime when WG releases a patch and there is bugs or missing details:

image.thumb.png.5f6cb3fae3e0b1be0baf325b12e89965.png

I mean come on, 5 years and can't do simple QA and / or documentation. Should be better than this. :Smile_facepalm:

Edited by S0und_Theif
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
721
[WG]
Administrator
771 posts
14,819 battles

Commanders!
With the release of Update 0.9.9 you might have noticed some changes to aircraft carriers’ squadrons and AA fire. We are currently investigating this issue. Please, stay tuned for further details from us.
Excuse us for possible inconvenience. 
Good luck and fair seas!

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10
[FISH]
[FISH]
Member
47 posts
10,611 battles
33 minutes ago, Rina_Pon said:

Whatever, but for them to push through a big change affecting an entire ship class like with no mention in the patch notes is totally unfair to CV players, whatever you think about the changes themselves.

This is a competitive game. Advance warning of balance changes, even small ones, is an unwritten part of the rules.  

In an ideal world? Sure, you'd be right. However, my experience in this game has been so degraded by CVs - and Wargaming's insistence on forcing it into game modes where they do not belong - that I do not really care what it takes to get CVs nerfed. Period.

If Satan himself touched the Warships code to nerf CVs and get it out of CBs, I'd leave a kind word about him.

Edited by leops1984
  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,673
[-CAT-]
Member
3,409 posts
13,592 battles

On the other hand, this indirectly affects ranked.

It is factory defect after all and not user fault.

:Smile_hiding:

Edited by S0und_Theif

Share this post


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

×