Proposed CV and Submarine changes discussion thread

[Wolfswetpaws]

1 hour ago, GandalfTehGray said:

The sub less damage at close range is welcome for my coop matches, but the realism side of me says that's really stupid as the explosive warhead remains the same size. 

Agreed.  The warhead didn't suddenly change size.

[Snargfargle]

2 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

Agreed.  The warhead didn't suddenly change size.

When I heard about that proposed mechanic I thought "Well, that's another nail in the coffin of realism." Or maybe that's why ICBMs are so powerful, they absorb all of that magical pixie dust on their way from one continent to the next.

[Pugilistic]

On 12/16/2023 at 2:35 PM, MnemonScarlet said:

That's my point. Other ships can have wildly divergent scenarios from the normal gameloop due to teammates having failed at something extraordinarily simple (or just being all dead, I guess). You could still deal with it as a CV, but you also can as a BB alone vs a DD, but it is less reliable and exposes you to greater risk. At least, if there's no fighter spotting, which...

Regarding fighters, when I posted my original post I thought they'd be removing that too based on some things I'd seen in the discord, but evidently not. So they left one of the most oppressive spotting tools lying around lol. A tool so oppressive that when I used it on a blue DD player in a ranked game (one of the few times I bothered to try CVs in a PvP environment), it got him so tilted he began complaining about it in all chat.

They just don't wanna do minimap only spotting. And no, the population of people who can easily shoot well using the minimap is not big enough to shy away from it, since I've seen that as a reason to avoid it in a few places (not just here).

 

22 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I think they don't want to do minimap spotting because they believe it would be seen as an admission of failure that they had to give in to the playerbase...

...which is not at all true, but it's one of the systematic failure causes in WGs business practices.

Its amazing the contortions that WG will go to deny a problem, and then demonstrate even greater pretzel logic when they finally do someting about it. 

[Andrewbassg]

2 hours ago, HogHammer said:

@GandalfTehGray Just three days? 🤣

Just wait until the actual WoWs dev blog rolls out with some real numbers and game mechanics.  This will look like peanuts.

Yep.

 

 

[OldSchoolGaming_Youtube]

On 12/16/2023 at 7:18 PM, Sailor_Moon said:

I have to admit, I'm concerned with how...abusable....the "Duo-flight mode" mechanic seems to be. Of course, we won't know anything further about it till testing starts, but IF you can swap freely between the modes, that could break the game. Go in attack mode, attack, swap to flight mode, avoid AA, get out of AA range, swap to attack mode, rinse and repeat. At that point, AA literally wouldn't matter AT ALL. In short, it would be so much worse than what we've got right now (and it's pretty terrible even now).

This is pretty much how submarines work right now so im not that convinced this wont be the implementation for new travel/attack flights for CV planes as well, remember WG dont wanna break their "protected classes" they just wanna show they are concearned and is trying some stuff...

In a Sub you can be at surface most times due to good concealment. Playing Gato and U-2501 im pretty much at surface 80 % of all games spotting, I only dip under when planes come near or a hidden radarcruiser pops a radar and then im visible for bout 3 sec and then im gone and then I also have a skill that shows me the exact time its active and any other sonar/hydro/radar as well, and this is of course broken A-F, but that is subs for you.

So maybe a new BS CV Skill like Watchful for Subs that will tell the CV whenever he is flying thru a Def AA cruisers circle even in travel mode so its safe whenever he wants to dip down and attack. They gave it to subs that already can dip whenever there is any type of danger so why not give CVs the same with their new Dipping mechanic?     (copy-pasta.....)

Of course, as a sub, you can light up planes at depth and also surface ships with sub hydro without them even knowing it .... because reasons. Even tho ANY other type of spotting is announced to the spotted player, but subs gets "hidden" spotting.

So im not really that hopeful regarding how they will implement this dipping in and out of attackmode to spot etc. They probably just copy-paste the spagetti code from subs.

 

On 12/16/2023 at 7:18 PM, Sailor_Moon said:

But with that said, there's a high chance it WON'T be like that, because it'll break the game, and Wargaming will be monitoring for that level of breakage....hopefully. 😅

Yeah .... their track record is awesome regarding NOT implementing stuff breaking the game .... 😆

 

On 12/17/2023 at 12:14 AM, UnderTheRadarAgain said:

I agree - this proposed CV rework (2.0 or is it now 3.0?) looks to be a dogs breakfast. And I agree there are going to be bugs, all the best bugs. My money is on your shells coming out the back of your turret whenever you fire your main battery while AA is active. 

It would be nice to at least see some now interesting bugs, instead of all the old ones we already lived thru ... and there is A LOT....!

 

On 12/17/2023 at 12:14 AM, UnderTheRadarAgain said:

I already hate having to play a CV for naval battles - being the clan leader means you have to play the class nobody else wants to for that star. I suck bad at CV play. Never above middle in team ranking at the end, rarely break 100k damage regardless of the ship used. And since the rocket nerf (DD buff) it's impossible to use that ammo on them. I even stopped using tiny tim rockets because the 5 second delay makes it impossible to hit anything that is moving. I only have something like 96 games in a cv in randoms out of over 4600 games played. So when I talk CV stuff - it's from the perspective of a potato.

 

Have you tried the Russians? Im not big on playing CVs but when I do it seems like the Russians get most damage almost. You can even hit DDs in smoke with the bouncing bombs ... its hilarious ...... not so much for the skilled DD captain tho....

 

On 12/17/2023 at 12:14 AM, UnderTheRadarAgain said:

We are just going to have to wait until these changes go live on the PTS server to even hope to actually understand what the hell the devs have been smoking.

Yes .... and im afraid ... very afraid ....

 

Gotta say, Flamu brings up quite many interesting things here.

They could have fixed pretty much all of this with a simple already implemented mechanic (Minimap spotting) which most of the playerbase have been suggesting for years, but instead they will tear up and try to re-balance/re-code ancient spagetti coding, on every single mechanic in this game, to get all these new stange mechanics ans consumables to work (flashbangs for surface ships to counter CVs ....... really?!?)

I dont think Flamu is BS-ing when he says this is just a Huge Ego issue for WG. They cant say they were wrong all these years and the playerbase handed them the solution on a silver platter so now they will try and re-code the Mount Everest so they dont have to. 

 

Also another note. Isn't it strange the new submarine surveillance consumable will only be implemented on Commonwealth cruisers, a new cruiser line so of course gets this so everyone and their grandmother will grind it superfast ..... just to be able to counter subs....

But then also Venezia, Zao and Yodo line ....?? Is that just a tad bit strange? 3 lines that at most times will sit in the back lines spamming HE and SAP at 18 km targets? Why do exactly these 3 lines get it?! Not Des Moines, Wooster, Minotaur and Golden Lewd ... you know ... cruisers that for obvious reason will most likely sit near caps in the front line?

Isnt this a tad bit strange...? So WG will create the illusion that they are trying to fix a problem by fitting these cruisers never even close to front lines and subs .... with submarine surveillance?

Venecia and Hinden also receiving Air dropped ASW ... finally! ! For some strange reason 2 heavy cruisers that didnt get it from the get go?! (Intern assigning ASW range with dice?) And that is great but still 2 cruisers that sit in back line, so doesn't really matter that much for subs, but dutch cruisers .... that for obvious reasons sit near islands and caps to utilize their PLANE AIR DROPPED HE bombs ... for some strange reason CANT GET AIR DROPPED ASWs?! Even tho the code must already be there for the HE bombers.               Could this maybe .......  just maybe be because it would be an actual counter to subs since the Dutch cruisers will be near them? Why else would Dutch cruisers that sits close to the action just happen to be ONLY HEAVY cruiser in the game after this rework that won thave any capabilities to counter subs?! 

I for one cant find any other intelligent reason for this! And this make me a whole lot of sus regarding this whole overhaul.

Also as Flamu mentions in this video, they already FIXED SUBS SHOTGUNNING in may of 2022. WG made the dispersion for unguided torps very wonky so it would be hard to get all hits in on a ship while shotgunning .... and it worked ... during a full week shotgunning was really crap... so what did WG do then? They reseted all the nerf to dispersion and shotgunning was back! ! This is how much they wanted to "fix this problem" ... and this was a year ago in 2022.

So worst case scenario is that we will get about a 1000 new bugs in the upcoming year/years, some new strange captain skill reworks, AA will matter even less in the future possible, the player base will become even more confused about how stuff works in the game with even more "He cheated in this match"-threads and Subs and CVs will just carry on.

But I will try and stay hopeful, but its hard taking all this in.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 18, 2023 by OldSchoolGaming_Youtube

[Crokodone]

On 12/14/2023 at 2:08 PM, Subtle_Octavian said:

Change CV spotting? nope.

Magical AA that ramps up with time, and magical immune planes. Flashbang planes, because why not.

Change sub detection?

Add magical escape mode to subs and choose between 6 seconds of underwater spotting or just use the periscope.

Fix sub shotgun?

Nope, make torpedoes accelerate slowly like some wind up toy, with damage magically increasing with range.

Expecto Torpdo! I cast magic missile!

 

 

These changes are both lazy and horrific at the same time; compelling one to invest more in real life than another version of World of Warcraft with ship skins and everything confined to miniature instances. These changes. With the forums down address everything and anything but the problem, while creating more problems. Going after torpedo damage over distance is beyond asinine. If it was a global change, even then it would be a problem. 

A more ideal solution??? Detonation angles for all HE projectiles, including Torpedoes. That one change alone would solve HE, DB and wall of skill/shotgun spam once and for all at every tier, for every ship and aircraft from the past, present and future... 

[Musket22]

3 hours ago, Snargfargle said:

When I heard about that proposed mechanic I thought "Well, that's another nail in the coffin of realism." Or maybe that's why ICBMs are so powerful, they absorb all of that magical pixie dust on their way from one continent to the next.

Realism? Shirley you jest!

The lack of realism in the implementation of the submarines & CV air groups with all their gimmicks would be to laugh at if one doesn't see how detrimental to the GAME both subs and CV air groups are.  

Too many sub drivers want it to stay an arcade game.

[Helstrem]

1 hour ago, OldSchoolGaming_Youtube said:

Also as Flamu mentions in this video, they already FIXED SUBS SHOTGUNNING in may of 2022. WG made the dispersion for unguided torps very wonky so it would be hard to get all hits in on a ship while shotgunning .... and it worked ... during a full week shotgunning was really crap... so what did WG do then? They resetted all the nerf to dispersion and shotgunning was back! ! This is how much they wanted to "fix this problem" ... and this was a year ago in 2022.

The problem I see, just from the geometry of it as I didn't play with it, is that it nerfs non-shotgunning even worse than it nerfs shotgunning.  So yes, it made shotgunning less effective, but it also made shotgunning the only remotely viable way to use those torps.

[Jakob Knight]

37 minutes ago, Musket22 said:

Realism? Shirley you jest!

The lack of realism in the implementation of the submarines & CV air groups with all their gimmicks would be to laugh at if one doesn't see how detrimental to the GAME both subs and CV air groups are.  

Too many sub drivers want it to stay an arcade game.

 

It's always been an arcade game, and always will be.  The degree of fantasy is really the question.  All ships have fantasy elements, so the question becomes which ones are appropriate in-game and which aren't.

 

 

[Musket22]

11 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

The problem I see, just from the geometry of it as I didn't play with it, is that it nerfs non-shotgunning even worse than it nerfs shotgunning.  So yes, it made shotgunning less effective, but it also made shotgunning the only remotely viable way to use those torps.

Simple solution, remove subs from the game until they work properly in a more realistic way.

[Jakob Knight]

13 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

The problem I see, just from the geometry of it as I didn't play with it, is that it nerfs non-shotgunning even worse than it nerfs shotgunning.  So yes, it made shotgunning less effective, but it also made shotgunning the only remotely viable way to use those torps.

 

Indeed.  I suppose the proposed 'fusing warhead' proposal might work, but it will remain to be seen if it handicaps Subs that are charged too much alongside the other ASW measures available.  We'll see what we actually get once it hits testing.

[Jakob Knight]

2 minutes ago, Musket22 said:

Simple solution, remove subs from the game until they work properly in a more realistic way.

 

Then we'd have to remove all ships in the game, as none of them work in a more realistic way.  Subs are among the more realistic, all things considered.

 

 

[Musket22]

5 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said:

 

All ships have fantasy elements, so the question becomes which ones are appropriate in-game and which aren't.

Subs more so than surface ships. 

Surface ships and subs all have fantasy speed.

Surface ship gun ballistics are suppose to be using real-world ballistics but don't.

Subs have fantasy torpedo types and abilities (Max speed AND max range? Homing? Really?)

Damage Mitigation? Sub underwater maneuverability? Torpedo launch angles? 

Invisibility to sonar? 

I Could go on for several more lines. 

[Musket22]

7 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said:

Then we'd have to remove all ships in the game, as none of them work in a more realistic way.  Subs are among the more realistic, all things considered.

Suurface ships worked fine against each other before the force-feeding of subs onto the pllayers.

All things considered? err NO!

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

1 hour ago, Musket22 said:

Suurface ships worked fine against each other before the force-feeding of subs onto the pllayers.

All things considered? err NO!

LOL

No, they did not.

The game has NEVER been well balanced, and never will be.

[Jakob Knight]

2 hours ago, Musket22 said:

Subs more so than surface ships. 

Surface ships and subs all have fantasy speed.

Surface ship gun ballistics are suppose to be using real-world ballistics but don't.

Subs have fantasy torpedo types and abilities (Max speed AND max range? Homing? Really?)

Damage Mitigation? Sub underwater maneuverability? Torpedo launch angles? 

Invisibility to sonar? 

I Could go on for several more lines. 

 

Um....surface and CV torpedoes have the same fantasy abilities of max speed and max range.  The homing mechanics of having to send out a pulse to lock the torpedoes on is realistic (though the use of DCP to remove it is certainly not).

 

Sub underwater maneuverability is certainly as realistic as surface ship maneuverability in the game, and torpedo launch characteristics are about the same fantasy level all around (real surface torpedo launch systems fired torpedoes in sequence, so the actual attack was staggered rather than a wave).

 

And the invisibility to sonar is all-around, with Sub sonar unable to pick up a surfaced unit and having a limited duration.  Subs unable to spot each other right next to each other, while other ships do so is another fantasy element both ways.

 

And radar that goes through mountains, hydro that detects -everything- on or under the sea in range....

 

Yeah, fantasy all around.  But that's why this is a game in a game universe.  If we were doing a realistic simulator, it would be completely different, and CVs would rule just about everything.

 

 

[Musket22]

56 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

LOL

No, they did not.

The game has NEVER been well balanced, and never will be.

Even if YOU perceive it as never to be balanced, it is no reason to applaud WG trowing it even more off kilter by shoving subs and air groups on the scales.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

6 minutes ago, Musket22 said:

Even if YOU perceive it as never to be balanced, it is no reason to applaud WG trowing it even more off kilter by shoving subs and air groups on the scales.

Ah, I see the misunderstanding.

I'm not applauding WG for this change, far from it.

I'm helping remind people that WG does not value a balanced game very highly.

[Sailor_Moon]

3 hours ago, Musket22 said:

Surface ships and subs all have fantasy speed.

Well, except the USN standards. Of course.

Can't give THEM any breaks, right Wargaming?

[Wolfswetpaws]

5 hours ago, Musket22 said:

Realism? Shirley you jest!

The lack of realism in the implementation of the submarines & CV air groups with all their gimmicks would be to laugh at if one doesn't see how detrimental to the GAME both subs and CV air groups are.  

Too many sub drivers want it to stay an arcade game.

  
https://www.fanpop.com/clubs/laverne-and-shirley/images/23583312/title/laverne-shirley-photo
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074016/
 

[Pugilistic]

Looking at the fantasy and complexity of these changes, can we be far from a Unicorn consumable that drops glitter bombs? 

Edited December 18, 2023 by Pugilistic

[Helstrem]

3 hours ago, Sailor_Moon said:

Well, except the USN standards. Of course.

Can't give THEM any breaks, right Wargaming?

British Dreadnoughts seem pretty locked into their historical speeds, no?

[GandalfTehGray]

12 hours ago, HogHammer said:

@GandalfTehGray Just three days? 🤣

Just wait until the actual WoWs dev blog rolls out with some real numbers and game mechanics.  This will look like peanuts.

Around the 2 4 letter W words, work & wife. 

[Kynami]

6 hours ago, Sailor_Moon said:

Well, except the USN standards. Of course.

Can't give THEM any breaks, right Wargaming?

Of course not! Gotta have a reason to keep recommending the Brisk talent and keep dangling speed flags in front of the players trying to use them. Also given the accurate information about them they can proudly point and say its to established historical standards. They didn't have to take them into the back room and have Ivan give them a little polishing to fill in holes in the documentation.

[OldSchoolGaming_Youtube]

13 hours ago, Helstrem said:

The problem I see, just from the geometry of it as I didn't play with it, is that it nerfs non-shotgunning even worse than it nerfs shotgunning.  So yes, it made shotgunning less effective, but it also made shotgunning the only remotely viable way to use those torps.

I dont understand your point. WG made the RNG dispersion for non - homing torps very wide so it literary was like a shotgun blast so very few torps would hit a non-pinged target, for the homing torps you still had pings so they would go where you pinged regardless of the ange they got launched out of the tubes.