Andrewbassg Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 (edited) 52 minutes ago, Aethervox said: How about you man up & say where you stand (on all three)? I've done so. 😁 Eeeaaaasy ..... :) he played mainly, if not exclusively Bearn, specifically in the Cv neutering role. As for subs, he provided honest and true feedback on the state of subs during testing and got very disappointed when subs vs sub action was, de facto, removed . So... Edited May 19 by Andrewbassg 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaydin Posted May 19 Author Share Posted May 19 (edited) 13 hours ago, Yedwy said: For instance? That they aren't as overpowered as the hate mind for them says they are? A sub is effectively defenseless now if a ship gets within 3km due to how little damage their torpedoes do within that window, a change that makes no sense. Shotgunning could be devastating, yes, but getting into position to pull it off was also extremely risky for the sub because if they got caught before they were in position, they would get nuked by every ASW in range. A shotgunning submarine was in a more dangerous position than a torpedo boat DD launching in stealth at mid range. For carriers, the biggest misconception people have is that if a carrier manages to make even one attack run that AA is worthless. That runs completely counter to WGs stated intentions with the carrier rework which was that a carrier should always be able to make at least one attack per squad. The question then becoming for the carrier if that one attack is worth it versus the risk of losing the entire squad. God knows how many people I've had arguing semantics that CVs can't be deplaned because they can still launch single plane squads no matter how many times I've explained that a carrier launching understrength squads is a screwed carrier due to the snowball effect: The fewer planes there are in a squad, the easier the remaining planes become to shoot down and therefore the fewer planes can survive an attack run and get back to the carrier. Then you have the people who sail off alone and then get picked off by a CV/Sub when a solo target is a very tempting one for both ship types since isolated targets have a harder time defending themselves, whether it's overlapping AA bubbles against aircraft or concentrated ASW attacks against subs, defending against CVs/subs is stronger when done in groups. Finally, there's the one that pops up a lot: that CV/subs are brainless to play and anyone can do well in them, usually pointing out unicums who have done 300k+ damage in matches with either. Well... duh. They are unicum players. Of course they are going to do well. If you take a 40% win rate player and give them the best CV or sub in the game they aren't going to magically play well. Everyone has encountered bad subs who submerge too early and run out of dive capacity in the middle of the enemy fleet or else try to skirt around the edge of the map trying to pick off the enemy carrier instead of picking at the enemies flanks with torpedo attacks and trying to disrupt their formations. Edited May 19 by Zaydin 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOBTHEBALL Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 17 hours ago, Zaydin said: Bonus points: Dare say anything even slightly negative about the balance of DDs and the role they play in shaping the meta or say anything remotely in defense of subs/CVs and you get torn apart. Well I think this is because Subs and CVs are much more broken than DDs. It isn't hard to decipher this especially if you've played all three of those classes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel_Allan_Clark Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 6 minutes ago, Zaydin said: That runs completely counter to WGs stated intentions with the carrier rework which was that a carrier should always be able to make at least one attack per squad. The question then becoming for the carrier if that one attack is worth it versus the risk of losing the entire squad. The reality of this proves the point though...it effectively means air defense (the entire goal of a WW2 CV) is impossible... It's a stunning admission of incompetence by WG staff. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaydin Posted May 19 Author Share Posted May 19 1 minute ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: The reality of this proves the point though...it effectively means air defense (the entire goal of a WW2 CV) is impossible... It's a stunning admission of incompetence by WG staff. This isn't WW2. It's an arcade game. It would be miserable for CV players if they couldn't do any damage at all. If the game were 'realistic', most battles would be CV heavy with a few BBs, cruisers and DDs providing escort. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaydin Posted May 19 Author Share Posted May 19 6 minutes ago, BOBTHEBALL said: Well I think this is because Subs and CVs are much more broken than DDs. It isn't hard to decipher this especially if you've played all three of those classes. Play a BB in a match without carriers or radar to flush a DD out of stealth and be permaspotted the entire match by it while periodically zig zagging and praying you didn't just turn into the DDs torpedoes while being bombarded by the enemy fleet the entire time. Tell me how much fun you have. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrewbassg Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Zaydin said: That they aren't as overpowered as the hate mind for them says they are? A sub is effectively defenseless now if a ship gets within 3km due to how little damage their torpedoes do within that window, a change that makes no sense. Shotgunning could be devastating, yes, but getting into position to pull it off was also extremely risky for the sub because if they got caught before they were in position, they would get nuked by every ASW in range. A shotgunning submarine was in a more dangerous position than a torpedo boat DD launching in stealth at mid range That's not the issue. The issue is they trying to fix something which is their own making. Literally countless people warned them that subs weren't ready yet they even then kept piling buffs after buffs on them in order to make dollar. And did the very same mistake as with Cv;s, by removing sub vs sub action. Effectively assigning them a pure predatory and griefing role. 16 minutes ago, Zaydin said: For carriers, the biggest misconception people have is that if a carrier manages to make even one attack run that AA is worthless. That runs completely counter to WGs stated intentions with the carrier rework which was that a carrier should always be able to make at least one attack per squad. The question then becoming for the carrier if that one attack is worth it versus the risk of losing the entire squad. And again that's not the only issue with Cv's. There are a gazillion of them. 16 minutes ago, Zaydin said: God knows how many people I've had arguing semantics that CVs can't be deplaned because they can still launch single plane squads no matter how many times I've explained that a carrier launching understrength squads is a screwed carrier due to the snowball effect: The fewer planes there are in a squad, the easier the remaining planes become to shoot down and therefore the fewer planes can survive an attack run and get back to the carrier. You still missing the fundamental problems with Cv;s...... Edited May 19 by Andrewbassg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolitudeFreak Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 1 minute ago, Zaydin said: Play a BB in a match without carriers or radar to flush a DD out of stealth and be permaspotted the entire match by it while periodically zig zagging and praying you didn't just turn into the DDs torpedoes while being bombarded by the enemy fleet the entire time. Tell me how much fun you have. Shouldn't your allied cruisers and DDs be assisting with the enemy DD? It's almost like there are roles and counters in this game. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOBTHEBALL Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 2 minutes ago, Zaydin said: Play a BB in a match without carriers or radar to flush a DD out of stealth and be permaspotted the entire match by it while periodically zig zagging and praying you didn't just turn into the DDs torpedoes while being bombarded by the enemy fleet the entire time. Tell me how much fun you have. Sounds like you don't position right haha. Why are you being bombarded by the enemy fleet alone and spotted on a flank with the DD trying to torp you? We can fix your positioning problem my friend, maybe knock some game-sense into you as well! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel_Allan_Clark Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 9 minutes ago, Zaydin said: This isn't WW2. It's an arcade game. It would be miserable for CV players if they couldn't do any damage at all. If the game were 'realistic', most battles would be CV heavy with a few BBs, cruisers and DDs providing escort. Tell that to WG marketing...they market it as a WW2 game. 6 minutes ago, Zaydin said: Play a BB in a match without carriers or radar to flush a DD out of stealth and be permaspotted the entire match by it while periodically zig zagging and praying you didn't just turn into the DDs torpedoes while being bombarded by the enemy fleet the entire time. Tell me how much fun you have. Indeed. This is the problem most people who want to remove air spotting have not realized...without air spotting, there is too much concealment. DDs are a bit overtuned...specifically the ones with good concealment. Planes are their counter. 4 minutes ago, SolitudeFreak said: Shouldn't your allied cruisers and DDs be assisting with the enemy DD? It's almost like there are roles and counters in this game. LOL Cruisers don't counter DDs. Not even radar cruisers. Radar is a limited duration, limited number, limited range consumable. It is as much a counter to DDs as defAA is a counter to planes. DDs are the next best counter to DDs...but if the enemy has the better concealment DDs...your team is at a massive fundamental disadvantage since the enemy team can spot from safety while your team cannot. It all comes back to vision control being fundamentally broken. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethervox Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 27 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said: Eeeaaaasy ..... :) he played mainly, if not exclusively Bearn, Why are you answering? My comment is/was directed at someone else. Why are you barging in? Oh ya, a reworked Bearn CV - a perfect example of how WG has completely screwed CVs. So, he plays reworked CVs. & a 'specific' OP CV at that. So, swallowing WGs 'load'. The 'image' is, imo, sickening 😒. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrewbassg Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 24 minutes ago, Zaydin said: .....magically play well 🙂 Ook I'm game, WHAT is the definition of good play? Raking up dmg? Getting kills? Playing for the win? One can rack up big numbers and still lose. Conversely one can do pitiful dmg and still play for the win. So what is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfswetpaws Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: Which claims? Because WG lied about just about everything to do with 0.8.0. I would not accept any WG documents from that time period as being in any way the truth. Counter strafing was a known bug covered by some of the CV focused CCs back in the day. We could try looking through Farazelleth's archives. He and others would also cover just how janky and buggy the RTS interface was...In my experience, most people didn't play CV because learning that clusterF of a UI was painful...hence, the 'skill gap'. WG skillfully redirecting the playerbase from the reality that the root cause was their inability to code a decent UI. My statements with regards to what I perceive as the vision WG has for CVs is my looking at their ACTIONS, not their words, and in nearly every case...the objective is to try to force CVs to be primarily about damage farming, not vision control. Even the new support CV line has insufficient vision control capabilities to make that the primary use of the CV. Fine. I'll just consider everything to be your opinion and leave it at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrewbassg Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: This is the problem most people who want to remove air spotting have not realized...without air spotting, there is too much concealment Nobody said to them to remove vision from Cv's, that's their own st*p*dity. However, them spotting for the team was and is braindead. And...the game is perfectly playable without Cv's. Edited May 19 by Andrewbassg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrewbassg Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 5 minutes ago, Aethervox said: Why are you answering? Coz a) its a ... forum? And b) you don't know him and I do. You are barking at the wrong tree. Aether, you were on EU, not on NA. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArIskandir Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 4 minutes ago, Aethervox said: Why are you answering? He's the kind of friend that stands with You even when things get rough, he won't stand idle when he can lend a hand. That's why. I Will answer your post in due time, what You ask...'where I stand' has no easy black and white answer. Many here already know were I stand anyway. 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfswetpaws Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 39 minutes ago, Zaydin said: That they aren't as overpowered as the hate mind for them says they are? A sub is effectively defenseless now if a ship gets within 3km due to how little damage their torpedoes do within that window, a change that makes no sense. Shotgunning could be devastating, yes, but getting into position to pull it off was also extremely risky for the sub because if they got caught before they were in position, they would get nuked by every ASW in range. A shotgunning submarine was in a more dangerous position than a torpedo boat DD launching in stealth at mid range. For carriers, the biggest misconception people have is that if a carrier manages to make even one attack run that AA is worthless. That runs completely counter to WGs stated intentions with the carrier rework which was that a carrier should always be able to make at least one attack per squad. The question then becoming for the carrier if that one attack is worth it versus the risk of losing the entire squad. God knows how many people I've had arguing semantics that CVs can't be deplaned because they can still launch single plane squads no matter how many times I've explained that a carrier launching understrength squads is a screwed carrier due to the snowball effect: The fewer planes there are in a squad, the easier the remaining planes become to shoot down and therefore the fewer planes can survive an attack run and get back to the carrier. Then you have the people who sail off alone and then get picked off by a CV/Sub when a solo target is a very tempting one for both ship types since isolated targets have a harder time defending themselves, whether it's overlapping AA bubbles against aircraft or concentrated ASW attacks against subs, defending against CVs/subs is stronger when done in groups. Finally, there's the one that pops up a lot: that CV/subs are brainless to play and anyone can do well in them, usually pointing out unicums who have done 300k+ damage in matches with either. Well... duh. They are unicum players. Of course they are going to do well. If you take a 40% win rate player and give them the best CV or sub in the game they aren't going to magically play well. Everyone has encountered bad subs who submerge too early and run out of dive capacity in the middle of the enemy fleet or else try to skirt around the edge of the map trying to pick off the enemy carrier instead of picking at the enemies flanks with torpedo attacks and trying to disrupt their formations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfswetpaws Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 36 minutes ago, BOBTHEBALL said: Well I think this is because Subs and CVs are much more broken than DDs. It isn't hard to decipher this especially if you've played all three of those classes. I play all available ship types, and I don't think any of them are "broken" or "over-powered". They each have virtues, vices and quirks. Usually the "weakest link" is the player(s) who haven't learned enough about how to play well, in my opinion. Mental coping skills might also be lacking. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrewbassg Posted May 19 Share Posted May 19 (edited) 7 minutes ago, ArIskandir said: ...when things get rough Yup, we did a LOT of fights against Wedgie's ...."missssses". Like when the ec rework hit and we realised that the new system will remove stacking..... Edited May 19 by Andrewbassg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaydin Posted May 19 Author Share Posted May 19 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said: Cruisers don't counter DDs. Not even radar cruisers. Radar is a limited duration, limited number, limited range consumable. It is as much a counter to DDs as defAA is a counter to planes. DDs are the next best counter to DDs...but if the enemy has the better concealment DDs...your team is at a massive fundamental disadvantage since the enemy team can spot from safety while your team cannot. It all comes back to vision control being fundamentally broken. Radar no longer counters DDs and hasn't in ages. Not with how good DD mains are at whining till they get their counters nerfed. What radar counters these days are smokescreens. Radar these days is too short a range to counter many DDs and most are too short lived to light them up for long, particularly those with high concealment and high speeds meaning it's trivial for them to stay out of radar range unless they aren't paying attention and blunder into a radar cruiser. Edited May 19 by Zaydin 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaydin Posted May 19 Author Share Posted May 19 17 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said: Nobody said to them to remove vision from Cv's, that's their own st*p*dity. However, them spotting for the team was and is braindead. And...the game is perfectly playable without Cv's. The game is also perfectly playable without DDs. What's your point? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOBTHEBALL Posted May 20 Share Posted May 20 13 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said: I play all available ship types, and I don't think any of them are "broken" or "over-powered". They each have virtues, vices and quirks. Well I play all ship types and I can feel how much more powerful some are compared to others lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrewbassg Posted May 20 Share Posted May 20 1 minute ago, Zaydin said: The game is also perfectly playable without DDs. What's your point? But you will play a LOT more Cv 'less games than dd' less ones. As for the point....aerial spotting isn't a necessity. Personally ( tho I can make the case as being also factually) it is the other way around..... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clammboy Posted May 20 Share Posted May 20 16 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said: I play all available ship types, and I don't think any of them are "broken" or "over-powered". They each have virtues, vices and quirks. While I love you to death Wolf I just have to totally disagree with this especially in random games coop not so much so. We all know that certain ships and classes are just better suited then others. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfswetpaws Posted May 20 Share Posted May 20 17 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said: 23 minutes ago, ArIskandir said: ...when things get rough Yup, we did a LOT For those who aren't fully aware, @ArIskandir did a lot of pioneering with Submarines and the CV Bearn. Here's a link to some of his past work, courtesy of Wayback Machine. https://web.archive.org/web/20230728134606/https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/262261-how-to-dodge-homing-torpedoes/ 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now