Is the patch today the CV changes?

[_KlRlTO_]

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

They started that foolishness from day 1 of the forum closure.

If anything, they created a greater monster for themselves, because they have no control over what is posted here. The only thing this forum isn't is well connected to newer players, to which I strongly recommend informing newer players that this forum exists, assuming they are the type to actually participate in forums to begin with.

 

 

17 hours ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

Removing CVs and subs would be the best thing for the game, so yeah, it would survive it.

Also, in regards to removing CVs: Removing paid for assets, and assets with hard time and effort put in to earn, just goes over so well with a player base, especially when those assets offer a unique and different experience, and when those assets bear such important historical significance in a game that actually tries to appeal to history nerds. Enough of the player base would leave immediately upon CV removal that bots would be needed up to at least tier 8 to keep the queue times down within two patch cycles, servers would have to be folded in to keep player numbers high enough to function, and the game would be in maintenance mode in 12-18 months. Sure, it would make about 25% of the current population really happy, but they aren't enough to keep the lights on.

[Ferdinand_Max]

15 hours ago, _KlRlTO_ said:

Also, in regards to removing CVs: Removing paid for assets, and assets with hard time and effort put in to earn, just goes over so well with a player base, especially when those assets offer a unique and different experience, and when those assets bear such important historical significance in a game that actually tries to appeal to history nerds. Enough of the player base would leave immediately upon CV removal that bots would be needed up to at least tier 8 to keep the queue times down within two patch cycles, servers would have to be folded in to keep player numbers high enough to function, and the game would be in maintenance mode in 12-18 months. Sure, it would make about 25% of the current population really happy, but they aren't enough to keep the lights on.

CVs may be a cultural thing for USA, but most people I know actually prefer battleships.

On 6/26/2024 at 3:26 PM, Wolfswetpaws said:

I politely disagree.

The game is more interesting, challenging and entertaining with CV's and Submarines in it, I feel.

While the game isn't perfect, and implementation of various in-game processes may vex some players here & there, the ships existed in real-life and I feel they deserve representation in-game.

Are you saying that backline camping and running in circles is "interesting, challenging and entertaining"? Because that is the kind of gameplay CVs and submarines promote.

[Jakob Knight]

16 hours ago, _KlRlTO_ said:

 

Also, in regards to removing CVs: Removing paid for assets, and assets with hard time and effort put in to earn, just goes over so well with a player base, especially when those assets offer a unique and different experience, and when those assets bear such important historical significance in a game that actually tries to appeal to history nerds. Enough of the player base would leave immediately upon CV removal that bots would be needed up to at least tier 8 to keep the queue times down within two patch cycles, servers would have to be folded in to keep player numbers high enough to function, and the game would be in maintenance mode in 12-18 months. Sure, it would make about 25% of the current population really happy, but they aren't enough to keep the lights on.

 

But wait!  After the players who leave quit being an active part of the game, the 25 percent who approve of the change will become 50 percent of the playerbase.  After they remove Subs, it climbs to 60 percent for the same reasons.  After they remove DDs (next on the chopping block once people need something else to blame), it will rise to 75 percent!  Once Cruisers are also removed, no doubt it will reach 90 percent.

 

See?  Player approval of these changes would keep increasing the fewer players we have, so the final elimination of all ships in the game will no doubt result in infinitly more approval by the town inhabitants who would be the only ones left in the game, and who could finally get to have normal lives without shells crashing through their kitchen window or planes buzzing their cars.

 

 

Edited Thursday at 03:08 PM by Jakob Knight

[Wolfswetpaws]

1 hour ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

Are you saying that backline camping and running in circles is "interesting, challenging and entertaining"? Because that is the kind of gameplay CVs and submarines promote.

Who said anything about back-line camping and running around in circles?

I plan to sink ships.  I don't mind sailing to point-blank range in order to accomplish that.  🙂 

[ArIskandir]

1 hour ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

Are you saying that backline camping and running in circles is "interesting, challenging and entertaining"? Because that is the kind of gameplay CVs and submarines promote.

I was going to object... until I remembered they banned Submarines doing close range stuff ☹️

[AdmiralThunder]

22 hours ago, ArIskandir said:

Dude, everyone here is 'known' from the old Forum... There's no 'infiltrators', EC is just himself as he has always been for years; I'm also the same contrarían as always... Pissing people off (including WG staff) since 2016 😬 

I agree the usual people are here and bring their agendas (me too of course). Not so sure we have instigators and rabble rousers planted by WG. Just the usual defenders of everything they do and WG employee wannabes and suck up’s we have seen for years. Actually WG doesn’t need plants. We have people who do it for them voluntarily LOL.

However, I do believe WG spies on the forums in the background. We all know Ahskance was around for a bit but that went over like a fart in Church and he has not interacted for a long time.

That company can’t help themselves and would never be able to stay away from here. Posting as players probably not. Monitoring the forums from the background absolutely with no doubt.

JMHO

Edited Thursday at 03:33 PM by AdmiralThunder

[AdmiralThunder]

1 hour ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

CVs may be a cultural thing for USA, but most people I know actually prefer battleships.

I would not say CV’s are overly populated or played on NA and they aren’t a cultural thing whatever that is supposed to mean.

From what I see on NA I would say BB’s and DD’s are equally popular and the most popular. Then Cruisers. 

If you want to see CV’s played a lot and where they are extremely popular go to the Asia server.

Edited Thursday at 03:43 PM by AdmiralThunder

[Jakob Knight]

5 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

I would not say CV’s are overly populated or played on NA and they aren’t a cultural thing whatever that is supposed to mean.

From what I see on NA I would say BB’s and DD’s are equally popular and the most popular. Then Cruisers. 

If you want to see CV’s played a lot and where they are extremely popular go to the Asia server.

 

Indeed.  Considering it was Japan that pioneered the concept of air power, I'm not surprised the Asian server has its share of Carrier enthusiasts.

 

 

[Asym]

1 minute ago, AdmiralThunder said:

I would not say CV’s are overly populated or played on NA and they aren’t a cultural thing whatever that is supposed to mean.

Carriers are our, the United States of America's, power projection platform and they are a large part of our Naval Doctrine.

You know that.....  Of all people, you know that.....

Over populated?  No.......  A sad state of affairs that could have been implemented a lot better and I believe, could have made the game a better product....  Alas, that is not the case though....

Culturally, in a way yes !  It's what we actually use in real life to provide a "bump" to the political realities we can't solve peacefully....  We deploy Carrier task forces to hot spots all over the world....  Crap, a freaking carrier task force off our coast, they must be serious....!  Now?  Who knows anymore.....?

It was the "Battleship Doctrine" before that.  England used it's Navy for a long time to "insure what they wanted politically to happen...."  or else, all trade stops....

[Justin_Simpleton]

51 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

I agree the usual people are here and bring their agendas (me too of course). Not so sure we have instigators and rabble rousers planted by WG. Just the usual defenders of everything they do and WG employee wannabes and suck up’s we have seen for years. Actually WG doesn’t need plants. We have people who do it for them voluntarily LOL.

However, I do believe WG spies on the forums in the background. We all know Ahskance was around for a bit but that went over like a fart in Church and he has not interacted for a long time.

That company can’t help themselves and would never be able to stay away from here. Posting as players probably not. Monitoring the forums from the background absolutely with no doubt.

I agree with this assessment.  I think WG would be interested in what is said on this platform without having to defend their current situation.  This forum may be a source of information that WG draws upon in guiding their decisions but there may be other forums they value as a good sources of info and internally, they balance their decisions.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

2 hours ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

CVs may be a cultural thing for USA, but most people I know actually prefer battleships.

Are you saying that backline camping and running in circles is "interesting, challenging and entertaining"? Because that is the kind of gameplay CVs and submarines promote.

As if backline camping and running in circles doesn't happen in games including only BBs, cruisers, and DDs.

Oh wait.

[MnemonScarlet]

3 hours ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

Are you saying that backline camping and running in circles is "interesting, challenging and entertaining"? Because that is the kind of gameplay CVs and submarines promote.

I'm not a fan of CVs and subs or anything, but the badly designed maps probably promote that more than anything else in the game. More than any single class interaction. Probably more than even the vision system. It's been a problem for a looonnng time, and only gotten worse as WG has made more maps that just want you to do that for optimum filler gameplay.

[Jakob Knight]

1 hour ago, MnemonScarlet said:

I'm not a fan of CVs and subs or anything, but the badly designed maps probably promote that more than anything else in the game. More than any single class interaction. Probably more than even the vision system. It's been a problem for a looonnng time, and only gotten worse as WG has made more maps that just want you to do that for optimum filler gameplay.

 

I miss Ocean.  That should be the map seen in half of all matches at all Tiers, since that map most closely resembles normal operating conditions for blue water vessels.

 

"Nowhere to run, no place to hide...we're all along for that one way ride."

 

Edited Thursday at 07:03 PM by Jakob Knight

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

1 hour ago, Jakob Knight said:

 

I miss Ocean.  That should be the map seen in half of all matches at all Tiers, since that map most closely resembles normal operating conditions for blue water vessels.

 

"Nowhere to run, no place to hide...we're all along for that one way ride."

 

It's also the map that disfavors CVs the most.

Islands are a planes best friend. They block line of fire to the hull...they block AA fire but not plane direction...

[hipcanuck]

On 6/24/2024 at 12:47 PM, Musket22 said:

 

- Don't have to worry about running out of a/c ----- check

 

 

Proving that he doesnt know what he's talking about ------- check

[Asym]

15 hours ago, Jakob Knight said:

I miss Ocean.  That should be the map seen in half of all matches at all Tiers, since that map most closely resembles normal operating conditions for blue water vessels.

"Nowhere to run, no place to hide...we're all along for that one way ride."

In fact, Ocean should be the KOTS finals map.  The map.  Saying KOTS is the ultimate form of PVP in WoWs and not having them fight it out on Open Water is simply allowing them all of the exploits and none of the actual "skills" needed when there is "no where to hide...."

Some say it's boring....  Really???  It's how and where the real world Navy's live or die should the world get nasty...  You really can't exploit the Ocean map....  And, no exploits, no KOTS......  I doubt they'd even know how to fight in formations of ships or how to compute how much throw weight (Mass) it takes to defeat oncoming formations of ships.....

"You are correct Sir !"

[Admiral_Karasu]

4 minutes ago, Asym said:

In fact, Ocean should be the KOTS finals map.  The map.  Saying KOTS is the ultimate form of PVP in WoWs and not having them fight it out on Open Water is simply allowing them all of the exploits and none of the actual "skills" needed when there is "no where to hide...."

Some say it's boring....  Really???  It's how and where the real world Navy's live or die should the world get nasty...  You really can't exploit the Ocean map....  And, no exploits, no KOTS......  I doubt they'd even know how to fight in formations of ships or how to compute how much throw weight (Mass) it takes to defeat oncoming formations of ships.....

"You are correct Sir !"

Presumably, in case you don't know, an element of the community does not think using islands as such as a dirty map exploit but good tactics. I do not quite share that assessment as naval battles tend to be open water engagements and not something like river delta skirmishes with patrol boats.

The Ocean remains the best map to date, the one with the most dynamic and tactical game play.

[Ferdinand_Max]

17 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

As if backline camping and running in circles doesn't happen in games including only BBs, cruisers, and DDs.

Oh wait.

I'm not saying it doesn't happen when there are no CVs and subs. Just that CVs and subs promote such type of gameplay.

Main issue is spotting. Destroyers have good stealth, but their surface detection range is still large enough that you can use islands to predict where they are and compensate, possibly push them out of position, and then use that window to close the distance.

For CV and submarines, islands are not a problem the way they are for DDs. CVs straight-up ignore them, and submarine can submerge when threatened.

Granted, as others have said, maps are a problem as well. Mass of islands in middle with open ends is just BS... they need more maps where entire map is covered with islands, and maps that have few or no islands at all.

[Admiral_Karasu]

43 minutes ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

I'm not saying it doesn't happen when there are no CVs and subs. Just that CVs and subs promote such type of gameplay.

Main issue is spotting. Destroyers have good stealth, but their surface detection range is still large enough that you can use islands to predict where they are and compensate, possibly push them out of position, and then use that window to close the distance.

For CV and submarines, islands are not a problem the way they are for DDs. CVs straight-up ignore them, and submarine can submerge when threatened.

Granted, as others have said, maps are a problem as well. Mass of islands in middle with open ends is just BS... they need more maps where entire map is covered with islands, and maps that have few or no islands at all.

Definitely more island free maps, as for the other one, I'm not particularly sure if I want to know but what would an 'entire map covered with islands' look like?

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

1 hour ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

Just that CVs and subs promote such type of gameplay.

CVs do not. The existence of islands on the map ALWAYS benefits the aircraft carrier, not the enemy ship.

As a CV main, I love the maps with lots of islands. Ocean actually requires real skill to stay alive.

1 hour ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

Granted, as others have said, maps are a problem as well. Mass of islands in middle with open ends is just BS... they need more maps where entire map is covered with islands, and maps that have few or no islands at all.

Amen.

[Ferdinand_Max]

1 hour ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

Definitely more island free maps, as for the other one, I'm not particularly sure if I want to know but what would an 'entire map covered with islands' look like?

Archipelago, Land of Fire, New Dawn... also decent examples are Polar, Big Race, Fault Line and Neighbors.

https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Maps

26 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

CVs do not. The existence of islands on the map ALWAYS benefits the aircraft carrier, not the enemy ship.

As a CV main, I love the maps with lots of islands. Ocean actually requires real skill to stay alive.

Amen.

Issue with CVs is spotting. If you are permaspotted, your only defense if you want to do a maneuver is distance.

[Utt_Bugglier]

On 6/26/2024 at 12:36 PM, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Their Discord has failed?

I haven't been on there in a while now. What is the evidence of failure?

Wrong question. The correct question is:

”What is WG’s criteria that defines success or failure?”

Until you know their criteria for evaluating success or failure, you don’t really know what to consider as evidence.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

3 hours ago, Ferdinand_Max said:

Issue with CVs is spotting. If you are permaspotted, your only defense if you want to do a maneuver is distance.

For sure.

Which really demonstrates how the core problem is not planes, but in how concealment 'works'.

22 minutes ago, Utt_Bugglier said:

Wrong question. The correct question is:

”What is WG’s criteria that defines success or failure?”

Until you know their criteria for evaluating success or failure, you don’t really know what to consider as evidence.

Ah, but I also have a definition of if I consider it a failure...as do other people.

It's always an interesting question to ask, as long as you keep in mind the perspective of the info transmitter.

[OldSchoolGaming_Youtube]

On 6/26/2024 at 3:26 PM, Wolfswetpaws said:

I politely disagree.

The game is more interesting, challenging and entertaining with CV's and Submarines in it, I feel.

While the game isn't perfect, and implementation of various in-game processes may vex some players here & there, the ships existed in real-life and I feel they deserve representation in-game.

I politely disagree.

Im an avid chess player, my late father turned me into that actual "thinking mans game". For me WOW has been like chess from start 2015 (even considering the chess like minimap). Even tho youre only in control of ONE piece you can see what the other pieces are doing and you move around and you out-think you're opponent. This also goes back to my military background on how to setup an attack or ambush on an enemy force. This has always intrigued me as a student of war and history.

But then you face CVs and Subs! Which in chess term would be like telling you're opponent you're next 3-4 steps of strategy, because anything you try and do in WOW will get spoiled by a 30% CV guy just stumbling upon you're flanking/ambush behind island etc etc etc. 

And playing against a CV guy in chess would be like if he didn't like the smart play you just made he would just sweep the board like a aggro child and if you said "You cant do that" he would respond "I can do that because im a CV players so I can spot you and strike you wherever I like and you have zero counterplay".

Imho CVs and subs bring NOTHING to this game except grief and un-balance. WG themselves has been trying to balance CVs for 9 YEARS and still failing, which says a lot.

This game would be great if there was no CV and subs and I will tell you why.

1. DDs are enough spotters, but they aren't "God mode" like CVs and Subs and like some 30% BB babies out these who thinks "DDs are OP" because they cant do any WASD hacks for 20 min.
2. Unlike CVs and Subs DDs has plenty of counterplay (but can still perform spotting mission). We have enemy DDs, radar thru islands, hydro thru islands etc etc .
3. IF Subs and CVs actually got deleted from this game the cruisers and BBs would actually for ONCE value the DDs on their team and actually push in and support them in game modes like 3 cap dom mode, Arms Race, Airships etc etc, and not just take them for granted and sit on 10-line Screaming "Intelligence data" all game. If DDs was the only thing spotting and they died, BBs would have nothing to shoot at!!! Which means no more BB camping, everyone push in and help .... you know like this "team based" game is supposed to be.
4. More communication between different surface classes DDs and BBs.
5. Right now DDs are the most expendable class there is. No ones cares if they die going for a buff in Arms race .... you have you're CV guy flying planes all game. You will probably loose (because you have no DDs) but at least you have spotting so you can break that 100 K damage wall in youre Yamato loss.....
6. A "Chess guy" like me could finally actually use my brain and skill to muster perfect flanking maneuver's and ambushes on enemy forces without them getting ruined by broken plane spotting.  

5 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

CVs do not. The existence of islands on the map ALWAYS benefits the aircraft carrier, not the enemy ship.

As a CV main, I love the maps with lots of islands. Ocean actually requires real skill to stay alive.

Amen.

This!

I LOVE islands when I play my Malta. Nothing beats the feeling when going over a mountain to strike a un-aware Jinan/Austin/Smolensk/Wooster etc etc and getting 5 citadels in one drop because his AA didn't have time to react to my approach.

Im not sure but is it still possible to do those massive range strikes with some CVs when flying over tall island?

Edited Friday at 05:19 PM by OldSchoolGaming_Youtube

[Utt_Bugglier]

56 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Ah, but I also have a definition of if I consider it a failure...as do other people.

Yes, but that didn’t appear to be your stance when asking@OldSchoolGaming_Youtube for evidence of failure.