again it looks like...

[Frostbow]

9 hours ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

The goal is the ship. Do you want the ship? Do what's necessary to win it efficiently.

That exactly was the reasoning of WG behind the missions of the first Dockyard, aka Puerto Rico dumpster fire.

7 hours ago, derf said:

BUT  i stand by the concept that limiting aircraft destruction to half in ops is stupid

Yes, it is grossly stupid. Operations is not Co-op where the bots are irreparably dumb.

While there are certain aspects that should be reduced in half, such as damage inflicted, shooting down aircraft should not be included. 

You can spend a lot of time in Hermes and get less than half of planes compared to spending half the time in Co-op and get more than double the planes.

 

 

[Frostbow]

7 hours ago, Ensign Cthulhu said:

That being said, with operations being so scripted and able to be farmed out by a clued-up division team that knows what it's doing or rampant unicum, I think some sort of scaling was inevitable both as an initial compromise and for the foreseeable future - especially now that superships are in the mix (screenshot with YT link below):

All PVE is scripted, including Co-op. But what you failed to mention is this:

The bots in Operations are not the usual dumb ones you enjoy in Co-op. These bots in Operations have enhanced health pools, likely better HE (fire chance and penetration), and can focus their fire to bring down a player quick. So to frame the discussion the way you just did (farming in Operations, divisions, etc.) is defective and does not really inform the public the whole picture. 

We can talk about the damage done, the ribbons earned, etc. in Operations in the context of missions and I would agree to some of it being reduced by half; but for aircraft shot down, it should not be reduced by half because the amount of planes you destroy in a single Co-op match that usually takes around 5-6 minutes is usually comparable to the planes you destroy in a 16 minute Operation. 

[derf]

4 hours ago, AdmiralThunder said:

 

I don't think this is a case of WG not playing their own game. Plane kills for missions is not new nor especially hard. Now, if WG implements these new CV changes that are being tested that make it almost impossible for a CV to spot, and then continues to have spotting damage tasks for CV's, I will say that is them not playing their own game. Plane kills though? Nah.

 

 

yeah, again my bad - i misread and thought it was 'shot down by fighters' requirement...i can dumb with the best/worst of 'em

 

Edited September 19 by derf

[KampKeema85_2D]

I got a total of 5 shot down today.  I will be done with that mission in no time.

[HamptonRoads]

just need to make the best of your opportunities:

 

 

Edited September 19 by HamptonRoads

[Utt_Bugglier]

It’s not that hard of a mission:

I played ONE random last night, Wisconsin, shot down 73 planes.

But it doesn’t count for me because…

…because I just began last week’s missions. And I probably wont even get those done.

[Wolfswetpaws]

28 minutes ago, Utt_Bugglier said:

It’s not that hard of a mission:

I played ONE random last night, Wisconsin, shot down 73 planes.

But it doesn’t count for me because…

…because I just began last week’s missions. And I probably wont even get those done.

I've noticed that previous weeks missions that aren't yet finished can be simultaneously progressed with current week's dockyard missions.

But, I hadn't thought about being unable to work on current weeks missions if the previous week's missions haven't been completed (to unlock the current week).

In other words, a player cannot work on mission-chain #5 if they haven't completed mission-chain #4?  Yes/no?
 

[Justin_Simpleton]

4 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

I've noticed that previous weeks missions that aren't yet finished can be simultaneously progressed with current week's dockyard missions.

But, I hadn't thought about being unable to work on current weeks missions if the previous week's missions haven't been completed (to unlock the current week).

In other words, a player cannot work on mission-chain #5 if they haven't completed mission-chain #4?  Yes/no?

I'm on mission chain #3 and I cannot unlock the next one.  I got a late start.

[Nevermore135]

17 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

In other words, a player cannot work on mission-chain #5 if they haven't completed mission-chain #4?  Yes/no?

Yes, this is standard. While each of the mission chains is not available before a certain date, the previous chain must be completed (in this event’s case by completing any six of the missions in each) before they are available to the player.

This is almost certainly designed to provide incentive for players to play regularly throughout an update/event rather than just wait until the end and grind everything simultaneously. In the past the devs have also utilized this structure to encourage spending. This event was a welcome exception, but in most dockyards there is a set of onerous missions (usually potential damage and/or base XP) as part of one of the later mission chains that is designed to be a “roadblock” for more casual players. This often results in players falling behind near the end of the event and can encourage FOMO spending (especially if the player already sunk cost into the dockyard via starter packs).

Edited September 19 by Nevermore135

[Wolfswetpaws]

Just now, Nevermore135 said:

Yes, this is standard. While each of the mission chains is not available before a certain date, the previous chain must be completed (in this event’s case by completing any six of the missions in each) before they are available to the player.

This is almost certainly designed to provide incentive for players to play regularly throughout an update/event rather than just wait until the end and grind everything simultaneously. In the past the devs have also utilized this structure to encourage spending. This event was a welcome exception, but in most dockyards there is a set of missions (usually potential damage and base XP) as part of one of the latter mission chains that is designed to be “roadblock” for more casual players. This often results in players falling behind near the end of the event and can encourage FOMO spending (especially if the player already sunk cost into the dockyard via starter packs).

[Utt_Bugglier]

47 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

I've noticed that previous weeks missions that aren't yet finished can be simultaneously progressed with current week's dockyard missions.

But, I hadn't thought about being unable to work on current weeks missions if the previous week's missions haven't been completed (to unlock the current week).

In other words, a player cannot work on mission-chain #5 if they haven't completed mission-chain #4?  Yes/no?
 

That be correct, Wolf.

[Wolfswetpaws]

11 minutes ago, Utt_Bugglier said:

That be correct, Wolf.

👍

[Ensign Cthulhu]

1 hour ago, Nevermore135 said:

(especially if the player already sunk cost into the dockyard via starter packs).

This is why I never use them, even if it's a little more expensive in the end. All it takes is one big IRL thing to f*** me over and prevent completion, and then I'm in that pickle you describe. At least if a DNF happens to me, I'm not already out of pocket and I can decide to scrub it if the cost to redeem is more than I consider worthwhile.

By buying the starter packs, you're effectively laying a wager that you can get the thing done. I wonder how many people happily lay that wager while simultaneously complaining about "lootbox gambling". 😈

[Colonel Potter]

Was able to complete the aircraft mission and CV ribbon mission in 10 co-op games with my Graf Zeppelin B. Might be the way to go if you have either the Graf Zeppelin or the B version. Would have been fewer games, but was a couple of games where the bots zipped off from their spawn points to parts unknown and that meant they never got in my secondary range.

[Ramsalot]

On 9/18/2024 at 7:28 AM, derf said:

weegee does not play it's own game

 

 

you can go days without shooting down a single plane with those [expletives deleted]

and to top if off, the usual "Oh, you're in Ops?, only half count"   -  MORE THAN HALF THE OPS DON'T EVEN HAVE AIRCRAFT TO SHOOT DOWN

 

rant over

 

I honestly do not get what this rant is all about, I unlocked last set of missions yesterday and this is just playing normally without trying to go after aircraft (zero CV games):

[Admiral_Karasu]

38 minutes ago, Ramsalot said:

I honestly do not get what this rant is all about, I unlocked last set of missions yesterday and this is just playing normally without trying to go after aircraft (zero CV games):

It's all very situational, like me being able to shoot down 37 aircraft with my Alabama. Then again, I'm pretty sure if I'd been trying to complete the mission, I wouldn't have shot down a single one.

[AdmiralThunder]

On 9/18/2024 at 7:25 PM, derf said:

 

 

yeah, again my bad - i misread and thought it was 'shot down by fighters' requirement...i can dumb with the best/worst of 'em

 

Back when WG did the CV rework they didn’t return them to Co-op for quite a few updates. If a human brought a CV the bots got a BB to match it.

There was some mission chain at the time that called for 30 and 60 plane kills (almost seem to remember a 90 too but?). Co-op was allowed LOL. To do it you had to rush ahead and be next to a bot ship when it launched its fighters/spotter.

That sucked so bad. I did all of them but the amount of games it took was mind numbing. THAT is a case of WG not playing their own game and not paying attention.

Edited September 23 by AdmiralThunder

[Aethervox]

On 9/18/2024 at 10:36 AM, derf said:

"I" don't wanna play CVs

I don't play reworked CVs. I consider those barf excretions from Wedgie. 

 

On 9/18/2024 at 10:36 AM, derf said:

"I" don't wanna play subs

I don't play Flubs. Again, like reworked CVs, Subs are very poorly designed by Wedgie.

 

On 9/18/2024 at 10:36 AM, derf said:

"I" don't care about shills

Me neither, however, some cockroaches sneak in somehow anyway.

 

On 9/18/2024 at 9:03 AM, Ensign Cthulhu said:

Oh no, "they" play the game.

Isn't that 'game' "they' play otherwise known as the 'Holy Spreadsheet' or the 'Unholy Spreadsheet' (depending on how you view this) 😁

[Ensign Cthulhu]

19 hours ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

Then again, I'm pretty sure if I'd been trying to complete the mission, I wouldn't have shot down a single one.

But of course. And whether this fits your particular Alabama game or not, it's well known that needing only one [insert thing here] to finish a mission brings relatively high chances of the next battle resulting in a veritable rain of [that thing] occurring.

And you say to yourself afterwards, "Now if only that had happened [significant number of] battles ago!"