Aircraft Carrier Rework Critique – World of Warships

16,498 views
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (710 votes, average: 4.82 out of 5)
Loading...

Close Ad ×

Checking out the rework focusing my critique on many different systems they implemented with notes related to American . Hope you have a wonderful day I’ll catch you next time!

VI American Carrier Ranger Replay

https://playtogether.worldofwarships.com/invite/OwzqAkj – Warships Friend Invite

https://discord.gg/33xzEjR – Discord Server

Related Ship Rage!

69 Comments:

  1. Great points you made here notser. Liked and shared for you on twitter Google+ and youtube. Keep up the great work! I hope life calms down for you soon!

  2. Notser
    It would be nice if players could adjust the cruising altitude of plane formations. Dive bombers could approach from high altitude and torpedo bombers could approach from just above the water. It would make things more realistic and interesting especially in terms of potentially avoiding fighters who could also adjust their cruising altitudes. Spotting ranges could also be affected for both planes and ships depending on the planes altitude. Planes at lower altitudes or very high altitudes may not spot ships as quickly and low flying and very high flying planes may not be spotted as quickly by ships. Just a thought.
    Also not sure how I feel about planes apparently not having to reload after dropping one set of torpedoes.

    • Sam Sam
      Exactly. The planes may not be spotted as easily at sea level while at the same time they could not detect ships as easily flying low. Imagine if you had your fighters flying high cover while your torpedo bombers flew near sea level. You could really do a lot with it.

    • +DV8 *** that would be great. When I saw the DB there were low flying which made no scents. They should be at 15k or higher.
      If they are going to do this they need to go all the way.
      Make the DB fly high and TB low and some type of fighter control.

    • In full agreement with altitude adjustment, I’d love that

    • Plus, it would give the “aircraft experience” a more 3D experience since you can fly more freely!
      We rellly should find a way to give your genius feedback to WG so they implement it while its all flexible and all possibilities are still open!

    • Sam Sam
      Well, hopefully Notser is paying attention to the comments. He usually does, so maybe he can suggest it. Beyond that, spread the word in forums, if you do that kind of thing, or send WoW message through their website. Perhaps bring up the idea in game chat so other players can think about the idea.

  3. Balance can be adjusted over time. The main goal of these tests is to test the mechanics and debug as needed.

    • Exactly, balance is obsolete right now and totally not the intent of this test server

    • Finally someone that sees things how they should be seen!!!

    • Indeed I give WG flack for some things but this is still being tweaked. Once it is functional “as in UI, ship control, plane control, etc” we can then worry about dot damage, alpha strike, and “OPness”. I like what they have done thus far.

  4. I agree totally that is what I am finding game after game. The other team’s cv player hunts you down from the start and you cant do anything about it, that is so bad.

    After 8 games I had enough, as this happened 60% of the games as then the enemy cv can go on and kill ships

  5. I’m in the CV test also, I just don’t feel like I’m part of the match. At least with the old RTS style I felt involved in the match. Its fun but after a while I just feel like I’m constantly setting up attacks, very little strategy involved. No positioning, no chess game, no countering anyone, just launch, pick target, set angle of attack, attack, attack, attack, then back to CV again

    • Ok, first of all… RTS won’t come back… No one liked it

      Second, You have to to do strategy, see where the team needs help and act… What you do is just dmg farm… And does nothing for wining.

      Third, I agree with the fact that we don’t have a counter but this can be fixed when the fighters get more action involved

    • +GUSTAVO 337 actually allot of players like the RTS but the problem is WG made it overly complicated and was very different from the other ship classes which made a steeper learning curve over the other classes. I’m not saying it should return but there are a few aspects that could be kept like ship control

    • Apenas outro autista

      RTS never was the problem, the problem was op aa and cv to cv skill and effectiveness gap. And from cv side op alpha strikes and excessive spoting. Strategy is gone, the only thing you need to decide now is who you atack and where you deploy the figthers. And as counter aa nets did get stronger, but alone ships are weaker now. And i’m a teste too, i’m preffer the low tier old system, but i’m okay with the current gameplay, just need a lot of work yet.

    • “Alot” of players represented about 10% of the population, with 90% actively not playing because they didn’t like the RTS system or felt it was too hard. The new CV rework does require some work but we are talking about a CBT that is what, 2 weeks into a 6 month cycle? The whole point of the test is for people to critique what they have now so that it can be improved. The new system is far more accessible though than the old, and regardless of how many of the CV players ragequit over losing their iWin button, I feel the CV population will see a net gain in population.

  6. If you want a CV player to be able to use “skill” to reduce the effectiveness of AA, and yet you are to stay true to your argument there needs to be a counter available to a player, then it follows the target must also be able to use “skill” to make their AA MORE effective. Thus AA becomes a contest of skill available to both the CV and the target.
    Good luck with that, can’t see it ever happening. If anything, WG’s history has been to reduce the levels of skill required in their games so as to maintain the widest possible net for potential players (lowering BB citadels, for example, pretty much across the board regardless of the nation).
    There’s so much wrong with this rework as shown I’m not at all convinced WG will ever get CVs to the point where they’re fun to play but also tolerable for everyone else. They certainly haven’t managed it so far, and they’ve had a few YEARS. That’s something to contemplate, isn’t it? They’ve had a few YEARS yet an entire class of ships remains either OP in its effectiveness and impact on the game (to the point the class gets excluded from certain modes), or near worthless.

    • “They’ve had a few YEARS yet an entire class of ships remains either OP in its effectiveness and impact on the game (to the point the class gets excluded from certain modes), or near worthless.”

      Yes, it’s unbelievable, actually. I also have very little confidence that it will be anything less than permanently botched. Waiting for WG to come up with a viable carrier solution reminds me of waiting 4 years for DayZ stand alone to advance past Beta and 4 years later the whole project died.

    • They should implement manual management of your own AA, like using the cursor to direct your own AA fire

    • Making ships less skill dependent (i.e. raising skill floors and lowering ceilings) is a good way to make the game fun and enjoyable to everyone, in the same way that RNG normalizes skills gaps (especially in aiming, unlike in FPS games). So, dumbing down and limiting CV gameplay is a good path for everyone and adding skill dependent mechanics violates this principle. In fact, I believe the skill part should come from game strategy instead of mechanical skill. This is already done quite well on other ship classes, for example, knowing when to push or retreat as a BB, whether it is safe to capture as a DD, when I should leave island cover as a CA, has determined the outcome of the battle 9/10 times. While the new UI and is definitely more appealing and engaging, overall the design of the gameplay should be as simple as possible, so the extent of manual control should not yield significant gameplay advantage.

  7. Could they not have fixed this whole issue by reducing the range of planes? With a max range of, say, 2/3 across the map (more or less depending on tier), any manoeuvring you do will reduce your strike range, and you will also have limited time to loiter over enemy ships, giving their position away. It will encourage CV captains to take risks by occupying a forward position, which will then make them vulnerable to being killed.

    • +sean angelo Except that only 9 (10?) tech tree cruisers have radar. The rest are a bit screwed

    • Mwi Teir 8s have them. If you play teir 7 you are mostly likely guaranteed to see atleast one in your match so they exist there too. Even then, ships have hydro from teir 5 up, which is designed to spot torps. And if I’m correct, the jap DDs are the only ones who can stealth torpedo pre-teir 7 so it’s a pretty much non-issue. You probably just have shitty positioning and get rushed by them because you don’t bother to stick around the cruisers or your own DDs

    • +sean angelo   I meant that of all the tech tree cruisers in the game, only about 10 have radar. (Baltimore, Buffalo, Des Moines, Cleveland, Seattle, Worcester, Chapayev, Dimitri Donskoi, Moskva, and sometimes Minotaur.) I’m not concerned about low tiers since most players are quite poor anyway and ships aren’t as devastating. And any good cruiser player, unless in a German cruiser, will usually take Defensive AA. The hydro on the other cruisers just isn’t adequate.

    • Mwi O Russian CAs have good hydro aswell, and no point to take def AA because if how bad their AA is anyways. Also you forget that the ship lines that have radar are the most commonly played cruiser lines. There isn’t a game without atleast 1-2 of these on either team. You’re just mad, because you’re bad

    • +sean angelo Firstly, who said I was mad? Secondly, I’m bad? Don’t make me laugh. My win rate is 57%. 63% in Montana after 100+ games. That aside, Soviet hydro is nowhere near as good as German hydro, so it’s not worth mentioning. Also, Defensive AA is extremely important on Soviet cruisers because they have very bad handling characteristics. Especially Moskva because it’s a very large ship. If you were good, you’d understand that Defensive AA not only helps shoot down more planes, but it also scatters plane drops so they’re easier to dodge. Also, most of the time, there are more non radar cruisers in a game. It’s just that radar cruisers have more of a strategic impact, so people notice them more.

  8. It seems worse then what we have now. Once more, dd lives will be ruined, but this time it wil not be by fighter planes, but by dive bombers which will fly over you for 3 minutes.

    • Not really. I’ve found DD’s AA to be potent enough to not stick around too close. Besides, I’m not gonna circle a target forever when there are BBs driving in straight lines to torp.

    • with less torps being launched from planes, torp dodging will be easier for dd, which makes me happy, as now i wont get taken out by two full squads of midway torp bombers in my z52

    • +Shay Gordon
      Yes, but there is an infinite number of Aircraft
      +Ben Philips, +Red Salamander
      Torp planes, sure. But what about rocket planes and dive bombers?

    • the problem that came with a finite number of aircraft was that once the CV was out of planes, they were completely and utterly useless to the team. The tradeoff here is that you only have one squadron in the air at a time so the surface ships will have an easier time keeping track of where you are.

      This also encourages people to stay together so that their AA guns will work together. This has always been a problem and this could further push people to finally stop straying from their team to die alone.

      There absolutely are plenty of issues that need to be resolved, but it’s still really early on and lots could change.

    • exactly i noticed if they were close to each other you would get shreded out of the sky by AA

  9. Notser your right.
    What I find hysterical is everyone complaind everyday and on every form to remove cv. You got your wish and here it is. Its arguably more powerful than before and dd players your life became filled with rockets and fire. BB your life will be filled with torps and fire.
    Everyone got what they wished and now the complaing will start up a new.
    As the old saying goes, be careful what you wish for because you might get it.

    • tell me, are you someone that moans about realism in WoWs? If so, then I’ve got some bad news for you. Getting one-shotted by AP bombs is essentially the same thing as being detonated. I’ve been detonated by a Montana in my Yamato while Bow on to it before. I’ve been detonated bow on in my Alabama before. I’ve been detonated bow on in my Bismark before. Aircraft having such potential is realism. That’s why BBs died out. they became useless in realistic naval battle scenarios because of Aircraft. You want aircraft removed. I say that if we do that, why not remove detonations too? make it absolutely impossible for one round to kill you instantly.

    • +Blind Side i wish there was a realist(ish) verstion. A mode that dd would not reload torps, a ammo counter and no names of ships. It wiuld be an interesting modee

    • +Blind Side absolutely. Remove detonations from the game. I’ve been saying this for years. I don’t care if it’s historically accurate. I only care about gameplay. It’s an awful gameplay mechanic. Rng based with no way to escape it except for using a consumable I would rather not use. Death to dets.

      The comparison between being one shotted by AP bombs and deronating is not a bad one. It feela pretty much the same. When I get detonated, I go “come on, this is BS”. Pretty much the same happens with AP bombs

    • I don’t foresee many DD tears with these changes. DDs now have to deal with crossdrops perma spotting and dive bombers. A good CV player can keep 3 caps spotted giving their DDs the advantage. Whining about farming damage is a joke. What do good CV players do now? They decide who dies first, control vision of the map, and farm damage. You’ll still decide who dies but you will no longer control the whole map.

      One change that may come about is BBs moving closer to cruisers to help them from being focussed by a CV which is what everyone wants right?

    • +Mainerd LoydI really want the hammer brought down on the terrorists dd players. They got cv basicly removed. They got Toro spott I g lowered. The got bb shells not damaging there ships and they will get radar removed. There is no appeasing these jerks and I cant wait for them to be eliminated.
      possible about bb. As aa is no longer as effective. I wonder what is going to happen with captain skills and as ships like Worchester.

  10. If this stupidity of perma flooding a BB with repeated attacks by just one squadron you’ll find that nobody will be playing real ships, or maybe just playing at tier2

    • @Tiago I realize english may not be your first language…but what you just said does not make any sense.

    • ye… trying my best. but why doesnt it make any sense? that would make AA defense more in teractive for the player and more rewarding for good players. directing our own AA fire would also be far more fun than just selecting one area

    • Yes that would be very fun. I was saying your replay didnt make sense to what my earlier post was saying. Sorry for the confusion.

    • I do not like the idea of unlimited planes it takes the biggest single skill a CV needs to learn plane management and throws it out the window as you can launch an unlimited number of planes at a ship and you will win regardless of how crap you are all that will happen now is teams will camp next to a CV to try and protect thier carrier from pesky dds while it just farms all the damage

    • I agree. I think this whole remake of the way carriers play is a huge fubar. I know they tried to make it different and better but its not working out.

  11. WG must give us direct control of the CV.

    • +Daniel Morgan You have to choice how much dmg you take vs dmg you make. Its a new mechanic.
      People are asking for, cause its more comfortable. They are asking for a active fighter squadron, or for more then one squadron in the air etc..

    • And also direct control of our AA, that would be skill-based counterplay

    • what if, your CV deck is burning, you plane can’t landing on buring deck, and you can’t change control directly to your CV until your plane is landing, your gonna burn to death.. easy arsonist…

    • Press F, you can change directly control to your CV and repair while your squadron returns. After repair choose another squadron before your old squadron returns to your cv.
      Easy.

    • +Arctica but after repair, another fire is burning up, RIP fire chance from rockets xD

  12. This feels more disjointed from the game than current CV’s. It gets very boring very quick, and while if this was the design for JUST manual drops, at least in regards to visuals and aircraft control, would be something, as an out right replacement to current CV gameplay, is out right garbage. I am a CV player – even I say CV damage and spotting need to be reigned in, that some ships need more AA, but this crap isn’t it. Current CV gameplay may not be as visually amazing for the CV player, but I’ll take it over the flashy garbage. Even if they just raised plane altitude a bit so you didn’t have to zoom in as far to see all the effects and the planes (the range you zoom to is a little awkward, though a lot of that is angle as it switches to some weird angle between top down and chase view) that could look just as good without all the crap of this rework.

  13. One thing I hate and is a non starter for me, is watching planes fly through islands. If a plane hits the land it should crash, and if that means you can’t park your carrier bow into an island, so be it.

    You fire your guns at the shells don’t go through, why should this be any different?

    I don’t like the multiple attack runs; you can just farm the ships and the defense is all RNG.

    The play looks so repetitive. Could I watch the replays of 2 or 3 matches in a row? No; the visuals are the same. It looks boring after a short while

  14. Why not Control the Planes with wasd, and control the CV with the Arrow Keys? As far as I know, by default, the Arrow keys dont have any key bindings over them at all, they would be perfect for making course changes while looking at the Minimap, and still flying aircraft.

    • Ideally, I think WASD could be kept for CV. What needs to happen, I think, is some way to switch between view of the ship and squadron. in such a case, you will also be able to use dmg con when needed without having to RTB

  15. The sector AA is not a skill based counterplay to a CV drop. It is still the case, as before the rework, that players have no counterplay option to inflict more damage on planes and mitigate the damage they take other than the same broken choices as before such as take only AA ships to battle, spec for AA, dont position at all and just huddle together and press a button and pray. These are the exact things, BY WGs OWN WORDS, that the CV rework is supposed to address BUT ISNT ADRESSING IN ANY WAY.

    • They should implement manual management of your own AA. That would be skill-based counterplay if you could direct your own AA fire with your cursor while having the camera locked on your ship.
      That way you can’t perma flood Battleships because you aren’t always focused on your attack planes when youre being under attack

    • @Tiago Casquinho

      as long as my AA still fires at planes automatically without direct controle of the AA too i have no problem with that. Otherwise i would be completely defenseless against planes in situation where i am busy dealing with enemie ships close to me which could torp me or citadel me and in which i do not have the time to manually use my AA because of that. That would just be annyoing and suck in that case and it would just lead people to stay at max range so that they have a better chance/easier time when dealing with planes and ships at the same time.

    • because the AA rework ist still planned for the future, this is just a temporary solution

    • I’m betting a lot of players are going to totally ignore sector based AA. Not even bother with it.

  16. It does not solve biggest problems with CVs, effectivity.
    If you give CV player way to “skillfully avoid Flak” what would be in your opinion defense against CV player and reason for having flak whatsoever? Wouldnt it make CV attak unavoidable? Think about it…
    Ideas like that made CVs problem in first place.

  17. OK, so what did the enemy Fuso do wrong ? Nothing, he just took 3 passes of a squad and that was that. Ahhh, those fond memories of getting blapped in a KM BB by 2 attacks of AP bombers… They need to eliminate CV completely and get some AI CV’s in every game to provide some “air show”.

    • as far as I can tell he didn’t touch wasd keys even once during all 3 passes… which is why he took 3 passes of a squad.

      now look at enemy CV he tried to drop later on – dude avoided 2 out of 3 drops completely and if he was not under fire from rest of notser’s team he’d probably survive third one.

  18. Buckeyefan31x Go Bucks!

    I’ve been testing it and the design choices is a disaster. It gets extremely boring after a few games. The CV sniping is terrible. You dont feel like your going aganist other players and feels like your playing coop game. The whole design of the CVwork is garage and I think they pulled this right 9ut of there mobile game instead of a PC game. Wargsming doesnt have the guts to delay the rework for over a year and go back to the drawing board. They need to buy battlestations midway and make the CV gsme play like that. Not this half ass rework.

  19. As much as CV gameplay seems a lot more fun and accessible for the people playing it, it does just about everything else wrong. As you said, it’s far too easy to farm damage, especially with all the D.O.T’s you can easily set. Planes can still drop torps immediately after flying over a tall island. With long and medium range AA being made into something that can be dodged, fleet support AA has become meaningless. I’ve watched another video where someone uses a torpedo bomber squadron on a Montanta (from a Midway) that was right next to a Worcester and yet every single strike wing got through to deliver the drop, they usually then got destroyed after the drop but then who cares, the damage has already been done and the CV can just pick another squadron with no penalty. With CV’s now getting essentially unlimited aircraft, does that mean we can now expect AA mounts to become invincible or will playing CV’s just get more and more easy mode as the battle goes on? with fighter squadrons now a consumable essentially for self defence, where is the incentive for CV’s to have teamwork? they are just a purely damage farming class. there seems to be virtually no delay in getting a fresh squadron into battle, they launch, speed boost and are at the target within 20 seconds so even if you somehow shot down an entire squadron, who cares another one will replace it nearly instantly! lastly, will the 2 per team MM still remain after the rework because just imagine co-ordinated work by 2 CV’s you could literally be getting dropped by some type of plane every 10 seconds for as long as your ship survives (which I’m guessing won’t be very long) ok, rant over now 😛

    • That’s why as a battleship player for example, you should have manual/direct control of the AA fire by using the mouse/cursor when having the camera locked on your own ship

  20. Sorry but I despise the new mechanics.. It looks even easier now for CV’s to dominate and just keep circling a target and whittling them down while they helplessly do the only thing they can do which is go in circles. All hyperbole aside I can honestly see this killing the game for me. I hate how helpless you are when you are targeted by the red CV.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *