Waterline: Carrier Beta Test | World of Warships

69,163 views
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1,206 votes, average: 4.38 out of 5)
Loading...

Close ×

We are happy to announce the forthcoming Open Beta Testing for updated aircraft carriers. As all of you know very well, the life of aircraft carriers has not been easy in of . We touched upon this issue in our videos, as well as during streams and several discussion sessions. In order to summarize every piece of information about the new in-game process, the reasoning behind it and its goals, we suggest you watch a special selection of developers’ comments.

Want more info? Check out the website!
https://wo.ws/website

Related Rage!

103 Comments:

  1. World of Warships Official Channel

    If you are interested in this beta test, please sign in to our portal and press button “I WANT TO JOIN”.
    We will invite various groups of players during different phases of the test. We will try our best to grant access to everyone, but we cannot guarantee it due to unpredictable technical limitations that may appear during the test. In order to participate, you will need to download a special test client. We will send all related information, as well as login credentials and special forms to the email addresses linked to player accounts.
    NA:
    https://worldofwarships.com/news/public-test/carriers-rework-test/
    EU:
    https://worldofwarships.eu/news/public-test/carriers-rework-test/
    ASIA:
    https://worldofwarships.asia/news/public-test/carriers-rework-test/

  2. I hope the rewards for players that have been playing carriers are decent, since the whole play stile is going away… so all the time spend learning doesn’t go completely to the trash

  3. A lot of Promising the are coming World of Warships we got reworked CV and Submarines

    Gonna miss the RTS gameplay

    RIP old CV gameplay 2015-2018/19

  4. I see the topic of not wanting a ship with the capability to “alpha strike” come up a lot, especially from this particular member of the dev team. Just about every ship in the game can alpha strike. I play a lot of BB and I can’t tell you how many times I am able to just delete a cruiser from the enemy team the moment the cruiser is spotted within a minute of the game starting with a 2+ citadel shot from 15+km. I would argue that it’s easier to alpha strike in a BB than it is to do so in a CV. Just saying… the alpha strike argument for CV’s is kind of a moot point.

    • As a CV player I can tell you that the AA bubble is so large on the upper tier ships that I can be losing planes from off the screen I’m looking at.  So the pull out of range and wait for TFAA to cool, really doesn’t work since you lose half a squadron trying to pull back.  Then when you try to reengage, you have a partial squadron and you lose some of those to regular AA fire.  Its not all seal clubbing for the CV.  Just trying to provide some perspective.

    • I would like to add a perspective, which is that the CVs planes are basically ammunition.  Once they are gone, the CV can’t do anything.  No other ship in the game has to conserve ammo.  And yes you can counterplay CVs even at Tier 10,  Overlapping AA bubble are brutal.  As a Midway player I can expect to lose all 12 planes from both torpedo squadrons when attacking ships operating together.  I can only do that about 3 times before I am out of planes.  The counterplay may not be obvious, but it is run the CV out of planes.

    • Paul name one other ship in the game you have to balance your build and playstyle around? The reason there is such intense AA is because they are so overpowering no cruiser or BB who can attain high level AA will pass it up because a carrier can ruin their day if they do. Lots of people pass up sonar because the threat of carriers can be so strong. In your example you said in 3 strikes you have been deplaned. How many ships have you sunk? I know the answer for lots of players is 3 so you can knock out 1/4 of the enemy team almost guaranteed. That is saying the team has decent AA sometimes they don’t. Other times you run into a flank with 4 ships with piss poor AA firepower and you take out 4 to 5 of their ships only losing 1 to 2 squads. As a carrier I have seen this I have done this. My mouth waters when I check a flank and see a Russian and French cruiser and a German battleship together on the flank because I know they are basically defenseless.

    • There is a difference between me being caught in an unfortunate position I shouldn’t have been in and getting Dev’d for it and being manual dropped by 20 torpedo planes 2 feet from the side with no counterplay what so ever. One is a learning experience, the other is the CV being fundamentally broken in design.

    • This is true. But the fact is that no one builds for AA cause it’s a waste. You carrier players know this. You take advantage of it. Because you only see a carrier every 1 in 10 matches at most why waste all the captain perks and Module slots for a ship class you see 10% of the time? And people don’t. So as it stands CV prey on this knowing that this is the case. I see carriers in tier 10 matches Alpha strike Des Moines because they quickly realize they DM is running Hydro and not DFAA because 5 destroyer games are FAR more common then CV games.

  5. Subtitles are not on sync

  6. Do what you want but PLEASE dont remove the ability to control the ship with WASD

    • Mike P they might gave that where you can do that if you don’t have a squadron up.

    • What WG really need is invest on AI so they can reintroduce WASD. By implement AI for CV, you will have an alert passive unit. If you are in squadron mode, AI will do their best to maneuver the ship when in danger when spotted while still maintain the waypoint you set up. If you are in CV mode, the AI will do their best to evade fighters and AA ships. Switch between mode will be exhausting to normal players, which is what the dev is trying to avoid.

    • +Oyamada13 ai on Cv will not fly full control or they remove the type all together and fighter control

    • +SCI i have played cv rework and i have 3 word to say about that. RIP MY FPS

  7. Dual torpedo planes???

  8. Taking RTS away from carriers was bad. :/
    Having CV players only control one squad of aircraft, minimizing mother ship utility is bad.
    Selling ship cosmetics for CV’s in the past that only effect the CV and not the aircraft, now controlling the aircraft and never seeing mothership camo is bad.

    • Taking the RTS away is not bad. If they didn’t listen to the majority of players that demand a change like that they would’ve risked to get to the point that navy field gotten into

    • BlitzTaifun / DragonScales

      A CV battle makes Destroyers useless to do their role. It IS a good idea. Why would you have a class that completely makes another class (save maybe Khabarovsk) useless?

    • +BlitzTaifun / DragonScales this still makes DDs bad. Dds are bad because constant radars and High RoF cruisers. CV’s just quickens their misery.
      Also DDs have four roles: Capping, Spotting, Counter-Spotting and dealing buge torp damages (or forcing DCP, to make it clearer). You can still cap,you can still spot, you can still counter spot and you can still be effective witherer. CV is just better at spotting and counter spotting. Although CV also forces DCP, they abuse DoT damages, or with the AP shells, they go full Alpha Strike to delete ships. Which is a bad implementation

  9. I hope the ability to directly control the Carriers gets added back in. One of my best kills was with my CV’s secondaries and some torpedo dodging. Plus it just makes sense that you should be able to admire and control all the ships in World of Warships.

    • they arent directly controllable anymore? wtf lol

    • wait wait wait, one of your best kills? you have 100 games under your belt? lololol

    • What do you mean, i’m pretty sure if you press Z or something you can control your carrier just like any onter ship, atleast i can do that with my Lexington

    • I had the final kill with my bogue secondaries in a tier 7 game on a German dd. Best match ever.

    • Are you talking about the beta? At least I hope you do.
      Because if you’re talking about the current live build, you probably never checked the options….
      There’s a setting in the options like “activate third person view for carriers”, that when checked will give you the same old direct third person view on you carrier that we have since ever.

  10. I was interested in carrier because it was the biggest greatest looking ship in the game at the end tiers. Quickly fell in love with the control of the carrier and multiple aircraft. This new gameplay looks very unappealing. Disregard to the carrier and focus on 1 set of planes. -1 carrier main player here. In all honesty a tweak of the current system ui and control of planes would of been better. This is a great game but I’m not positive I’ll be playing carrier

    • +Lil Penpusher i wonder if that is the case after they release subs. And cv players are begging to chance that

    • Kinda too early to tell, at this stage. Wargaming is using this year’s Halloween event to give Submarines a try and see how well it works overall. If it works well and people like it, we’ll see them implemented for good. But it’s safe to say that Submarines will face the same challenge as Carriers: Vastly different gameplay from all other classes. That’s not a bad thing per-se for Subs, but something to watch out for imo.

    • Lil Penpusher And they already gave them some balancing, lowest health in game, barely faster than the katori, and limited amount of submerged time.

  11. It’s heartening to see a developer take such a huge risk to improve their product, it removes any doubt on a player to continue supporting and enjoying the game.
    Perhaps in the future, we could see the RTS CV gameplay as a different mode or perhaps even a separate RTS game?
    We really appreciate the effort and hope you never tire with the feedback-improvement cycle!

    • +Quintiax Actually I didn’t get cv sniped but I had it over my head with t10 players ruining the learning process by going with air superiority loadouts and farming newbies like I was

    • Regardless of how the rework turns out, I think it is admirable that they are willing to rip up the floorboards and rebuild such a large part of the game from the ground up if necessary.

      I just wish they’d made their minds up on it faster. During those years and years of procrastination and stopgap changes people have invested a lot of time and effort into getting good at the class, time and effort that they won’t (and can’t) get back.

    • I had to re read your paragraph a couple times because I thought you were being sarcastic

  12. Farazelleth’s points are true. You, my devs of WoWS aren’t teaching them enough, removed manual mode on tiers 4 and 5, and subjected them to an immediate plunge in skill gap the moment they reach T5(T5 auto-only vs T6 that has manual) and many more. Do check out Farazelleth’s commentary videos on the CV Rework. He’s one of the best CV players and CV mains in WoWS.

    • DxB planes do less damage, losing a squad forces you to take out a different squad and wait for a new squad of the plane type you were using to be readied again, strategy still exists it’s just no longer the grand strategy style that is common among RTS, but rather it’s more akin to strategy used in Battlestation Pacific, which if you played the campaign and challenges, yes there is strategy behind this style of carrier and aircraft play, you see it as a way to farm on one ship, I see a means of spreading out the damage among numerous ships, while also risking having to lose access to one of my squads for a good while should they get shot down during one of their bombing runs due to the longer amount of time they spend overhead of enemy ships now when you go into a bombing run.

    • Doesn’t matter if they do less damage. You torp, force dmg con, wait, get another flooding and move to the next target aka spreading the damage.
      It’s easier now since there are no enemy fighters to worry about. This is the problem, this is no risk, high reward gameplay, which is absolutely stupid. Losing the squad also doesn’t hurt you anymore since you have unlimited planes and there’s no respawn cooldown as far as I know.
      In fact, this is another positive aspect for the CV, sometimes it’s good to waste your squad instead flying all the way back to get faster turnover time, which now will be even further reduced. So wasting them is no problem at all.

    • I’m glad you have a copy of the beta to tell us what exactly the new changes bring to the table…oh wait you don’t have a copy of the beta? Why the sweeping assumptions then? Maybe you should do what everyone else is doing and wait to play the product before you pontificate to everyone exactly how dumb and bad the changes are. WG is even making it easy for you and having an open beta. Surely you can wait for that cant you?

    • Those aren’t “sweeping assumptions”, those are reasonable assumptions based on the gameplay we’ve already seen. Wargaming won’t change much before the beta.Wait the beta, wait the release and see it will turn out exactly as I said it will.

    • Kinda pointless to argue about this now since nothing’s gonna happen. WG will still push for this until the end but, just to answer some stuff,

      Had WG made a proper, well-thought out tutorial and hand-held the players until they’re able to do good manual, the skill gap wouldn’t be so high. Heck, we wouldn’t be having these changes at all. If you noticed, WG made tutorial vids for all other classes except for CV. Yeah they made 1 or 2 but it never really taught anything. I don’t mind CV rework because I’m CA/CL main but I did love the RTS aspect of carriers. Yes, you’re right that they want to appeal to the larger playerbase but it all boiled down to having no 1st party tutorial.

  13. The Invincible Iowa

    Dont twist things, alot of us like RTS games like Planetary Annihliation and Star Craft, its because you guys could not balance Carriers.
    Aside from DD’s no other class has such a big learning curve, but unlike DD you just lose planes and keep going.

    • The Battlestations series of games did a pretty good job of switching between RTS control and control of individual ships including CVs. Why WG wasn’t able to do that is up for debate.

    • deathlegionair yup if people wants to play rts MMO set in WW2 there’s a bunch of alternative, hell WG could pull a total war arena on us and focus entirely on rts gameplay.

    • yeah, totally not interested in RTS CV gameplay.

    • The Invincible Iowa If I want to play an rts, I got play Supcom because it has the variety, complexity, depth, opponents and mechanics that WoWS cannot offer since WoWS is not an rts.

    • Statistically you are in the vast minority of WOWS players. Since you are the vast minority, nobody would really miss if you left the game. WG knows this, and it is why they are trying to fix CV gameplay. Not to keep people like you around, but to try and fix what 90% of the community recognizes as a broken aspect of the game.

  14. I’m liking the rework less and less. Let’s say I’m just going to miss the rts.

  15. Stop lying. You guys are doing this to get WOWS into consoles.

    • Kibric different dev teams ya mook.

    • ^yep pretty much this, and a whole lotta bs about how it’s “unbalancable” to hide this fact. (Not gonna retype all the counterarguments here, since anyone who cares can look it up and anyone who wants to keep kissing WG’s rear end will keep doing that anyway.)

    • but it is unbalanced. I think you need a better tinfoil hat.

    • deathlegionair same greedy company ya mook.

    • CV gameplay is unbalanced? Yes it is. But WG did anything to issue this? Not until they completely trashed the RTS system.
      What could’ve been done? Give training sessions for EVERY CLASS of ships so that a BB player should know how to use HE and why he needs to switch it OCCASIONALLY. Or reverse on Brits which is ‘why you should use AP’.
      Cruisers could learn why island covers are important, when how is to maximize your AA, why showing broadside is bad etc.
      Destroyers could learn concealment mechanics, spotting, how to torpedo (also torpedo training isn’t a thing iirc), and why you shouldn’t use your guns often.
      CVs however will have teach spotting, fighter duels, how to attack manually, or automatically. What is going on at your ship?
      This would make the game triple times better imho, instead of butchering CV gameplay. (Yeah, i know it is a small number of us, but, what makes them unique is their absurd power which historically is true to the point that world view of aircraft warfare changed totally) this just makes CV’s are just non damageable ships that deal damage, Less than what it could do, and can’t control the battlefield anymore as it could do both historically and gameplay wise.

  16. The change ONLY makes the CV easier,but also brainless. Why should I play CV without a strategic planning?

    • Here we go. Someone nailed it. Strategic planning. This is why we play CV’s. Turning it into a mobile app mini game is the last thing we dedicated CV players are drawn to.

    • Rolando Tecson Ugh… yeah, except that’s not why most come into this game. I love rts, but I hate cvs in World of Warships cause I am not playing it to have to have to worry about strategic planning and managing multiple units at a time, I am playing it to have some fun and take part in team based strategy rather than solo grand strategy.

    • As mentioned in the video the impact of a bad or mediocre cv player against a better player is losing the battle. Nice experience for the other players in the team, even if you are the best CA, bb or dd player in the world.

    • With a bit of luck you Cv players may choose to leave them in their port

  17. I play CV, and I do enjoy current RTS in wows. sigh

    • I still say the problem isn’t the RTS gameplay, but a bunch of balance problems that can easy still be in the new gameplay.

    • You enjoy one shoting Battleships with torps you mean…….

    • You enjoy it but every other non cv players don’t.. You have too much power with it….

    • All the issues you just stated could have been fixed without this dumbed down, idiot proof rework targeted at casuals and probably console heroes in the future.
      3 torpedo squads are too much? Simply adjust flight control, hangar load out, turnover time, etc.
      AP is broken clicker mechanic? Adjust damage and penetration mechanics or remove it.
      Perma spotting? Adapt your playstyle, easy as that. Everytime I see somebody crying about perma spotting is someone rushing in or wandering off solo.
      Saipan? Make it lose one plane on the first exit strafe.
      GZ? Change the auto drop pattern.

    • +DxB yeah yeah, WG tries to balance CVs for 2 year by doing exactly what you say, and guess what, that don’t work. In the current meta, CVs are simply impossible to improve and balance. So what do we do now? Change or Erase, simple.

  18. The reason why no new player play carriers is because there is no ingame guide on how to play it. There is no explanation on how the gameplay works, and you either need to look up 3rd party guides, or learn it yourself (and most people dont, so most people quit, or fail their way up to tier X).
    Also the UI needed an upgrade. So many UI features like torpedo arming range where never implemented, or the fact that you cant manual drop at tier VI and V. The list goes one

    • +Malevolent Kiwi with as a result an entire generation that doesnt know how to manual drop or strafe. So ones they hit tier VI they get slammed by other tier VI’s CV’s that do know what they are doing. And you even have some people that never learn these fundamental mechanics up until tier X.

      You want to prevent seal clubbing in the lower tiers? Easy. Just make it so that people who have grinded out the higher tier CV’s have no way to play them. Prevent people with a tier VI CV from using their old tier IV and tier V CV. Problem solved.

      Honestly the class needs a rework. But its ignorant from WG to think they tried everything they could. Cause they clearly didnt

    • I think the new style will work much better than the old, it’s easier enough for them to tweak the values once the new system is in and much easier to work the balance. The RTS style never fit in with the rest of the game, the perma spotting mechanics are a nightmare and not a great idea. I agree it needed a rework and I didn’t think they tried everything either, BUT, I do think after the teething issues are sorted and the handful of outraged CV mains calm their farms it will work out pretty well. I look forward to testing it soon!

    • Knodsil HAALLEEYYLUYAAAAA u said it, especially when past t5 where things get even hotter. Most cv player quit because the difficulty spike suddenly when up. Wish they implement torpedoes arming range and remove limit from hangars. If bb can fire infinite shell, why cant cv with infinite plane since CV already battered with long penalty cooldown of losing a squad

    • The rework is bad. There’s no sugar coating it.
      Sure the current CV gameplay has tremendous issues for everyone involved but this idiotic rework only swaps the old problems for new ones.
      No control over fighters, unlimited hangar, multiple drops with a single squad, no fighters.. all that means if you don’t have strong AA you either hope you can hug a strong AA ship or you become a xp pinata for the enemy CV.
      Currently you can at least hope for fighter support and once the CV dropped it’s load you know when the next one will come and you can act accordingly.

    • There are still fighters, AA can be buffed in a sector but takes time to switch so the carrier can try and bait it, the damage done by multiple drops can be easily tweaked once the new system is in place allowing it be balance adjusted on the fly fairly easily. It was meant to be a ship focused game not Air to Air focused, so this brings the focus back to where it was meant to be. CV’s being deplaned was a horrendous issue, especially with the skill gaps. The faster your squad dies the longer it takes to respawn it works better I think. At least now you’ll never get a CV going ‘I’m out of planes, I’ll hid on the 10 line for the next 15 minutes, good luck.’ Bearing in mind WoWS was NEVER meant to be a simulator, it’s an arcade game.

  19. As a Tier 9 US CV player I can say that I’m both excited and scared for this update.
    I spent a whole lot of time learning the RTS controls for CV’s (almost years) and I understand why they had to change it.
    I hope WOWS has done a good job with the rework as this will obviously decide the fate of players like me who only focus on CV gameplay.. You could make or break it WOWS. I hope you know that.

    • Not to add to the pressure, but um, yeah. THIS. This will seriously change the game, and given I enjoy the game both in and out of CV’s, I hope it’s a change for the better.

    • +Ben Lubbers I agree.. Hopefully we won’t be disappointed

    • What does RTS mean again?

    • Food 2411 real time strategy. I think the cv should be outside the map for a certain time period before they show up to be blasted. I think it should keep the cv players focus on the battle before they have to start taking care of themselves. Probably a horrible idea 😛

    • Thank you for telling me what RTS means and it would be nice for like the first 3 minutes of a game they were hidden off the map so they couldn’t be wiped out right away. Maybe even add a class of escort carriers that could resupply the main carriers with planes and the escort might be able to launch themselves too, but they would be a lot weaker

  20. So I worked my way all the way to Midway just for continuous nerfs and then an outright removal of the whole reason I played a CV?

Leave a Reply

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