World of Warships – NEW CARRIER ACTUAL GAMEPLAY

15,807 views
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (624 votes, average: 4.75 out of 5)
Loading...

Here is the video WG showed us of ACTUAL GAMEPLAY.
I will show you the entire video and discuss everything I see in it bit by bit and than talk about my thoughts on the whole thing while the video runs in the background.
bear in mind it’s all still work in progress.
I hope you enjoy the video and find it helpful and enlightening after all this time of waiting 😉

73 Comments:

    • Seems to me the attack planes are more for DD dealing with

    • taking fighters away means one thing. good cv captains will no longer be able to protect you from the enemy. one squadron can set multiple dots during one run. excellent choice. lol as if dds and bbs weren’t useless enough already when it came to planes.

      do those folks at wargaming even play their own games? obviously not.

    • But for example u Can have torpedo and AP bombers and spoting planes at the same Time ? Liké thé normal cv

    • Rasmus Finn you still can with the fighter consumable (i think)

    • I think Wargaming are trying to simplify the CV gameplay to get WoWs possible on consoles…..

  1. Still a better flight sim than WoWP

  2. no dogfights????? wtf were they thinking????!!!

  3. Skycancer 2.0
    Does remind me of Battlestations: Pacific

  4. Fire… flood… more floods… fires, fires and more fires…

  5. It _does_ seem somewhat interesting at face value, but I do agree that it’s perhaps too simple. What I would have done is have 2-3 squads airborne and make players jump between them, or maybe have some additional micromanagement of the squadron they’re already in control of (so give each individual flight of 3 some sort of additional orders, like attack a separate target). Basically something to make CV players think a little more about how they’re going to do their job.

    Fighters are also a small concern to me, and I can’t help but wonder if there’ll be some kind of method to deal with them should they intercept your squadron. WG has the potential to do something amazing here, but something comes off as a little thonk-worthy, here. Maybe it’s just me, or perhaps I’m not alone. Time will tell.

  6. Being superunicum cv today I am dissapointed as hell. As you said boring and little skill behind. Rip cv gameplay.

    • Rip old RTS cv gameplay.

    • CV won’t be able to carry game all alone anymore… Idk if it’s a bad thing or not, it’s usually deserved, but having people unable to play just because the enemy CV is good can be frustating.

      (I remember one of my first game as a Yamato newb, the enemy Midway got rid of me with two raids even tho I knew how to dodge torps (but Yamato’s ass is too huge aaand my CV didn’t prefered defending his own strike squadrons than me, a choice like another); not an enjoyable experience, and unlucky chosen ones people are probably feeling the same on each (skilled enough) CV game..)
      WIP, not rip yet, balance it, make it skilled again, but not uncounterable and/or boring.

    • this guy, detected as fucking seal clubbers who destroy new players. Eat this! Fucking OP CV must be nerfed

  7. CVs now can’t scout other sections of the map where they are not in active action. from this it seems that CVs now act moreorless like any other class of ships, they are only active where they are directly attacking. Though they are more powerful in their attacks but in the general 20mins maps control play they have been nerfed hugely. If a DD teams-up with any other ship in a random match (which many a times I try doing) this CV play will very badly fail. The outcome will be that the CV player with curse all other team-mates for a better gameplay by the enemy team players.

  8. Looks a bit meh. If it’s like this in the final version I guess my CV’s go away and I’ll stop with my normal 1 from every line for every nation. Current CV play is poor, but this isn’t an improvement, it looks more of a lowest common denominator change to appease the window lickers.

  9. I didnt think that CV’s could get less interesting than they already are but hats off to WG they mananged to do it.

  10. How must cv players who have invested so much time and effort in this game feel with this change? It’s too much of a step backwards in game technique and skill imo. This was so not worth the wait. Try harder wargaming.

    • will see where it ends up after all testing and actual live version
      i think.it has pottential if done right

    • i was kinda expecting this. i still cried. and uninstalled.

    • Who cares? And what about when invisible fire was removed and people were forced to sit behind islands if they didn’t want to get blapped by a random BB? What about DDs losing the chance to fire their guns freely and forced to sit in smoke if they want to with no vision?

      It wasn’t easy learing the proper skills and using the right modules to pull invisible fire off. Not to mention the skill to stay outside of detection of every single enemy ship/plane. How did they felt when all their time and effort was thrown out of the window?

    • @John.J especially those who literally paid real money to get premium CVs…..

  11. I m rather new to WOWS and found CV play great because it s like strategy/chess game and can be quite intense as it is. This is more oriented toward arcade mode games. So i agree and would encourage you to help them find a balance between the game styles.
    Maybe they could let us chose if we want to lead the attack arcade mode or just keep doing with the old way that is just working fine. Thanks for your uploads great job!

  12. Looks like they have done the same thing with carriers that they did with conqueror: make a system that is both unfun to play, and unfun to play against.

    Playing carriers is basically a glorified minigame with these changes, just aim and click and aim and click and don’t worry about positioning or long-term strategy, which every other ship class in the game right now (including the current version of carriers) must do. Carriers are now the ultimate EZ point and click damage farmers, much more so than conqueror, Stalingrad, or HE cruisers. Like seriously, carrier players under their new system will never even worry about spotting those weird circle things called CAPS, they will only care about clicking to increase those damage numbers. Also, the video here only showed attacks against targets that were stationary or going in a straight line. Trying to attack a maneuvering target will be very annoying with these controls. Not hard, but simply annoying.

    Carriers will now be the most annoying ship in the game to play against too, much more so than they already are. A single massive squadron of enemy planes will now park above you and farm you and farm you unless you can shoot down a lot of the planes. Think the current massive CV alpha strikes are annoying? At least you only have to dodge those once, and the game continues. Now, getting attacked by a CV squadron will remove you from the rest of the game for at least two minutes, because you have to dodge FOUR separate strikes before the one single squadron finally f*cks off and returns to the CV.

    If this is the improvement WG has been promising us for years, I am not impressed.

    • +AGENT47ist Ummmm…. Did you even read what I wrote? You accused me of only wanting the game to suit my needs, even though I just wrote a long paragraph about how carriers should support their entire team and not just themselves. I’m not sure how a desire for more teamplay = me being selfish, but apparently you know something I don’t. Also, are you seriously going to use the argument that carriers can have any kind of gameplay because they don’t matter if you stick to team aa? Please read my comment again. I wasn’t saying that they are OP under the new system, I was saying that they are unfun to play and unfun to play against. But what do I know, I’m just a “brainless crying kid“ apparently.

    • Even with the current gameplay,with the current AA,if you have a Des Moines,Worcester Minotaur supporting each flank their planes are no use

    • +AGENT47ist except when a CV baits your def AA, waits you out and then AP bombs your DM off the map. And if you get nicked by a conqueror once? Lol at your 3 AA mounts you have left.

      Sure those ships are demons, but if a t10 cv wants you dead, you are dead. It’s just how many planes he’s cool with losing to kill you.

    • Wait til you get the Conqy Legendary Upate 🙂

    • Even without def AA,Worcester Des Moines and Minotaur have strong AA by design,it what they are made for. A CV has a limit to it’s planes. I doubt he would be cool with spending all of his squadrons on a Worcester or a Des Moines,he would be left with an almost empty hungar. All it takes is skill,nothing else. This is a game that requires some brain useage you know,its not pacman or tetris.

  13. Challenge for Flambass, Take any ship you like and get 10 torp hits…but you have announce your torps in chat when you fire and who they’re aimed at! #4

    Wait… fighters being 100% RNG?
    Oh lawd.

    No more multi tasking? No more CV scouting with one group while attacking with another?
    Eh, this just makes carriers into WoT arty, but with propellers on the explodey bits.

    Lowering the skill floor, while basically wrecking the potential for a truly excellent carrier player to help his team. This..isn’t going to work.

    • Bet you are one of those guys alway complaining about CV gameplay. gameplay I think this is going to make people play more CVs. Also keep in mind that this is very early footage. Hopefully they’ll add more spice and make it a bit more complex. Oh, no multi squadron means that if lots of players are going to use Carriers, there might be more than one-two per team, which opens new, and possibly “historically accurate” scenarios. As for spotting I think there are already enough radars and hydros out there to shit on dds, so nothing’s bad with it. Last thing I hope is that with AA rework my Atlanta is going to be way more useful to my team and fun for me. AA ships are going to get back their pride I think. You know, when I started my grind I looked into strong points of each nation and line. Whole USN has this absurd AA which sets them apart from nearly every other nation. Point is, why grinding a line that has in it’s “trademark” a thing meant to counter carriers and then there are none? Why taking that over Typical German ap and hydro, or typical high velocity Russian guns? A carrier increase would make murica great again (no pun intended, I’m not even American) in terms of usefulness. Also, if they are going to make the AA in a structured defence, I’d love to see spotter planes high again together with catapult fighters.

    • Gawd damn, talk about a wall of text. I’m going to break things up and reply point by point, just to make it more readable.

      *”Bet you are one of those guys alway complaining about CV gameplay”*

      Oddly enough, no I’m not. It’s not perfect, but it’s certainly better than this ‘revamp’.

      *”Oh, no multi squadron means that if lots of players are going to use Carriers, there might be more than one-two per team, which opens new, and possibly “historically accurate” scenarios. “*

      Oh yes, because people using 1 squadron each is *sooo* accurate. Because having fighters as a 100% RNG based thing is *sooo* accurate.

      *”as for spotting I think there are already enough radars and hydros out there to shit on dds, so nothing’s bad with it. Last thing I hope is that with AA rework my Atlanta is going to be way more useful to my team and fun for me. “*

      It’s not only about spotting DDs. Besides, radars have a limited duration and a limited number of charges which really hurts their overall utility. Hydro has that same downside, but with the extra hit of having very limited range. Again, the game needs tweaking, not a full blown sledgehammer like revamp. Hydro & radar need to be line of sight based (no camping behind islands and radaring). This one change would enable carriers to become the scouts again.
      Atlanta is an obsolete ship that has no place on a team, if it ever did.

      “A carrier increase would make murica great again (no pun intended, I’m not even American) in terms of usefulness. ”

      Yep, because a carrier mega nerf (which is what this is) is what it takes to make American ships useful again. Please be careful, my sarcasm is dripping all over the floor right about here.

      So let me get this straight, you would truly, epically nerf entire lines of ships just to make yours ‘useful’ again? Why not just…I don’t know… maybe buff/rework the American ships? Make them a “jack of all trades” kind of ship?
      Radical, I know.

    • First point, ” Historically” is between ” for a reason. It’s still an arcade game. As for murica, the main selling point of the *entire* nation (not just my ship) in-game is their AA. It’s their trademark, and there is really no reason for new players to grind those trees in a game with little to no carriers. Better getting good German hydro or more useful things right? As for the nerf if you want an rts go play rts games. If you wish you can try a very good one on my steam account. Anyways, making their gameplay simpler is obviously going to lure in more players. That’s a good enough trade for me. I would play them. If you think it’s not entertaining, I don’t think that sailing around while shooting an getting shot at is that much fun either. I get bored after some time.
      You are right, your sarcasm is dripping all over the place. Careful not to trip on it.
      Edit- I forgot to mention that maybe people will start asking for escort again. I heard that in beta it was common thing.

    • As for the radar/hydro nerf I absolutely agree

  14. …Thank you for the Video Flambass. I appreciate your content, and am a big fan. I just think Wargaming are going to mess things up worse with unrealistic crap like that. If they want to satisfy the window lickers and have first person option, im fine with that. But they cant make things so totally unrealistic that the true CV players who play them will stop playing them. Where is the scouting? The multitasking? The dogfighting? Plane management? Wargaming will make things worse with this. CVs dont need to be super easy that everyone can play them mindlessly. It should take some skill, ya know..

    • Imagine if WG changes the game play so that instead of having only 150-ish current CV players they will increase to 900 – 1500 “new” CV players…which choice is best….pleasing the 150 or pleasing the 900 – 1500? (potentially losing 150 to gain ten times more)
      And they did say they will compensate the current 150-ish if they do not like the new CV’s when they come out.
      Also, they will not be released until they believe they have a good working model.
      Opinions are fine, but premature and “only” time will tell.
      I’m sure this change is a very difficult job.

      PS:
      There is a reason that the current CV’s are not popular…

    • +Gary Anderson II I get that, and I do understand it’s a work in progress. If they could keep some aspects of the current gameplay as far as switching between squads while auto dropping the others and make it fun but require some skill I’ll be okay with it. But I just feel it’s just a way to massively nerf or try to eliminate CV play. They already keep CVs from clan wars. Yes CVs can be powerful in the hands of a skilled player, but that’s realistic and makes the team play wisely and stick together. I just don’t want the game to turn into a simpleton fest game. It takes some skill to play sucessfully. Learning to angle, torpedo beat, concealment. I just don’t want it to turn into something watered down for noobs

    • I understand.

    • “Unrealistic crap”? That is quite funny, considering in the current system you are playing a 2D strategy game with 0 realism in it. Several torpedo bombers unloading their entire arsenal in a perfect line? Several dive bombers making a dive bomb at the same time? Fighters unloading a straight line of heavy machine gun fire at the targeted area, still perfectly in sync? Where EXACTLY is the realism in THAT? Hmm?

      No planes/squadrons could pull this shit EVER in real life. Right now this new system looks way more realistic. Multiple runs from the same squadron with only a few planes with heavy RNG. That is how it happened in real life too. More or less, since planes couldn’t just up and break through the enemy’s AA defense whenever they wanted to.

    • Exactly the point, it takes skill to learn something, if crying kids want the game suited to their needs, you can play tetris. As a midway player and a Montana I am not in for the current playstyle of carriers but this model doesn’t solve the problem. Also I don’t think this will be the final version, it is still work in progress, a lot of things to model. For the kids they say they want realism they can play Digital Combat Simulator, I guarantee that you won’t last a minute in a simulation game like that.

  15. I hate it 🙁

    They should’ve just fix the UI, do some sort of tutorial IN THE GAME (not Youtube etc.) and maybe do some rebalancing but within the RTS gameplay. But this? It feels like all the efforts of getting good at Carriers were just a waste of time. I know its WIP but it will very likely go into this direction. This makes me honestly so sad… Carriers were my go-to class for my whole WoWS career. When I was upset of bad games or matchmaking I would just play some CV games and feel empowered again, especially at mid-ish Tiers.
    But if they decide, and they probably are going to, to do this “action gameplay style”, I might just quit playing carriers and I think many experienced CV players who took the effort to become Unicum and super Unicum will do the same.

    Thank you for your attention, have a nice day @all

    • What I hear you saying is that when you weren’t doing well you’d go seal club to feel better. I think that is the kind of thing that prompted the whole rework in the first place. Super Unicum and Unicum players are what made the game so unplayable for people who weren’t at that level. I would bet a lot more players will routinely play reworked carriers over what it is now, which is broken.

    • No, that isn’t what I meant. I understand your standpoint and there is much truth in it but I wasn’t refering to sealclubbing. For me is even T9 CV still a mid-ish Tier, in fact everything from T7 to T9. Maybe its just subjectiv but I have much better games with T9 CV than with T10. Yes, getting good at outplaying the enemy CV was an important step to become an Unicum. Do you know how many games I needed to play to improve? Carriers have such a high learning curve because they are so different than any other class in the game and you can’ t transfer the skills to another class. Would the rework change that? No, not really. But what it would do is making all the skills the good CV players learned over time irrelevant. And like Flambass said, it doesn’t look like fun to grind CVs with that action playstyle for many games, at least in this state. I know that Carriers need rebalancing, but this rework is just wrong.

    • ROMANSOLDIER3 agree, strategy is gone:-( I am a fervent CV player too, still at tier 7/8 but really enjoying it. I think I might stop playing if this goes on

    • people with unicum and super get t10 very often, they won’t take t6 or t7 … it’s sure if you hurry in order to get your t10 without learning thhe CV gamelay, you’ll fail ..

    • from RTS (with bad UI) to full arcade game mode. Not the change we waited for :/ Pretty sure the good CV player will hate this change, and bad CV player will prefer it. Total change.

  16. I think if this is the equivalent of aiming and shooting your guns for a carrier, then it’s a good core gameplay loop. What would make it great would be balancing the carrier’s player skill versus AA setup on the targets, and it sounds like that’s the way they are going – particularly if there is a good way for players to see and understand where the gaps in the AA coverage are.

    Meanwhile, this solves a whole host of problems with the current carrier setup – squadrons spotting everything on the map, fighters being able to perma-spot destroyers, the huge power gap between inexperienced carrier players and good carrier players, the outsized influence a good carrier player can have (see previous videos on carriers in ranked play, and carriers not being allowed in competitive battles), the frustrating carrier interface with rapid clicks not registering, and the RTS-style “icons moving around on a map” that is current carrier gameplay.

    Also, note that while the rockets do appear to be easy to use, they don’t do very much damage – the second attack was all shatters, which means their HE penetration probably isn’t very good, and the destroyer attack only did a couple thousand damage.

    • Finally someone who’s not complaining lol. I’d personally add more squads (1 each type perhaps) with the possible command of “move forward” like in RPGs with the ability to switch between them when needed. It’d still make it complex for players while keeping some of the utility they lose.

  17. This looks tedious to play and infuriating to play against. Also, removing dogfights? No way to defend your own ship while flying? These decisions are Highly Questionable™.

  18. Well this is God damn horrifying!!! Absolutely zero skill to repeatedly set a ship on fire and looking at the actual attack, especially battleships, there’s nothing you can do. Looking at how much tweaking the pilot could do on the drops, a ship will never be able to avoid getting dropped on. You will either be perma fired or perma flood because you’ll have to wait to repair any fire/flood for them to potentially have 4 runs at you, setting you on fire or flood every time. If it goes into game like this I’m not even going to bother playing any more because it looks incredibly op to play carriers. I’d rather they just remove carriers from the game completely. As for a ship’s AA, I heard it will take 8-10 seconds to switch which side of the ship your AA will even fire from. So you can’t even efficiently shoot at the planes to put off their attack.

    This is just plain broken (pun intended)

    • there is no skill involve for bb ca and dd to set s ship on fire either so whats your point exactly

    • The damages weren’t “op/broken” from what we saw. This WIP CV seems to be a flood/firemachine tho, but it won’t be as op as deleting ships in one strike and perma spotting multiple DDs around the whole map, with the possibility of making the enemy CV useless. Current CV system is so funny for everyone, wow, DDs enjoy it, BBs enjoy it, and oh AP bombers, cruisers love them. CVs are op in our current system, even if it’s skilled and deserved if you win, it’s not fair for all the enemy team (but the CV). “Just because you win a 1v1 you win the game” system have to be reworked.

    • They were only showing what the view will look like in the video. Not how hits / RNG will work. These details are to be sorted later on.

    • +iamplay you can have some degree of line of sight to hide your ship behind islands or get out of range. With this there will be no where to hide at all on any map. There will be absolutely nothing you can do to avoid it. Full AA builds will be mandatory for every ship in the game wether your ship has decent AA or not

  19. This is to drastic of a change. It will disturb the game balance too much. If carriers are this problematic, then you should remove them as a playable option and just have bots control the CVs. Bots don’t hover the DDs and they autodrop everything. The play will be more balanced if the only bots control CVs. I love playing my Midway, and I’m a decently good CV player. And I’ve blapped BBs with one alpha strike. But WOWS should be more about ships then planes. Compensate my loss to playing the Midway with another tier 10 of my choice.

    This re-work is uninteresting and has poor replay value. Scrap this entire project. Keep the focus of play on ships!

Leave a Reply

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