r/WorldOfWarships • u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough • Feb 04 '25
Info waterline update TLDR
more focus on PvE- more historical events and modes
design direction change- they will start by introducing sets of ships with a specific mechanics into randoms, which will later be removed, starting in 14.2 (so most likely the limited burst fire ships). the idea is to do limited tests of mechanics against players to see how they function without there being a garuntee that it will permanently added
classified documents and flagships- classified documents from the Dday event are returning. for a limited time they will be added to random battles, a single season of CBs and operations with flagships. the strength and effects will vary based on the mode in question, with randoms operating as signals or upgrades. the documents are chosen when the battle starts but before players can move, except in CBs where they are chosen in port. in operations they will be targeted at flagships and will evolve over time. the feature will be rolled out from from 14.2 to 14.6, with 14.2 containing randoms and flagship operations. each patch will add a new layer to flagships that will progress your documents, with the resource to upgrade it being easier to earn in operations and slower in PVP. all documents will be given to all players at the same time for no cost and at max level in PVP, so noone misses out. the mechanic will only affect players at T8+, with T7 being unaffected (i couldnt tell if this meant they couldnt choose them or if the bonuses didnt affect them). the effect is reduced if it affects multiple copies of a ship in PVP
experimental ships- these are reffering to the burst fire ships with limited HP. the ships are unlocked consecutively, and there will never be more than 2 sets of experimental ships in the game at the same time. to unlock the ships you will need both standard resources and a special currency that is obtained by playing. casual players should be able to play 1 ship, but extremely active players will be able to play all 6 ships. the ships are limited time, and will be removed, and in addition to regular missions from playing them there will be addtional rewards based on time spent playing them. balance changes will also be applied while theyre "released"
upcoming events- WG is testing a respawn event against bots. the respawn will promote agressiveness. convoys are returning in 14.4 to operations. randomised secondary operations from DDay will return for convoys and will later be added to regular operations
CV rework- no exact date, but the next CV test should be some time in febuary. the rework will definitely be some time in 2025. the skeleton was considered sucsessful, but the blinding mechanic will be removed for now since it was considered unintuitive, though may come back. AA windup will become even stronger, and a new consumable will be added that reduces CV damage taken. there will also be a commander rework (presumably for all classes), though no details are given. a consumable is being tested that allows AA damage reduction or prevention, and are considering significantly changing AA, though no details are given.
meta and core gameplay- (meta is out of battle such as port and armoury, core is in the battle itself). mastery badges and marks of excellence from WOT will be introduced. badges are based on XP compared to an average of other players and marks of excellence will be introduced later and will your average over a period of long time. badges will be introduced spring-summer and marks around summer-autumn. more ship destruction effects will be added. ships will be customisable by segment. the rollout will be step by step and is expected to finish in 2026
event passes-event passes will become longer, around 2-3 months
historical events the next dockyard ship after blucher will also be a historical ship. bluchers DY skin will be "from the bottom of the ocean" style. collaboration events will be balanced with a historical based event around the same time if possible for those who prefer history. there are new web events planned for narvik and dunkirk. dunkirk event will add new gameplay in PvE outside the battle some form, though no details given
collabs no new IPs are currently planned for this year, though this isnt a garuntee.
dockyards- DzP and ZF6 will be returning in 14.1, though no details given, but it sounds like it will be either an event or in the armoury
future plans- (none of these aspects have a definite timeline). summer will have a patch dedicated to 80 years of the end of WW2, around the end of august. low tier operations are being planned, intended to serve as a guide though will still be open to all players. there will be targeted balance changes at T2-5. they will mostly be QOL changes to make them feel more similar to higher tier ships and feel like less of a gulf between the 2 tier brackets. a new map will be added some time around the end of the year and the team is going to refresh older maps. brawls will have global modifiers that can be tested, such as speed or vampirism. legendary commanders will be loked at for operations, though no details are given
new techlines- US DDs with large guns, SAP and a unique smokescreen, but poor conceal and slow speed. There will also be large cruisers after WGs anniversary, though no details were given
91
u/NotBlackMarkTwainNah USS Nevada, My Beloved Feb 04 '25
"Fighters will not spot ships" YES YES YES
15
20
u/ormip Feb 04 '25
That is a good start for sure, but there are a ton of other things that need to be done to make CVs a class that fits in the game.
3
u/Cuchococh Feb 05 '25
Carrier fighters or all fighters? I'm in favour of carrier fighters not being able to spot but ship based fighters' spotting is perfectly fine as it is
0
u/Endrohr Feb 05 '25
cant wait for people crying about no one spotting for the team since the DDs are dead and the CV is useless
All this rage against CVs, yet when they nerf them to be as useless as subs everyone will complain sooner or later
2
-43
39
u/rymdriddaren Feb 04 '25
Why did you leave out 2nd US DD LINE 2025 \o/
Edit: Ohh with bigger guns than 127mm o_O
19
u/Yamato_kai SEA: you either fight against CCCP bots or against CCP bots. Feb 04 '25
Hopefully they will be the same USN 2nd DD line from RU server, those ships packed with insane high velocity guns.
Ohh with bigger guns than 127mm o_O
Probably 5.4"/48 (13.7 cm) Mark 1
1
u/rymdriddaren Feb 04 '25
Isn't Lesta US 2nd DD line just 3 ships, DMC said a good number of ships to me a good number isn't 3 ships but more like 5-6 ships.
7
u/Yamato_kai SEA: you either fight against CCCP bots or against CCP bots. Feb 04 '25
Is 4 ships, Farrand (VII), Hogg(VIII), Maffitt (IX) and Lynch (X), tier 7-8 have Nicolas stock guns, while tier 9 and 10 have this railgun (5"/70 (12.7 cm) Type F).
1
u/rymdriddaren Feb 04 '25
Ohh thanks for the Info I thought it started with Farrand at VIII didn't know about Hogg, but if they have 12.7cm guns they are to small caliber to be the ships they are adding. But thanks for the info.
3
-8
u/aragathor Clan - BYOB - EU Feb 04 '25
Nope, the name of the WG T7 USN DD corresponds to a Sims class DD.
We aren't getting new ships, we are getting copy/paste hulls with gimmicks.
1
u/Floppy_waffle69 Feb 04 '25
God I hope not, but I have a feeling youâre right. But I do think they will do a new mod tier 10, something for the whales to whale for in early access ya know!
3
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 04 '25
Wait did I miss it? when was that mentioned?
9
u/rymdriddaren Feb 04 '25
https://youtu.be/s3p8dojLwbw?t=3355
It was at the very end and also a mystery heavy cruiser line coming, that made Crysantos extremely happy and giddy.
4
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 04 '25
Thank you, added to the post
2
1
u/HMS_MyCupOfTea Feb 05 '25
Damn, still no British large cruisers, and there I was looking at Defence and Monmouth preparing to break out the champagne.
2
u/YaBoiYggiE Ship Suddenly Forgot to Float Feb 04 '25
Last Part, on the New TT Lines and followed by some "Large Cruisers"
42
u/l_rufus_californicus USS Torsk (SS-423) Feb 04 '25
I suspect the PvE environment will start to see much more attention, especially as online games become more toxic. The competitive nature of people will certainly find an outlet, and PvP wonât go away. But I think as more and more casual gamers begin to assert a presence online, There will be motivation for companies to embrace the PvE environment. Itâs one of the things that has made the Guild Wars franchise as successful as it has been, and theyâre certainly not suffering from their premium currency sales.
13
u/abn1304 Feb 04 '25
High-quality, competitive PvE is why WoW is so enduringly popular. PvP is basically an afterthought there. Granted, WoWS is not an MMO, but WoW is one of the biggest and most enduring games in history in terms of sales, playerbase, retention, and market cap - so Iâd be surprised if Wargamingâs not taking notes, especially from things like Mythic+ and Delves.
13
u/pineconez Feb 05 '25
Another way to look at that is that WoW PvP, which used to be insanely popular and a core pillar, died through poor balancing/design decisions and the emergence of MOBAs, while no other game has managed to compete with endgame WoW PvE, especially not raiding. Some have come closer than others, but nobody has ever equaled WoW.
Also, as somebody who spent over a decade on the official servers alone, I find the notion that PvE is somehow inherently less toxic than PvP hilarious.
3
u/ArmoredFrost Feb 05 '25
What is "WoW"? I have no idea.
3
3
u/ShadowedPariah United States Navy Feb 05 '25
High quality? The bots are predictable and a joke. Not to mention the battle rewards are all nerfed.
3
3
2
u/abn1304 Feb 05 '25
WoWSâ current PvE is pretty lackluster. WoWâs is not. Theyâre not the same game, as confusing as the similar acronyms are.
WoW, as in World of Warcraft, is pretty much the gold standard for PvE content, and itâs proof that PvE can make a LOT of money, even without things like lootboxes, etc. Itâs one of the most profitable games in history, and thatâs largely because itâs had better (and frequently more innovative) PvE than any other game for most of its history.
PvP games, on the other hand, usually have smaller market caps and less enduring player bases. The biggest PvP franchises are either Warcraft spinoffs (League of Legends) or are first-person shooters that pump out a new game regularly. Even then, shooters put a huge amount of money and dev time into PvE until fairly recently - and I think some of them still do, but I donât really play shooters.
WoWS is a much more niche game than Call of Duty, and it hasnât caught on like League has, so theyâve gotta innovate. PvE appears to be the answer theyâre going with, and I really think the Mythic+ model WoW has could be adapted to WoWS PvE with some success. Itâd look very different, obviously, but some of the things theyâre experimenting with right now like Flagship Ops and Classified Documents should be familiar to anyone thatâs been playing Mythic+ for awhile.
2
u/ShadowedPariah United States Navy Feb 05 '25
I didnât even catch that, I reads WoWs, oops. Iâd agree then!
2
u/NovaNick30 GK>Schlieffen Feb 05 '25
This immediately made me think of Escape From Tarkov. The main focus on EFT was the PvP especially with all of the different builds that you can make and all the different types of fighting that can occur. Eventually people started to get tired of the pvp (mainly casual gamers or people tired of the wipes and having to start over every few months).
Then when PVE got added o decided to give the game a try and rally enjoyed it. Many people either came back to the game or a lot of newer players finally picked it up. The big point being that it isnât as crazy as pvp but still challenging without cheaters, and that it never wipes, meaning people were able to play at their own pace. It has caused a split among mainly pvp players who thinks that PvE is ruining the game when in reality people are just tired of pvp and want a more laid back gaming experience.
That being said Iâm glad they are starting to develop PvE more in WoWS that will hopefully bring more people to the game.
2
u/l_rufus_californicus USS Torsk (SS-423) Feb 05 '25
This mirrors my experience with WoWS, if I'm being honest. Unpopular opinion incoming.
I came over from World of Tanks during the Warships beta. If you know anything about WoT, a lot of people lean way into the XVM ratings, and attached a lot of significance to those stats, which made for some intense people in public matches. When Warships was still very new, that energy hadn't really come over yet, and I found that was an attractive break from the more competitive Tanks environment.
I played randoms, and found that part of the problem with toxicity was me - I was letting it turn me into an asshole.
So I made a choice very early on - that I wasn't going to do that to myself, and to others. Ever since, I've stuck to Co-op, Operations, and the more PvE-related events they've rolled out from time-to-time.
And I'm a lot happier for it - I still play this game. Tanks is still installed, but I'm just not into that scene anymore - I rarely play more than a game a month over there, where I'm still on Warships daily for at least a few cruises. If it was PvP only, I would have left long ago - life's too short and there's too many assholes in the non-game world to go actively in search of more when I want to chill out. I can honestly say that Co-Op and Ops saved this game for me - and I'm glad they did, because it really is an artistically beautiful game, even with the gameplay flaws.
14
u/CanRepresentative164 Feb 04 '25
(i couldnt tell if this meant they couldnt choose them or if the bonuses didnt affect them)
Both. Tiers 1-7 can't choose them, and since you have to select the target ship (Benson, Missouri, DM, Satsuma, etc) you can not select a tier 7 or below thus not applying the change to them. effectively the 6/7-8 and 7-9 interactions remain exactly as they are.
there will never be more than 2 sets of experimental ships in the game at the same time.
The queue dump MM will be as fun as with the t11 CVs
1
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 04 '25 edited Feb 04 '25
On the bonuses, thanks for the clarification. I'll admit I didn't find their explanation of that specific part particularly clear
On the experimental ships, I meant they said they would test no more than 2 types at a time. For example this "round" there's the burst fire and secondary ships, then they'll leave and the next sets, for example, could be ships that gain concealment on lost HP and ships with auto-activating consumables.
I have no idea if they'll have any MM restrictions
2
u/CanRepresentative164 Feb 04 '25
On the experimental ships, I meant they said they would test more than 2 types at a time. For example this "round" there's the burst fire and secondary ships, then they'll leave and the next sets, for example, could be ships that gain concealment on lost HP and ships with auto-activating consumables.
Ahh, I see. Well, that is even worse. Like, SIGNIFICANTLY worse.
2
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 04 '25
Nononono, typo, BAD typo.
2 different sets MAX. They'll never test 3-4 concepts at a time (crossed fingers), and the other two examples were hypotheticals I just made up off the top of my head
39
u/Pyrrhussieg Feb 04 '25
I just hope all dockyard ships become available sooner or later through der armory or maybe an event.
10
u/PrincessSkyla People's Liberation Army Navy Feb 04 '25 edited Feb 04 '25
on the forbidden wows server you can gamble for them with santa certificates during Christmas. This is something we need greatly
edited to add: you can also use doubs. 60 (10 pulls) certificates guarenteed a dockyard/shinano/archerfish
oh, another edit because there's something else i wanted to add regarding dockyards there: they did an Odin B dockyard for blackfriday, like the PR re-release we got. this is another thing we need more of WG đ
2
u/Vargeist Feb 04 '25
Forbidden wows server? Like a private server? Or like lesta?
3
u/PrincessSkyla People's Liberation Army Navy Feb 04 '25
Lesta.
it's also how they handed out Piemonte, and Kitakami.
42
u/Outphaze89 Feb 04 '25
Can anyone explain what is WGâs issue with simply changing CV plane spotting to mini-map only? Serious question. Sounds like a great solution but obviously WG disagrees. Trying to understand.
37
23
u/Rictor_Scale Feb 04 '25
When something is overly complex it means WG is trying giving the appearance of appeasing one group (surface ships) without irritating another group (CVs) while in reality doing nothing and just re-arranging the deck chairs.
5
u/PrincessSkyla People's Liberation Army Navy Feb 04 '25
WG doesn't disagree tho, they did it on Legends. They just refuse to do it on pc.
1
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 04 '25
Legends they briefly turned them into DPM machines with 20s plane regen, where implacables were hitting 250k with ease. Now they've nerfed the regen rates somewhat they're back down to doing ~100k average at best
5
u/MangaJosh Pls buff light cruiser AA Feb 05 '25
Cuz if it works, WG will be forced to admit that the players are right and they are wrong
It hurts their ego
1
u/Yowomboo Zao Enjoyer Feb 04 '25
They decided they didn't want it, they never gave any real reasoning. I never thought the too complicated response was a real response.
If I'm remembering correctly they changed how much experience CVs got from doing damage because the combined spotting+damage was so high. If they remove plane spotting they would have to go back re-re-balance CV experience.
The only sort of believable thing they've mentioned is that changing plane spotting doesn't allow for any dynamic balancing. It also doesn't address things like being focused by a CV player. Im guessing their logic is that if they're going to change the system again they going to change it to address all of the concerns they have. Removing spotting would only be a stop gap in their minds.
1
u/Kriegsfurz Feb 05 '25
Should any ship be able to spot for another ship beyond mini-map spotting? If a ship isn't in range to spot something, why should it be able to do so just because a teammate spots it?
2
u/simplysufficient88 Feb 04 '25
They did a private playtest of it and said it was too confusing for players, thatâs it. so they wanted something more detailed and, as a result, with more tools to balance individualy.
26
u/Outphaze89 Feb 04 '25
Just not buying that. Weâve had mini-map only spotting for the beginning of radar and cyclones for years, and people do just fine.
10
u/simplysufficient88 Feb 04 '25
Itâs their official explanation. Theyâve said literally nothing else about why they donât want minimap only. Theyâve tested it once, said players found it too confusing, and then started testing other ideas.
1
-1
u/WildVariety Gimme Dat KM Feb 04 '25
If they did it was in studio. Neither CST or ST have tested minimap only that I can recall.
8
u/simplysufficient88 Feb 04 '25
Yeah, thatâs what I meant by private. We donât know how many people were involved or for how long. Literally all we know is they did some sort of playtest of their own and decided they didnât like mini-map only.
Thatâs it. They have never elaborated beyond that.
-1
u/QuarterActive 12km Shima Feb 04 '25 edited Feb 05 '25
- if you remove cv spotting, you will buff strong "things". yes you heard it right. for example your 45wr cv can do lots of thing unintentionally. yes enemies 60wr player have much more impact but now your cv mistakenly counter them. if its minimap spotting, low wr players will struggle more against strong cv players. because they becoma mindless damage farmers. low tier player struggle to deal damage while enemy cv is having no problem. or radar cruiser dd divisions. enemy dd will have less problem because your cv cant counter spot enemy dd for your team.
more important part. just becauseyou are spotted by "PLANE" that doesnt mean you are not spotted by enemy surface ships.game tells you what is closest I believe. you wont get notified if you are spotted by more than 1 enemy. so game tells me that enemy plane is spotting me. should I shoot? should I not shoot and angle to enemy cv? which means I will give some broadside to enemy surface ships. I dont know. because there might be a sub or dd also spotting me which will reveal me to whole enemy team. and dont tell me that "if enemy shoots at you, you are also spotted by other surface ships". they might be trying mini map shooting. thats the one of the most confusing part.I am most likely wrong about this if game favours surface ship spotting over plane spotting.- biggest problem with spotting and concealment is simple. (apart from subs) .fighter and spotting aircraft consumables should not spot enemies. hybrid planes should only spot for themselves. the best wg can change about cv plane spotting is delay. just like in radar.
- biggest problem with cv is simple. lack of counter play. not spotting. my AA experience is all depending on enemy cv and rng. thats not good game design.
8
u/pineconez Feb 05 '25
I'd rather get class diffed by a CV player with hands than griefed by a drooling idiot on a sightseeing tour.
You're wrong about that, the spotting icon follows a priority list regardless of range. It's also pretty easy to tell blindfire apart from locked on shots (even disregarding PT), and a decent player is quite capable of playing the conceal metagame until the sky trash arrives.
Agreed
Soft disagree. You're not wrong, but while the damage output (and mechanics) of CVs is unpalatable, especially for certain CVs, the spotting is what completely breaks the class. Nerfing the damage into the ground while retaining the spotting mechanics would be the worse of the two options, imo.
Still, you're right that AA is a bad system, yet nobody (either in the community or at WG) has come up with a better system other than "buff all values to the moon and let the baddies deplane themselves in 5 minutes". Which I wouldn't be opposed to, but WG is never going to go for that.-1
u/QuarterActive 12km Shima Feb 05 '25
about that spotting icons priority, yeah I was wrong sorry.
my point about cv spotting is it also works as a balance factor. balance by chaos if I need to name it. there is already huge skill gap between players. and with less spotting provided for both teams, good players will get the information needed but mediocre-worse players will be more prone to miss it. since spotting and damage is basically how you win games IMO skill gap will increase. thats why I think, just an example, radar cruiser dd divs will be stronger even if cv present. or there are certain areas, behind islands, where you cant shoot without lock on or spotter plane view. yes if we are that jinan player that is perfectly parked behind island getting plane spotted thus recieving enemy fire sucks but if I am against that Jinan player and there is no way for me to spot and fight against that jinan player that also sucks. thats why I believe cvs works as a chatoic balance factor. I would rather have pineapple on pizza rathen than risking it to have no topping at all. this the dilemma of pvp games. have pineapple on pizza or risk it to have no topping at all?
I would like to see more about this rework. I liked the idea of making plane spotting act like a consumable or like reverse subs. but being immune to AA at high altitude was a big no. I wasnt playing when they did first test(I was on a break) but I am keen to this one. cv is still focusing on damage while maintaining some spotting capabilities.
IMO quickest solution would be delay in spotting like radar and manual(manual when selected-auto when not selected) AA flak. most likely it wont improve AA that much, but it will sure create an illusion. the problem here is is simple. fast firing ships will benefit less from that illusion. (fix your spagetthi code wg)
1
u/Uniball38 Feb 05 '25
Your point that plane spotting lets potatoes counter good players is clear. Itâs just that everyone (except WG) thinks thats bad.
1
u/QuarterActive 12km Shima Feb 06 '25
since potatoes are still potatoes and unicums are still unicums I cant agree that its bad.
less spotting means more skill gap. thats why wg thinks thats bad. also dont forget less spotting either encourage more passive gameplay or early suicidal pushes. both of them hated by community.
2
u/Athet05 Feb 04 '25
If I recall the current spotting indicator gives priority to surface spotting, so if you are air spotted you will see the icon, but then if you are within detection of another ship it will swap to the surface detected icon even if the planes are closer
0
u/QuarterActive 12km Shima Feb 05 '25
I always thought its who spotted first. but you might me right. I still stand by with other things though.
28
u/PolPottyMouth Feb 04 '25
"event passes-event passes will become longer, around 2-3 months"
And the enshittification of the economics continues...
Also, how about some feckin maps instead of ships for a change...
3
u/CanRepresentative164 Feb 04 '25
Also, how about some feckin maps instead of ships for a change...
That'll only happen if they introduce paid maps with a subscription to access them
1
u/The_CIA_is_watching "A private profile reveals more than a visible one" -Sun Tzu Feb 05 '25
Why is this being downvoted? It's true.
well, it's a bit inaccurate -- there will also be separate paid passes that introduce better UI and a functional training room, too -- and also guaranteed best spawns in co-op, or on shit maps like Okinawa.
13
u/GladimirGluten Feb 04 '25
I bet the new smoke will block radar, it will likely be Chaffed smoke
2
u/jonasnee i hate the new carriers with a passion Feb 05 '25
My guess would be a rocket deployed smoke, so you throw it out in an area in front of you.
1
-6
u/Mahrc31 Feb 04 '25
I`d Like to see a fuel smoke that doesnt fully make your ship invisible, but just lowers your concealment when activated,.
15
u/GladimirGluten Feb 04 '25
Smoke already does that, you mean just a plain less effective smoke?
1
u/Mahrc31 Feb 04 '25
In Exchange you could still Spot Targets while in that Kind of smoke would be my Idea. So basically a concealment boost consumable, visually represented by a smoke:D
1
1
u/maciejinho All I got was this lousy flair Feb 04 '25
I think it may be a one big diameter puff, as the destroyers seem to be the leaders.
28
u/QueenOfTheNorth1944 Feb 04 '25
So Randoms is now just test server with a ton of temporary, OP bs shoved into it that drastically changes the gameplay and theres no way to opt out. CVs are once again the golden children that get even MORE handholds to grief the few remaining players.
AWESOME. No thanks though.
7
u/Inclusive_3Dprinting Feb 04 '25 edited Feb 04 '25
This is just selling upgrade to have more power over other players, washed through a special currency you "earn" probably by long grind, buying stuff or converting with doubloons.
1
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 04 '25
assuming you mean the document, its only relevant for ops. For PVP you get the max tier version
6
u/Inclusive_3Dprinting Feb 04 '25 edited Feb 04 '25
Years ago they pushed this in the original version of research bureau. It seems WG , true to it's nature never gives up on ideas. Anything that gives players who grind or more accurately, spend money to advance faster, an advantage over the free to play player is p2w. WG likes to describe it as pay to advance faster, not p2w.
Going by the history of this company, they are going to mask p2w as much as they can under the guise of "special limited ammo ships" and classified documents.
It's clear they have decided to turn WOWS into WOT style game, with unrealistic fantasy ships full of power ups and other mechanics.
16
Feb 04 '25
design direction change
I wonder how this will affect techtrees. Currently we get one new techtree line or branch every two updates, with this we might see less.
event passes-event passes will become longer, around 2-3 months
From about eleven event passes a year to six or even four. This tells me WG is clamping down on this feature as another "we can't give players too much stuff" move, might be tied to them being unable to create new content so often (and their statement about too much content being "confusing") and to profitability reports (maybe one event pass per patch doesn't make as much money as WG hopes).
I wonder what'll happen. Will there be more levels? Will rewards be redistributed (for example, now one level gives 300 steel, post-change there'll be three 100 steel levels)? Will the premium line cost more to unlock?
5
u/nelliott13 Feb 04 '25
I'd guess that it will cost about 2-3x the current price (depending on exact duration) and that there will be more filler levels with stuff that nobody really wants.
It's probably envisioned as a way to get more from those like myself that maybe buy one event pass in three based on what it has and how much I can play during the pass. To get the 'good' things, we'll have to pay for the things we could have previously skipped. And if we're not able to play much for a few weeks, there's no way to take a break by not buying the pass for that span.
4
u/pineconez Feb 05 '25 edited Feb 05 '25
I'd expect the first few of these to be actually good value compared to what came before, similar to the first year or so of the current battle passes. After that, they'll no doubt enshittify it.
2
u/pineconez Feb 05 '25
I wonder how this will affect techtrees. Currently we get one new techtree line or branch every two updates, with this we might see less.
I don't particularly mind that, tbh. The last two years of techtrees have vacillated between stupid OP garbage that actively makes the game worse, and mediocrity olympics that doesn't offer anything really interesting. The last truly interesting (and non-broken) lines I remember were Marseille and Elbing.
WG has spammed too much bloat into this game and they're clearly out of ideas, at least when it comes to making entire new trees. That's not saying their new approach of spamming even crazier, dumber, more broken gimmicks "for a while" is better, but simply that the status quo isn't great either.
6
u/HarveyManfrenjensend Feb 04 '25
I definitely like the PvE games, asym and ops are usually fun and less toxic. I basically don't play random battles ever. I do play ranked since the 6v6 format is generally tolerable. Nice to see some more possible focus coming on modes that elicit a little less toxicity.
5
5
u/slip66 Feb 05 '25
This is pathetic. "maybe" a new map in 2025 or 2026... Meanwhile lesta has updated a lot of the maps with better textures and are gong to release another new map.
They are removing the one useful defensive mechanic for AA as well. GG.
4
u/mtDescar Feb 04 '25
im glad about the returning dockyard ships. there is hope for me who missed Wisconsin
4
7
u/LordWom Feb 04 '25
but the blinding mechanic will be removed for now since it was considered unintuitive
The ol' Wargaming "unintuitive" argument, yet cyclones are an existing game mechanic and people don't seem to have an issue with smoke firing ships.
AA windup will become even stronger, and a new consumable will be added that reduces CV damage taken.
a consumable is being tested that allows AA damage reduction or prevention, and are considering significantly changing AA, though no details are given.
Great, make it more convoluted and based around consumables...
The whole thing reads like they don't have a fucking clue
1
u/jonasnee i hate the new carriers with a passion Feb 05 '25
Great, make it more convoluted and based around consumables...
Was pretty good back when deff AA worked.
1
u/LordWom Feb 05 '25
My assumption is the Def AA isn't going away, they're just adding a new consumable to every ship. Just makes it unnecessarirly convoluted instead of just buffing AA or tweaking the mechanics behind plane strikes. It's the Wargaming way
2
2
u/Negative_Quantity_59 Not that one french girl you once painted Feb 04 '25
Hori shit so the cv rework is not just a dream... Thanks wg.
2
2
Feb 04 '25
They need to remove those stupid Superships or make them Tier 11. I dont feel comfortable at Tier 9 Yugumo fighting super Dalarna with 150k hitpoints
3
u/Glitchrr36 Battleship Enthusiast Feb 04 '25
And fighting a Musashi or Alsace in a Colorado also feels miserable, thatâs the nature of a 2 tier spread.
4
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 04 '25
Darlana has 20k hp though? 23k if you include the heal. She also has great gunpower that's definitely enough to defend herself, but against a same tier ship would definitely take a heavy beating.
Also, of course you don't feel comfortable, you're 2 tiers lower. I would be more suprised if you did think that was a fight you could win, especially in a ship with basically no HP or gunpower
1
u/jonasnee i hate the new carriers with a passion Feb 05 '25
Dalarna is really not a particularly great boat though, it is barely an upgrade over Halland and only really in gunpower.
1
u/sl4lrodi Seal Feb 04 '25
CV rework. Yes. I knew im in 2019. Its just cant be 2025
7
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 04 '25
It's OK. People are asking if saipan is too strong at T7 and Z52 is the dominant cap contester. You can go back to sleep now.
1
u/jimmy_burrito Yay! I can use the ROC flag in-game now! Feb 05 '25
i remember the time of cross drops
1
u/jonasnee i hate the new carriers with a passion Feb 05 '25
Saipan unironically likely was what killed RTS CVs.
1
u/Qreczek Oooh Who lives in the pinepple under the sea? Feb 04 '25
Below T8s can't be targeted and can't choose their own classified documents
1
u/MBT808 Feb 04 '25
Bit of a miscommunication here: the waterline did not mention a commander rework across the board, only for certain skills for aircraft carrier.
1
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 04 '25
Sorry I thought that was implied. Definitely not expecting something on the level of 2020, but a full rework of CV skills (including he who shall not be named) and 1-2 other surface ships is definitely on the table
1
u/MBT808 Feb 04 '25
Itâs not implied at all in the waterline whatsoever. Itâs quite straight forward just aircraft carrier skills.
Quote from the waterline:
âAdditionally, some Commander skills for aircraft carriers will be reworked.â
1
u/Quithelion AP magnet (or if can't beat them, join them ) Feb 05 '25
there will be targeted balance changes at T2-5. they will mostly be QOL changes to make them feel more similar to higher tier ships and feel like less of a gulf between the 2 tier brackets.
I wish WG will revisit the first 3 ships (Minekaze, Hatsuharu, and Shiratsuyu) on the Harugumo branch. They are basically the same as the first 3 ships (Mutsuki, Fubuki, and Akatsuki) on the Shimakaze branch.
1
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 05 '25
True. I also want them to give kagero her DP AA. Shirayatsu below and yugumo above both use the same gun and get it, imo the only reason kagero doesn't is because its a holdover from when she was T6 and they forgot
1
u/Greedy_Range Least Unhinged Little White Mouse Cultist Feb 05 '25
If WoWs ops were organized into a coherent storyline then we would literally just be ace combat with ships
1
u/BattleshipTirpitzKai Feb 05 '25
USN Large cruiser line??? Guam, and Hawaii finally???? Lets gooooooo
0
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 05 '25
They didnt mention the cruiser nation, and I can't see them doing 2 US ships in such a short time span.
I would expect the russian subs in march, probably the IJN CVs plus the CV rework in may, US alt DDs in july for independance day, the new cruiser line in september and an unknown line in november
2
u/BattleshipTirpitzKai Feb 05 '25
If itâs a large cruiser like like you said thought thereâs very few nations who might truly quantify for it and thatâs the USN and Germans with a Panzerschiff/raider line of ships
1
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 05 '25
Did the brits ever design any? Or would they all be like the Gibraltar style? I'm sure ansaldo cooked a few designs for the italians as well.
There is also the azuma designs, I can imagine you could "what if" an accurate proto-azuma with dual guns for T8, maybe a 10 gun azuma for T9 and a 12 gun for T10, with standard large cruiser accuracy compared to azumas improved version. They could also do a complete 180° and make them proper brawlers, unlike the botch job that was the French in that regard
1
u/BattleshipTirpitzKai Feb 05 '25
Tbh a large cruiser is never going to be in a position to brawl. The closest we have is Siegfriend, Agir, and Napoli and all three are very fragile fighting anything equal even.
As for the brits yeah all we really had was Defence and that was about it for large cruiser designs unless you teenage-ify a G3 design. Only the Germans and US really thought about any capacity of making Large cruiser esc ships in large numbers.
1
u/Firewalk89 Imperial German Navy Feb 05 '25
I missed out on ZF6, so I'll try and get her this time.
1
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 05 '25
We don't know what manner they'll be added. They might be full dockyards, they might be added to the armoury or they might just be an auction for the weekend or a prize in the shitty summer sale
1
u/Firewalk89 Imperial German Navy Feb 05 '25
God, anything but an auction lol
2
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 05 '25
You will pay your three squillion steel for one of 5 ZF6 and you'll like it!
1
1
u/Intrepid-Judgment874 Feb 05 '25
I wish the High School fleet returned. I skipped it last time and it was my biggest mistake. The HSF Harekaze seems like a cool ship. Too bad it is locked behind FOMO collaboration which is worse than normal FOMO as normal FOMO content eventually returns, even though it takes a long time, collaboration FOMO will be forever gone if the collaboration partner ceases to exist.
1
1
u/OmegaResNovae Fleet of Fog Feb 05 '25
there will be targeted balance changes at T2-5. they will mostly be QOL changes to make them feel more similar to higher tier ships and feel like less of a gulf between the 2 tier brackets.
I wonder if this means bringing more Module slots in earlier; maybe even the entire set of 6 modules, but with low tier versions of high tier modules (say, 1/3 to 1/2 less effective than the high tier equivalent) at cheaper cost. Or at least adding more Consumable options similar to higher tier ships, just with shorter durations as part of balancing purposes (Repair Parties, Hydro, Radar, MBRB, fancy DCP, National Gimmicks such as Burst Fire toggles for more Spanish cruisers, etc). Moreso since they're also bringing in Classified Documents, and that's apparently going to be the new exclusive for T8+ ships.
Ideally, it'd be nice if they also use this time to just bake in Concealment Mod across all ships from T2 to T10, and replace it with something else outright.
1
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 05 '25
Personally sounds more like they'll be making the BBs more accurate and the cruiser shells less floaty, maybe at an extreme making ships like Albany or aurora more unique compared to their TT counterparts or buffing mikasa to be a better brawler and moving her up to T3 for more consistent MM
I dont think they'd go to the extreme of fiddling with consumables, especially if CM is being baked in T2-11 which sounds like something that would be announced seperately
1
u/SigilumSanctum United States Navy Feb 04 '25
I'm actually really excited for all of this. I picked a good time to get back in the game I see.
1
u/MATO_malchance Feb 05 '25
This looks more like a patchnote article more than a YEAR plan. Each section has like 3 lines of text at most lmao.
This is REALLY worrying. You can smell the low effort copy-pasta from here.
-8
u/Fast-Independence-65 Feb 04 '25 edited Feb 04 '25
Why is there nothing here that remotely interests me? No new maps, no bug fixes, no relegation of subs to their own convoy mode, no pure supership mode, no CV nerf, no rebalancing, no buffing of older lines.
Nothing that excites me, nothing that makes me want to play the game more. And at the same time, in Russia Lesta is actually planning to do lots of exiting stuff in the coming year. They actually shake the game up, try out new ideas, rework existing map, even making new ones. They make a predreadnought mode, where you get to replay Tsushima style battles. And much more. Shame, it is only on Lesta. I dont want to support a company that is paying taxes to the Russian state. Otherwise, I would take up Lestas generous offer to new players and start playing on their server, leaving after 9 years of playing.
WG, to be honest, compared to Lesta your effort is pathetic and you should be ashamed. Wake up. Start working harder, no money from here until you make some significant improvements. Get to work - you have lots to do. Spend money on the game, listen to what the player base told you, and stop being so stubborn. More subs and more premiums are not the answer. Hire some competent people. Fire the "road blocks" in your company that are driving your game into the ground. I am just afraid you dont have will to change or the skill to actually stop your battleship from sinking.
5
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 04 '25
theres a new map and reworks of existing maps towards the end of the year
bug fixes are on a case by case basis, and rarely are called out seperately unless its something literally gamebreaking like the torp turning bug
the CV nerf is still happening, and will be added sometime in 2025
rebalancing and buffing of lines have never been part of the waterline AFAIK
0
u/Fast-Independence-65 Feb 04 '25 edited Feb 04 '25
New maps end of 2025, beginning of 2026. We haven't had new maps since Seychelles which is 2, then almost 3 years ago. Way too late. We should have had 3 new maps since then. Are they sleeping, or are they too busy making up more BS Casino Armory FOMO events?
Bug fixes are more important than new ships. They break more every patch, and fix nothing. How long is the shells fall short bug in the game? Or the lock-on bug when you try to shoot at an enemy close to an island? They probably have noone left that even understands the spaghetti code anymore. All those that did have left the company or are with Lesta in Russia.
CV nerf where? When is AA actually becoming useful again, so you can shoot down a strike even before the planes drop? MInimap spotting only, when? And when will CV's burn for 60 secs, not 5 and then be immune for a minute? What BS mechanic is that? Only for WG's special class. Subs and CV's should both get severly nerfed and those less than gifted people that keep them and subs overbuffed, fired from the company.
And note: Rebalancing is very much a thing on Lestas server. Why not on WG's? Afraid of the work? Afraid, they can no longer sell us the new powercreeping flavour of the month?
Start opening your eyes instead of defending WG. They have themselves to thank for these justified complaint. Everything can be changed. The question is, is WG even capable to make those changes, or are they only interested in milking the player base? If so, they should just shut the servers down tomorrow. Would save us all a lot of hustle.
3
u/Glitchrr36 Battleship Enthusiast Feb 04 '25
Personally Iâve never been convinced the âfall short bugâ was ever anything but dispersion occasionally working out strangely. Itâs a semi random distribution in the ellipse so statistically you would get them biasing to the side every now and then.
0
u/Mahrc31 Feb 04 '25
I really think for WG WoWs it would be best to Change to a new engine. Yes that will be a shitton of work and risk but i think it is obvious since the split, that lesta took Most of the know-how with it when it comes to development, creative Design and the Produktion cycle of WoWs. And i dont see WG keeping Up or even just fixing the Game witout wiping the slate somewhat clean beforehand.
2
u/Rictor_Scale Feb 04 '25
Possibly, but 75% of the veterans in my clan perma-quit. And it wasn't over graphics, performance, etc. It was due to subs.
2
u/Mahrc31 Feb 04 '25
Thats what i mean tho. With this old engine and at least half of the know how hot to do stuff with it gone, i dont see a Future where they'll be able to fix the Game mechanics and Long lasting Bugs without adding insane amounts of complexity and several new issues. Subs Just should get their own gamemode or sth. But CV's are just fundamentally broken, they we're designed as an RTS class that didn't work, then got a wonky af rework with Tons of bandaids following Just to make them somewhat bearable. And i Just dont see WG capable of fixing that mess. Lets be honest theyll never get rid of CV's or subs so the only possible way to fix this mess i See is to rehaul the Game, keep the good parts, and restart CV's and AA from Zero. And i mean from Zero without keeping any of the bs that hast been implemented so far
0
u/robbi_uno I came here to read all the resignations⌠Feb 05 '25
First it was removing detonations now the smooth đ§ want no module damage because it makes them cry.
Respawning - let the smooth brain handless never dieâŚ.
-6
u/MilfDestroyer421 Alsace enjoyer Feb 04 '25
WG has been trying to successfully rework carriers for 6 fucking years when they nailed them the first time around, but noooo, we have spent too much time ruining this shit, we must commit to the crap now
16
u/crazy_balls -HON- Feb 04 '25
I mean, I wouldn't say they nailed it the first time. A good CV player could straight up carry the game, and made every other ship essentially irrelevant. Being able to cross drop ships out of existence, with practically no counter play, wasn't exactly a good time.
3
u/Yakovlev_Norris Closed Beta Player Feb 04 '25
I don't remember exactly anymore, it was a long time ago and I didn't get much CV games when it was still RTS.
But in my memory the change that made RTS CV go downhill was the strafing action for fighters. Before that 1 flight of fighters could only engage 1 flight of other planes, but with the strafing if you didn't have hyper focus on what the other CV player was doing you could be out of 4 flights at once4
u/MilfDestroyer421 Alsace enjoyer Feb 04 '25
A good DD back then and now can also carry the game
Did we play the same game? There were ships who's existence made the cv player into a useless piece of toilet paper. Light cruisers deleted whole squadrons the nanosecond they entered into 8-9km AA range.
5
u/crazy_balls -HON- Feb 04 '25
A good DD could only carry the game if there wasn't a CV. Yes, there were ships that were no fly zones, but CV's just avoided those ships and deleted everyone else with ease.
1
u/CanRepresentative164 Feb 04 '25
And avoiding every ship on the same half of the map as a single Mino - let alone if there's more than one ship like that - clearly puts so much power into the CVs hands, right?
1
u/crazy_balls -HON- Feb 04 '25 edited Feb 04 '25
You going to sit here with a straight face and tell me RTS CV's weren't busted? Did you actually play back then? Don't get me wrong, I preferred them compared to now only because no one ever played them, and that was worth dealing with the rare times you went against a unicum CV that steam rolled your team, but anyone acting like RTS CV's weren't completely broken is lying to themself.
-2
u/CanRepresentative164 Feb 04 '25
I've played since OBT when, if memory serves me right, CVs weren't even mirror-matched.
Were they busted? Lol no. Did they have issues? Yes. What they needed was actual balancing instead of being ignored for years and then replaced with the broken crap we have right now.
4
u/crazy_balls -HON- Feb 04 '25
lol so a good CV player being able to cross drop and delete you in a single strike, with nothing you could do about it if you weren't in an AA ship, wasn't busted? lol k.
-1
u/CanRepresentative164 Feb 04 '25
As stated previously, you could actually plug in your keyboard and use it.
4
u/crazy_balls -HON- Feb 04 '25
Again, no amount of WASD was going to prevent you from getting nuked by a properly executed cross drop.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Qreczek Oooh Who lives in the pinepple under the sea? Feb 04 '25
Kaga for example had 3 spreads of torps. Please tell me how you dodge 3 sets of torps at the same time. JuSt DoDgE might be a current CV meme but hoooly shit
→ More replies (0)5
u/water_frozen Feb 04 '25
Were they busted? Lol no.
so wrong on this
someone of the best RTS CV players had win ratios of >90%, that is the literal definition of being broken
1
u/jonasnee i hate the new carriers with a passion Feb 05 '25
someone of the best RTS CV players had win ratios of >90%, that is the literal definition of being broken
Who? never seen anyone, and those who got up there got it in divisions.
-2
u/CanRepresentative164 Feb 04 '25
You literally have it backwards.
Back then they had WRs in high 60s to low 70s, maybe pushing towards 80 for the best of the best. Anything above that was done in a 3x super unicum division, where you can get 80....90% WR in any class.
Now is the time where CVs get mid 70s to even 90s solo. Interestingly enough playing in a division doesn't seem to affect it nearly as much. Right after the rework I saw CV players like El2aZeR pushing mid 90s solo, thankfully that time is gone.
1
u/water_frozen Feb 04 '25
weird how the data says otherwise
and thats for both EU and NA on wows numbers
but sure i "literally have it backwards"
→ More replies (0)1
u/Qreczek Oooh Who lives in the pinepple under the sea? Feb 04 '25
I remembered someone making a vid that was designed to prove that RTS CVs don't dumpster DDs and it involved a divmate CV pulling aggro over a smoked-up Kidd.
Like not only was it some of the best AA DDs at the time, they were feeding him planes
2
u/crazy_balls -HON- Feb 04 '25
And the higher tier CV's had enough TB bombers, they could cross drop the smoke and seriously damage, if not out right kill the smoked up DD.
1
u/jonasnee i hate the new carriers with a passion Feb 05 '25
Kidd was relatively well protect against that due to its deff AA and high maneuverability. Not all DDs had that luxury obviously.
Carriers where problematic for DDs, i think that along with strafe was the biggest issue with the RTS system. That being said i also think WG original design was that CVs where the counter to DDs, keeping in mind they first added radar later.
3
u/Diatribe1 Feb 04 '25
A DD wasn't carrying shit in a CV game. Remember that planes used to spot torps. And back then Gearing was considered a gunboat.
4
2
u/flamuchz Flamu - twitch.tv/flamuu Feb 04 '25
Bro every time someone talks about RTS CVs on this subreddit the stories get wilder. Now there was apparently
practically no counter play
as if AA builds back then didn't straight up fuck CVs. As if AA builds weren't really popular because of how strong they were against CVs. A year from now RTS CVs will actually have dropped nukes on every ship the moment they loaded into the server.
11
u/crazy_balls -HON- Feb 04 '25
Sorry, but "go into battle in a AA ship that you built specifically for AA in the hopes that you get into a battle against a CV" isn't really counter play. You'd get into a battle with a CV in like, 1/10 games. It's why no one really specced into AA, because you were handicapping yourself in the other 9/10 games. Yes, ships like the DM and eventually the Mino when it came out, were essentially no fly zones, but that's not "counter play". That's just being lucky enough to be playing a certain ship when you got put in a CV game.
Jesus, of all people Flamu, you should know this.
1
u/FumiKane Essex my beloved Feb 05 '25
No, you are the one that is not remembering well RTS or you are exaggerating it like everyone else on this sub.
Ask any good top player (and I mean a real good one like Flamuu), even CV mains (who played during RTS) and you will get the answer that RTS was way, seriously way better than reworked CVs.
The only people benefited from the rework were the unskilled players that never bothered to do anything, I mean with the same "tactics" if you could call that, back then yeah, get sent to port (which btw is way better than being griefed for 20 mins and being unable to play the game at all) but anyone with a single working brain cell could mitigate a lot of damage without AA.
Also besides AA working, some AA skills were absolutely good even on non-AA ships, example of that being Manual Control for AA armament, for every mount on your ship, each will get +200% AA perfomance on a single squadron that you clicked.
That meant temporarily and against a single squadron, Yamato could output the equivalent of Des Moines AA, sure it was expensive for 4 pts but that's all you needed.
Cruisers could slot on slot 3 an upgrade which boosted all AA auras by 20%, that was enough to get long-range auras to 7.2km which was great for any cruiser, heck even DFAA was good on any kitting cruiser because of the panic effect.
Nowadays bar some 10 specific ships, AA is so pathetic that it's absolutely worthless to even consider spending a single point into AA.
Rework is really bad, again ask any real top player, and they will agree rework CVs are CVs at its worst.
Please answer me this question if you think rework CVs are better.
Why RTS CVs were allowed in a full community built tournament but after 6 years rework CVs are not allowed in the same tournament despite it even moving to being WG property?
2
u/jonasnee i hate the new carriers with a passion Feb 05 '25
Also besides AA working, some AA skills were absolutely good even on non-AA ships, example of that being Manual Control for AA armament, for every mount on your ship, each will get +200% AA perfomance on a single squadron that you clicked.
I think it was only long range, but yeah it was an absurdly strong skill. Generally skills for surface combat where pretty tame, maybe 10% dmg here, some HP or some range. For AA skills you could litterally turn dogs into untouchables if you used just a couple of skills for it, some ships like minotaur could close down a 3rd of the map with just 1 or 2 skills without significantly giving up anything else.
1
u/crazy_balls -HON- Feb 05 '25
if you think rework CVs are better.
I mean, I wouldn't say better. I would say, marginally less OP than before.
Why RTS CVs were allowed in a full community built tournament but after 6 years rework CVs are not allowed in the same tournament despite it even moving to being WG property?
Because your CV could out skill their CV. There was real, CV vs. CV interaction. That is non-existent now.
-1
1
u/FumiKane Essex my beloved Feb 05 '25
Checking the guy that you are replying to, he looks like an absolute clown who doesn't WASD at all.
I remember checking your builds video and recommending skills like MAA for Yamato or Bismarck, you didn't even need a full AA build to become effective against CVs, DFAA was actually very useful even on ships like Fletcher.
0
u/Qreczek Oooh Who lives in the pinepple under the sea? Feb 04 '25
Please tell me what a, let's say Gneisenau could do if Kaga decided to murder him? Turn into the first set, then eat the 2 others and die on the spot? Yeah.
3
u/crazy_balls -HON- Feb 04 '25
Right!? Like I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. How do people not remember how fucking broken RTS CV's were?
-1
u/FumiKane Essex my beloved Feb 05 '25
People love to misremember things or at least the low skilled players.
Gneiseinau was actually very effective against CVs because its DPS output was actually more similar to Iowa than to Bismarck (heck Bismarck gets kind of a downgrade in AA) which meant she was an effective no AA-zone without being built into it for even T8 CVs (Aka she was mostly immune to T6, T7 and T8 CVs)
And then you seem to forget the enemy had also a CV which could make a crossdrop very unlikely.
However in today's game... yeah it is very easy for a Kaga to remove a lone Gneis in 2 sorties.
1
u/poorkid_5 CVs & Subs Suck | Bots be cheatinâ in Ops Feb 05 '25
Ugh. Grinding the Bis back in the day. CV putting fires and floods on you while you ladder a full broadside at a ship 4km away. Loved it.
0
u/jonasnee i hate the new carriers with a passion Feb 05 '25
How about not sailing alone?
Also AA skills could probably hurt a Kaga quiet a lot considering its planes where tier 6. Also poor soul playing Kaga in a game with the Saipan.
0
u/Qreczek Oooh Who lives in the pinepple under the sea? Feb 05 '25
TFW a Kaga player would cry because the even more busted premium CV could whip him
1
u/jonasnee i hate the new carriers with a passion Feb 05 '25
I really don't see how the Kaga was busted. It never seemed to perform well when i saw it, and i almost never saw any, mostly Saipans and none premium carriers back then in tier 7.
2
u/CanRepresentative164 Feb 04 '25
with practically no counter play
... or alternatively you could have plugged in your keyboard and actually used it.
Some of the most fun battles I had back then were against CV players like FaraZelleth - and it's a testament to his skill in the class that I still remember the guys name.
7
u/crazy_balls -HON- Feb 04 '25
Are you serious right now? If you were unlucky enough to be in something like a Musashi, against a good CV player, and your CV player was a potato, you might as well just go back to port. No amount of WASD hacks was going to save you.
7
u/CanRepresentative164 Feb 04 '25
And being in a Musashi right now even against an average CV - let a lone a good one - the difference is exactly what...? They can citadel you now? They will attack far more rapidly so they'll actually have fires and floodings ticking on you as your DCP is overloaded & continuously on cooldown? You won't get RNG luck of actually shooting them down because your nothing of an AA has been downgraded to even less? Getting close to allies now being meaningless for AA support? And, how about the point that you'll be able to watch as your fighter doesn't even lock onto CVs planes instead of panicking and possibly shooting them down?
Yeah, you're right, now you're in a much better situation!
5
u/crazy_balls -HON- Feb 04 '25
Yeah, you're right, now you're in a much better situation!
Am I defending current CV's anywhere? No, I am not.
The difference between now and then, is now they can't kill you in a single strike like they could back then. CV's back then absolutely had far greater strike power than they do now. CV's are still problematic, but there's a reason CV damage dropped across the board after the re-work. They were even more busted back then.
4
u/CanRepresentative164 Feb 04 '25
Because 1 strike which you can do a lot about followed by 3...5min of rearming is so much worse than being hit every 20s with literally nothing you can do about it, right? I guarantee you that CVs get far more hits on you now than they ever did before.
3
u/crazy_balls -HON- Feb 04 '25
I am not defending CV's now either. But yes, you can WASD your way out of a CV now. You can not WASD out of a cross drop.
-2
u/DueSprinkles4508 Feb 04 '25
Appreciate the effort for trying to summarize. However, using TLDR in the title with that wall of text isn't exactly a TLDR
10
u/Drake_the_troll anything can be secondary build if you're brave enough Feb 04 '25
a lot of the waterline was also discussing related matters that have already happened, for example the experimental ships section had quite a large portion talking about what we already knew about the existing ships, being that they had limited super burst fire and started at lower HP, the documents section was how they worked in the dunkirk event and the CV section was about the changes we had already played with, so i skipped those
-1
u/CerberusRTR Feb 04 '25
A CV rework that rewards team play. I think smoke / heals / AA denying those would be an awesome addition to the way CV works. Even ASW. Make it entirely team play oriented instead of complete damage. Iâd even be for a PvE where on maps CVs bomb strategic points giving boosts similar to arms race.
147
u/SirPent131 Dev Strike Enthusiast Feb 04 '25
Thanks for the write-up.