THATS WHAT IM SAYIN
(I spoke on an idea almost identical to this on the topic made by WT justifying their changes, but idk if this is a coincidence or is taken from what I said. Granted it’s not that hard to come up with the idea so the likelihood of it being independent is quite high)
5 Likes
Agreed!
I can see a mix of the old and new system;
6.7 and below: free
7.0: low SP
7.3- 7.7: medium SP
8.0-8.3: medium-high SP
8.7: high SP
There’s still nothing 6.7s-7.7s can do against 8.7s; but the staircase towards 8.7 would be streamlined enough to ensure everyone rises on a relatively proportional rythm, and each previous BR is relatively balanced against the next.
But I think the best compromise would be to attempt to achieve the “paper, rock and scissors” dynamic where every ship class can play a significant role;
Although these ideas are not mutually exclusive and could be combined.
All in all, I still prefer New EC over Old EC, although I’d also settle/vouch for an improved version of Old/combining elements, concepts refined ideas from New and Old.
2 Likes
Yes, although it will be a bit sad to lose the whole destroyer and cruiser range in the top BR bracket, I of course understand that it is not exactly the best feeling getting absolutely hunted down by a 8.7 Battleship. The thing is, as i explained before, every second of him focussing some “useless” 5.0 destroyer that is no threat to him and not in any way decisive for the match outcome (its basically impossible to capture points with a destroyer bc people can just spawn there, sometimes even the coastals outright kill you trying to do so, and lots of destroyers dont have aphe or higher penning sap to even kill the coastals) is a second won for your team to get something done somewhere else. Destroyers are the big distractors for battleships, especially at ranges where they are hard to hit due to their size, speed and ability to dodge.
Sadly distracting a battleship or ship way above your weight class, even if thats leading to his succesful defeat gave you -as the one that was targeted- No rewards. While it was incredibly important sometimes for someone to fill that role. If you would have gained SP for the time you are focussed by a ship 2.0 BR above the one you’re in that might have been different. I know thats probably impossible to implement, just theoretically that would have been cool.
And- If the Battleship captain was inexperienced or just too bloodhungry - he could easily make serious mistakes focussing the wrong targets.
That would be preferable ofc. Though im not sure how that should work, even with subs. But i hope that the snail is currently cooking something.
The idea to alleviate that with a better spawn point distribution is certainly is good. I proposed a rework of the spawn point distribution on the map multiple times. But i’m afraid in the way you suggest it, it wont work. Convoys and Carriers are prime targets and good for destroyers and cruisers. They are fast, can cut the carrier off, scout him (u need to be 5 km or closer if you dont have a scoutplane) and can easily handle all the convoy ships. Unfortunately these prime targets for destroyers gave basically no SpawnPoint rewards in the past. Only thing that they possibly need there is cover by big ships if an enemy battleship makes it hard for them to attack.
While battleships excell at pushing ports, because you can have endless rows of cruisers and destroyers spawn there to defend. And thats the same in the new ec format. Someone with a 10 slot lineup like me, can theoretically spawn 10 ships there. And then start again with the first one. Considering how far the ports sometimes are from one of your spawns and that even if you make it there undetected, enemies will be looking for you as soon as the first killed coastal pops up in the killfeed, you will need something to sit there and take a serious beating for several minutes. Preferably a ship that excells at close range combat like a scharnhorst together with some longer range support of something really big. I would very rarely go to cap a port in a yamato. One battleship spawning on the side where your guns aint looking and youre done for. You dont wanna make a 30 min trip there just for basically anything to spawn and anything, that anyone most likely has in his linieup to easily beat you up from 3 km away.
3 Likes
Yes, but the effect that actually happened was that once one team has the advantage, they just park a BB out side the torp nets and shell the snot out of anybody spawning while the DDs have to survive and sail a considerable distance before even trying to use their only effective weapon.
I get they also need to prevent the spamming of DDs to just torp spam the enemy when they try to take a port, but the spawn timers would do that.
What you seem to be ignoring is that 2 casual modes already exist, why should EC be turned into a clone of the existing modes when those modes are already well established? Nobody here is upset that casual players can play naval, they are upset because the only naval mode with any depth to it is being gutted.
And personally I found the old EC mode far more relaxing then the conventional AB/RB, when I had a few hours to play un-interrupted I could stuff a case of beer in the fridge, put on some classic rock and just chill out in a long form match.
Honestly this community boggles the mind some times, they carry on for years about how gaijin needs to add more game modes, then cheer when they turn one of the few unique ones into a copy of existing modes, just with bigger maps.
Yes EC had some serious issues that needed addressing, but completely removing everything that made the mode unique and interesting is just typical Gaijin laziness and I’m at a loss as to why people are cheering for it.
9 Likes
Ah, yes, the “everybody dies in 1-4 minutes shooting at each other after spawning at point blank range around a circle” mode. And the “match is over in 5 minutes after a PT boat caps the PT-exclusive zone before any actual ship can get remotely close to their zones”.
Definitely and literally a clone of, like I said earlier:
Yeah, I picked up any good idea that though it was good and could change/improve gameplay.
But battleships at the end could go to destroyer place cause its in another part of the map.
But, SP need to back in place.
2 Likes
What you say do not work cause all ships are mainly from the same years…
And also, in GRB, some 2000" tanks are fighting 1945.
It still a clone.
There is matchmaking +1-1, There are bots.
In the past EC, there wasnt +1-1, no bots.
And there is another thing i would like to talk. Bots do not use airplane. What’s the point now to use anti air ship (not talking about missile boats).
Gaijin limited the whole gameplay.
5 Likes
It’s about capabilities, not years.
An Emden is as effective against a Soyuz as a Panzer III is against an IS-3.
Even if we went by years, we would have: Tigers vs M4s, M4A1s and T-34/76s, KV-1s vs PZ.38(t)S, etc. there’s a reason why matchmaking isn’t historical, hahah.
Imagine Leopard I vs T-64A.
I saw myself sinking cause of destroyers/cruisers when i was BB.
As like I sunk a soyuz with a tashkent because 3 hulls destroyed …
It work, even if its hard, but it work …
At a moment, stop wanting to childish the whole game. Everything is possible.
https://www.reddit.com/r/WarThunderNaval/comments/1m86x0x/drop_the_depth_charges/
4 Likes
And technically you can kill T-64As in Leopard Is, still doesn’t mean it’s “childish” not to want to slam your face in a Leopard I against a T-64A 17 times until finally being able to spawn a Leopard 1A5.
Congrats on killing a Soyuz with a DD, it’s not the norm and it shouldn’t be forced upon anyone.
You call me “childish” for wanting basic balance while your argument that 5.0 DDs facing 8.7 BBs is fine “because you’ve done it”…
Utterly blind players like that aren’t the norm. Most of the times, BBs obliterate DDs before DDs can even get within functional torpedo range.
2 Likes
You’ll whine when a submarin will kill you in your sovetsky ?
You’ll say that gaijin have to delete submarins and put them in their own lobby ?
If there is a big ship shooting at one spawn, why dont you change spawn ?
It was like this since the begining of EC and was the identity of EC.
That was – personnaly – the best gamemode of whole Warthunder.
73% do not like what EC became, there are some reasons.
It losed all the EC identity.
We should not be forced to have our beloved EC changed like this.
5 Likes
Cool, 73% of the Naval Forum users who kept sharing the post with those they knew agreed with them.
Let’s see actual player counts from the General and wider playerbase who doesn’t even browse the Forums. Because as far as Gaijin has said, player numbers spiked drastically.
1 Like
Gaijin said stats increased.
Did they say that players stayed the whole match for all ? All the screen we have prove that players leaved faster than before.
And also that the matches were empty for the whole majority.
Gaijin can says that stats are good, but they did not said what they counted, how they did it and even, they didnt showed it.
Naval EC will decrease over the time. And they splitted the community between the whole matchmaking 16 times
This is a player that liked at first the thing.
Also, yesterday, i saw streamer that i like, to have fun in EC with his friend, he played AGAINST them.
Its also called arranged battle. That will lead to arranged battles and farming. That, i remember is totally FORBIDDEN in the rules.
6 Likes
submarines ? what where when XD. im so glad to see at last naval players fight each other in chat.D. btw what do u think. let say we can play air sim in denmark. and naval ec on denmark. same scale and size. map. what . what if we interate air sim. and naval ec. it can buf player count. and mace some air sim players t wnat to have naval.
2 Likes
That a thing that i asked on the other post, adding an amount of air players to naval. And increase max player in the match to add airplayers
5 Likes
i liked new EC. just cuz it were new. first game where funn. on lowa + b52. absolute domination. just first game. new. diferent feling. second game. frank knox. 127.kill. imagine how menttaly painful it is to kill AI 127 times. in one game. its so horrible. yes old mode. i could not even get in game. but at last when we get there played. tryharded. thx you.for time and worck u put for us. we naval players are so small comunity. here. we have no voice.u tring for us. ty
6 Likes
I was already unhappy with the changes, it took two matches of pointlessly fighting bots during peak hours to really cement them for me haha. Thanks to you as well for participating in the poll, every vote we get counts :)
2 Likes
So, if i understood, that the start, you liked, but at the end, you dislike cause this is boring to fight bots ?
Np :)
1 Like
ofc i liked new felings. it lookd good. early. naval is were alredy so toxikly boring. someting new. olwys feels good. before u realize what is it XD.
.look. whytout prem acc and busters. i was thinking. il biy prem time. use usters. cuz we have a lot eny way fro m loot boxes. i can mace 3 m sl per game. its cool. but. game is so painful no amount sl can mace me go and farm stupid ai. its so painful. imagine 3 hour. shooting ai.
4 Likes
Yeah. It doesn’t make any sense, because it is a hypothetical situation—you made it up. Analogy is not proof. However, if we continue the discussion in this area, a better analogy would be the gradual transition from armored reconnaissance vehicles to IFVs, then to light tanks, and finally to MBTs.
5 Likes