World of Warships

Analysis of Ahskance Reacts: Potato Quality’s CV Video, by [RAIN] Sister

Content of the article: "Analysis of Ahskance Reacts: Potato Quality’s CV Video, by [RAIN] Sister"

The video in question, The Analysis by Sister

Honestly… I'm slowly watching through the vod now of the reaction to PQ'd vid, but one thing that already kind of stands out to me is a point you make addressing the crossfire that PQ mentions. You don't call it a crossfire but a threat, I disagree with it, but thats more semantics than anything. The point I want to make however is that you compare the damage 5 ships will do to the potential of one. Yes taking 60k is probably not worse than going broadside to 5 ships (when excluding the dot damage a CV inflicts during or after that) but the problem lies in the fact that the CV can do this, regardless of many things in the game. you could call this a "vulnerable position" of course, it probably is, because being nose in against 5 ships is, usually a vulnerable position. This however does not mean that taking 60k of what is practically unavoidable damage is okay just because its the lesser evil.

the fact you call this "not massive damage" is also pretty amusing considering the fact you later call FDR drops as having "really high damage, 20k is a lot of damage" which is the exact amount you use in that example, which is a bit contradicting.

next up the whole element of surprise thing

in general when playing clan battles or any competitive modes where there is a homecap to be cap and a contested cap. Ranked is not really competitive since you still play with mongs but thats not important. You argue there is still an element of surprise. When playing in hurricane league, it will take some time for the enemy to cap their home cap, touch it or cap it. When you do a 7 push to one side without a CV the enemy team will know that this is happening due to your homecap not being contested. However, teams will just send 1 ship to cap the homecap when they want to do these things just to make sure this is not obvious. The best teams will realize that the cap is extremely late and probably be slightly more prepared for this possibility, but cant count on this. Even with a 5/2 split the element of surprise is there and if there is a DD on the 2 side it is impossible for the other team to know until they a play being made. Thus there is a lot of element of surprise, up to a solid 3-4 minutes, When the enemy team has already deployed into positions and (tries to) make(s) their own plays. However if you introduce a CV, this is not possible. After 45 seconds all deployments are known. He wont linger there forever no, but you have a 45 second window again before your new plans are revealed, if your intention was to bait. In any competitive setting this absolutely ruins any element of surprise and we all know it. That DD thats been unspotted for so long? can be found by CV, even more so by using the plane detection system to guess the possible location. That cruiser that's been unspotted for a while? CV can go spot it. It costs time, but its sooooo much easier for a CV to spot than it is for a DD to spend severeal minutes and risk its body than for a CV to fly over, look for 20 seconds and find said ship.

in randoms this usually doesnt matter too much, since deployment is not nearly as big of an issue as long as flanks are similarly balanced in terms of ship numbers, rather than ships themselves

the -50% air detection change is scrapped afaik

the argumentation on torpedoes hitting the bow/aft which is 50% healable and the torpbelt factoring this in is slightly flawed. Simply by saturating the bow or the aft you can already get -50% damage from torps taken there and then on top heal 50% of that already reduced damage. So then no, its not completely fair to say "its factored in" because its citadel damage and citadel cannot be saturated ever.

and then the whole "if you can citadel the BB thats nose in to your teammates it can be the damage your team needs to overcome that battleship" is referring back to the crossfire point that PQ makes.

also 2/3 fires is not uncommon at all for CV drops. 2 is not uncommon, quite the opposite. Usually when dropping with midway its a disappointment to get 1 fire instead of 2, rather than "yay I got 2 instead of 1". The expected result, is 2 fires. 3 is uncommon yes, but 2 is already enough to warrant dcp in most cases

Read more:  "CVs have infinite planes": Myths and facts, a discussion

the damage necessary on a BB to pop heal is about 30-40k 2 drops is more than enough to warrant that, unless its mainly cit damage, which is 90% permanent damage. However when talking about a cruiser, 1 drop is, in most cases, enough to force heal, and since most ships in competitive settings are cruisers… well…

also the thing that "who is setting the fires is not relevant, a BB can do the same" is not entirely fair either. Spotting comes into play again, since that might be a reason why you're getting focused in the first place, and the other thing is, yeah the conqueror can do the same, but the conqueror is far less likely to do so, and can be counterplayed much more easily by repositioning. Reverse behind that island, dodge the torps, pop the hydro to do so. Those tools dont exactly exist in the same fashion as they do for a CV strike in such a situation

also people DO call out plane losses in competitive.

honestly the mouse over the ship and "send fighters" is not a bad idea tbh

the DFAA thing is a bit ehh. I agree with the fact that, for RTS it has to be extreme to counter an extreme, but the current DFAA is still too weak. Give gearing back 300%, grozo too probably. and cruisers/other DDs/BBs to something like 150-250%

I do think however that it should be, in some way, easier for a CV to disengage if a target does use it.

the whole rock paper scissors game doesnt make a whole lot sense. This is because one counters the other but beats the other. But is like introducing an atom bomb in rock paper scissors atom bomb, where the atom bomb wins against every other possibility except itself. Yes you play differently without DDs/BBs/Cruisers whatever, but the problem is that a CV does what a DD can almost exclusively do, which is spot, also do what a BB can do, which is setup long range threat, while also providing heavy (DoT) damage like a cruiser. That is the fundamental flaw in comparing this to rock paper scissors. Its not like one of the classes inherently counter CVs and force the CV to play differently. Only the state of the game does that, not the composition of BB/CA/DD

well it forces the CV to play "differently" when there are few BBs but lots of DDs, but not nearly in the same way it would for the BB for instance

also comparing spotting to chess is not exactly a pristine analogy. This is an arcade game and 12v12, not 1v1 where 1 player controls so many things. A comparison to league is better, which actually does employ something extremely similar you described. Fog of War. Which does actually hide players and makes the game more tactical. Wouldn't be exactly fun if there was a champion that could suddenly reveal the entire map. I guess you can argue twisted fate does something similar, but its very short lasting and not often available, making its use far more niche than just that.

Yes O7 adapted to the venezia meta, they adapted to the T6 meta, as did every other top team that played those seasons, but VERY few of them actually enjoyed it. I talk with quite a lot of people. Mostly from EU because that's the region I play on, and I can tell you that the ratio of players in top clans that enjoyed those seasons more than the older seasons is smaller than 1/10, because I know of just 2 players who actually enjoyed it, and they were the CV mains themselves. 1 player out of 7. per team, but only 2 out of 30 per clan usually.

The whole "you can still play around concealment in a DD" is not exactly true. In a torpedoboat you want to be as close as possible to make sure your torpedostrikes land. If there is no radar threat its not uncommon for DD players to sit at 6-7km from their target. This is simply IMPOSSIBLE in a CV game, just out of fear of being lit by a CV that either randomly flies over or comes to actively spot you. It's just not possible ever, just because the CV decides that its going to spot you, you will die in such a position, while in a non CV game, as long as you are wary of the enemy DD's position (through means like teammates, map awareness and RPF) you can maintain that position, until its at risk. At which point you can (usually) still run away from said DD that is forcing you out. In which case you are forcing the enemy DD to come over and contest you and waste severeal minutes of his time. Now the counterargument will be one of 2 things. You have to sit further back in your DD to avoid this scenario is one of them. Well frankly that's the entire issue. You simply cannot ever play like this in a CV match, which means your effect goes down because you have to torp from further, because of the mere possibility the CV might spot you. The other argument is that you can run away or use smoke. Running away is not really viable as the CV is way faster than you could ever hope to be. Smoking will save you temporarily, but then the CV leaves a fighter on top, forcing you to stay there for 60 seconds or die, which allows the hydro ships to move in and kill you in time, because you are so close. The explanation just does. not. work.

Read more:  Do you really all agree that Kitakami is OP?

so simplified: you have to sit at a range with your DD where you can mitigate the threat presented enough. This range is significantly increased when there is a CV present, even if said CV is not focusing you

you might argue about radar, but radar ships dont sail at you at 200 knots, you outrun radar cruisers, and outspot them. Usually. This is why stealth radar is bad for the game.

Island positioning is significantly weaker and maybe I missed it, but you didnt talk about it. Idk the vod sometimes lags out and doesnt let me skip back at some points. Anyway I do hope you atleast acknowledge that island play, which a lot of cruisers heavily rely on, is almost out of the window.

the reason PQ says "sniping at the back of the map" he doesnt mean actually the back of the map. its a bit similar to the DD explanation I just did. You have to play 1-3km further back sometimes because you simply cannot rely on going dark to disengage, which means you need more distance between you and them to mitigate the damage they can deal to you.

just going to skip the wot artillery, not interested in wot, dont care, never played

next up the 45% vs 70%. There was a pretty clear example. A clanmate of mine was streaming () and Lulu was in the division. lulu has a 70% winrate. He got focused by a carrier in a match for multiple minutes straight in a DD, despite turning, dodging, juking, you name it. smoking whatever. The CV player is barely 50% winrate and new to the game (~1k battles). In no way would that same player have been able to impact the match this much by removing and during that time dying Lulu to play the entire game, in a surface ship, because very simply, more counterplay exists for this. It's just not possible for that same player to influence my clanmate's match by killing an extremely high impact player in the match like this in any other ship than a CV.

the whole "styling all over people with DD juking takes a LOT of skill and only a very small % of the playerbase is able to do this to a degree where its extremely consistent and constant. This simply doesn't go for me in a carrier styling on the enemy kurfurst with bombs and torps, or styling on the enemy DM with bombs and rockets. It's just not the same interaction and I'm pretty sure that I can't style on Lulu in a surface ship most of the time, but I can "style" on him in a CV. That is simply the reality.

its not about "the player with said winrate is able to touch me and thats why I dont respect it" If that same player is in a cruiser hitting me, thats acceptable damage, because I have active counterplay, or he simply did a good prediction. I can't completely dodge the CV, I can mitigate it. I can't completely dodge the spotting. I can't completely predict where the CV will drop and slow down or accelerate in time (not yet anyway, since that is/was in testing) It's simply the fact that a less skilled played does not need to use his brain in the same capacity the surface ship does to hit me. It's about said player simply being able to damage regardless of skill. You can mitigate so much damage from bad players if you are only skilled enough in most circumstances. Simply not the case for CVs because there is no real "aiming" to be done.

Read more:  Plea to WG: Please change rewards and challenges to encourage play-to-win styles of gameplay. Dangle the carrot, WG.

CV players being better only better in PR is also not true. Most shit players that have better stats in CVs also have better Winrate, usually by a couple %

the "its fine because im good at it" argument comes from the fact that, for a large majority, people who defend CVs, are generally only good in CVs and not very competent in other classes. Wait that reminds me of someone…..

honestly the fact you say "which side of the map do I have to piss on first" is fucking hilarious. Almost directly admitting that CVs just shit on people by default regardless

not sure you can say that for any other class in the game

The thing is, what PQ said about positioning is true. Learning to aim and learning to shoot is not hard, it took me 500-1000 battles to figure that out. Positioning however is WAY harder to figure out. That took me 2500-3000 battles to actually properly figure out + a lot of learning in high level CBs. This positioning is BY FAR the hardest thing to learn in the game, and the fact it lacks in CVs make the learning curve a lot easier for them. There is learning involved in playing a CV, as there is everything in life, but this learning curve is just way faster due to the lack of it. Target selection, focus fire, map awareness, whatever the fuck. That is included in all other classes too. The only thing different is that positioning is lacking from CVs, and that shooting is harder than dodging flak and dropping. And I have found exactly the same.

not really going to touch the cv players playstyle thing. It's more annoyance than imbalance and thus not relevant.

the fact the spreadsheets are 1.5years old is not exactly bad. The maplesyrup playerbase analysis is also a year old, but I doubt that the average of 48% winrate has changed as well. These things generally do not change, and the graphs from the Track™️ bot basically prove this

Thank you for reading, sincerely, Sister

and honestly as a little side note, I do want to add the same thing PQ said at the start of his video. If you dont have any sort of credibility and you want to reply to this, dont bother


Similar Guides

Top 7 NEW Games of January 2021

New year - new month - new games. Take a look at the first 2021 games you’ll be playing on PC, PS5, PS4, Xbox Series X, Xbox One, Switch, and more.

More about World of Warships

Post: "Analysis of Ahskance Reacts: Potato Quality’s CV Video, by [RAIN] Sister" specifically for the game World of Warships. Other useful information about this game:

Top 10 Best Video Games of 2020 (So Far)

In times of uncertainty, video games allow us to escape from the stress of the real world. For this list, we’ll be looking at some of the best games released in the first half of 2020.

You Might Also Like

Leave a Reply

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