Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
AlcatraZ_MCR

Thoughts on CV rework

42 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
7 posts
1,944 battles

Heya :) 

 

So i used to be a CV main before the rework and even tho i didnt get to the T10 Carriers i´d still like to talk about the current CV state. Before anybody gives me crap, these thoughts are only from what i have seen in my games as Saipan/Shokaku in the last few weeks. 

 

The Major issue i have encountered as CV is that they are virtually toothless in the early game. In the early game most targets are packed in a group and they form an incredibly strong AA bubble. This was also the case in the prior updates and this is in my opinon not the major issue. But in the previous Patch as a Shokaku you had the ablitly to attack a ship with 4 Squads at once for their full damage while at the moment you need 4 attack 4 times to fire your entire weaponry. But since ALL of your planes follow you into the AA bubble even tho only 2-4 planes attack, you will recieve damage on all planes which makes a second run virtually a waste of planes. (Note: This scenario was carried our in a 1v1 vs a player controlled Bismark). 

The second and in most games even more important job is spotting. This used to be very easy especially as the Shokaku since you could control your fighters to patrol certain areas to spot enemy DDs/torps. But also larger ships in the mid/late game. Nowadays you can release a small fighter squadron above a selected area which can spot but once it is released you cannot control the fighter squad anymore. Anymore is the wrong word here since you never can control them but you get the point. 

 

My suggestions would be to take a step back into the previous direction. I know this update is to make WOWS console ready so they will not go back to the only bird view option (which then again was a better solution for skilled CVs but eh). What i mean here is that the CV player should have the option to attack with all planes at once. This is not Overpowered since most of us still remember the Japanese Skyhammer on T10. If have never played against a decent Hakuryu in the old patch just imagine ~20 torps heading towards you from all directions and a firestorm unleashed on your deck. Or if you decide only to attack with 4 out of 12 planes, the remaining 8 planes should not follow blindly into the AA bubble and die. 

 

Another way would be to drastically nerf the AA defense of most ships but i do not like the idea. In my opinion if you rework a working system and it does not pan out, it is because the rework is too weak/strong and not because the previously existing framework is faulty. 

 

For me, the new patch was a huge disappointment. And i have to say honestly that if the CVs do not get balanced soon, I might swap to another ship class entirely. 

 

If you people have anthing to add or disagree with my points please tell me. Id love to have a discussion about this <3 

 

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7 posts
1,944 battles
Just now, xXx_Blogis_xXx said:

we all know that aa is op atm :)

And i do not think it is due to the AA. The AA was fine before the rework. Nasty sometimes but a decent CV could get around that. If the only way to fix the rework is too nerf the established AA system, then the rework is not as good as the devs thought it would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BHSFL]
Players
1,925 posts
6,124 battles

The rework was good and enjoyable after some getting used to it. The CV then were much less powerufl then the RTS ones but ok. It was just the situation the other players were slow to adapt but forced WG to do something as they stopped p(l)aying and complained whole forums full. Now they did adapt afterall as could be expected ( other players are no morons )  it could have been done without any rigorous nerfing.

 

But after the many, many, many nerfs each time reducing the already limited accuracy and damage, and even blocking your ability to fire by a delay making you pass targets without being able to shoot and buffing many ships AA they have pretty much make playing CV a struggle while it was enjoyable in it's original form.

 

The point i want to make is nerfing is a bad buisiness that always disappoints someone. You should prevent having to do that, let alone nerfing 4 patches in a row containing multiple nerfs each.

 

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
5,177 posts
6,629 battles
2 minutes ago, xXx_Blogis_xXx said:

we all know that aa is op atm :) CV players think AA is OP atm

FTFY :cap_like: When some CV players are able to strike Minos and Worcesters with DefAA, i rather start to think that its a l2p issue.

 

6 minutes ago, AlcatraZ_MCR said:

Hakuryu in the old patch just imagine ~20 torps

3x4 = 12 torps, not 20. And the crossdrop was only deadly to DDs, for CAs and BBs the alpha power of such a strike was too low to kill them, because you could still dodge half of em (even more with defAA active and focusing the squad you will turn out to)

 

10 minutes ago, AlcatraZ_MCR said:

Another way would be to drastically nerf the AA defense of most ships but i do not like the idea.

 

Sure, then we lower the damage output from CVs by the same amount and we are good to go. Actually, thats most likely the only way to make CVs fun to play, but it will also remove the skillgap in the process basicly.

12 minutes ago, AlcatraZ_MCR said:

Or if you decide only to attack with 4 out of 12 planes, the remaining 8 planes should not follow blindly into the AA bubble and die.  

In that case, you would actually need to Buff AA ...

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,108 posts
5,871 battles
Vor 9 Minuten, DFens_666 sagte:

In that case, you would actually need to Buff AA ...

This is wrong. The planes striking always get damaged first and if they die will be replaced by the rest of a 12plane flight. If you only strike with 3 out of 12 (dropping load in the ocean) against strong AA ships you wont get a strike off wirhout a plane dying and another going red.

 

Increasing AA further would prevent any strie which would suit the crowd just to well right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
5,177 posts
6,629 battles
Just now, Zuihou25 said:

This is wrong. The planes striking always get damaged first and if they die will be replaced by the rest of a 12plane flight. If you only strike with 3 out of 12 (dropping load in the ocean) against str8ng AA ships you wont get a strike off wirhout a plane dying and another going red. 

 

Increasing AA further would prevent any strie which would suit the crowd just to well right?

 

No, because if you would scale AA down to a level, where you dont lose any plane anymore, then you could have 4 strikewaves which are basicly guaranteed to go through. Also you could trigger DCP even easier than ever before. Simply wait outside of the AA. With RTS CVs this worked only vs low AA ships, while strong AA ships would easily shred one incomming squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7 posts
1,944 battles
5 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

3x4 = 12 torps, not 20. And the crossdrop was only deadly to DDs, for CAs and BBs the alpha power of such a strike was too low to kill them, because you could still dodge half of em (even more with defAA active and focusing the squad you will turn out to)

3x4? a Squadron was made up from 8 (or more? i dont know actually) torp bombers. So my calculation is 3x8=24. I remember a game in which a Hakuryu broke through the allied fighter Squads and gave me 85k dmg in a single drop on the Kurfürst. 

 

The other points you make are half valid. I compare pre rework and post rework. CVs are a pain in the early Tiers. Because in the early Tier you do not have the experienced CV players. That is not a l2p issue because those players are new to C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,108 posts
5,871 battles
Vor 1 Minute, DFens_666 sagte:

 

No, because if you would scale AA down to a level, where you dont lose any plane anymore, then you could have 4 strikewaves which are basicly guaranteed to go through. Also you could trigger DCP even easier than ever before. Simply wait outside of the AA. With RTS CVs this worked only vs low AA ships, while strong AA ships would easily shred one incomming squad.

Wait, what are you disagreeing with? I havent said to nerf AA have i?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weekend Tester
792 posts

Well started playing the Hermes and no way is it op, rocket fighters flight of 6, with 2 attacking at a time, very little damage, dive bombers flight of 3 with one attacking at a time, again not a lot of damage lastly torp bombers same flight of 3  with one attacking at a time, torps are good short range, but talking about 3k of damage per torp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,085 posts
6,827 battles
2 minutes ago, AlcatraZ_MCR said:

3x4? a Squadron was made up from 8 (or more? i dont know actually) torp bombers. So my calculation is 3x8=24. I remember a game in which a Hakuryu broke through the allied fighter Squads and gave me 85k dmg in a single drop on the Kurfürst. 

 

A) your calculation is off

B) do you know how long it took a CV to prepare such an attack? For that time, 85k is not even that awesome reward. Saw a Bourgogne do 86k yesterday withhin 15 sec (prolly even more since he had some other ships still cooking from his perma fire).

 

5 minutes ago, AlcatraZ_MCR said:

CVs are a pain in the early Tiers. Because in the early Tier you do not have the experienced CV players. That is not a l2p issue because those players are new to C

 

So the players in the other ships are more experianced how... ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
5,177 posts
6,629 battles
2 minutes ago, AlcatraZ_MCR said:

3x4? a Squadron was made up from 8 (or more? i dont know actually) torp bombers. So my calculation is 3x8=24. I remember a game in which a Hakuryu broke through the allied fighter Squads and gave me 85k dmg in a single drop on the Kurfürst. 

No, Hakuryu had 4 torp bombers per squad, like all IJN CVs had. And Haku had 3 TB Squads. If you took all 12 torps, then it might be possible to receive that amount of damage. But then it most likely was not a Crossdrop, just all 3 squads attacked from one side.

 

2 minutes ago, AlcatraZ_MCR said:

The other points you make are half valid. I compare pre rework and post rework. CVs are a pain in the early Tiers. Because in the early Tier you do not have the experienced CV players. That is not a l2p issue because those players are new to C

Thats kinda the problem: If you make them too easy, people will sealclub on lowertiers... Thats why they nerfed RTS CVs on T4-5 back in the days, because too many people were sealclubbing. This actually did hurt new CV players even more simply because it was harder for them to learn Alt-attack at T6.

 

4 minutes ago, Zuihou25 said:

Wait, what are you disagreeing with? I havent said to nerf AA have i? 

Basicly the OP did, which i quoted. You then took my quote and disagreed :Smile-_tongue: Alltho looking at it afterwards, maybe he didnt want both changes at the same time.

Still you cant be able to use 1/4 of your strikeforce, demand to get a strike through while the other 3/4 are sitting in safety. Then we would need more AA fortresses which would be immune to being dropped actually, and that would be bad for the game.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,108 posts
5,871 battles
Vor 2 Minuten, DFens_666 sagte:

No, Hakuryu had 4 torp bombers per squad, like all IJN CVs had. And Haku had 3 TB Squads. If you took all 12 torps, then it might be possible to receive that amount of damage. But then it most likely was not a Crossdrop, just all 3 squads attacked from one side.

 

Thats kinda the problem: If you make them too easy, people will sealclub on lowertiers... Thats why they nerfed RTS CVs on T4-5 back in the days, because too many people were sealclubbing. This actually did hurt new CV players even more simply because it was harder for them to learn Alt-attack at T6.

 

Basicly the OP did, which i quoted. You then took my quote and disagreed :Smile-_tongue: Alltho looking at it afterwards, maybe he didnt want both changes at the same time.

Still you cant be able to use 1/4 of your strikeforce, demand to get a strike through while the other 3/4 are sitting in safety. Then we would need more AA fortresses which would be immune to being dropped actually, and that would be bad for the game.

Well then i am sad to inform you that i am doing just that at every start of the game, striking your full AA ship with tiny tims for 7k+ dmg with only 3 planes over and over and over and over. How? Drop the load in the ocean to let 6 planes return safely while suiciding 3 remaining for strike

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
5,177 posts
6,629 battles
Just now, Zuihou25 said:

Well then i am sad to inform you that i am doing just that at every start of the game, striking your full AA ship if tiny tims for 7k+ dmg with only 3 planes over and over and over and over. How? Drop the load in the ocean to let 6 planes return safely while suiciding 3 remaining for strike

This is very similiar, but not the same. It would still be way faster/easier to park your squads at 10km from the ship, than to let them fly back to the CV (and start from there again).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,108 posts
5,871 battles

Oh yes you are right, probably is the reason why that isn't possible to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7 posts
1,944 battles
1 minute ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

A) your calculation is off

B) do you know how long it took a CV to prepare such an attack? For that time, 85k is not even that awesome reward. Saw a Bourgogne do 86k yesterday withhin 15 sec (prolly even more since he had some other ships still cooking from his perma fire).

 

 

So the players in the other ships are more experianced how... ?

Well it didnt. Once he straved the allied CVs fighter squads he went for an attack. That took him like 30 seconds. 3 torps squads and 3 bomber squads rained hellfire on me. And my calculation may be off because it is too low. With the old shokaku cou were able to drop 16 torps at once and the Hakuryu had an entire squad more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
5,177 posts
6,629 battles
3 minutes ago, AlcatraZ_MCR said:

Well it didnt. Once he straved the allied CVs fighter squads he went for an attack. That took him like 30 seconds. 3 torps squads and 3 bomber squads rained hellfire on me. And my calculation may be off because it is too low. With the old shokaku cou were able to drop 16 torps at once and the Hakuryu had an entire squad more

 

How many TBs per squad? :Smile-_tongue:

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,085 posts
6,827 battles
1 minute ago, AlcatraZ_MCR said:

Well it didnt. Once he straved the allied CVs fighter squads he went for an attack. That took him like 30 seconds. 3 torps squads and 3 bomber squads rained hellfire on me. And my calculation may be off because it is too low.

 

A) Your calculation of the number of enemy TBs is wrong.

B) Your calculation of an attack run is even MORE wrong. So you claim, it took a RTS CV 30 sec to start fighters, strafe enemys, start 3 squads of TBs, fly them to the target and align for a crossdrop? Complete fantasy dude.

 

5 minutes ago, AlcatraZ_MCR said:

With the old shokaku cou were able to drop 16 torps at once and the Hakuryu had an entire squad more

 

wtf dude? Do you think you can tell fantasy stories here? did you actually forget how it was or are you trying to tell lies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7 posts
1,944 battles
2 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

How many TBs per squad? :Smile-_tongue:

Huh. seems like i was throwing around the nations. my bad. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-FC-]
Players
296 posts
9,953 battles

My feeling is that the main imbalance at the moment is between the damage that DDs take (with the exception of a few that have outstanding AA) from rockets set against the damage that cruisers & BBs take.  The latter can shrug off the damage, and heal at higher levels.  The poor DDs can have their health stripped down to dangerous levels with just one squadron ... I know WG talked about nerfing the accuracy of rocket planes when turning, to allow DDs to manouever out of trouble ... still waiting to see if this ever arrives and has an effect.  Otherwise I feel they should just remove the rocket planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7 posts
1,944 battles
1 minute ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

A) Your calculation of the number of enemy TBs is wrong.

B) Your calculation of an attack run is even MORE wrong. So you claim, it took a RTS CV 30 sec to start fighters, strafe enemys, start 3 squads of TBs, fly them to the target and align for a crossdrop? Complete fantasy dude.

 

 

wtf dude? Do you think you can tell fantasy stories here? did you actually forget how it was or are you trying to tell lies?

I dunno what my mind was doing there but yeah i had a totally wrong memory... I was not trying to lie i am just a little tard sometimes... I apologize for that

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weekend Tester
792 posts

To be honest think they made a total clusterfuck of it, they pandered  to the dd players who were whinging on about how they were always spotted, could see the point if this was something new but it wasn't they were always perma spotted in the old game and what made things worse was the cv could wipe them out wi torps because of it, now if their spotted its by a single flight, which can either continue to spot them and get very little reward or go and try and inflict same damage on another target, i know what i would do, and lets talk about damage, its poor its very poor , torps  doing about 1/3 to 1/5 of what normal torps do ,bombs mehh, it seems to be the rocket planes which seem to cause the dd's to throw the dummy out, another thing do they not know how to use wasd keys or smoke to avoid detection ??

  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,108 posts
5,871 battles
Vor 19 Minuten, DreadArchangel sagte:

To be honest think they made a total clusterfuck of it, they pandered  to the dd players who were whinging on about how they were always spotted, could see the point if this was something new but it wasn't they were always perma spotted in the old game and what made things worse was the cv could wipe them out wi torps because of it, now if their spotted its by a single flight, which can either continue to spot them and get very little reward or go and try and inflict same damage on another target, i know what i would do, and lets talk about damage, its poor its very poor , torps  doing about 1/3 to 1/5 of what normal torps do ,bombs mehh, it seems to be the rocket planes which seem to cause the dd's to throw the dummy out, another thing do they not know how to use wasd keys or smoke to avoid detection ??

Be careful, you are hurting peoples feelings,the meta and the game with your opinion

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JR-IT]
Alpha Tester
875 posts
7,599 battles

i just "bought" the hermes, only one word for it: frustrating  to play

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BHSFL]
Players
1,925 posts
6,124 battles

I found Japanese CV doing much less damage then US ones, and i think underperfomring AP bombs are to blame.

 

When attacking CV for a change i could kill them with US aircraft, but fail with Japanese aircraft. Cause : horrible japanese AP bombs that just fall through CV's and many other light or unarmoured ships without doing damage. And if they already cause a citadel against an armoured ship, that almost causes no damage aswell.

 

I think bombs should be selectable, not fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×