CV - I can't take it anymore - too boring

[Pappus]

I didn't even make it to the essex. The fact that you are pretty much forced to play with fighters to counter the possible enemy fighters reduces your action to one torpedo strike every 3 or so minute.

 

Going to target takes ~40 seconds, landing a craft takes 15 seconds coming back from targets and so forth it takes way waaaaay to long. If you can smoke a cigarette inbetween each "shot" its simply too much.

 

You are literally only checking the map watching it all unfold and once every 3-4 minutes you have "impact" on how it unfolds. If you miss your salvo though.... ...... ...... better don't since you get like 5 strikes at most per round.

 

I have no idea what you can do other than outright removing fighters so people can use divebombers AND torpedo bombers. I desperately tried making it work already, but the matchmaking doesn't understand what loadout you have. If you play against 2 cvs and have no fighters you can literally see 8 enemy plane arrows point at you the second they realize that and the match is over.

[MaxxyNL]

[Pekoe_Darjeeling]

Ah so you basically want CV's to spam with Torp. bombers even more... Anyway the closer the CV to the frontline the more strikes it can perform so I guess most of the time you spend on K1 or so.

[J_Fuller]

First of, no you don't need to only use the fighter setup... it is neither the best or most effektiv!

secondly try to use the map, and your allies, that way you will find that carriers can be quit good, and try to stay closer to the battle... 

[Seinta]

How about you learn to play smart?

Had plenty of games in my fighter heavy Lexington where a skilled CV captain managed to out play me and sink 1 or 2 ships.

[Fominator]

I find them boring too, but they are far from useless in a good hands.

[Pappus]

With BB having ranges of 18km there aren't that many positions you can safely stand so you will mostly lurk 1-2 sectors behind the BB line and even then it isn't guaranteed that the best target is in that line so this isn't about a CV going to the map edge. You will never find me there but it still takes several minutes per strike and as I said your anectodal half-evidence is useless because without fighters in a 2vs1 match you might aswell suicide, because outplaying 1 cv is not the problem because you have 4 squads against his 4. If you have 4 squads and they have 4 fighters + 4 stuff to attack you with they don't even need to properly aim because you are going down even without manual drops.

 

Don't even try to say ask a Cruiser to protect you because they don't care in pub games. Sometimes you have a guy that listens but most often then not you are on your own and need the best you can do against all odds.

 

I also don't understand how you can even remotely say that you can play without fighters - that is why you will see literally every lexington except the stock one run 2 fighters and 2 torpers, because it wouldn't make sense to use dive bombers if you would profit overall right? It works allright, but even then their fighters will go against your main damage obviously and with divebombers alone you aren't sinking valuable stuff, but at least you have room to wiggle. You can only prevail in a 2vs1 with 2 fighters though or you will get nothing done.

 

The fightergame is a  minigame within CV gameplay. It is try to create a situation where you dispatch their fighters better, if they don't want to you block their fighters with your fighters regardless and proceed to bomb, because having the torpers circle for a minute ain't gonna help your team win.

 

I mean just go ahead and get a cheap CV and go bomb you will see how often you can do it. Also more action doesn't need to mean more damage it could simply mean having more squads, but as it is CV gameplay has little action.

 

From torpedo strike to torpedo strike is a pause of roughly 3 minutes - a timeframe where realistically very little is going on otherwise you are just waiting for your planes to return, land, restock, gather and send them out again which wouldnt be a problem if it wasn't every 3 minutes.

[AgarwaenME]

If you'd spend half as much time trying to play in different ways as you try to justify yourself when you say CVs are ineffective, then maybe you'd not be as ineffective.

[Pappus]

If you'd spend half as much time trying to play in different ways as you try to justify yourself when you say CVs are ineffective, then maybe you'd not be as ineffective.

 

If you'd spend the time you needed to write that post and invest this into attention and reading comprehension, then maybe you wouldn't be this inapt. I will quote myself from the OP and maybe you will understand the difference between ineffective and boring:

 

"The fact that you are pretty much forced to play with fighters to counter the possible enemy fighters reduces your action to one torpedo strike every 3 or so minutes."

 

I didn't say ineffective, I said that the action as a CV is so sparse that you can smoke a cigarette inbetween and you can.

[Ishiro32]

I agree that Lexi is pretty much forced to go 2fighter 2 TB deck.

The risk connected with not having fighters is just too high. 

I had games in my Lexi when I was alone against 2 Rangers and one of them had 3F 1 DB deck. I managed... somehow, but even with Inferior planes the ammount of fighters and air cover they had was bleeding me out. I can't imagine doing that without 2 Figher wings. 

 

CVs are making a gamble when they decide to go either full fighter or full bomber decks. MM is not relaiable and we can not take this risk. That's why most lexi go for 2F 2TB and not 1/2/1 which in my opinion is much more fun. 

 

As for the downtime. Some people are having problem as it is when playing CV, I killed couple of enemy CVs who were just sitting in one place and not moving. Even though my TBs were flying near their allies and they should notice them, they didn't. If you feel not challanged by the US CVs, then wait with me for the IJN. Smaller wings, but higher number of them in the air will open a lot of possibilities and it will be a bit micro intensife, especially since CVs themselfs seems to have better stealth and will be more mobile so they will require more attantion also.

[Pappus]

I agree that Lexi is pretty much forced to go 2fighter 2 TB deck.

The risk connected with not having fighters is just too high. 

I had games in my Lexi when I was alone against 2 Rangers and one of them had 3F 1 DB deck. I managed... somehow, but even with Inferior planes the ammount of fighters and air cover they had was bleeding me out. I can't imagine doing that without 2 Figher wings. 

 

CVs are making a gamble when they decide to go either full fighter or full bomber decks. MM is not relaiable and we can not take this risk. That's why most lexi go for 2F 2TB and not 1/2/1 which in my opinion is much more fun. 

 

As for the downtime. Some people are having problem as it is when playing CV, I killed couple of enemy CVs who were just sitting in one place and not moving. Even though my TBs were flying near their allies and they should notice them, they didn't. If you feel not challanged by the US CVs, then wait with me for the IJN. Smaller wings, but higher number of them in the air will open a lot of possibilities and it will be a bit micro intensife, especially since CVs themselfs seems to be have better stealth and will be more movile so they will require more attantion also.

 

Ahhhh and I was already starting to lose hope given that nobody that wrote in this thread seemed to even grasp the issue including why you are forced to pick fighter. I love playing with 2 bombers and 2 torpers because you are constantly attacking, but the fun only lasts until you have a fighter guy then you can still manage but aren't nearly as effective as if you would simply forget the bombers and make sure to click on his fighters everytime before you engage with your torpers. This is very poor gameplay wise.

 

Additionally I truly do not understand why fighters are even in the game. They serve no higher purpose because every higher ship has already so good aa, that you can't even really readjust or misclick in the first try, because by the time you reaim you have lost half your stuff. So it ain't like they are needed. I get why you kinda have to implement them though, but maybe you can merge fighters and HE bombers into  one being. That way it makes sense to try and outsmart the opposing fighters, because then you will still end up with a bit of firepower on ships.

 

Another divebomber can then get the AP bomb everyone is asking so hard for.

 

So the decisions for CV would be. You see then even the triple Fighter mods would make more sense and be less prone to sucky matchmaking (after all if you take 3x fighters.... what are you gonna do when there is no enemy cv in your match how is that fun?)

[AgarwaenME]

 

If you'd spend the time you needed to write that post and invest this into attention and reading comprehension, then maybe you wouldn't be this inapt. I will quote myself from the OP and maybe you will understand the difference between ineffective and boring:

 

"The fact that you are pretty much forced to play with fighters to counter the possible enemy fighters reduces your action to one torpedo strike every 3 or so minutes."

 

I didn't say ineffective, I said that the action as a CV is so sparse that you can smoke a cigarette inbetween and you can.

 

"inept"

 

Anyhow, you somehow seems to think it would be "balanced" that CVs wouldn't be forced into playing like a CV would be expected to play, ie. providing BOTH fighter cover and attacking ships. Secondarily, actively using your fighters, both to scout, to protect your attack aircraft and attack other attack craft is part of what takes up your time playing a CV. As is manouvering your attack aircraft into good positions. You write like you're merely ordering your aircraft once every 3 minutes, and if that's the case then the problem is that you're playing extremely poorly, not that there's not enough things to do.

 

I'd find it far more boring if CV play was reduced to merely sending my torp/dive bombers every 2-3 minutes.

 

And crying that the matchmaker doesn't give you perfect opponents is even more silly. As if it should do so for anyone.

[Ishiro32]

Fighters need to be in the game as mainly anti-air though, because well.. That was their job. To destroy enemy planes and fight for air domination. This was vital in any bigger engagement. You can't just give them HE bombs, they were not created for flying with them.

I think there is really lack of benefits for having air domination though. Right now air supremacy means that you just defended your team against enemy planes and have a bit more scouting information. Maybe fighters can strafe some ships to disable their AA (most of the AA guns were handled by the crew that could be killed with fighter's machine guns), maybe increase benefit of fighter scouting (like fighter might fly near the enemy ship in their AA range, but since they are so close they are gathering intel which result in your allies having "Aim mod" on that enemy). Fighters have to have usefull job for the team other than killing TBs. 

[armholeeio]

It maybe nice to have fighter bombers, a few rockets on them to cause a temporary knock out to AAA

[Hethwill_Khan]

Ah so you basically want CV's to spam with Torp. bombers even more... Anyway the closer the CV to the frontline the more strikes it can perform so I guess most of the time you spend on K1 or so.

 

This.

 

The closer you are the more sorties you make OP. I find myself sticking with the cruisers for navigation and keeping the squadrons on stand-by in another part of the map. One thing I never do is straight paths to my carrier, too easy to guess where I might be if I do that. Stand by is usually 5 clicks fly by with the DDs for fighters and attackers with the cruisers, or BBs is it is a dive bomber as it works as a deterrent against DDs.

 

Obviously a CV cannot cope with DDs breaking through but can eventually tank enough dmg to keep the attack planes doing sorties.

Dive bombers are great to hunt for already crippled BBs or simply to screen incoming DDs, other than that they provoke good deck fires on the opponents CV.

 

And yes, choosing the squadrons setup is always a mind game - air superiority or hitting power ? One will help the team more than the other while the other one will grant you more income and glory bragging. I prefere to play with air superiority myself and pray that the BBs, now safe from air attack, can perform their jobs. It does not work many times, but that is what it is. We all learning right ?... Yes we are

 

Personally WW2 naval for me is all about carriers and its planes so I play other classes to know my enemy.

[Ishiro32]

And yes, choosing the squadrons setup is always a mind game - air superiority or hitting power ? One will help the team more than the other while the other one will grant you more income and glory bragging. I prefere to play with air superiority myself and pray that the BBs, now safe from air attack, can perform their jobs. It does not work many times, but that is what it is. We all learning right ?... Yes we are

 

There is no mindgame as you do not know anything about enemy nor you can impact his decision. Right now choosing setup is gamble. And gambling as all about lowering risks. At the moment with the current power of fighter torpedo bomber and dive bomber the most optimal decision is to take 2 fighter 2 torpedo setup. Any other setup has big risk tied to it while at the same time it does not provide enough reward to make it viable.

Partly this is due MM, but mainly as I said earlier it is connected with the fact that fighters have nothing to do other than hunting enemy bombers and flying above enemy DDs and spoting their torps. Fighters need utility buff in my opinion. They need to be able to do something else that is beneficial to their team so there will be more openings in air. Fighter decks would be more viable as Air supremacy would have a tangable meaning for the team. Opening in the air defence would also open more space for bomber decks. 

 

Also please don't anwser with "be closer to the battlefield", because any CV player worth a dime knows it and it does not in any way impact what I wrote above.

[Hethwill_Khan]

Granted, fighters should be able to straffe destroyers.

 

But even without that the simple fact of spotting the incoming torpedo waves helps the team... yes yes it does not give anything, credits or xp, but I do not mind as winning is a big plus.

 

I only put up the fact of hugging the fleet given I seldom see good CV admiral doing constant sorties and relying on the "arty mindset".

[Aerroon]

I agree with OP - the game in carriers is pretty boring for like half the game. There's nothing at all to do since everything is mechanically the same. Every first 2 minutes are essentially identical in every single match you play in a carrier - throttle up, get planes in the air properly. Move to that one spot that would be closest to enemy fighters and engage their fighters, then move torpedo bombers in.

 

Also later on you have minutes worth of downtime where there really is nothing to do as you just wait for your planes to fly back, land, resupply and get into the air again.

 

The thing with going closer to action is that once you are targeted it can easily just be game over - it's way too risky for too little reward. The couple of seconds you gain from being a bit closer to the action is heavily outweighed by the risk of some destroyer breaking through and having a field day or taking a long range volley from a Yamato and just dying.

 

Carriers are super effective against noobs though, but that doesn't make it not boring.

[Hauptbahnhof]

Fighters need to be in the game as mainly anti-air though, because well.. That was their job. To destroy enemy planes and fight for air domination. This was vital in any bigger engagement. You can't just give them HE bombs, they were not created for flying with them.

 

That's like saying you shouldn't be allowed to have anti air on ships because no ships were created with anti air as their main role or "job".

 

War, Strategy and Tactics is not about only being able to do one job, it's about being able to adapt to the situation, and work with what you have to win...

 

Now alot of times that included equipping the fighters with both bombs and rockets, the USN fighters did this so much they started calling many models "fighter-bomber" instead because as resistance from Japanese airpower weakened they were pushed into bombing role so often that they flew more bombing sorties then fighter sorties.

[J_Fuller]

Partly this is due MM, but mainly as I said earlier it is connected with the fact that fighters have nothing to do other than hunting enemy bombers and flying above enemy DDs and spoting their torps. Fighters need utility buff in my opinion. They need to be able to do something else that is beneficial to their team so there will be more openings in air. Fighter decks would be more viable as Air supremacy would have a tangable meaning for the team. Opening in the air defence would also open more space for bomber decks. 

In part I agree... Fighters should perhaps have an ability to attack enemy warships and knock out some of the "lighter" AA guns.

However I think this is a path that offers the risk of making on gruppe of planes "to good", already they are really good at knocking down enemy planes, and as you already said, they can scout... That is not a bad thing for the team, and I think you somewhat understats that effect...

Is it bad to get into games where one is the only CV in the battle, and one have taken the fighter setup... of course, but that is a gamble one takes... in the battles were the fighter setup is on, and there are enemy CV, that setup can be quit good...

 

The chief problem is that shooting down planes, are not rewarded enough

[MudMonkey]

Well, I dont play CVs because I think they are boring. But I have read in the 0.3.1 notes that there will be some changes for the planes. You might want to look at it.

[Ishiro32]

In part I agree... Fighters should perhaps have an ability to attack enemy warships and knock out some of the "lighter" AA guns.

However I think this is a path that offers the risk of making on gruppe of planes "to good", already they are really good at knocking down enemy planes, and as you already said, they can scout... That is not a bad thing for the team, and I think you somewhat understats that effect...

Is it bad to get into games where one is the only CV in the battle, and one have taken the fighter setup... of course, but that is a gamble one takes... in the battles were the fighter setup is on, and there are enemy CV, that setup can be quit good...

 

The chief problem is that shooting down planes, are not rewarded enough

 

In my head fighters should have a choice. Either we go around trying to find enemy aircraft and mainy defend or we use our ammunition on the different task.

Let's say fighters have abillity to strafe and deal minor damage to ships while also turning off some AA guns.

Now let's say there are two modules for fighters, one has high damage lower ammunition, another low damage a lot of ammunition. High damage would be better at killing planes as he still have enough ammmo to get rid off enemy wing, another would be better at sticking to enemy ships. Choice. Both can do that, but then during the game you ask yourself what I want to do right now? You get what I have in mind?

Also let's say that fighers have that abillity to super spot that I mentioned, then there is a reason to have fighter squad with low damage, low ammo but high survivability. Those are very rough ideas, bear that in mind. They are here just to get my point across better.

 

Of course you risk unbalance, this is utility buff, this is huge and should be handled by professionals and should be extensievly tested. But I belive carriers should have to think how to use their planes more, right now it is as straightforward as it can be and because of it you can have something like we have with lexi right now, about 90% players play one deck.

 

MudMonkey, on 08 May 2015 - 02:09 PM, said:

Well, I dont play CVs because I think they are boring. But I have read in the 0.3.1 notes that there will be some changes for the planes. You might want to look at it.

 

Well, I just like to talk a lot and what can you do else before we have 0.3.1.

[J_Fuller]

 

In my head fighters should have a choice. Either we go around trying to find enemy aircraft and mainy defend or we use our ammunition on the different task.

Let's say fighters have abillity to strafe and deal minor damage to ships while also turning off some AA guns.

Now let's say there are two modules for fighters, one has high damage lower ammunition, another low damage a lot of ammunition. High damage would be better at killing planes as he still have enough ammmo to get rid off enemy wing, another would be better at sticking to enemy ships. Choice. Both can do that, but then during the game you ask yourself what I want to do right now? You get what I have in mind?

 

 Well the problem I have at the damage dealling (other than very smal amounts of it) is that yes fighters did attack enemy vessels... But not enemy warships of the kind we play with, in the sense you talk about... Reason, not enough firepower in their guns.

It is of course true that some figters were fitted with rockets, but far from every kind of fighters, and from a gameplayy point of view, I would think that it is better to make fighters able to destroy some of the AAA on the ships (so that the real punch can be delivered by the bombers) and then keept to their present funktions.

 

regarding the superspotter, I don't really see the need, as the CV progress the fighters becomes better and more though... the thing with the Lexi is that patch 3.1 should implement some better use of dive-bombers (they get AP bombs) as well as some other changes... After that the game might change somewhat! 

[Ishiro32]

 Well the problem I have at the damage dealling (other than very smal amounts of it) is that yes fighters did attack enemy vessels... But not enemy warships of the kind we play with, in the sense you talk about... Reason, not enough firepower in their guns.

It is of course true that some figters were fitted with rockets, but far from every kind of fighters, and from a gameplayy point of view, I would think that it is better to make fighters able to destroy some of the AAA on the ships (so that the real punch can be delivered by the bombers) and then keept to their present funktions.

 

regarding the superspotter, I don't really see the need, as the CV progress the fighters becomes better and more though... the thing with the Lexi is that patch 3.1 should implement some better use of dive-bombers (they get AP bombs) as well as some other changes... After that the game might change somewhat! 

 

You missed my point completely. As I wrote above thouse are rough ideas to show that If the fighters had more utility it would give more reason to use other decks. It would lessen the risk of a gamble that CV is supposed to do right now.

We will see how it will look after patch but I doubt that we will see a lot of variance in deck usage.

[Larky2k]

I didn't even make it to the essex. The fact that you are pretty much forced to play with fighters to counter the possible enemy fighters reduces your action to one torpedo strike every 3 or so minute.

 

Going to target takes ~40 seconds, landing a craft takes 15 seconds coming back from targets and so forth it takes way waaaaay to long. If you can smoke a cigarette inbetween each "shot" its simply too much.

 

You are literally only checking the map watching it all unfold and once every 3-4 minutes you have "impact" on how it unfolds. If you miss your salvo though.... ...... ...... better don't since you get like 5 strikes at most per round.

 

I have no idea what you can do other than outright removing fighters so people can use divebombers AND torpedo bombers. I desperately tried making it work already, but the matchmaking doesn't understand what loadout you have. If you play against 2 cvs and have no fighters you can literally see 8 enemy plane arrows point at you the second they realize that and the match is over.

 

have you thought you know staying close to the fleet and not sitting right at the back and complain about how long aircraft take to get to target and get back. Being closer to your target might mean you have a bigger impact and be able to keep attacking with shorter travel time. Its Amazing the matches i see Carriers go right to the back in the corner and complain for the whole match on how long it takes and why they keeping dieing.