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

General CV related discussions.

6,846 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[THESO]
[THESO]
Moderator
4,187 posts
11,267 battles

Hello dear forum users.

As most of the regulars know, we had a CV rework discussion for a long time on top of the page.

After almost a year, we removed the pin on it, to allow new and more topics emerge and have discussions about it.

After months, the discussions about the CV related topics, had diluted down to a handful of subjects.

So, in order to keep the forum clean, this will be the place for further CV related discussions, such as but not limited to;

 

  • General interaction between surface ships and CVs,
  • New developments on the CV mechanics,
  • CV related MM issues,
  • CV influence over different tiers,
  • Discussions about individual CVs,
  • Tactics, captain builds, counterplay,
  • AA
  • CVs in competitive mods.

 

Please remember, all the forum rules are in place and try to stay away from personal discussions, arguments, stat shaming, etc.

and try to keep it constructive!

 

  • Cool 10
  • Boring 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ALYEN]
Players
1,867 posts
3,900 battles

And will you keep an updated TOC list as the first post ? because it is bloody hard to have a topic focused discussion (f.e. AA balance) in a general thread where all the topics are mixed ?

 

A CV subforum would be better - I know there is one in game guides, but that's more specific ship and how to play them related than balancing and game mechanics. ...

 

just a suggestion ....

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,198 posts
11,986 battles
1 minute ago, Asakka said:

Is this the topic where we ask for CV buffs ?

Not only buffs, but also AA nerfs:cap_cool:

After all, flyboys got multiple attack wings for a reason

  • Cool 6
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
845 posts
1 minute ago, Panocek said:

Not only buffs, but also AA nerfs:cap_cool:

After all, flyboys got multiple attack wings for a reason

Exatly, it would be shame to not use all attack wings just because of the bad op AA :Smile_trollface:

  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BATES]
Alpha Tester
3,074 posts
12,030 battles
19 minutes ago, Asakka said:

Is this the topic where we ask for CV buffs ?

Stop trolling. This is the topic WG have created to allow us to feel like our concerns about cv's are being listened to. It's the section they want to now use to gather 'important feedback' following a seemingly new revelation to them that many players think cv's are broken and the 'rework' was a joke. It's a quasipolitical section which on the surface aims to provide the impression WG cares about this when in reality they very likely have zero intention of fixing anything further (or I'll eat my hat). In a nutshell, it's all smoke and mirrors man and a story as old as time itself.

  • Cool 17
  • Funny 7
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[V888]
Players
166 posts
21,639 battles

Im fine with CVs, but I don't like the changes in AA that made previous AA ships like Kii and Fletcher much less effective.

 

If you got tired of plane attacks before the rework you just brought out your best AA ship.

This is not the case anymore, at least not as it used to be. Bear in mind that some of these ships were Premium ships that lost much of their AA influence. Now when I get tired of plane attacks you quit the game or play CV yourself and make someone else feel miserable instead.

 

This and the uncertainty of yet another change (Submarines) is why I for the first time in four years I have not bought more premium time.

 

  • Cool 11
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,428 posts
17,122 battles
4 minutes ago, Reckie said:

 

If WG wonder why I did not buy the 360 days of premium as I usually do every holiday season, it is because of this and the upcoming uncertainty of yet another change aka Submarines.

 

I am exactly the same - i did not renew my premium time either , and for the same reasons! :Smile_honoring:

  • Cool 10
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
611 posts
1,918 battles

I actually think the answer is more CVs.

 

Wait! put the flamethrower down...

 

 

Split the fighter consumable from the strike carriers and make it a separate class.

Always 2 CVs per game; one strike with bombers, rocket planes etc and one escort carrier with fighters which can either be set to orbit a ship or an area; but with limited numbers of simultaneous use or can be controlled by the player with the CV on auto-pilot.

 

The fighters actually work and will shred an incoming attack wave unless it is bigger or escorted.

The fighters can also spot as they have eyes & radios.....

 

 

 

Now you can flame...:Smile_hiding:

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Moderator
4,187 posts
11,267 battles
12 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

CVs + clanbattles = when?

Soon TM

  • Funny 3
  • Bad 1
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BOTZ]
Players
412 posts
22,749 battles

 

2 hours ago, Excavatus said:

After months, the discussions about the CV related topics, had diluted down to a handful of subjects.

Reason being, you don't listen so people gave up.

 

Just had a double T8 CV game in my Benson ........it was garbage.

 

I see no point in being constructive as you hand all the power to CV's.

 

Please skip over this post as it does not appeal to the echo chamber you seem to live in.

  • Cool 5
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,198 posts
11,986 battles
1 minute ago, Captain_Breeze said:

 

Reason being, you don't listen so people gave up.

 

Just had a double CV game in my Benson........it was garbage.

 

I see no point in being constructive as you hand all the power to CV's.

 

Please skip over this post as it does not appeal to the echo chamber you seem to live in.

Wargaming doesn't listen to their own QA department and volunteer supertesters. What makes you think conscripted forum moderators have anything to say about game development:cap_hmm:

  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,280 posts
19,937 battles

This again? Any reason why the 39 page topic that was already in full swing was not simply pinned?

 

Ok lets recap: CV rework is the worst feature 'improvement' this game has seen in it's history. CV's are boring, survive way too long in the hands of bad players, are disruptive to most other classes, their tier setup is stupid, there's too many CV's per battle in tier IV en VI, AA modules and AA skills are too expensive and useless blah blah blah.

 

:fish_palm:

  • Cool 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
4,624 posts
16,647 battles

Hi all,

 

Very interesting post on Reddit: "Myth Buster: Anti-Air Edition"

 

Quote

Myth Buster: Anti-Air Edition

The vast majority of my matches I drive regular surface ships. However, yesterday I unlocked the Hakuryu after 97 battles with a 69% WR (nice!) in my Shokaku. Thought this might be a good time to address the explosive topic that is AA.
 

I started playing when RTS CVs were still a thing, so I remember entire squadrons being eaten alive by AA cruisers with DefAA active. Back then this was balanced by a significant cooldown and the relative rarity of those cruisers on low tiers or hugh plane reserves on higher tiers, as well as baiting out DefAA on the tactical level.

 

These times are gone since the CV rework. During this rework CVs traded their devastiting alpha strike threat for more evenly distributed damage. This is why we now have smaller strike packages in one bigger flight. In accordance with damage by planes being more distributed over time the damage to planes has also been more evenly spread. This is fair in terms of game balance and the reason why expecting entire flights wiped out as it was possible before the rework is not up to date anymore. So far, so much one-year old coffee.

 

Still, I almost on a daily basis can see posts calling for a removal or further rework of CVs - and honestly, I can understand the authors (being harassed by CVs more often than driving them). WG however claims AA is pretty much balanced by now - and again by sheer statistical anaylsis they also might be right (can't confirm without access to those numbers). So how can it be that CVs are both a pain to play against and still AA appears to be balanced on the numbers side?

 

I think it comes down to perspective. This is the most important observation I have made during the grind on all 3 Tier VIII CVs: The AA of your own ships is almost meaningless, yet the AA of close-by allies certainly is not!

 

Why is that? As a fairly competent CV captain I can in pretty much all cases avoid flak damage form the ship I'm attacking. This is mostly done by starting the attack run and boosting when entering the flak zone having aligned my planes beforehand so they only have to go in a straight line to the target ship. That way the combination of reduced time in the flak zone due to boosting and the change in altitude by starting the attack run pretty much auto-dodges flak.

 

The planes lost to continues AA damage is about equal my plane replenishing rate on equal tiers and a little higher when being uptiered, but not by much. When bottom tier my flights are usually depleted to 2/3's with no reserves at the end of a match.
So it is only flak that really cuts into a CVs continued strike capabilities and as just stated the ship being targeted is virtually incapable of getting hits on all but potatoe CV captains with it.

 

However, things change when there is an allied ship close-by; since you want to get the aiming recticle of your planes as small as possible as a CV you should avoid heavy manoevring. This makes the planes path very predictable and if that paths goes along the flak zone of an allied ship the flak puffs of that ship rarely miss their mark and wreak havoc among the planes.

 

As a result the attacked ship does minimal damage to an attack strike but eats all the damage while an allied ship, if it is there, reaps the benfits of damaging and shooting down most of the planes. This and the fact you can't really retaliate against a CV makes for a deeply frustrating, yet (maybe) overall balanced AA interaction.

 

Since there are no ways to ensure that allied ships are there to provide that very impactful AA support, more often than not the CV gets away very easy, which makes it even worse for the surface ship in reality.

 

That sounds quite grim, doesn't it? It doesn't get any better when I say that without a way to ensure that the CV-surface ship interaction is only between the targetd ship and the attacking squadron the AA balance will more likely than not be out of whack in one or the other direction. And besides exploits in potential implementation like delibertaly locking onto a ship with poor AA close-by only to change to your real target in the last second this would feel artifically restricted in a game where shells and torps can targets you didn't even aim for.

 

So what to take away? Already driving in 2-ship teams in such a way that your flak protects your ally can be very effective against a CV. And while you can't safeguard against all damage the losses won't be sustainable for the CV this way. As the trageted ship: make pre-aligning a strike difficult keep dodgingTM to mitigate at least some of the damage, but beyond that take the inevitable damage, frustrating and game hindering as it may be, in the knwoledge you safed eleven other teammates (temporarily) from your fate.

 

Bonus: AA consumables

 

DefAA: for the reasons stated above almost ineffective for self-defence, good utility though for punishing CVs for striking nearby allies.

Fighter: actually useful in frustrating follow-up strikes, but utterly incapable of preventing the first attack run if the enemy CV insists. Timely activation (planes about 7-8km out) might presuade a CV player to not attack at all for the run time though.
Important note: less useful against Torpedo Bombers, as their heal, when activated correctly, can complitely nullify any damage done by the fighters.

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LEEUW]
[LEEUW]
Players
491 posts
7,763 battles

CV's are fine... 100% winrate after 5 ranked games, it's balanced.

Just take AA of the ships, i'd like that. Losing a plane... Man, do people even realize there are people in those planes? And the environment... All those plane fuel. metal and weapons that get spilled into the environment. Ships shouldn't have AA, so the CV can recycle the planes. Recycle is so much better #AskGreta

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 5
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
463 posts
7,353 battles
Just now, Europizza said:

This again? Any reason why the 39 page topic that was already in full swing was not simply pinned?

 

 

 

I was wondering the same thing myself.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BOTZ]
Players
412 posts
22,749 battles
1 minute ago, TheBrut3 said:

CV's are fine... 100% winrate after 5 ranked games, it's balanced.

Just take AA of the ships, i'd like that. Losing a plane... Man, do people even realize there are people in those planes? And the environment... All those plane fuel. metal and weapons that get spilled into the environment. Ships shouldn't have AA, so the CV can recycle the planes. Recycle is so much better #AskGreta

This is a CV player trying to be funny......ha ha ha ha.......not! Go away @TheBrut3......Pro CV players trolling here like they do in game. :Smile_sceptic:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
60 posts
9,984 battles

Look I know  WG will never throw CV out of the game BUT it need to do something so player can counter it with his input/gameplay

 

First what all said - spotting from CV should be nerf to the ground - CV should only spot for CV

second - AA platforms and class like DM, Mino, Wocherster, some DDS like Haragumo, Grozovoi and so on - should be "no fly zone"  and especially if you use prior.sector in perfect time/ing  and if you put captain skill especially 4-point + 3 point + module on ship ( now atm all of that is like piss against the wind )..

 

and at the end rocket planes should have half of the bomber/torpedo plane HP..

 

 

I think this would make  balance ok for the start  - later they could add some better interaction between class by adding range to the plane 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,198 posts
11,986 battles
12 minutes ago, Leo_Apollo11 said:

Hi all,

 

Very interesting post on Reddit: "Myth Buster: Anti-Air Edition"

 

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

TL;DR

 

Competent solo play?

OYY4VcP.gif

 

1 minute ago, Castiel2110 said:

First what all said - spotting from CV should be nerf to the ground - CV should only spot for CV

Apparently WG tried that and scrapped that idea already:cap_tea:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POP]
Weekend Tester
1,119 posts

I demand historical accuracy! Carriers were an important part of WW2 and they must have their historical place in the game - all games should be epic and exciting 4CV vs 4CV battles, where AI driven surface ships are simply targets and AA escorts. Puny gun ships can have their own separate game modes free of carriers, called "random battles", "ranked battles" and "clan battles", where they can pretend to still be relevant in the world of naval aviation.

  • Cool 8
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×