General CV related discussions.

[CptBarney]

1 minute ago, Pikkozoikum said:

I think, that even bad players often rated too bad and wrong. I think that every person, even me, often have a limited view on the battlefield and not fully understand the situation of other players. I mean yes, there are bad players and they do bad, but it's not like they roll their head over the keyboard.

 

Just an example for misinterpretation of a situation. I played Yoshino. I was a bit more on distance, a GK was pushing over the flank. I destroy a DD. Then I destroy another DD, a few seconds later I get pinged for my position, that I'm so far off.

A perfect example for people, who don't understand the situation. He sees only my position, but not the effect that I had.

 

So often people have a limited view and think they know best (as I said, that even applies on me, though I often reflecting myself).

 

I don't think, that players with ~50% WR won't be able to use the DC Floatplanes.  ^^

48% will probs be the skill floor maybe 47% for winrate in terms of usage, if we go down that route.

Idk having depth charges would be better too be honest and far less complex to operate as well.

[Pikkozoikum]

1 minute ago, CptBarney said:

48% will probs be the skill floor maybe 47% for winrate in terms of usage, if we go down that route.

Idk having depth charges would be better too be honest and far less complex to operate as well.

DCs for BBs? I don't know if that would work well. I personally like the idea with Floatplanes, it looks like it could be fun to use. Also we have to mind, that BBs shouldn't be the counters to Submarines, so they need something weaker. Otherwise a BB would just move towards a SS, bow tank some torps and drop the DCs^^

[Capra76]

53 minutes ago, lovelacebeer said:

Here is the current idea on the Devblog

 

Let's see if I've got this right.

 

DD and light cruisers, who are meant to counter sub, have to get suicidally close, likely in the face of concentrated enemy fire, to attack them, meanwhile BB and heavy cruisers get stand off weapons systems that are effective from 10km away.

 

So not only do subs take much of the DD's role away from it, the planned ASW role for them has now been handed to other ships as well.

 

Total shambles incoming.

[UnterSeeBot]

would this help or hinder with the problem of CVs?

 

[BanzaiPiluso]

An idea:

A battle mode where CVs can't attack any ships except the enemy CV. Once that is done, they can start attacking BBs, then cruisers.

So some ships in the team have to stay near the CV and defend it.

The CVs may need to sail to a cap point in particular so they have to move.

Just an idea, to take the focus off the usual mode.

 

[Pikkozoikum]

42 minutes ago, Winged_Cat_Dormant said:

An idea:

A battle mode where CVs can't attack any ships except the enemy CV. Once that is done, they can start attacking BBs, then cruisers.

So some ships in the team have to stay near the CV and defend it.

The CVs may need to sail to a cap point in particular so they have to move.

Just an idea, to take the focus off the usual mode.

 

When I tell people, that DD should maybe not rush to the cap and stay more around team mates, they are often saying, that's boring and not what a DD is supposed to do.

Guess this would be just the next level, that people don't want sit around the CV ^^

[DFens_666]

1 hour ago, Winged_Cat_Dormant said:

An idea:

A battle mode where CVs can't attack any ships except the enemy CV. Once that is done, they can start attacking BBs, then cruisers.

So some ships in the team have to stay near the CV and defend it.

The CVs may need to sail to a cap point in particular so they have to move.

Just an idea, to take the focus off the usual mode.

 

 

Please no... there are already CV player running around who think, surface ships are there to protect their precious hull. No need to further strengthen their egocentric view about them being the masterrace

Also that sounds really unfun, since only the CVs could actually play the game? Or not when they cant attack the enemy CV either when all ships camp around it

[BLUB__BLUB]

30 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

When I tell people, that DD should maybe not rush to the cap and stay more around team mates, they are often saying, that's boring and not what a DD is supposed to do.

Guess this would be just the next level, that people don't want sit around the CV ^^

Well, rockets have been nerfed (no way to insta-delete a DD unless he goes broadside... mostly),

and some think that they should now start attack the CV and get away with it. Muhhhh!! Not!!

Next a planned even more reduction of spotting-distance for DDs, what's next? Invisible DD for CV until its torps are up the CVs behind?

Usually DDs are not my prime target, but really, maybe I should make it so. 

 

Meanwhile, every other ship gets spotted... nothing happening about the BASIC problem. 

WG, finally fix it - make CV spot just for the ships ~8km away from the planes - like in storm.

@Excavatus IMO that would solve MOST of the problems.  

 

 

 

 

[Pikkozoikum]

2 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Well, rockets have been nerfed (no way to insta-delete a DD unless he goes broadside... mostly),

and some think that they should now start attack the CV and get away with it. Muhhhh!! Not!!

Next a planned even more reduction of spotting-distance for DDs, what's next? Invisible DD for CV until its torps are up the CVs behind?

Usually DDs are not my prime target, but really, maybe I should make it so. 

 

Meanwhile, every other ship gets spotted... nothing happening about the BASIC problem. 

WG, finally fix it - make CV spot just for the ships ~8km away from the planes - like in storm.

@Excavatus IMO that would solve MOST of the problems.  

 

 

 

 

I think the ~50% concleament buff could already do a lot. For spotting the CV has to go into aa for almost all ships

[BLUB__BLUB]

2 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

I think the ~50% concleament buff could already do a lot. For spotting the CV has to go into aa for almost all ships

I'll try predict what it will do. A CV will no longer spot anything at all. Why should he, to get his planes dead?

CV will just wait for something to be spotted. And then decide to attack or not. As simple as that. 

Because if he has to go spotting for it, he'll find the AA first and then he'll find out if it is a fat snack or indigestible crap. 

 

 

What it will do is make CVs just wait what will happen. Like a BB sitting at the back line but worse. 

 

Compare it to, a BB that has a hint/feeling there's something, and then you fire, depending on what you shoot at your turrets get blown off.

You'd not shoot. You wait for somebody else to spot what it is, and then you'll shoot. If it is not a nice snack but just blows your turrets off, you do not shoot.

So, suppose you see a cap being turned, but the enemy team has a Halland and has a Mino and a Wooster. Screw that, not shooting it. Makes sense? 

[BLUB__BLUB]

BTW @El2aZeR look at those poor T9 seals. 

I'll try to be #1 next time, I promise masterrrrr.... 

 

Spoiler

 

[Sidewayz]

On 8/29/2020 at 8:01 AM, pWnZoMg said:

And here, you can see the example of CV flaming DD for actually having AA.

How dare they have some semblance of defense when they should have their speeds and maneuverability reduced so they would stay perfectly still while I'm sending waves and waves of rocket planes to kill them! Nerf the dds! Nerdf the cruisers! Nerf the BBs! In fact, let's make this game all about Carriers and 12v12 Carrier battles!

[Meremortal]

Just been doing the new missions at level 2-4 and Wow... Most of the time more CV's in the queue than Battleships or Destroyers.   Proving once again that WG reward cowards hiding at the back who wreck the game for their own miserable wants.   Please rename the game "World of Rewarding Cowards who hide at the back"  I know it's a mouthful but at least you can tell people that they're knew what they were getting in for!

[Deckeru_Maiku]

4 hours ago, Sidewayz said:

let's make this game all about Carriers and 12v12 Carrier battles!

This... soo much this... I would pay money to see these battles between nothing but CVs.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

7 hours ago, Sidewayz said:

How dare they have some semblance of defense when they should have their speeds and maneuverability reduced so they would stay perfectly still while I'm sending waves and waves of rocket planes to kill them! Nerf the dds! Nerdf the cruisers! Nerf the BBs! In fact, let's make this game all about Carriers and 12v12 Carrier battles!

are you joking? 

Halland and defense? 

What defense. 

[arquata2019_]

@Excavatus, is this topic (general cv related problems) for tips for balancing them? to start: i have over 500 battles in cvs, 1,4 million experience on shokaku+hakuryù combined, i also have midway, but no one cares about this and don't ask me why i writed my cvs.

I think cvs should have no more rockets planes, they should have planes like they have in other (old) games or real life: Fighters, Torpedo bombers and Dive bombers.

Let's take the American Tier10 CV Midway

Fighters... well, you know? i think everyone knows how does a fighter work, but it should replace at all the rocket planes.

the torpedo bombers, should be different: the midway ones shouldn't have  6 torpedoes on btd destroyers per attack (and midway stock ones should have 3 torps per attack, same for ranger), they should have 4 with a slighter wider spread, but also with higher flood chance, and maybe 600 more maximum damage per torpedo?

the Dive for the win bombers, i think they should have 3 planes per attack squadron but also an entire squadron should have 9  to 7 (yes, 7) planes per entire squadron; their damage could be reduced a little bit like 500 less maximum damage for bombs and their fire chance should be (or less) 5% less, also 2 bombs per plane leave me a bit confused..

All planes should have 100-110seconds regen time per plane, except the fighters that should have 80seconds, the planes (torpedo bombers and dive bombers speed) should be slightly lower.

If it's a mess about the regen time i propose this: you start from 75seconds  to regen a single plane when battles starts, and if you lose a torpedo bomber you add +2seconds or +1second to the regen time of the torpedo bombers, so, you lose 5 torpedo bombers? from 75seconds to 80/85seconds to regen a torpedo bomber.

---------

About Hakuryù she should have 9 planes per entire AP dive bomber squadron.

Torpedo bombers should have torpedoes that are 3 kts slower, and deal 1000 maximum damage less, and they should -5% less of chance to cause a flood.

Every cv should have fighter planes and similiar characteristics to the midway i writed above.

if, again, the regen time for a plane is a mess, try doing this: you start from 80 seconds to regen a single torpedo bomber before losing any, if you lose one you add +2seconds or +1 second to the regen time (from 80seconds to 81/82) and if you lose 5 more you add +5seconds or +10seconds to the regen time(from 81/82 to86/92seconds to regen a single torpedo bomber).

 

 

 

[DFens_666]

5 minutes ago, arquata2019 said:

I think cvs should have no more rockets planes, they should have planes like they have in other (old) games or real life: Fighters, Torpedo bombers and Dive bombers.

Let's take the American Tier10 CV Midway

Fighters... well, you know? i think everyone knows how does a fighter work, but it should replace at all the rocket planes.

 

The problem with fighters would be, that we might end up with "gentlemens agreement" as in: if you dont take a fighter, i dont take a fighter, so both CVs can farm damage unharmed.

1 squad playstyle has no room for active fighterplay - as sad as it is, its still the truth. Why would you take a fighter out?

[arquata2019_]

4 minuti fa, DFens_666 ha scritto:

 

The problem with fighters would be, that we might end up with "gentlemens agreement" as in: if you dont take a fighter, i dont take a fighter, so both CVs can farm damage unharmed.

1 squad playstyle has no room for active fighterplay - as sad as it is, its still the truth. Why would you take a fighter out?

i didn't think about it....

what about a second squad for maximum?

the second is always with fighters

edit:(if we need to respect the 1squadron rule)

If we play in a division or whatever we can play "difensevely?" where if we deal 30k damage to enemy planes with fighters it equals in 60k normal damage for experience ranking

if we play and see our lovely dd being ambushed we send fighters to him, maybe he can control those too

[arquata2019_]

Proprio ora, arquata2019 ha scritto:

i didn't think about it....

what about a second squad for maximum?

the second is always with fighters

Ofcourse if you want to win you can always "deplane??" an entire enemy cv..

[Foxhound421a]

Spearfish bombload should be 4 500lb bombs and the sea hornet should have 2 1000lb bombs. For accurate bomb loads 

[Pikkozoikum]

49 minutes ago, Foxhound421a said:

Spearfish bombload should be 4 500lb bombs and the sea hornet should have 2 1000lb bombs. For accurate bomb loads 

and Hakuryus J5N should have one 250kg bomb, oof

[rage1750]

Says it all:

 

 

[arquata2019_]

2 ore fa, Pikkozoikum ha scritto:

and Hakuryus J5N should have one 250kg bomb, oof

Is nobody going to answer the masterpiece of balancing i writed?

i'm sad :(

23 ore fa, arquata2019 ha scritto:

@Excavatus, is this topic (general cv related problems) for tips for balancing them? to start: i have over 500 battles in cvs, 1,4 million experience on shokaku+hakuryù combined, i also have midway, but no one cares about this and don't ask me why i writed my cvs.

I think cvs should have no more rockets planes, they should have planes like they have in other (old) games or real life: Fighters, Torpedo bombers and Dive bombers.

Let's take the American Tier10 CV Midway

Fighters... well, you know? i think everyone knows how does a fighter work, but it should replace at all the rocket planes.

the torpedo bombers, should be different: the midway ones shouldn't have  6 torpedoes on btd destroyers per attack (and midway stock ones should have 3 torps per attack, same for ranger), they should have 4 with a slighter wider spread, but also with higher flood chance, and maybe 600 more maximum damage per torpedo?

the Dive for the win bombers, i think they should have 3 planes per attack squadron but also an entire squadron should have 9  to 7 (yes, 7) planes per entire squadron; their damage could be reduced a little bit like 500 less maximum damage for bombs and their fire chance should be (or less) 5% less, also 2 bombs per plane leave me a bit confused..

All planes should have 100-110seconds regen time per plane, except the fighters that should have 80seconds, the planes (torpedo bombers and dive bombers speed) should be slightly lower.

If it's a mess about the regen time i propose this: you start from 75seconds  to regen a single plane when battles starts, and if you lose a torpedo bomber you add +2seconds or +1second to the regen time of the torpedo bombers, so, you lose 5 torpedo bombers? from 75seconds to 80/85seconds to regen a torpedo bomber.

---------

About Hakuryù she should have 9 planes per entire AP dive bomber squadron.

Torpedo bombers should have torpedoes that are 3 kts slower, and deal 1000 maximum damage less, and they should -5% less of chance to cause a flood.

Every cv should have fighter planes and similiar characteristics to the midway i writed above.

if, again, the regen time for a plane is a mess, try doing this: you start from 80 seconds to regen a single torpedo bomber before losing any, if you lose one you add +2seconds or +1 second to the regen time (from 80seconds to 81/82) and if you lose 5 more you add +5seconds or +10seconds to the regen time(from 81/82 to86/92seconds to regen a single torpedo bomber).

 

 

 

 

[Pikkozoikum]

11 minutes ago, arquata2019 said:

Is nobody going to answer the masterpiece of balancing i writed?

i'm sad :(

The big pickachu picture is distracing me :P

[Too4sfull]

Played whole evening and not one game as top tier. This is absurd. Not even that MM failure World of Tanks is can measure to the levels of World of Warships.