General CV related discussions.

[Panocek]

39 minutes ago, bobtherterrible said:

I appreciate I'm a noob so my opinion counts for little but here's some ideas on how to make CV's less likely to make people give up completely:

Don't worry, WG ignores everyone equally

[MacFergus]

3 hours ago, bobtherterrible said:

Hello.

I appreciate I'm a noob so my opinion counts for little but here's some ideas on how to make CV's less likely to make people give up completely:

 

1) CV's only able to launch and recover aircraft when moving at at least 10kts 

 why? Stops camping and hiding behind islands or in a corner etc and makes CVs less invulnerable. Also more "realistic"

1a) As above but into "wind" i.e. in a particular direction

why? Stops CVs just going round and round in circles in the corner to comply with 1)

 

2) Because CVs can hide, it should matter a lot more when they are discovered so

2a) Any CV with fire or flood cannot launch.Again more "realistic"

2b) nerf CV AA  so that CVs are likely to attack each other. Again more "realistic"

 

3) Limited planes.

 

4) Make aircraft spotting distance relative to how fast the target is moving

why? Makes it harder for CVs to spot things. Again more "realistic" as aircraft often spot the wake rather than the ship.

 

Sorry, I'll go back in my box now.

 

 

Some dam fine ideas you have I like the fact that Aircraft cant launch while at certain speeds this makes sense.

 

I think the spotting needs to be removed completely that should be a DD job and after that Cruiser but i think the CV might get an expendable spotting plane with limited uses maybe.

[Nibenay78]

5 hours ago, bobtherterrible said:

Hello.

I appreciate I'm a noob so my opinion counts for little but here's some ideas on how to make CV's less likely to make people give up completely:

 

1) CV's only able to launch and recover aircraft when moving at at least 10kts 

 why? Stops camping and hiding behind islands or in a corner etc and makes CVs less invulnerable. Also more "realistic"

1a) As above but into "wind" i.e. in a particular direction

why? Stops CVs just going round and round in circles in the corner to comply with 1)

it would be nice to be able to manually control the CV then while flying, but as we very well know. We are so dumb that we should not be allowed to even think about controlling TWO - 2 -  entities at once!!

 

5 hours ago, bobtherterrible said:

 

2) Because CVs can hide, it should matter a lot more when they are discovered so

2a) Any CV with fire or flood cannot launch.Again more "realistic"

It used to be like that, even own skill to take off during fires. But hey, lets not let verisimiltude get in the way of WG grabbing money. Lets make CVs have no detonation, 5 second fire, the ability to bounce 406mm shells on the deck, enough HP and speed to fend off most DDs that sneak up on them for long enough to just spam them to death with planes.

 

5 hours ago, bobtherterrible said:

2b) nerf CV AA  so that CVs are likely to attack each other. Again more "realistic"

That'd lessen the popularity for CVs, less money! etc!

 

5 hours ago, bobtherterrible said:

 

3) Limited planes.

We wish...

 

5 hours ago, bobtherterrible said:

 

4) Make aircraft spotting distance relative to how fast the target is moving

why? Makes it harder for CVs to spot things. Again more "realistic" as aircraft often spot the wake rather than the ship.

Sounds like complex programming, would take too much time, and as we know programming equals wasted money!

 

5 hours ago, bobtherterrible said:

Sorry, I'll go back in my box now.

yes and shush!

 

disclaimer: this post may contain sarcasm

[__RSK__]

This is fine.. fun was had by all involved

 

[Capra76]

4 minutes ago, __RSK__ said:

This is fine.. fun was had by all involved

 

Spreadsheet says you were having fun.

[Deckeru_Maiku]

2 hours ago, __RSK__ said:

This is fine.. fun was had by all involved

 

 

Ah, come on... nearly no fire damage taken from the bombs and not a single torpedo hit... couldn't have been really that bad...

[Kazomir]

Okay, some arguments and suggestions to make CV's feel less unfair and more counterable.

 

• CV's SHOULD NOT be able to be warned when spotted by a surface ship - Game and Map design make it so that if you are spotted by an enemy as a CV, you almost assuredly know where the threat is coming from by way of exclusion. 2/3 paths of approach are usually covered by friendlies. This allows the CV to find the spotter pretty quickly, usually a lone DD, and strike him without any counter available to the DD to deal with it. This also makes it impossible for a DD to torpedo a carrier that just sits in 1 place the whole game.
• CVs SHOULD NOT be able to launch planes while under fire, or while their ship is on fire. A special skill should be available to CVs who wish to do this, however, a penalty of 50% to squadron size should be applied to squadrons launched while on or under fire.
• CVs SHOULD BE able to be detonated, like any normal ship. That, or remove detonations altogether. Equality for all!
• Shooting at Ships ONLY SPOTTED BY A CV and not within spotting range of any other ship should give you a BIG penalty to dispersion equal or larger than the penalty to dispersion when you are shooting at a non-locked target.

[musthir]

I am so tired of these CV´s, not uncommon with double CV.

Why does WG love CV´s so much? Have they given any explanation because i do not get it.

Its unplayable it is really unplayable.

[BLUB__BLUB]

1 hour ago, Kazomir said:

CVs SHOULD NOT be able to launch planes while under fire, or while their ship is on fire. A special skill should be available to CVs who wish to do this, however, a penalty of 50% to squadron size should be applied to squadrons launched while on or under fire.

I'm not sure that would be such a punishment. Mostly you have to dump one attack-flight anyway. 

How about, half the ammo on all planes? After all, they had to be loaded "under fire"... 

[Nibenay78]

47 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

 

How about, half the ammo on all planes? After all, they had to be loaded "under fire"... 

Rather 50% hp.. or less!

[TunaRoll]

Double CVs is a monetary and awful decision by WG. They want to make low/mid tiers kinda annoying to play since they dont make ANY MONEY on that tiers. They want you to step up to the high tiers to milk the sh!t out of you....that is the reason why high tiers are only one sided stomps anymore, all the new players are kinda running up the tiers avoid that toxic double CV scenario. WG is the most fucked up developer we have in this gaming industry...maybe besides EA.

[marcopieroni16]

everyone says that cvs are op.............dude the reason is simple, its all RNG, there is no skill, perfect reticle can miss, i had areeeeealllly bad reticle (playing kaga) on a dd i spotted at the last second on my right, started attack run, slow, aggiusted position, and somehow 4 bombs hit ...........YES...........4 bombs.......then this dd got stuck in a island, i was on her, dive, bombs release and.........no bombs hit the target.........what i am saying is that the CV need to be depentant from skills and not from luck, even torpedoes now are random, i had crazy disperison with kaga and ryujo.

they should add the possibility to give different orders to the fighters:

-defensive ( choose a ship to defend, any planes in the distace of 5 km from the ship will be engaged)

-aggressive (will go around  lurking for planes, if AA starts firing at them, they escape to the nearest ally ship)

 

thus regeneration is neessary for a simple reason, most planes will die during a dive, without delivering their bombs or torpedoes. its like playing a bb that reloads one turret at a time, thats how we feel after the rework, so we are forced to focus a ship in order to do damage

[Infernoken]

What kind of bombs does that new CV 'Werner Voss' have that is now in live testing??? 

Just encountered one that did some insane dmg with those bombs...

I was in a Yama with 55k hp left  and he vaporised me in 3 bomb drops from a single run. Then like 2 min later he did the same to a thunderer that was close to me with like 40k hp left.

I mean thats like a 90k dmg done in 2 min.. I hope they nerf that crap into the ground before it gets released.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

6 minutes ago, Infernoken said:

What kind of bombs does that new CV 'Werner Voss' have that is now in live testing??? 

Just encountered one that did some insane dmg with those bombs...

I was in a Yama with 55k hp left  and he vaporised me in 3 bomb drops from a single run. Then like 2 min later he did the same to a thunderer that was close to me with like 40k hp left.

I mean thats like a 90k dmg done in 2 min.. I hope they nerf that crap into the ground before it gets released.

replay please. 

[159Hunter]

Doesn't he have those Skipping bombs?

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Just now, 159Hunter said:

Doesn't he have those Skipping bombs?

Yes and what I heared about them so far is that they are rather heavy RNG and ineffective. I need to see the replay to understand how they work better 

[Dirpitz]

Do I need to buy some form of premium AA time in order to be able to defend against CV planes?

[Estaca_de_Bares]

I'll comment in italics about the suggestions within the quote:

2 hours ago, Kazomir said:

Okay, some arguments and suggestions to make CV's feel less unfair and more counterable.

 

• CV's SHOULD NOT be able to be warned when spotted by a surface ship - Game and Map design make it so that if you are spotted by an enemy as a CV, you almost assuredly know where the threat is coming from by way of exclusion. 2/3 paths of approach are usually covered by friendlies. This allows the CV to find the spotter pretty quickly, usually a lone DD, and strike him without any counter available to the DD to deal with it. This also makes it impossible for a DD to torpedo a carrier that just sits in 1 place the whole game. Long ago, the warning about being spotted was actually a captain skill you had to spend points on but it was changed so everybody would have it by default, so a bit difficult to do a rollback right now. Maybe adding back such a difference would be possible with the skill tree rework. As for DDs being unable to torp a sitting duck, while true at low tiers, Gearing, Somers, Shimakaze (if equipped with 20km torps) and Asashio beg to differ.
• CVs SHOULD NOT be able to launch planes while under fire, or while their ship is on fire. A special skill should be available to CVs who wish to do this, however, a penalty of 50% to squadron size should be applied to squadrons launched while on or under fire. Such a skill (i.e., launching and retrieving planes while on fire) existed in RTS times, and it was deemed a noob trap by experienced CV players. Leaving that aside, current CVs are almost immune to fire for the most part, and getting a full duration one means you mispositioned or misplayed big time.
• CVs SHOULD BE able to be detonated, like any normal ship. That, or remove detonations altogether. Equality for all! Agreed.
• Shooting at Ships ONLY SPOTTED BY A CV and not within spotting range of any other ship should give you a BIG penalty to dispersion equal or larger than the penalty to dispersion when you are shooting at a non-locked target. This would require further changes and extra rules to the spotting and lock-on mechanics and, considering how many problems there have been with them, adding more complexity isn't going to solve issues. Not to mention such a measure would actually protect some CVs from being sunk early in the battle by a bit of teamwork (Musashi/Yamato sniping).

 

2 hours ago, musthir said:

I am so tired of these CV´s, not uncommon with double CV.

Why does WG love CV´s so much? Have they given any explanation because i do not get it.

Its unplayable it is really unplayable.

There's a general consensus about low tiers (where AA is almost nonexistent) being overpopulated with CVs, and that such overpopulation either frustrates and drives away newer players or forces them into this...

29 minutes ago, TunaRoll said:

They want to make low/mid tiers kinda annoying to play since they dont make ANY MONEY on that tiers. They want you to step up to the high tiers to milk the sh!t out of you....that is the reason why high tiers are only one sided stomps anymore, all the new players are kinda running up the tiers avoid that toxic double CV scenario.

...which is the typical "the higher the tier, the better" viewpoint about F2P games and the basis for this kind of business model. Other elements that made the CV presence a lot more noticeable were eliminating the odd tiers and expanding their cap from 2 to 3 per team at low tiers. As for "loving" CVs, I doubt WG does, but they implemented the rework in order to make more money out of them (they were a really unpopular class in RTS times, to the point you encountered them every 4-5 battles at low tiers and every 10 battles at the high ones, unless in ranked, operations or divving-up with/playing them yourself) by following the logic of making the class more noob friendly instead of educating the playerbase up to a bare minimum. They got themselves into this rabbit hole and can't help but follow it through deeper and deeper.

 

As for myself, I'm unable to play reworked CVs more than 2-3 games per session, no matter randoms, operations or coop, and that's if I'm in the mood and force myself a bit into it. Once finished with grinding Hakuryu's LU I'll stop playing them out of operations again (with the exception of grinding the snowflakes in coop), although the extra knowledge gained by my current brief incursion will be useful when facing carriers in the future.

 

Salute.

[El2aZeR]

3 hours ago, Infernoken said:

What kind of bombs does that new CV 'Werner Voss' have that is now in live testing?

 

Same as Loewenhardt.

 

[Fatal_Ramses]

With ship coupons resetting in 20th I was wondering how to spend my steel.

Do you guys think there is a chance they remove FDR at some point? Could it be that OP that it will go the way of the Smolensk? Or was Smolensks problem its popularity?

I'm pondering in between, FDR, Bourgogne, Shikishima and maybe Plymouth.

 

When it comes to tier X im more of a collector than a player.

[BLUB__BLUB]

6 hours ago, Nibenay78 said:

Rather 50% hp.. or less!

That's not gonna help, since WeeGee decided they'll shoot the last plane first. 

[Panocek]

12 hours ago, Dirpitz said:

Do I need to buy some form of premium AA time in order to be able to defend against CV planes?

Last time I've checked you don't need premium to play tier 1 and 2 if you don't see planes at all, then it means your AA is absolute, no?

 

9 hours ago, Fatal_Ramses said:

With ship coupons resetting in 20th I was wondering how to spend my steel.

Do you guys think there is a chance they remove FDR at some point? Could it be that OP that it will go the way of the Smolensk? Or was Smolensks problem its popularity?

I'm pondering in between, FDR, Bourgogne, Shikishima and maybe Plymouth.

 

When it comes to tier X im more of a collector than a player.

JB wasn't considered "OP" and still was removed. Heck, even if you would want to buy an absolute turd like Cheshire, its still not available, only briefly appearing in premium store for week or two.

[cherry2blost]

239 pages and still everyone keeps posting.... Wee Gee won't listen, don't care and hide any CV discussion in a thread so long it would take weeks to read it all..... Give it up, close your wallets, and let them decide when they are ready to listen to their CUSTOMERS!

[Capra76]

17 hours ago, musthir said:

Why does WG love CV´s so much? Have they given any explanation because i do not get it.

 

I think quite simply they spent a lot of time and money developing the class and no-one wants to admit the obvious, that it has all been wasted and has made the game worse.

 

The same is likely going to be true when we see subs arrive in a few months time.

[Nibenay78]

10 hours ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

That's not gonna help, since WeeGee decided they'll shoot the last plane first. 

We can use the Spreadsheets™ to come to the correct and agreeable number. My suggestion would be a 99.5% hp reduction of all planes if the CV is on fire.