General CV related discussions.

[Nibenay78]

1 hour ago, cherry2blost said:

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!

I'm sure they enjoy the income from Makarov day! :D Does it even have AA?

[bobal_2]

Hello everyone. I agree with the majority of the penalties you decide. I use CV 8 out of 10 games and I'm happy with them, but it would be fair that it also had an improvement like that: There would be NO penalties in karma. There is always someone on my team as well as on the enemy team reporting to me (random battles).

 

Hola a todos.
Estoy de acuerdo con las mayorias de las penalizaciones que decis.
Utilizo el CV 8 de cada 10 partidas y estoy contento con ellos, pero seria justo que tambien tuviera una mejora como que :
NO hubiera penalizaciones  en el karma.

Siempre hay alguien en mi equipo como en el equipo enemigo que  me reporta (batallas aleatorias).

[Nibenay78]

51 minutes ago, bobal_2 said:

Hello everyone. I agree with the majority of the penalties you decide. I use CV 8 out of 10 games and I'm happy with them, but it would be fair that it also had an improvement like that: There would be NO penalties in karma. There is always someone on my team as well as on the enemy team reporting to me (random battles).

 

What else should we do with our reports? When I am out of reports, it usually a good time to stop playing. At that point I have no placebo to make me feel better after being crapped on by the fly skyrats!

I suggest that people with 0 karma can join games but have 0 planes in reserve then increasing 1 for 1 until the normal cap.

 

Thank for your closing the other thread, it feels so much cozy back here!

[Kazomir]

16 hours ago, Estaca_de_Bares said:

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

 

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...

...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.

 

You replying in italics is making it harder for me to reply to your reply, but I'l try. Important to note that I know the CV mechanics back when they were RTS style.   It won't be hard to remove the Spotted warning from CVs. Just remove the ability from the CV class as a game mechanic/ add an exception to the rule for CVs. CV's definitely cannot be surprised by torps while they sit idle. As soon as a DD Spots a CV and aims torps, the CV, aware that noone should be able to spot him while hiding and sitting at 1 place, will start shuffling out and re-locating. 20 KM torps can indeed hit CVs, but CVs that are unaware of the game situation should definitely be able to be surprised by a DD that has snuck up on them and one shot. 

 

Being on fire should be a big detriment for a CV. Seeing as the class is one of the most flammable ones IRL. Things were just not designed to be on fire with all that plane fuel/ordinance onboard and in the hangars. CV's are currently not bothered by fires at all on the rare occasion they do get lit.

 

As for the last spotting part. Not many mechanics need to be put in place. A plane Icon above a player name (Displayed instead of the aiming reticle that surrounds the icon of the player) will be able to notify you you are aiming at a target that is only spotted by planes. As for your argument that this will reduce the times CVs themselves are sniped out early into the game, I say no one deserves to be spotted by CV and deleted in the first few minutes of the match, even other CVs.

[Fatal_Ramses]

8 hours ago, Panocek said:

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 tw

JB, Musashi and others were removed cause they were "too popular" and it took around 1-1.5 to get cancelled. Smolensk didn't even last 0.5 year.

[Estaca_de_Bares]

9 hours ago, Kazomir said:

You replying in italics is making it harder for me to reply to your reply, but I'l try. Important to note that I know the CV mechanics back when they were RTS style.   It won't be hard to remove the Spotted warning from CVs. Just remove the ability from the CV class as a game mechanic/ add an exception to the rule for CVs. CV's definitely cannot be surprised by torps while they sit idle. As soon as a DD Spots a CV and aims torps, the CV, aware that noone should be able to spot him while hiding and sitting at 1 place, will start shuffling out and re-locating. 20 KM torps can indeed hit CVs, but CVs that are unaware of the game situation should definitely be able to be surprised by a DD that has snuck up on them and one shot. 

 

Being on fire should be a big detriment for a CV. Seeing as the class is one of the most flammable ones IRL. Things were just not designed to be on fire with all that plane fuel/ordinance onboard and in the hangars. CV's are currently not bothered by fires at all on the rare occasion they do get lit.

 

As for the last spotting part. Not many mechanics need to be put in place. A plane Icon above a player name (Displayed instead of the aiming reticle that surrounds the icon of the player) will be able to notify you you are aiming at a target that is only spotted by planes. As for your argument that this will reduce the times CVs themselves are sniped out early into the game, I say no one deserves to be spotted by CV and deleted in the first few minutes of the match, even other CVs.

All of those are pretty sensible points many can agree on. My main point of contention was that, since this game does the calculations server-side, things aren't that easy to implement without proper thought. And even small changes and QoL improvements have taken some time to be implemented. For example, the change to the "spotted by" priority rules took a while (I think it was done with the introduction of the rework, but discussion about it began at least half a year prior -see here and here-).

 

The "only spotted by plane" you initially suggested included not only a change in icons client-side (which correlates to the spotting priorities) but also different dispersions for each situation, and dispersion, aiming and lock-on have been problematic to say the least a few times (lock-on bug, shells falling consistently short -can't find a link to this discussion right now, but it certainly happened-, etc.). But let's assume it's done. Why not apply the same rule to radar and hydro spotting, so anyone who doesn't spot directly gets a penalty (or the other way around, only "true spotters" get a dispersion buff)?

 

I'm all in for some changes, but (as naïve as it sounds) they should follow the KiSS philosophy as much as possible and not feel like ad hoc solutions. Unfortunately, it comes down to WG's will to put them in the game and how they do it, and experience has taught me to be quite skeptical about the outcome.

 

Salute.

[TunaRoll]

On 12/14/2020 at 10:39 AM, cherry2blost said:

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!

Absolutely true. People need to stop giving them ANY money. That is the only speak these edit* over there can understand and speak.

 

 

[arquata2019_]

On 12/14/2020 at 10:39 AM, cherry2blost said:

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!

they can, just say this:

Weegee, careful, there's money down here! if you remove the edit* you can earn money!

No Guaranteed

(ok, i'm awful to be humoristic in this post :o)

 

edited: watch the language please

[Nibenay78]

The fuzzy feeling when you get to fire several salvos on a stationary CV at ~20km. Only to watch most of the shells bounce off the deck. Knowing full well that ANY BB you hit would have recieved significantly more damage from 19 hits. And yes I did not aim for the deck...

 

[BLUB__BLUB]

40 minutes ago, Nibenay78 said:

The fuzzy feeling when you get to fire several salvos on a stationary CV at ~20km. Only to watch most of the shells bounce off the deck. Knowing full well that ANY BB you hit would have recieved significantly more damage from 19 hits. And yes I did not aim for the deck...

 Use Conqkek HE, and do not aim - just fart in the general direction. 

Amazing results guaranteed. Usually straight BLAP.  

[Nibenay78]

1 hour ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

 Use Conqkek HE, and do not aim - just fart in the general direction. 

Amazing results guaranteed. Usually straight BLAP.  

I should have used HE, it's just something that breaks my immersion in this game when carriers bounce more than battleships at that range 

[TohtoriP]

I have a complaint to make. There seems to be CVs in every game. It is getting pretty boring. Is it really that one must play only tier9 to get games where there is sometimes no CVs?

[Nibenay78]

1 hour ago, TohtoriP said:

I have a complaint to make. There seems to be CVs in every game. It is getting pretty boring. Is it really that one must play only tier9 to get games where there is sometimes no CVs?

WG supposedly will read this complaint. All experience so far shows also it will be ignored!  Your enjoyment is irrelevant as long as you pay!

[TohtoriP]

4 hours ago, Nibenay78 said:

WG supposedly will read this complaint. All experience so far shows also it will be ignored!  Your enjoyment is irrelevant as long as you pay!

Jumping to tier 5 to club the clubbers. 57 aircraft shot down.. in an ARP Haruna.  At least we won.

[HystericalAccuracy]

13.444 HP in a single strike - 86 seconds into the game.

In a T6 ship with 34k hp total

CVs are fine 

[1MajorKoenig]

3 minutes ago, VIadoCro said:

13.444 HP in a single strike - 86 seconds into the game.

In a T6 ship with 34k hp total

CVs are fine 

AP Rockets from the looks of it - can be juicy if flat broadside but usually the target angles slightly and mitigates almost all dmg.
Not saying AP Rockets are a great idea though 

[zekai7498]

An enemy FDR killed our only dd with his single squadrion at the beginning on the match.Also in general (especially at T10) there is no counterplay no AA against CVs.

Extremely high potential with extreme player skill dependency,causing imbalance...

[Deckeru_Maiku]

9 hours ago, TohtoriP said:

I have a complaint to make. There seems to be CVs in every game. It is getting pretty boring. Is it really that one must play only tier9 to get games where there is sometimes no CVs?

My complaint would be different

 

Everytime I enter a battle with one of the designated "AA vessels" - Sims, Massachoochooo, Zara etc. - I never see a CV in battle. Never.

As soon take a different ship with weak AA -> Oh, hello Mr. CV... nice to meet you.. and you even brought your twin with you...

[BLUB__BLUB]

15 minutes ago, zekai7498 said:

An enemy FDR killed our only dd with his single squadrion at the beginning on the match.

I wonder how he got a "single squadron" at the beginning of a match. 

There is a 25sec waiting period, even if he dumps lots of them, it will  cost time to result in a single squadron.

The only thing I can think of, he was just hovering over a Halland or something?

 

15 minutes ago, zekai7498 said:

Also in general (especially at T10) there is no counterplay no AA against CVs.

Extremely high potential with extreme player skill dependency,causing imbalance...

That is true though. Sometimes it reminds me a bit of a turkey shoot. 

Unless you stuff up there's not that much surface ships can do. 

Yeah they can angle against AP-rockets, or try to avoid torps, but well... 

Also that is more like a "wall of skill", those FDR torps. 

[Deckeru_Maiku]

9 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

I wonder how he got a "single squadron" at the beginning of a match. 

There is a 25sec waiting period, even if he dumps lots of them, it will  cost time to result in a single squadron.

The only thing I can think of, he was just hovering over a Halland or something?

 

He probably meant "with his one flight" -> group of squadrons... not every one here in the forum is a native english speaker and/or knows all the military nomenclature...

And crapping on a DD right at the start with a full FDR flight sounds not impossible...

[BLUB__BLUB]

1 minute ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

 

He probably meant "with his one flight" -> group of squadrons... not every one here in the forum is a native english speaker and/or knows all the military nomenclature...

And crapping on a DD right at the start with a full FDR flight sounds not impossible...

Well with a FDR you can crap on anything at anytime, sort of. Even if it is the last two planes. 

There aren't many chances to miss... dammit that load of torps/rockets/bombs is something like a tsunami incoming. 

Even my Ark Royal blushes in disgust... 

 

[Kazomir]

2 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

AP Rockets from the looks of it - can be juicy if flat broadside but usually the target angles slightly and mitigates almost all dmg.
Not saying AP Rockets are a great idea though 

Yea dude just turn away....giving flat broadside to 5 BBs on the enemy team. Then, you have to turn again to not get blapped by the second rocket strike.

[callumwaw]

Not paying WG isn't gonna help. They will see their revenues are going down so they will panic and start introducing even more overpowered, half-brain easy-to-play ships to attract even more halfwits who like kicking small animals but are happy to use dad's credit card... 

 

CVs certainly shouldn't launch planes when on fire, but the fires only last a few seconds, so that wouldn't be a real hindrance. I don't know how much vodka you have to drink before you come to the conclusion that a ship that has thousands of tons of aviation fuel on board is pretty much invulnerable to fires (as a reminder, all or nearly all WW2 CVs sunk in battle went down chiefly due to fires). 

 

In my opinion, a key change would be to limit the output of the plane factory that CVs apparently have on board. Just last battle, the enemy Audacious lost 119 planes, and at the very end he kept scrambling squadrons that were 75-90% full, so he was nowhere near depletion. To remind you, the Audacious class of CVs carried a maximum of 60 planes in real life. I know this is an arcade game, so it can deviate from historical accuracy a bit, but THREE TIMES the real number? 

 

So make the on-board plane factory produce planes at a much slower rate,  and/or introduce a cap on the total number of planes per battle that a carrier of a given tier can have, for example: 80 for TX, 70 for T8, 60 for T6.   In other words, if the enemy team shoot down 80 planes, that TX CV is de-planed. 

 

One way or the other, it should be possible to de-plane a carrier if they're careless with their planes. Why?  Well, most other ships are severely crippled at the end of the battle: very low health, AA ruined by HE.  The carrier is the only ship that doesn't suffer from that, so even if he only has half-full squadrons, he can decimate the remaining, weakened enemy ships. 

 

This would promote skilled CV players, who know how to avoid flak, and punish the window-lickers who fly in straight lines through flak bursts and suffer no consequences. 

 

Alternatively, after the maximum number of planes has been shot down, the CV would only be able to launch single-flight squadrons, i.e., sufficient for just one strike.  They would still be able to kick little puppies (=destroyers) at the end of the game, but they would be slightly less OP. 

 

Some tweaks are also needed for AA dpm. In a recent battle, a Des Moines, Halland, a CL and two US BBs (at the start of the battle, so with full AA) weren't able to stop a single tier 8 squadron from carrying out a successful attack, shaving off 20-25% of the light cruiser's health... C'mon...

 

 

[Yosha_AtaIante]

6 hours ago, callumwaw said:

a cap on the total number of planes per battle

they are capped. They don't regenerate on infinite. 

The battle lasts only 20minutes you know? 

[1MajorKoenig]

7 hours ago, Kazomir said:

Yea dude just turn away....giving flat broadside to 5 BBs on the enemy team. Then, you have to turn again to not get blapped by the second rocket strike.

You don’t need to turn that much to avoid AP rockets. They only citadel flat broadside especially the T6 ones