General CV related discussions.

[tocqueville8]

Just now, DFens_666 said:

Then you could also say, ships should be able to use their guns aslong as they are not completely drowned under water because why not?

Well the game uses a health point system, it doesn't model damage realistically.

 

Indeed, you can use all your gun turrets and torpedo tubes (that haven't been destroyed, which is a somewhat rare occurrence) even when you're on 1hp, which is supposed to represent a ship that's very close to sinking.

 

Just now, DFens_666 said:

You should be able to designate a target and AI attacks for you - that would be the only fair way.

I don't see how that would be "the only fair way".

A squadron is a squadron. If you can fly a squadron with the CV still floating, why not one when she's been sunk, until they're shot down, drop their ordnance, or they run out of "fuel" (a constraint you don't have through the rest of the game, btw)?

 

I understand this is a problem with the FDR, as one of her squadrons can last for many attack runs, but in general? Nah.

[DFens_666]

10 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

Well the game uses a health point system, it doesn't model damage realistically.

 

Indeed, you can use all your gun turrets and torpedo tubes (that haven't been destroyed, which is a somewhat rare occurrence) even when you're on 1hp, which is supposed to represent a ship that's very close to sinking.

 

I don't see how that would be "the only fair way".

A squadron is a squadron. If you can fly a squadron with the CV still floating, why not one when she's been sunk, until they're shot down, drop their ordnance, or they run out of "fuel" (a constraint you don't have through the rest of the game, btw)?

 

I understand this is a problem with the FDR, as one of her squadrons can last for many attack runs, but in general? Nah.

 

Again, by the same logic i could use my guns aslong as the are above waterlevel. My hull has 0 HP - but my guns dont (unless they were destroyed ofc). Same is for CVs and planes. CV hull is sunk, planes can still fly and attack, which is equivalent to a ship and its turrets.

Nobody would say thats fair, when a sinking ship manages to citadel you, because you were passing by on it.

 

Or atleast the amount of time needs to be lowered and max 1 attack. Lets say 30 sec and 1 max attack, that would be ok. Ive had CVs permaspot ships for a prolonged time and then strike them just before their timer runs out - its completely unfair, and one more wheel on the CV tricycle, so that they surely cant fail as hard as any other ship...

[tocqueville8]

Just now, DFens_666 said:

Again, by the same logic i could use my guns aslong as the are above waterlevel. My hull has 0 HP - but my guns dont (unless they were destroyed ofc). Same is for CVs and planes. CV hull is sunk, planes can still fly and attack, which is equivalent to a ship and its turrets.

Again, I don't see how that's "the same logic".

The ship is the ship, it has one crew: engine room, turrets, AA mounts, kitchen, anything.

Ship and planes have different crews, they're different vehicles (with different hp pools) and CV captains play effectively two games at once, though one is often (badly) automated.

Actually, scratch that. A BB crew is already split: just because you lose the engine, it doesn't mean you lose the rudder or the ability to shoot. If dmgcon is on cooldown, you can still maneuver. In short, there is compartmentalization of the different functions of the same vehicle. All the more reason why there should be compartmentalization between different vehicles.

 

The game is modeling real life, where CV planes could land on other CVs, or on nearby air bases, or ditch in the ocean. A sunk CV couldn't launch the planes still in her hangar or on deck, nor recover those in the air, but the planes would go on on their own.

The analogy with ship turrets is already there: a CV with 1 hp can still launch all her squadrons like a BB with 1 hp can still shoot all her guns. Shells don't suddenly go stupid (e.g. losing the improved dispersion you get from locking the target), planes shouldn't either, imho.

 

Frankly, the biggest nerf CVs should get is also the most reasonable: they should be able to burn/flood just like any other ship.

WG could also add a fuel timer for all squadrons, I'd call that reasonable as well.

 

Cheers.

[UnderDuress]

40 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

Huh, no: you need range finders to spot and radio equipment to communicate the data to other ships,

Lol, you are actually using a realism argument. I must have missed all those times carrier strike aircraft provided artillery plotting for surface ships.

 

42 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

Look, in real life...

Seriously? In real life? Where would we begin with this game if we went down that road.

[COPlUM]

Apparently MVR can take away 30K HP from a cruiser in its spawn, before it even managed to accelerate. Since one ship spawning with 2/3rds of his HP missing is apparently a game-feature, I will reverse upon spawning from this day forward, so someone else can be the "lucky boy" to spawn dead.

I'm never moving forward again in a cruiser, spawn and reverse, until someone else loses 2/3 of his HP, then I'll start playing.

[tocqueville8]

Just now, UnderDuress said:

Lol, you are actually using a realism argument. I must have missed all those times carrier strike aircraft provided artillery plotting for surface ships.

 

Seriously? In real life? Where would we begin with this game if we went down that road.

Well spotting is a weird thing in this game, CVs or no CVs. Hydro and radar seeing through islands? Come on...

Not to mention a bunch of armor thresholds, concealment radii and more.

 

And yes, if you've got to nerf CVs, I'd rather you do it in a more life-like way, like making them burn just like any other ship (to be more accurate: just like BBs), instead of a sillier way, like making their planes "lose the will to live" mid-flight just because the mothership has been sunk.

[DFens_666]

20 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

Again, I don't see how that's "the same logic".

The ship is the ship, it has one crew: engine room, turrets, AA mounts, kitchen, anything.

Ship and planes have different crews, they're different vehicles (with different hp pools) and CV captains play effectively two games at once, though one is often (badly) automated.

Actually, scratch that. A BB crew is already split: just because you lose the engine, it doesn't mean you lose the rudder or the ability to shoot. If dmgcon is on cooldown, you can still maneuver. In short, there is compartmentalization of the different functions of the same vehicle. All the more reason why there should be compartmentalization between different vehicles.

 

The game is modeling real life, where CV planes could land on other CVs, or on nearby air bases, or ditch in the ocean. A sunk CV couldn't launch the planes still in her hangar or on deck, nor recover those in the air, but the planes would go on on their own.

The analogy with ship turrets is already there: a CV with 1 hp can still launch all her squadrons like a BB with 1 hp can still shoot all her guns. Shells don't suddenly go stupid (losing the improved dispersion you get from locking the target), planes shouldn't either, imho.

 

Frankly, the biggest nerf CVs should get is also the most reasonable: they should be able to burn/flood just like any other ship.

WG could also add a fuel timer for all squadrons, I'd call that reasonable as well.

 

Cheers.

 

There are distinct differences tho, f.e. like this:

- BB is reloading its guns and it dies. It cant suddenly decide to shoot another volley only because its dying.

- CV has planes in the air, lets say 3 planes so last part of the squad. The hull is under fire, CV player can recall the almost empty squad and start a fresh one before he dies.

The CV always has that option, while the BB has not.

 

The thing about crews is a RL analogy - we dont have crews in WoWs, thus its irrelevant. The player is the crew in either case, as he has the ability to both move the hull and the planes.

Balance should come before things you can just make up to explain them, and CVs clearly dont need another set of training wheels, because they already are superior to surface ships.

[tocqueville8]

3 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

Balance should come before things you can just make up to explain them

I agree, but there are already several ways in which CVs are (unrealistically) nerfed.

One of them is surface vs air detection: it's arguably easier to spot a ship from the air (the wake alone is huge and fairly visible), but in the game the air detection range is 30-60% the surface detection range.

That's fine, because it gives DDs a chance to slip away undetected or maybe make the CV overshoot. Otherwise, DD play would be miserable.

 

All I'm saying is, if you gotta nerf CVs, go with the unlifelike things first, like their virtual immunity from fires, instead of the last squadron thing, which doesn't even happen all that often, and is pretty reasonable.

 

The argument that CVs are too powerful is credible, but it doesn't mean that all the ways they could be nerfed make just as much sense.

[COPlUM]

26 minutes ago, NikolayKuznetsov said:

Apparently MVR can take away 30K HP from a cruiser in its spawn, before it even managed to accelerate. Since one ship spawning with 2/3rds of his HP missing is apparently a game-feature, I will reverse upon spawning from this day forward, so someone else can be the "lucky boy" to spawn dead.

I'm never moving forward again in a cruiser, spawn and reverse, until someone else loses 2/3 of his HP, then I'll start playing.

I hate quoting myself but I was offered a helpful solution on discord, spawn *just dodge* the torpedoes by turning hard left and showing broadside to a sov sovuz, a stalingrad and a jean bart within 17km, while spotted by torpedo planes. Basically you can avoid losing half your HP by losing all of it

[DFens_666]

4 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

instead of the last squadron thing, which doesn't even happen all that often

 

Probably more of an issue because ive seen it happen in smaller formats like CBs or Brawl. In the 5x5 Brawl, you actually had a chance to snipe the CV early, which didnt stop him from spotting you for 2 minutes, hope that his teammates pull your DCP and then attempt a permaflood on you. Or just take AP bombers and shave half your health of with them.

CVs get even more OP in those modes with less than 12 players, which really enforces all the issues they are adding to the game.

[DFens_666]

8 minutes ago, NikolayKuznetsov said:

I hate quoting myself but I was offered a helpful solution on discord, spawn *just dodge* the torpedoes by turning hard left and showing broadside to a sov sovuz, a stalingrad and a jean bart within 17km, while spotted by torpedo planes. Basically you can avoid losing half your HP by losing all of it

 

Removal of spotting would fix a lot of issues, and they hardly affect the CV player... but apparently, we are just too dumb to understand why the CV keep striking the water

[El2aZeR]

1 hour ago, tocqueville8 said:

And yes, if you've got to nerf CVs, I'd rather you do it in a more life-like way, like making them burn just like any other ship

 

Which ofc would have next to no impact on CV performance and therefore be completely placebo.

[tocqueville8]

21 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Which ofc would have next to no impact on CV performance and therefore be completely placebo.

Then why do people always bring it up?

It would make it far easier to snipe CVs, since they don't have heals.

 

How much would CVs lose in performance if WG made their last squadron before they're sunk much less effective? Not much, as CVs rarely get sunk in the first place, and it's only 1 squadron.

 

Their spotting ability is much more impactful, but I suspect if it was taken away people would complain about DDs being too powerful...

[tocqueville8]

51 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

CVs get even more OP in those modes with less than 12 players, which really enforces all the issues they are adding to the game.

Well of course, 7vs7 with 1 CV is basically like 12vs12 with 2 CVs, which is indeed a mess.

[El2aZeR]

16 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

Then why do people always bring it up?

It would make it far easier to snipe CVs, since they don't have heals.

 

Because it is prominent proof of how much the class is being coddled by WG. One of many at that.

 

17 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

How much would CVs lose in performance if WG made their last squadron before they're sunk much less effective? Not much, as CVs rarely get sunk in the first place, and it's only 1 squadron.

 

Indeed.

But the topic of discussion has simply turned this way. CV performance and how it is hilariously overtuned has already been discussed at length, I can assure you.

[ForlornSailor]

2 hours ago, tocqueville8 said:

A squadron is a squadron. If you can fly a squadron with the CV still floating, why not one when she's been sunk, until they're shot down, drop their ordnance, or they run out of "fuel" (a constraint you don't have through the rest of the game, btw)?

 

Because we are playing world of warships and not world of warplanes - which also exists. so go there if you want to play with planes.

 

 

[Capra76]

40 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

Well of course, 7vs7 with 1 CV is basically like 12vs12 with 2 CVs, which is indeed a mess.

 

But then 12 v 12 can become 7 v 7 as ships sink, which is kind of the point of the game, and CV are the least likely to go under and generally don't lose combat performance over time, thus 12 v 12 with one CV is a mess that just hasn't happened yet.

 

What you're really saying here is that the class is broken, but if there's enough other players for them to on it's just about tolerable so long as you're not the one being on.

[Kazomir]

3 hours ago, tocqueville8 said:

Players don't die (hopefully), it's just the ship that sinks.

 

Since CV players have to divide their time between flying planes and driving the CV, it makes perfect sense to let them fly around the last squadron once the ship is sunk. Once the squadron is gone, they indeed can give no more input. Planes aren't remote-controlled by the CV like the battle droids in the Phantom Menace...

Do they have to divide their attention really? Ever seen a CV maneuver the whole game? They mostly just stand at 1 spot, and chart a course quickly via the map if they get spotted. As a matter of fact, CVs are the only class that can solely focus on their attack capabilities for a whole game, while their ship is undisturbed.

 

Ordinary ships have a lot more maneuvering and positioning to do than a CV all the while shooting guns farther than 0.5km away from the enemy.

 

Once you sink (die) you should not be able to control anything, ships or planes.

[tocqueville8]

16 minutes ago, Capra76 said:

 

But then 12 v 12 can become 7 v 7 as ships sink, which is kind of the point of the game, and CV are the least likely to go under and generally don't lose combat performance over time, thus 12 v 12 with one CV is a mess that just hasn't happened yet.

 

What you're really saying here is that the class is broken, but if there's enough other players for them to on it's just about tolerable so long as you're not the one being on.

CVs lose a lot of combat performace over time, unlike other classes which often gain it (Adrenaline Rush).

It's true AA mounts are often disabled, but rarely over 50% unless there are Thunderers everywhere, and that's more of an issue with high caliber HE spam than with CVs per se. On the other hand, even a competent CV captain will often have to use half-strength squadrons.

 

Also, of course 1 CV vs 1 BB is more broken than 1 CV vs a bunch of ships, but the same is true of other classes. 1 CA kiting a BB can be completely broken (if the CA knows how to dodge/speed juke), 3 DDs stalking 3 BBs is completely broken, ecc.

 

In the early phases of a game, the CV can often find targets with poor AA and/or distracted, so she has more option. But trying to sink, say, a full-hp Worcester with half-strength squadrons in the late game, is often just pointless, especially since the last players alive (at least, cruiser players) are on average better.

 

So yes, 7v7 Ranked is better for CVs, but that in and of itself doesn't mean they're OP. Cruisers are not a weak class, but they just don't fit the 7v7 meta as well as the 12v12 meta.

[tocqueville8]

2 minutes ago, Kazomir said:

Do they have to divide their attention really? Ever seen a CV maneuver the whole game? They mostly just stand at 1 spot, and chart a course quickly via the map if they get spotted.

Everybody can "chart a course quickly", but it's harder to dodge shells that way. Maneuvering manually is not a chore, it's an advantage.

 

And yes, good CV players will maneuver a lot, park behind islands (but not nose-in: that'd make it much easier for the enemy to overrun you), go with the team, etc. If you think the team is strong on one flank and you park behind an island close to the cap instead of dropping anchor 10km behind, you'll increase your DPM by 20-30%. Higher risk, higher reward.

Never mind when your Haku gets attacked by a MvR and you need to keep angling against those rockets...

Or when a DD rushes your Parseval and you have to manage planes, secondaries and rudder...

 

The thing with the "dead hand" squadron is clearly not why people object to CVs.

[tocqueville8]

1 hour ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

Because we are playing world of warships and not world of warplanes - which also exists. so go there if you want to play with planes.

  

 

Kind of a petty thing to say.

I haven't been playing this game since its beginnings, but there were CVs back then already.

[ForlornSailor]

31 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

CVs lose a lot of combat performace over time

 

biggest joke ive heard in a while. Any specific reason you defend this class with lies? CV actually GAIN combat perfomance, massivly, since their pray gets less, thus there is less AA cover AND ships lose their AA which each time they get hit. Both makes it a LOT easier for CVs to attack. Well, unless the CV player in question is a moron and has lost all its planes in flak, since he plays on the level of a 40 %er.

[tocqueville8]

1 minute ago, ForlornSailor said:

CV actually GAIN combat perfomance, massivly, since their pray gets less, thus there is less AA cover AND ships lose their AA which each time they get hit

That's nice to hear: from this thread I was under the impression that AA was useless, or that clustering together didn't help.

 

In any case, a good CV skipper will often find isolated targets even with all enemies still present on the map, so I wouldn't say the combat effectiveness necessarily increases by much. And as I mentioned, enemies are more likely to pay attention to the CV when there are fewer threats from surface ships.

 

On the other hand, you can never carry more than a full squadron, so you certainly don't gain combat performance there, while all other classes can shoot/launch torps faster with AR.

[tocqueville8]

17 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

Well, unless the CV player in question is a moron and has lost all its planes in flak, since he plays on the level of a 40 %e

So far 60% WR in the Haku, so I'm not sure I'd qualify as one of these "morons" you speak of, but long games with lots of AA ships (Smaland, Smolensk, Thunderer...) often see me with half-strength squadrons by the 15min mark, especially if I push closer to help the team.

[geschlittert]

Hello, please listen

"fook CVs"

thank you

:)