General CV related discussions.

[Gudgeon]

Has everything not already been said about the CV class? What real changes really happened from the feedback? The spreadsheet must contain a lot of data from the hundreds of thousands of CV based battles by now. What more can be said? Is this thread similar to the in game report system............a pressure relief and nothing more?

 

Nothing is going to change.

[Excavatus]

1 hour ago, Gudgeon said:

Is this thread similar to the in game report system............a pressure relief and nothing more?

gentelmen!! they're discovering the truth!! 

RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!  

[Gudgeon]

comment on how great you think CV's are, only good things seem get altered for the worse in this game  Reverse psychology

[anonym_ithQExuCaqyB]

On 2/27/2021 at 8:59 AM, Excavatus said:

gentelmen!! they're discovering the truth!! 

RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!  

You think that the users all *edited*? 

 

This blah blah about tell us your opinion *edited* is really gets annoying...

 

Excavatus you have no arguments at all. All you do is telling the people that they are crazy or idiots, sorry but you are an first class example for an totally *edited*!!

 

EDIT: Insults removed.

 

Arty_McFly

[COPlUM]

On 2/26/2021 at 2:03 PM, LordBodoM said:

Conclusion:

- Give planes more HP

I played Jaguar once, figured I'd start a new line, french DDs look cool. My first game a terrible ranger player on the enemy team chased me around the map with one squadron of planes for 15 minutes, my AA was shooting that same squadron of planes for 15 minutes, I got one plane-shot-ribbon, I killed myself, laughed, sold the ship, decided to never play destroyers without smoke again and didn't play warships for a week.

But sure, give planes more HP. And lasers, oh and radar.

[Kyorinn]

6 saat önce, NikolayKuznetsov dedi:

I played Jaguar once, figured I'd start a new line, french DDs look cool. My first game a terrible ranger player on the enemy team chased me around the map with one squadron of planes for 15 minutes, my AA was shooting that same squadron of planes for 15 minutes, I got one plane-shot-ribbon, I killed myself, laughed, sold the ship, decided to never play destroyers without smoke again and didn't play warships for a week.

But sure, give planes more HP. And lasers, oh and radar.

you forget to add them 5000 kg glorious soviet bombs with egsaust smoke to make them run whenever they want without taking any aa damage 

[Procrastes]

Post-Mortem Plane Squadrons Need a Zombie Fix!

 

I recently squared off against a Lexington in a ranked battle where I was driving in my Orkan destroyer. It ended quite scandalously, I'll have you know.

 

First, the Lexington attacked me with a bunch of rocket planes which I dodged while shooting down one of his planes. Then the battle went on fairly civilly with each of us minding our own business in separate parts of the map.

 

But towards the endgame, where I had sunk the enemy Missouri and gone hunting for their Benham, I happened on the carrier as well. This triggered a furious naval ballet of rocket strikes and heroic dodges and pot shots against the carrier, where I had considerably more trouble dodging his rockets since I had to also simultaneously dodge the incessant torpedoes from the Benham. On the other hand, being in the Orkan I could heal back a lot of the damage I took, and the carrier was subjected to incoming fire as well.

 

In short, the carrier was sunk before he managed to put me under. This was bad enough, of course, and strictly against the rules of reworked CV/destroyer engagement, but the carrier was rightly and properly compensated by retaining a full squad of rocket planes - i.e., his post-mortem plane squadron - even after having been sunk.

 

But now I come to the scandalous part: The carrier player, after having been sunk, didn't manage to sink me with his post-mortem plane squadron.

 

Oh, he came close enough to make me hesitate to engage the enemy Benham with what was left of my hit points, and he did take out my engine (again), but he didn't actually sink me.

 

This is a proper outrage, I tell you. A carrier player did not manage, after having been sunk, to take out the destroyer he had been fighting while his ship was still in the game. I am sure most of us would agree that this is not supposed to happen.

 

Clearly the rework has failed. On behalf of reworked carrier adherents worldwide, I propose the following changes to carrier rules:

1. If a carrier is sunk by any other ship than another carrier, his post-mortem plane squadron will be immune to damage until he has sunk one other ship of his choice that is not a carrier.

2. The post-mortem plane squadron will have endlessly regenerating loadouts of bombs/rockets/torpedoes, which will however only be able to do damage to non-carrier ships.

3. If an enemy destroyer happens to be the closest enemy ship to the carrier when it sinks, the enemy destroyer will automatically sink as well.

 

I thought about making carriers immune to other torpedoes than those dropped from torpedo bombers, but that might be going a bit too far. We wouldn't want carriers to be seen as having an unfair advantage over other ship classes, after all.

 

 

 

Disclaimer: This is a spoof post. No vehemence towards carrier players or WG staff is intended; I am just letting off some steam. I will now go and get myself another cup of coffee. Have an altogether pleasant weekend, fellow forumites!

[arquata2019_]

54 minuti fa, Procrastes ha scritto:

Need a Zombie Fix!

no u

[ghostbuster_]

On 2/26/2021 at 2:03 PM, LordBodoM said:

-snip

Horsesh.t. 

This is as constructive as it gets for this post.

[Nov_A]

1 hour ago, Procrastes said:

Post-Mortem Plane Squadrons Need a Zombie Fix!

 

I recently squared off against a Lexington in a ranked battle where I was driving in my Orkan destroyer. It ended quite scandalously, I'll have you know.

 

First, the Lexington attacked me with a bunch of rocket planes which I dodged while shooting down one of his planes. Then the battle went on fairly civilly with each of us minding our own business in separate parts of the map.

 

But towards the endgame, where I had sunk the enemy Missouri and gone hunting for their Benham, I happened on the carrier as well. This triggered a furious naval ballet of rocket strikes and heroic dodges and pot shots against the carrier, where I had considerably more trouble dodging his rockets since I had to also simultaneously dodge the incessant torpedoes from the Benham. On the other hand, being in the Orkan I could heal back a lot of the damage I took, and the carrier was subjected to incoming fire as well.

 

In short, the carrier was sunk before he managed to put me under. This was bad enough, of course, and strictly against the rules of reworked CV/destroyer engagement, but the carrier was rightly and properly compensated by retaining a full squad of rocket planes - i.e., his post-mortem plane squadron - even after having been sunk.

 

But now I come to the scandalous part: The carrier player, after having been sunk, didn't manage to sink me with his post-mortem plane squadron.

 

Oh, he came close enough to make me hesitate to engage the enemy Benham with what was left of my hit points, and he did take out my engine (again), but he didn't actually sink me.

 

This is a proper outrage, I tell you. A carrier player did not manage, after having been sunk, to take out the destroyer he had been fighting while his ship was still in the game. I am sure most of us would agree that this is not supposed to happen.

 

Clearly the rework has failed. On behalf of reworked carrier adherents worldwide, I propose the following changes to carrier rules:

1. If a carrier is sunk by any other ship than another carrier, his post-mortem plane squadron will be immune to damage until he has sunk one other ship of his choice that is not a carrier.

2. The post-mortem plane squadron will have endlessly regenerating loadouts of bombs/rockets/torpedoes, which will however only be able to do damage to non-carrier ships.

3. If an enemy destroyer happens to be the closest enemy ship to the carrier when it sinks, the enemy destroyer will automatically sink as well.

 

I thought about making carriers immune to other torpedoes than those dropped from torpedo bombers, but that might be going a bit too far. We wouldn't want carriers to be seen as having an unfair advantage over other ship classes, after all.

 

 

 

Disclaimer: This is a spoof post. No vehemence towards carrier players or WG staff is intended; I am just letting off some steam. I will now go and get myself another cup of coffee. Have an altogether pleasant weekend, fellow forumites!

ok

[ghostbuster_]

1 hour ago, Procrastes said:

 

First, the Lexington attacked me with a bunch of rocket planes which I dodged

There is no dodging. Let me correct you.

"First, the lexi..... planes but he failed since he doesnt have enough hand coordination to do something really easy such as attacking DDs with rocket planes"

There.

[SV_Kompresor]

19 hours ago, Zappata82 said:

You think that the users all idiots? 

 

This blah blah about tell us your opinion crap is really gets annoying...

 

Excavatus you have no arguments at all. All you do is telling the people that they are crazy or idiots, sorry but you are an first class example for an totally ARROGANT, PATHETIC POS!!!

He's not really wrong though is he?

[ghostbuster_]

19 hours ago, Zappata82 said:

You think that the users all idiots? 

At least 95% of them, yes.

19 hours ago, Zappata82 said:

This blah blah about tell us your opinion crap is really gets annoying...

 

Excavatus you have no arguments at all. All you do is telling the people that they are crazy or idiots, sorry but you are an first class example for an totally ARROGANT, PATHETIC POS!!!

Why so serious? 

[Nibenay78]

On 2/26/2021 at 10:43 PM, Deckeru_Maiku said:

Then you'll probably the norwegian TV series Magnus

 

I am norwegian, dont need some tv series :p

[Nibenay78]

On 2/27/2021 at 8:59 AM, Excavatus said:

gentelmen!! they're discovering the truth!! 

RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!  

They should be referred to as placebo reports

[Deckeru_Maiku]

5 hours ago, Nibenay78 said:

I am norwegian, dont need some tv series :p

Ah, so what happens in that TV series is business as usual for You, right? 

[Imraphel]

I've not been playing this for very long and I appreciate that others might have a different view, but if this is a simulation, then shouldn't carriers have an absolute limit on the number of aircraft they carry?

 

In a couple of games I've shot down more than 45 aircraft; that's pretty much the entire compliment of a real aircraft carrier. And, counting up the aircraft kills, I've seen more than 120 more than once. Even with two carriers in the game, they should be running out of planes pretty damned fast. But they don't - they have endless supplies of full squadrons. 

 

This may be nice for the carrier players, but it's extremely unfair for everyone else. This should be a game of skill, but it's not if a carrier player can endlessly recycle full squadrons instead of taking care with his planes and taking the time and effort to get the best attack runs which will minimise aircraft casualties. The game should reward the better players, not make it dead easy for any muppet to play God as a carrier captain.

[Deckeru_Maiku]

16 hours ago, Imraphel said:

I've not been playing this for very long and I appreciate that others might have a different view, but if this is a simulation, then shouldn't carriers have an absolute limit on the number of aircraft they carry?

Logically and gamebalance-wise you are of course right.

But WG in their usual vodka induced stupor decided that it would not good for CV players to able to waste all their planes mindlessly and then be unable to attack any targets after five minutes of the battle have passed...

Can't have a potential source of income - here: CV players, who are supposed spend money on Premium CVs - to have at least a basic understanding of game mechanisms and skill to achieve great results. At least not until all potential buyers have spend enough money, after which the next new OP ship/class/whatever will implemented into the game.

[CV_Bot_Test]

On 2/26/2021 at 9:03 PM, LordBodoM said:

I know we are not supposed to complain but i'm gonna do it anyway:

 

1)  In most cases squadrons can only attack once. Most of the remaining planes will not survive while turning and lining up for a second attack. If you don't want to be without planes, 5 minutes in the game, you have to pre-drop.

Having to pre-drop is ridiculous so either: A) Give planes more HP or B) Make squadrons adjustable in size. If i want to attack with 4 planes why force me to launch 8?

 

2) Torpede bombers have a rather long attack run. Often a target is destroyed the second you start your run. There is no way to cancel that run so you have to drop anyway or keep flying. Dropping anyway can cause problems if friendlies are near. Keep on flying may result in the destruction of your planes when enemies are not in range of your attack run but AA or fighters are in range. Please make it possible to interrupt an attack.

 

3) Bomb dispersion is erratic at best. Even when you have a perfect allignment and drop when the reticle is at it's smallest, they miss too often. Sometimes it seems ships have a magnetic embrella that makes your bombs go nicely left and right of your target. When you have to actively maneuvre when AA is strong (all the time these days) they drop all over the place. Same with rockets. Trying to hit something at the end of a turn or anywhere near an island is wishfull thinking.

Only when, for example, a battleship is sailing alone and in a straight line and doesn't have massive AA and doesn't have fighters deployed, you can make a decent hit and still have some planes to take home afterwards. Hitting an actively maneuvering DD? Lol! Please make drop patterns a bit more consistent. Maybe even introduce a skill or module to improve the accuracy?

 

4) " There are upper limits on the percentages of battle tiers a ship will be sent to " -> For T8 CV's this means 10% same tier and 90% Tier 10? The amount of matches i'm confronted with Halland's, Minotaur's and other no-fly zones with a T8 CV is exceptionally high. Please either: A) Lower the amount of times this happens or B) Give planes more HP, T8 planes are not equipped to confront T10 AA.

 

5) Planes, no matter how big or how many, have an overall detection range of 10Km (Ex Jap TB), adjustable to 9Km with the concealment module. The CE skill has been replaced (lol) with 'Hidden Menace' wich only affects the carrier and is probably the worst CV skill ever. Spending 4 pts on this results in an assured loss of all remaining planes when they try to head home. The name and discription of the skill insinuates your carrier is harder to find and not to make your pilots demented after they drop their ordenance. Please adjust the skill so that their speed gets reduced AFTER they reach height.

 

6) Speaking of concealment: The respective detection ranges are as silly as a cross-eyed eagle. For example: A Kagero can spot a Lexington's planes at 10Km (or 9) but the planes can not even see the dd untill they are on top of them (2.5Km).

Ships on the other hand can spot said DD at 5.5Km. There was me thinking that elevation increases viewing range...Not! In this logic a pilot can more than double his viewing range by crashing his plane in the ocean and continue in his dinky.

 

7) Another issue is the fact that (taking the Kag & Lex as Ex) the distance from attack planes to their reticle is LONGER than the airial detection range of the DD. 3Km and 2.5Km respectively. This means you'd have to start the attack run BEFORE you can even spot the DD (if he is not spotted by another teammate or firing). You can counter this a little by slowing down your planes but that's very limited in time and the DD player has to be a doofus, sailing in a straight line.

 

 

Conclusion:

- Give planes more HP (NOT the FDR!!!);

- Make canceling an attack run possible;

- Improve dispersion;

- Improve MM;

- Adjust Air Detection Range (glasses for pilots?);

- Fix island problem (they mess up aim vs drop).

 

Other minor issues:

- Sometimes there is a very slight delay when launching rockets after the reticle went green. Probably after turning or when an island is closer than +/- 2Km.

- Fighters often get destroyed before deployment. The message 'Fighters Destroyed' even comes before 'Fighters Deployed'.

- AA score is wonky. Ex: Halland = 85 and GK = 88. According to it's firepower the Halland should have 99 or, perhaps more acurate: 1099...

- Where does the continuous DMG form the Halland come from anyway, all it has are Bofors. Flak ok but the invisable railguns??

 

PS: Only constructive criticism please. DD-players need not to respond. I have been called [edited] more than enough and we don't have infinite planes. I'm not mentioning the fact that DD's are packed bow to stern with torps either.

 

 

Now I see why my friends saying there have much more CV PTSD patient that wants CVs nerf to hell in EU server compare to CIS server.

This much reaction on a reply that saying DDs should not have so many advantages on air detection for examples like Halland's invisible AA trap

want nerf CVs here and there, why ?

"they just wanna have their problems go away for free"

[DFens_666]

12 minutes ago, CV_Bot_Test said:

This much reaction on a reply that saying DDs should not have so many advantages on air detection for examples like Halland's invisible AA trap

 

There is no invisible AA.

By that logic, every DD has invisbile AA with more range than its concealment, because every DD can disable its AA. F.e. US DDs have 5,8km AA range, so if i enable AA when CV spots me, thats also invisible AA?

[CV_Bot_Test]

1 minute ago, DFens_666 said:

so if i enable AA when CV spots me, thats also invisible AA?

Dude you forget about that 2 seconds spotting delay

[DFens_666]

2 minutes ago, CV_Bot_Test said:

Dude you forget about that 2 seconds spotting delay

 

And a CV loses all planes in 2 seconds?

[CV_Bot_Test]

Just now, DFens_666 said:

 

And a CV loses all planes in 2 seconds?

Of course there is such a possibility,even if it didn't happen that 2 seconds delay are much more matters then 2 seconds on BB or CA/CL

[RNGProtectsBraindeads]

On 2/26/2021 at 7:36 PM, CV_Bot_Test said:

Especially Audacious's 28mm HE penetration rocket that almost impossible to create effective damage to any class other then DD, and shotgun dispersion can't effective enough to hit DDs.

---

IMO all Tier 10 HE rocket's dispersion needs buff

When I was playing Hakuryu

That Shimakaze is leave her AA on and not even using [Survivability Expert] skill ,running with 17900 HP.

I still managed nuke and DS that potato shimakaze with 3 torpedo hit later that battle,

it's impossible to satisfy crying DD players and the potatoes who completely irresponsible to the team by manipulating RNG.

Manipulating RNG can only show that how insufficient WG's game design ability is , there is no way to balance the potatoes that throw themselves.

Hi, have you recently noticed extreme flak buffs with cruisers and bbs after recent update?

[ForlornSailor]

25 minutes ago, CV_Bot_Test said:

want nerf CVs here and there, why ?

 

Because they destroy the game we love. As easy as that.