General CV related discussions.

[DeviousDave02]

I've thought about this one before (The daft auto Damn Con system)

 

Personally, if it was made manual,  I'd make it so that fire and flooding dealt 50% less damage per tick to a CV than other ships BUT

also did:

 

Fire - Reduced take off speed by 25% for each fire on the Carrier (that's the speed a squadron can form up and start attacking stuff after take off) and deals 25% hp damage  per fire to the squadron taking off (so 75% if all spots are on fire)

Flooding - Increases plane restore time (the time it takes a new plane to be made ready) by 30%

 

That way it's not catastrophic if a CV player is away from the hull when something breaks out but it does incentivise dealing with it pronto and possibly recalling the current flight.

 

 

[Captain_Lootbox]

I think i dislike CVs less that subs now.

 

[marcopieroni16]

Alle 7/12/2022 alle 20:29, Captain_Lootbox ha scritto:

I think i dislike CVs less that subs now.

 

at least you see the planes coming 

[Floofz]

On 12/4/2022 at 9:26 AM, FellRaven said:

Firstly your historic point is actually wrong nobody actually built (laid down) new battleships after it became apparent that CVs were the dominate capital ship. so 100% of he "Real" battleships in game were designed without CVs being considered (Seriously) so having a game that reflects how they intended is perfectly reasonable. Also rather obviously German and Soviet Carrier fleets are completely ficticious and the Tier 10 Carriers are basically post war whereas the Tier 10 BBs in contrast are based on 20s and 30s designed which is why there were never built

 

Well this is just wrong on all levels. Not only were plenty of Battleships built way after the first fleet carriers entered service but some battleships were even built to escort carrier groups. Such as the Iowa class. 

 

Both Carriers and Submarines definately belong in the game and Im very happy that they are. There are balance issues however, especially with CVs. For example a CV is practically unkillable for a sub because they are more or less immune to sonarpings and as soon as youre spotted they auto launch ASW planes on you. You dont even have to use your planes at all.

Another issue is obviously the spotting from planes, which is in my oppinion the absolute biggest issue. Ive said it before, the best solution is to make planespotted ships visible only on the minimap. Then remove all the dumbstuff like automatic damagecon or automatic asw or foreverlasting damagecon. At the same time not being able to launch planes when the ship is on fire, and make the fire lasts as long as they do on BBs.

[Fediuld]

On 12/8/2022 at 10:10 PM, marcopieroni16 said:

at least you see the planes coming 

And you can defend if you spend couple of skill points to beat them. 

 

[Fediuld]

Few months ago complained about the Audacious  Atrocious. The ship was fixed partially by the RBP module and the captain to level 16 to get more HP on the slow moving airplanes. I still play it 3-4 times per week, because I like the ship and how bad it performs compared to all other T10 carriers.

 

However last night got Malta. First battle ended in just 7 minutes, half the team died in just 5. So didn't had time to use it more. 

This morning however Malta showed it's true potential. Absolutely superb carrier, Audacious on steroids I have to say. The AP carpet bombers are simply AMAZING. Compared to the Audacious HE bombers which set rarely any fires (one every 2-3 games) and barely do any damage these days even if 6-7 bombs hit the target superstructure. 

The torp bombers wide aim, somehow isn't an issue. Almost always the 4 torps will hit and they do good damage even on big cruisers. (Puerto Rico, Venezia etc). Also the angle allows to hit a DD with multiple torps if drop in angle. 

Rocket airplanes the same good old reliable to set 1-3 fires and do 5000-10000dmg per strike and reliable hunt DDs

 

All in all Malta feels truly superior to Audacious in every way, regardless the stock airplanes and the slow speeds. It is truly fun to play carrier. 

I have to say the same for Max compared to Richthofen, as the former is much more fun to play in random, and the latter more fun to play in ranked. 

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

43 minutes ago, Fediuld said:

And you can defend if you spend couple of skill points to beat them. 

 

+

28 minutes ago, Fediuld said:

However last night got Malta.The AP carpet bombers are simply AMAZING.

The torp bombers wide aim, somehow isn't an issue. Almost always the 4 torps will hit and they do good damage even on big cruisers. (Puerto Rico, Venezia etc). Also the angle allows to hit a DD with multiple torps if drop in angle. 

Rocket airplanes the same good old reliable to set 1-3 fires and do 5000-10000dmg per strike and reliable hunt DDs

= 

[Nibenay78]

1 hour ago, Europizza said:

+

= 

Am I playing the same game as him?

[BLUB__BLUB]

On 12/7/2022 at 3:13 AM, DeviousDave02 said:

That way it's not catastrophic if a CV player is away from the hull....

It is stupid anyway that you CAN change direction (using the map/autopilot)
and cannot use repair or something like that, while flying the planes. I mean:
In ships that have secondary guns you can even set them at a specific target on the map. 

 

There is NO NEED for the stupid automation. 
And YES it is stupid, it will start DC at the first fire, just like b0ts.

[Juuzaam]

I got the Malta today and this CV is different from what i am used to because it seems like almost every possible build and skill is viable. Anyone tried a lot and came to his optimal thing?

 

I am currently running some kind of fighter build and thinking about switching it up one last time.

[Nibenay78]

1 hour ago, Juuzaam said:

I got the Malta today and this CV is different from what i am used to because it seems like almost every possible build and skill is viable.

I read: its equally possible to pee on all other shipclasses. Good thing its vacation soon!

[NewHorizons_1]

3 hours ago, Nibenay78 said:

Am I playing the same game as him?

Apparently @Europizza has proved he's not playing the same game has himself.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

4 hours ago, NewHorizons_1 said:

Apparently @Europizza has proved he's not playing the same game has himself.

[El2aZeR]

16 hours ago, Fediuld said:

And you can defend if you spend couple of skill points to beat them. 

 

Mathematically under optimal conditions an AA build will result in 1 extra plane kill compared to investing no points at all for the vast majority of ships.

[FloatingTarget]

No point in investing anything into AA. They will always carry out their attack, you will not shoot them down before they get to you. Can only manoeuvre for what little that does.

[Fediuld]

6 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Mathematically under optimal conditions an AA build will result in 1 extra plane kill compared to investing no points at all for the vast majority of ships.

On most carriers, especially the tier 10s, that extra 1-2 airplanes lost need, is another compounded 2-3 minutes for the aircrafts to be replaced, on top of the other casualties. 

And that is per ship. If you have 2-3 ships together whole squadrons can be lost even for airplanes like Nakhimov. 

[Fediuld]

3 minutes ago, FloatingTarget said:

No point in investing anything into AA. They will always carry out their attack, you will not shoot them down before they get to you. Can only manoeuvre for what little that does.

On that I will disagree. You cannot take down the whole squadron in a battleship (Mecklenburg only can do it), but you grind the airplanes. Spending few points on a Yamato for example, will keep away the majority of the carriers, except those carrying jets or very good Nakhimov players. Losses getting compounded over the duration of the battle and each airplane type has one queue. So 6 lost airplanes on a Nakhimov, is 10 minutes to replace them. 

 

The majority of the players are copying of the same "optimal anti-ship" build someone put out, then complaining about carriers. Yet it only takes 2-3 points from the circumstantial skills many builds have, to just have good protection that will make the opponent carrier think twice. 

[Nibenay78]

1 hour ago, Fediuld said:

Spending few points on a Yamato for example

Maybe you would be so kind to calculate this mind numbing increase in dps that will make "almost all" carriers run in fear from this Yamato-AA-fortress? Once we have that we can be in awe over the additional attrition a carrier will experience.

[El2aZeR]

9 hours ago, Fediuld said:

On most carriers, especially the tier 10s, that extra 1-2 airplanes lost need, is another compounded 2-3 minutes for the aircrafts to be replaced, on top of the other casualties. 

And that is per ship. If you have 2-3 ships together whole squadrons can be lost even for airplanes like Nakhimov. 

 

That is incorrect. Not only is a regen time of 120+ seconds the exception rather than the rule, strike rotation ensures that viable strike wings can be flown out all match long even for terrible CV players regardless of AA opposition.

 

Three ships sitting together in one spot means no map control and thus a default win for the CV. Methods such as abusing island cover and slingshot also ensure that strikes can still make it through with sustainable losses.

[black_falcon120]

@Nibenay78 Do you think if I re-created my CV poll with a 'I don't know' option in the 2nd question, it would go better?

[Nibenay78]

2 hours ago, black_falcon120 said:

@Nibenay78 Do you think if I re-created my CV poll with a 'I don't know' option in the 2nd question, it would go better?

It would not go better for me Nor do I think WG even looks at what's said here... but do what you like 

[black_falcon120]

29 minutes ago, Nibenay78 said:

It would not go better for me Nor do I think WG even looks at what's said here... but do what you like 

Hmm, I’ll think about it…

 

In fairness it went far better than my previous two CV threads, the sheer amount of toxicity… 

[Nibenay78]

6 hours ago, black_falcon120 said:

Hmm, I’ll think about it…

 

In fairness it went far better than my previous two CV threads, the sheer amount of toxicity… 

One can only wonder why the amount of toxicity is so high... its almost like its an unfun element for many?

[BLUB__BLUB]

18 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

and slingshot

...is this still a thing? 

[SurfaceFish]

11 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

...is this still a thing? 

Offensive no, only on Indomitable. Defensive still yes to save couple of planes or escape tagged fighters, as those don't target player planes already dropped ammunition.