The huge and massive carrier rework suggestion - teamwork focus

[Grim_Destiny]

The following text is massive. I have uploaded a doc version. It is 11 pages.

The suggestion are a serious attempt at reworking carriers along with arguments for why I think this is a good idea.

I relalize this might all be merged with the current carrier thread and completely ignored, but please respect the effort and commitment involved with writing this. I spent a long time thinking about this and writing it all down for people to read, took an entire workday.

 

While my suggestions are extensive, i have tried to stay true to the fact that is, afterall, an arcade game.

 

The doc version is easier to read!

 

I could have posted this in the carrier suggestion thread, I know, but the thread has far more vitriol and anti-carrier comments than it does anything looking like actual suggestions. This thread will likely get merged with carrier suggestion thread, but I do hope a new thread could be started. One where actual suggestions are a requirement or posts get deleted. This would greatly increase readability.

 

Content discussed below:

·        Squadron readiness mechanic

·        Carrier “Scramble” slots

·        Squadron damage states

·        Spotting re-work

·        Recon planes as a function of spotting re-work and team collaboration

·        Altitude as a tactical consideration

·        ASW

·        Air combat

.        Ammo tracked per plane (if not already)

·        Angled flight deck

and more...

 

The content of this post stretch from closed beta forwards to our current gameplay. Be prepared- this is going to be a long one, but if you have an interest in carriers, it might still be worth a read.

 

My goal with this post, is to provide suggestions that would make carriers more interesting and more of a team asset, than what it is today. Lets face it- they are hardly an instrument of team enhancing effort. I do think the team part of the game, could be developed a bit further.

 

Topics discussed below:

Carrier gameplay in closed beta and now: What happened in between?

 

In balancing carrier gameplay, Wargaming have largely limited themselves to pulling on two specific levers:

1.      Ease of play

2.      Impact on game

They have consistently increased ease of play and reduced impact on game. It might seem strange to some that they have less impact, but you have to compare that to how it used to be. I can do 180K damage and still not affect the game in any way. I might not even get any kills. In closed beta a single carrier could dominate the match. There were several problems back then and there are several problems today. Wargaming have been pulling on the wrong levers and even when they didn`t get the results they wanted, they just kept pulling the same levers hoping some kind of change would work.

 

Teamplay is a lever never pulled, though one that should be integral to carriers. Back in closed beta, they were solo killing machines that could carry a team to victory. This was not good. Today they are much less, but still there is no incentive to be a teamplayer. I would say that carrier players are the worst team players, but they are playing the game that is there to be played. There is no XP in teamplay for a carrier player.

 

Seems 50-60% of players are battleship enthusiasts and the rest spread out on the other ship types. The battleship players want to go off on their own (these are the bread and butter for CV players) and then rant in chat when it doesn`t work out. These will easily cost you the game.

 

Destroyer players, in my experience, are great teamplayers. The shiptype is overworked with responsibilities, but they almost always step up. I try to help them whenever I can. Cruiser players have saved my bacon more times than I can count. Great teamplayers in almost every match. It annoys me that I often don`t do enough for them. It`s funny how the most vulnerable ships have the best teamplayers. Battleships have the most players that don`t care about teamplay and carrier players are simply playing another game. I`ll get into this shortly.

 

In closed beta and for a while afterwards the major issues with carriers were the following:

1.      They insta-killed any battleship in a single attack run. This was done by stacking torpedo squadrons on top of each other during an attack run.

2.      Carrier players, most often, didn`t bother engaging each other. Getting to the other carrier took a lot of time and if the player was good, then sinking it was a pain to accomplish. If you spent most of the match fighting the other carrier, there was simply no XP in it. So most carrier players ignored each other, shared the table between them and went to town on the other players.

 

Today the first point has been dealt with, but the way it was dealt with has ensured the second point is still largely true. I could spend time looking for destroyers and spotting, but there is really nothing in it for me. It means a lot of time without shooting anything and when damage per minute goes down, so does the score and to get XP and to do campaigns and missions, you need lots of XP. By and large that means focusing on dealing damage and helping teammates if and when, it`s convenient. Also, the spotting and DD hunting needs to exceed the utility of spending your time doing damage or the carrier is simply dragging the team down. Most often this just isn`t the case.

 

Because this has been going on for so long, carriers have become some parallel actor in the game, that is largely there to get in the way of people, but doesn`t really feel like a meaningful asset. Certainly not something you are happy to see on your team. This also made it kind of a joke that both teams must have a carrier, if a carrier is to be present in the match.

While the second point is still a major issue, it`s wargamings work on the first point that has ensured nothing has ever been fixed. Remember how I said, carriers were solo killing machines. They were and it was fun while it lasted, but not very productive. In order to fix the issue, they have between then and now done the following:

1.      No longer can you decide on a complement of strike craft for the carrier

2.      No longer can you manage more than one squadron at a time

3.      No longer can you move between control of ship and squadron as you wish

Wargaming did a lot more than this during the interval between closed beta and today, but the above represents the essential difference between then and now. They solved one issue, but did nothing to change what is arguably the most important issue:

how to make the carrier an integral part of the team.

 

Discussion of changes:

So how would I change carrier gameplay? What is my grand solution?

 

I would take what was great with carriers back then and combine it with what works with carriers today. Then I would redo or add content and mechanics, that I am now going to get further into the details of. At first it may seem like I want carriers to be stronger, but if you keep reading, you will eventually see that my ideas stretch both far and wide.

 

How to change carriers, carrier gameplay and make carriers an important part of the “team”. (initial changes to get on the right footing)

The first suggestions will seem minor and that meaningful, but the full picture is what matters.

1.      Bring back RTS. Allow the player to control all his squadrons at the same time, but require that the player must manually conduct the attack run like today.

2.      Introduce “crowded airspace” – bomber squadrons operating within “X”km of each other will debilitate aiming like the AA consumable used to do.

3.      Fighters flying closer than limit to bombers are considered “escorting”.

4.      Allow player full control of carrier while squadrons are in the air.

5.      Bring back specialized complements of strike craft – this is where we get into the interesting stuff.

6.      The above will help bring back the tactics and mindgames that existed in closed beta, but could be made far better if focusing on the right things. See below for further elaboration on this.

Also:

1.      Remove carriers from tier 4 (it`s just cruel)

2.      Add carriers to tiers 6-10 (5 carriers)

3.      New gameplay suggestions below

4.      New ribbons and new emblems

 

Setting up the carrier

It used to be that you choose a full with a specific complement of strike craft. I would like to see this return, but with a few twists and additions.

 

Let us say a Lexington has 100 slots for strike craft. All existing planes require 1 slot each. When setting up the carrier you can choose among lets say 4 configurations.

1.      3 fighter squads on deck

2.      1 fighter, 1 dive bomber, 1 torpedo bomber

3.      Etc

4.      And so on

Now lets say every bomber squadron has 12 planes. Now 36 slots have been spent. This is what you start the match with. As for the remaining 64 slots, the player can mix and match however he wants. 64 dive bombers? You got it. Even spread? You got it, but the complement you choose for the carrier, is what you launch the match with.

 

Now some important notes. The following will discuss the terms “readiness”, “scramble”, “damage state”, “recon”, “spotting”, “altitude”, “ASW”, “air combat”.

 

Instead of “airplane restoration”, I would introduce “airplane readiness”. No more plane restoration- replaced with “repair” timers.

 

Squadron readiness slots

To launch a squadron, it must first be “readied”. You start the match with a number of readied squadrons. It takes two minutes to ready a squadron and it takes 20-30 seconds to launch a squadron.

If you wish to replace a readied squadron with another squadron, it will take 2 minutes to remove the readied squadron and 2 minutes to bring up the other one. The exception being rocket planes. Rocket planes a fighters loaded with rockets. Takes 60 seconds to add or remove rockets. Fighters with rockets have penalties to speed, agility and flighttime (until rockets are spent)

Landing a squadron takes 20 seconds, during which planes cannot take off, unless the carrier has angled carrier deck (look for suggestion on it`s implementation further down).

 

Readiness slots are the number of primary squadrons under the players control

 

 

 

 

Damage states

Planes on sorties get damaged and they return to the carrier in varying condition. “Green” means no damage and no repair needs. “Yellow” means light repairs (30 seconds per plane), “Orange” means moderate repair needs (60 seconds per plane), “Red” means critical damage (90 seconds per plane).

 

Varying tiers and ship hulls have varying number of repair slots (number of planes that can be repaired simultaneously). Planes that have finished repairs can be “readied” for another sortie.

 

Planes with “critical” status automatically leave squadron and head back to carrier

 

 

“Scramble” slots

These work the same way as “ready” slots. Squadrons are assigned prior to a match, but these cannot be changed during the match. If a fighter squadron is placed there, then it can only have fighters for the duration of the match.

 

I was thinking that Fighters were the only legitimate squadron here along with ASW, but really any squadron could work here. GUI for ASW planes can be adapted.

 

Scamble slots are not controlled by the carrier-player

Primarily for fighter squadrons, recon planes and ASW planes, but anything could work.

Instead, scramble slots are a team resource. IF a player sends a request for air-cover and a fighter squadron is available in a scramble slot, it will automatically launch, from the closest ship with a relevant scramble slot, and head for the ship requesting support.

 

The squadron will follow the target ship for the duration of its activation and will also protect any allied ships within 4km of the target ship. The squadron will engage any enemy squadron threatening or vectoring towards any of the protected ships when they breach 6km from the allied ship they are closer to. Or to make it simple they could just intercept when an enemy squadron is 9km from the protected ship and vectoring towards.

 

This could work for rocket planes, dive bombers and torpedo bombers as well. The ASW GUI could be adapted for this. Auto bomb drops will clearly not be as effective, but could do some damage and will definitely cause the target to evade (“danger averted” ribbon).

 

Damage dealt and XP earned through “scramble” missions, are shared 50-50 between carrier-player and the player that called the mission.

 

Squadrons launched on “scramble” missions, launch 50% faster and fly at 20% higher speed until 10km from target location. Flight time is thus also reduced 25%.

 

In my vision carriers are going to have a lot more to do, so scramble slots make sense in this regard. Effective use of scramble slots also motivate the carrier player to position the carrier closer to those who will need its presence.

 

Spotting re-work

This will lead into suggestions on “recon”, “flight time” and “altitude”

·        Existing squadron spotting ranges are all reduced to 6km.

Maybe introduce ship trails that planes or ships could follow

·        All ships have spotting ranges reduced 20% - recon planes compensate

·        All ships can spot planes at current ranges

·        Existing spotting planes on battleships are replaced with “recon” planes

 

“Recon” planes do not give bonus to weapon ranges, but provides a 20% bonus to spotting range. Twist: It would be very fun if the owning player receives spotting data in real-time, but allies receive spotting info with 20 second delay. I realize the coding could be difficult when there are 3 battleships and a carrier, all with recon planes. Maybe the twist is not possible.

 

All carriers have a “recon” slot in addition to “ready” and “scramble” slots. A recon slot can only hold standard recon or a heavy recon plane.

 

Where existing planes and standard recons require one squadron slot, the heavy recon requires 3. ASW planes also require 3 slots, but are launched through either “scramble” or “ready slots”.

 

Heavy recons are slower, but fly higher, take reduced AA damage and have much longer flight time. Heavy recons can also use consumables: My current suggestions are either “radar” (short range) or “sub spotter crew”- specially trained crew with special binoculars looking for snorkels and movement in the water suggesting the presence of submarines. Recons Xkm spotting range, while heavy recons have X+% range plus either short range radar or sub spotting equipment

 

 

Flight time

Standard flight time for squadrons is 5 minutes and can be affected by altitude (including take-off and landing). Recons have 7.5 min and heavy recons have 10min. Cooldown timers are flight time + 2 minutes. Don`t everyone launch recons at the same time…

 

Squadrons that run out of flight time will automatically return to carrier, BUT will be considered to have yellow damage state (only 30 sec per plane, but if carrier only has 1 or 2 repair slots….)

 

Altitude

The game currently has 3 altitudes: low, flight and high-flight (german dive bombers). I would like to exploit this further.

 

Planes can only initiate attack runs from standard flight hight (except fighters that can attack from any height when engaging other planes).

 

Low-flight:

·        range at which planes can spot anything is reduced 50%.

·        Range at which ships can spot low-flying planes is reduced 50%

·        Recon planes are unaffected

·        Flighttime reduced 1 additional second per 1 second of flight at low-altitude

Flight/attack height

·        No modifiers

High altitude:

·        Speed increased 15%

·        Flightime extended 2 seconds for every 1 second of flight at high altitude for a maximum of 60 seconds. IE 1 second net increase flighttime per second of flight.

·        Squadrons at high altitude take 15% reduced AA damage, but cannot execute attack runs (even german dive bombers).

 

ASW

I would remove the ability for battleships to have their own ASW capability. IT only serves to extend the already negative impact current battleship playstyles are having on the game. We need more integration and incentives for teamplay, not additional abilities for people to go off on their own. This has to be reined in.

 

Battleships will along with carriers have recon planes and these will be a critical strategic asset. As far as ASW is concerned they should receive this from destroyers and carriers. Towards the end of the post I have some bold suggestions regarding ASW.

 

Air combat

Those paying attention will have noticed that fighters are suddenly extremely important. Another thing you might have noticed is that while carrier-players will have to be a lot more patient with regards to attacking ships, they will now have a lot more things to worry about.

 

Air superiority will now be a proper thing that serves the entire team.

 

Attacking enemy recon planes will be an important carrier mission, intercepting hostile fighters and hunting hostile planes will not only be important, but rewarding. Taking out planes will see increased XP rewards and many new ribbons and emblems.

 

Air combat ribbons and emblems:

·        Access denied (ribbon) – intercept and destroy squadron entering protected airspace or

vectoring towards allied ships

·        Blinded (ribbon) – destroy a recon or heavy recon plane with cooldown more than 5 minutes

·        Intercepted (ribbon) – intercept and defeat a squadron

·        Not today (ribbon) – intercept and defeat squadron that has activated attack run

·        Top gun (ribbon) – defeat a fighter squadron in close combat

·        Air superiority (ribbon) – be the only player with fighters in the air for 240 seconds and no

allied ships are attacked by planes. The hostile CV must be alive

·        Fighter ace (ribbon) – Defeat two fighter squadrons with the same squadron with only 1

surviving plane

·        Retaliation (ribbon) – Defeat squadron after it has completed an attack run

·        Consequences (ribbon) – launch a squadron of bombers within 10 seconds of an ally being attacked by planes and do at least 10K damage to hostile CV within 120 seconds of launching.

·        Harsh consequences - launch a squadron of bombers within 10 seconds of an ally being

attacked by planes and do at least 20K damage to hostile CV within 120 seconds of launching.

·        Air marshall (ribbon and emblem) - rewarded for achieving “air superiority” 3 times in 24

hours.

·        Commander of the heavens (ribbons and emblem) – rewarded for achieving Air marshall 3 times in a week.

How would air to air combat actually work. You can`t have manual dogfighting. Though you can have something resembling it. All squadrons are manually controlled and have animated attack runs. What would animated fighter attack runs look like????

 

My suggestion is fighter formations and associated attack runs. A kind of rock-paper-scissors in the air.

 

Lets say a fighter squadron has 3 formations and each formation has 3 associated attack runs that can be chosen. Both players can change formation during flight, but each change takes 10 seconds to complete. Each attack run also takes 10 seconds to complete. Example:

9 fighters fly in a standard triangle

The player decides to engage another fighter squadron and changes formation to 3 triangles. He now has 3 possible attack runs and chooses “pincer”:

·        Two center squadrons drop speed slightly while the left and right squadron turn wide, speed boost and they all coalesce 6km further down the map. Anything in the killbox will get hammered.

·        The other player however might have chosen “attack from above” attack run and might not have any planes in the killbox at all. Now they either re-engage or disengage.

Air combat might take time and should get more points.

 

Angled flight decks and ASW

At tier 10, the option of an angled flight deck should be included. These were pioneered in the thirties and implemented in 1952 (Midway). Given how ahistorical the shiplines already are, I don`t see this as a stretch at all.

 

Angled flight deck bonuses:

·        Secondary batteries can no longer attack ships

·        No batteries on flight deck

·        AA value reduced 50%

·        Can launch and retrieve planes at the same time

·        Deck space +6

·        Total air group capacity +12 (including the +6 for deck space)

·        Large plane elevator (other CVs must have large planes on deck and can thus have fewer of them. CV with large plane elevator can also maintain large planes (ASW or heavy recon) in their interior hangar.

·        Ready slot +1

·        Repair slot +1

 

Carriers tiers, slots and capacities

Those paying attention might notice it is not possible to load all slots with combat squads. Obviously all numbers are suggestions.

 

Tier 10 w/Angled flight deck

·        Ready slots – 4

·        Scramble slots – 2

·        Recon slot - 1

·        Deck space – 67

·        Total carrier air group – 124

·        Repair slots 3

 

Tier 10:

·        Ready slots – 3

·        Scramble slots – 2

·        Recon slot - 1

·        Deck space – 61

·        Total carrier air group – 112

·        Repair slots 2

 

Tier 9:

·        Ready slots – 3

·        Scramble slots – 2

·        Recon slot - 1

·        Deck space – 57

·        Total carrier air group – 108

·        Repair slots 2

 

Tier 8:

·        Ready slots – 2

·        Scramble slots – 2

·        Recon slot - 1

·        Deck space – 30

·        Total carrier air group – 100

·        Repair slots 2

·        Secondaries take up a lot of deck space – maybe a bump to their range

 

Tier 7:

·        Ready slots – 2

·        Scramble slots – 1

·        Recon slot - 1

·        Deck space – 30

·        Total carrier air group – 75

·        Repair slots 1

Tier 6:

·        Ready slots – 1

·        Scramble slots – 1

·        Recon slot - 1

·        Deck space – 24

·        Total carrier air group – 50

·        Repair slots 1

 

Final suggestions

These thoughts were not part of my original pitch, but something I started thinking about when considering both angled flight decks and ASW.

 

Helicopters

Helicopters entered mass production in 1942 (by sovjets) and by 1945 were employed by every branch of US military. Mainly observation, medevac and transport. ASW helicopters weren`t deployed until late in the 50s.

 

Destroyers could have recon helicopters as consumables. 3km spotting range. Click on an island or spot on the ocean and the helicopter will move there and hover for 2 minutes. Cooldown 6 minutes. 2x uses.

 

ASW helicopters would be only available for scramble slots on destroyers and carriers. A tier 10 destroyer could have 1x recon consumable OR 2x ASW helicopters for a single scramble slot. 3 minute flight time and 8 minute cooldown.

 

Carriers would not be able to use recon helicopters, but would be able to field ASW helicopters in scramble slots. Slower than planes though and only suitable as close range ASW option for carriers.

 

 

carrier gameplay.doc

[HassenderZerhacker]

Quote

but if you have an interest in carriers, it might still be worth a read.

lol

[Humorpalanta]

All this time invested in it and WeeGee response:

 

*EDIT*

[HaachamaShipping]

5 hours ago, Humorpalanta said:

All this time invested in it and WeeGee response:

 

*EDIT*

I expect that response in general also from much of the readers in this thread, not just WG. I'm not one to not argue, but this is just far too long and far too detzached with little indication that it actually is workable and even less chance that anything would change.

[Grim_Destiny]

I can see it feels a demanding read, but carrier are not in a situation that permits a Quick fin.

 

Same goes for the state of and benefits related to teamplay.

 

At this point, anything short is simply disingenous..

 

I absolutely had to make the attempt.

[1MajorKoenig]

First of all - you really put some erfrort into this so - chapeau 

 

With regards to your suggestions - in general I like the fact you are thinking to extend the rather limited gameplay mechanics the game offers currently. Some specific remarks + feedback:

 

1 hour ago, Grim_Destiny said:

Bring back RTS. Allow the player to control all his squadrons at the same time, but require that the player must manually conduct the attack run like today.

While I get the point - and that kind of model worked quite well in Battlestations Pacific - I doubt WG wants to do these kind of things. They want us to control a single avatar at a time. Although I don’t disagree - it would be an option 

 

1 hour ago, Grim_Destiny said:

Allow player full control of carrier while squadrons are in the air.

Yes - we certainly want that

 

2 hours ago, Grim_Destiny said:

Remove carriers from tier 4 (it`s just cruel)

2.      Add carriers to tiers 6-10 (5 carriers)

YES!!!!!!!!! Precisely!

 

2 hours ago, Grim_Destiny said:

Now lets say every bomber squadron has 12 planes. Now 36 slots have been spent. This is what you start the match with. As for the remaining 64 slots, the player can mix and match however he wants. 64 dive bombers? You got it. Even spread? You got it, but the complement you choose for the carrier, is what you launch the match with.

Choosing your airplane complement would be great but I could see it hard to balance. I doubt they’ll do it but I would like it.

 

2 hours ago, Grim_Destiny said:

Squadron readiness slots

To launch a squadron, it must first be “readied”. You start the match with a number of readied squadrons. It takes two minutes to ready a squadron and it takes 20-30 seconds to launch a squadron.

In general I like the idea of “readiness slots” as it would force to plan your next moves. However it would certainly make the CV less flexible and would need to be balanced again the current model in a certain way.

 

2 hours ago, Grim_Destiny said:

Scramble” slots

These work the same way as “ready” slots. Squadrons are assigned prior to a match, but these cannot be changed during the match. If a fighter squadron is placed there, then it can only have fighters for the duration of the match.

If you want to use fighters these would need to be in such scramble slots.

 

2 hours ago, Grim_Destiny said:

How would air to air combat actually work. You can`t have manual dogfighting. Though you can have something resembling it. All squadrons are manually controlled and have animated attack runs. What would animated fighter attack runs look like????

I would love to see direct control of air-to-air combat. But that would mean that you can have indeed more than one squadron up and switch between squadron during flight. That would not be a bad thing but WG wants a simple “one-avatar” approach.

 

I think a reasonable compromise could be to allow two squadrons, a strike wing and a fighter wing (plus hull control). That would probably be in line with the concept of readiness slot for strikes and scramble slot for fighters. 
 

With regards to dog fighting with player control it is difficult as the planes are not moving 3d. So all we could probably do in the current model would be an attack animation similar to any other animation which would mean something similar to the old “strafe”. Not sure if that is a good solution. Making planes “dogfight” instead would mean to create entirely new flight mechanics. 

 

2 hours ago, Grim_Destiny said:

Scamble slots are not controlled by the carrier-player

Primarily for fighter squadrons, recon planes and ASW planes, but anything could work.

Instead, scramble slots are a team resource. IF a player sends a request for air-cover and a fighter squadron is available in a scramble slot, it will automatically launch, from the closest ship with a relevant scramble slot, and head for the ship requesting support.

That is an interesting idea but what happens if the entire teams presses the “request support” button constantly?

 

 

In summary I appreciate the constructive nature of the suggestion and the effort spent on it.

 

I generally like:

- CVs start at T6 and go all the way up to T10

- readiness slots for strike wings

- immediately-ready slots for fighters

- player controlled fighters

 

[Hugh_Ruka]

I LOVE the idea of the scramble slots. But the CV player needs some control about it otherwise idiots will deplete/misuse those and won't be effective.

 

From my point of view, the only change needed for CVs now is the following:

 

Destroyed planes cannot be replaced.

 

You can repair damaged aircraft as much as you want, you cannot replace destroyed planes. This would be offset by a reserve set of planes (kinda like the US CVs had during WW2, spare planes hung from the hangar roof). Once you deplete those, every aircraft lost will be gone for good. This will make AA damage count for something again .... and force the CV to plan where he dedicates his planes.

[Grim_Destiny]

Regarding spamming "request support" button.

 

People will have to make some of the same considerations CV players always have to make:

How AA will they be exposed to while in transit. Once they arrive, will they still take AA fire?

They will need to consider if they are in the right position for air support to be effective.

 

If air support is required in multiple locations the CV can always deploy from an available "ready" slot. 

 

I think players might be able to learn to talk before making the request, unless they see an attack building up.

 

People spam requests in the beginning and May ask for recon planes all the time and battleships might deploy their recons all at the same time. However, once it settles in, how important proper use of recon is for the team and how important air combat will be, they will likely calm down.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

'Huge and massive'? OP sure weren't kidding...

[Prophecy82]

4 hours ago, Humorpalanta said:

All this time invested in it and WeeGee response:

 

Sadly this is the bitter reality. 

 

So, dear OP, thanks for your Wall of Text and there are some nice ideas in it, too. 

 

But it is in vain. WG says CVs are fine, so they are fine (lol). 

[Itwastuesday]

Well, you certainly thought about this. My question is with your ideas much the same as it is with the current CV and Submarines, "what does this class add to the game"?

[Karasu_Browarszky]

43 minutes ago, Itwastuesday said:

Well, you certainly thought about this. My question is with your ideas much the same as it is with the current CV and Submarines, "what does this class add to the game"?

 

New dimensions? 

[Grim_Destiny]

5 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

 

With regards to dog fighting with player control it is difficult as the planes are not moving 3d. So all we could probably do in the current model would be an attack animation similar to any other animation which would mean something similar to the old “strafe”. Not sure if that is a good solution. Making planes “dogfight” instead would mean to create entirely new flight mechanics. 
 

I can elaborate further on what I posted in the OP.

 

I don`t know anything about planes or air combat tactics so please bear that in mind when reading.

 

There are currently 3 distinct altitudes that can be exploited and combined with formations and attack animations to give the feeling of dogfighting without actually having to rewrite any of the game code. Air combat is only one of many interconnected parts, so anyone bothering to read this should consider reading the whole OP..:)

 

I`m envisioning 3 formations that each have 3 seperate available attack animations the player can choose (9 attack animations in total). In addition all squadrons can choose "scatter" which i`ll get back to.

 

Lets say your formation is a V made up of 3 or 4 VIC formations.

Your squadron is flying combat height and is intercepting another squadron.

Your available attack animations are:

Pincer - described in OP

Death from above - 

Strafe -

 

First you target lock the squadron you`re attacking. This points your squadron towards the center of the enemy formation, regardless of height difference. You click strafe and enter the attack run like torpedo bombers do. You boost towards the squadron , but you need at least 50% engine boost available to execute. When you execute, just like when torpedo bombers drop their torps, you enter a hands-off animation. The squadron boosts until it is 250 meters from target squadron and then everyone opens fire into a relatively small killbox. Afterwards you regain control of the squadron.

 

The squadron being attacked also has attack animations to choose from. The other player notices your squadron chasing and rather then boost himself to attempt an escape and re-engagement he changes his formation from three finger four to lets just call it zig zag formation. Now he can choose form

Immelman

Pukachev cobra - example of maneuver from another game: 

 

Flanking runs

 

He chooses pukachev and waits until your squadron is at 400 meters and then executes. Animation takes over and if he times it right, you`ll be executing your own maneuver just as you realize what he`s doing. Now his squadron ends up behind you and strafe your planes.

 

I don`t know how hard it is to animate all this, but it would give the feeling of dogfighting without actually changing how the game code operates.

 

Now for scatter:

All squadrons can scatter. When clicking scatter hotkey all planes in squadron will break formation in pairs and boost off in every direction and altitude.

You are automatically taken to the strategic map where you get a circle with diamater of 6km (center is where scatter was executed). When you click inside the circle, that is where the squadron with meet up again and you can either re-engage, return to carrier or go somewhere else.

 

 

 

5 hours ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

I LOVE the idea of the scramble slots. But the CV player needs some control about it otherwise idiots will deplete/misuse those and won't be effective.

 

 

I thought about what you said when i wrote up the post, but wasn`t sure how to balance it. My overall point was to slow down the squadron spammage from CVs and have them spend more time waiting for good opportunities, but having lots of other tasks they can perform to earn XP and help the team win.

 

One workaround could be to allow players to take control of the scramble squadrons, BUT any points, ribbons etc that are achieved using those by the CV player, are shared among all players on the team. So they can use them, but won`t get much XP from it. That way getting the 50-50 point share when an ally uses the scramble squadron, is a far more attractive alternative.

 

 

[arquata2019_]

6 minuti fa, Grim_Destiny ha scritto:

I can elaborate further on what I posted in the OP.

 

I don`t know anything about planes or air combat tactics so please bear that in mind when reading.

 

There are currently 3 distinct altitudes that can be exploited and combined with formations and attack animations to give the feeling of dogfighting without actually having to rewrite any of the game code. Air combat is only one of many interconnected parts, so anyone bothering to read this should consider reading the whole OP..:)

 

I`m envisioning 3 formations that each have 3 seperate available attack animations the player can choose (9 attack animations in total). In addition all squadrons can choose "scatter" which i`ll get back to.

 

Lets say your formation is a V made up of 3 or 4 VIC formations.

Your squadron is flying combat height and is intercepting another squadron.

Your available attack animations are:

Pincer - described in OP

Death from above - 

Strafe -

 

First you target lock the squadron you`re attacking. This points your squadron towards the center of the enemy formation, regardless of height difference. You click strafe and enter the attack run like torpedo bombers do. You boost towards the squadron , but you need at least 50% engine boost available to execute. When you execute, just like when torpedo bombers drop their torps, you enter a hands-off animation. The squadron boosts until it is 250 meters from target squadron and then everyone opens fire into a relatively small killbox. Afterwards you regain control of the squadron.

 

The squadron being attacked also has attack animations to choose from. The other player notices your squadron chasing and rather then boost himself to attempt an escape and re-engagement he changes his formation from three finger four to lets just call it zig zag formation. Now he can choose form

Immelman

Pukachev cobra - example of maneuver from another game: 

 

Flanking runs

 

He chooses pukachev and waits until your squadron is at 400 meters and then executes. Animation takes over and if he times it right, you`ll be executing your own maneuver just as you realize what he`s doing. Now his squadron ends up behind you and strafe your planes.

 

I don`t know how hard it is to animate all this, but it would give the feeling of dogfighting without actually changing how the game code operates.

 

Now for scatter:

All squadrons can scatter. When clicking scatter hotkey all planes in squadron will break formation in pairs and boost off in every direction and altitude.

You are automatically taken to the strategic map where you get a circle with diamater of 6km (center is where scatter was executed). When you click inside the circle, that is where the squadron with meet up again and you can either re-engage, return to carrier or go somewhere else.

 

 

 

 

I thought about what you said when i wrote up the post, but wasn`t sure how to balance it. My overall point was to slow down the squadron spammage from CVs and have them spend more time waiting for good opportunities, but having lots of other tasks they can perform to earn XP and help the team win.

 

One workaround could be to allow players to take control of the scramble squadrons, BUT any points, ribbons etc that are achieved using those by the CV player, are shared among all players on the team. So they can use them, but won`t get much XP from it. That way getting the 50-50 point share when an ally uses the scramble squadron, is a far more attractive alternative.

 

 

i would love planes   (not all because you know, more than 60 machine guns per squad against +60 machine guns match may lag a bit against planes) can fight eachother with our command, (excluding fighters) rocket planes can use machine guns same as all other type of planes (if it's too hard or too accurate to find the machine guns, just give them the fighter's one)

or that our dd/allies can take control of our fighter squadron to move it  *not to kamikaze them* for their liking or for helping each other or only themselves, fighters like (never played but know perfectly) RTS system where fighters could go anywhere and shot down any plane they want.

[1MajorKoenig]

45 minutes ago, Grim_Destiny said:

I can elaborate further on what I posted in the OP.

 

I don`t know anything about planes or air combat tactics so please bear that in mind when reading.

 

There are currently 3 distinct altitudes that can be exploited and combined with formations and attack animations to give the feeling of dogfighting without actually having to rewrite any of the game code. Air combat is only one of many interconnected parts, so anyone bothering to read this should consider reading the whole OP..:)

 

I`m envisioning 3 formations that each have 3 seperate available attack animations the player can choose (9 attack animations in total). In addition all squadrons can choose "scatter" which i`ll get back to.

 

Lets say your formation is a V made up of 3 or 4 VIC formations.

Your squadron is flying combat height and is intercepting another squadron.

Your available attack animations are:

Pincer - described in OP

Death from above - 

Strafe -

 

First you target lock the squadron you`re attacking. This points your squadron towards the center of the enemy formation, regardless of height difference. You click strafe and enter the attack run like torpedo bombers do. You boost towards the squadron , but you need at least 50% engine boost available to execute. When you execute, just like when torpedo bombers drop their torps, you enter a hands-off animation. The squadron boosts until it is 250 meters from target squadron and then everyone opens fire into a relatively small killbox. Afterwards you regain control of the squadron.

 

The squadron being attacked also has attack animations to choose from. The other player notices your squadron chasing and rather then boost himself to attempt an escape and re-engagement he changes his formation from three finger four to lets just call it zig zag formation. Now he can choose form

Immelman

Pukachev cobra - example of maneuver from another game: 

 

Flanking runs

 

He chooses pukachev and waits until your squadron is at 400 meters and then executes. Animation takes over and if he times it right, you`ll be executing your own maneuver just as you realize what he`s doing. Now his squadron ends up behind you and strafe your planes.

 

I don`t know how hard it is to animate all this, but it would give the feeling of dogfighting without actually changing how the game code operates.

 

Now for scatter:

All squadrons can scatter. When clicking scatter hotkey all planes in squadron will break formation in pairs and boost off in every direction and altitude.

You are automatically taken to the strategic map where you get a circle with diamater of 6km (center is where scatter was executed). When you click inside the circle, that is where the squadron with meet up again and you can either re-engage, return to carrier or go somewhere else.

 

 

 

 

I thought about what you said when i wrote up the post, but wasn`t sure how to balance it. My overall point was to slow down the squadron spammage from CVs and have them spend more time waiting for good opportunities, but having lots of other tasks they can perform to earn XP and help the team win.

 

One workaround could be to allow players to take control of the scramble squadrons, BUT any points, ribbons etc that are achieved using those by the CV player, are shared among all players on the team. So they can use them, but won`t get much XP from it. That way getting the 50-50 point share when an ally uses the scramble squadron, is a far more attractive alternative.

 

 

Other option would be to hijack the Sub mechanics of changing altitude for fighter planes and create a semi-3D movement for the fighters and give them a simple crosshair and machine guns (and limited ammo obviously)

 

EDIT: the proposal you make sounds a little like a card game 

[Perekotypole]

Vor 13 Stunden, Grim_Destiny sagte:

how to make the carrier an integral part of the team.

you've no idea how to play CVs, do you? CVs aren't that good at harrassing lone ships, but they are very good at killing ships that are under pressure from your teammates. It takes a long time for a CV to kill a DD in open water. But if your teammates can shoot her, all you have to do is spot, and your job at harrasing DD is done. Not to mention knowing where DD is gives your teammates a warning where from torpedoes might be coming. So there's a huge value in even briefly spotting enemy DDs. CVs are all about teamwork and that's why they are so overpowered. CV divisions are most nasty divisions you can meet.

[El2aZeR]

Quite frankly you are overcomplicating CV play to a point where it would make both the rework and RTS look highly popular.

[BanzaiPiluso]

What about a no CV mode? Et voila!

[MacFergus]

6 hours ago, Perekotypole said:

you've no idea how to play CVs, do you? CVs aren't that good at harrassing lone ships, but they are very good at killing ships that are under pressure from your teammates. It takes a long time for a CV to kill a DD in open water. But if your teammates can shoot her, all you have to do is spot, and your job at harrasing DD is done. Not to mention knowing where DD is gives your teammates a warning where from torpedoes might be coming. So there's a huge value in even briefly spotting enemy DDs. CVs are all about teamwork and that's why they are so overpowered. CV divisions are most nasty divisions you can meet.

Yes i do this i target DDs constantly for the first 5 mins of the game then CAs then BBs , It also stops DDs capping and they normally smoke up before getting into cap although some do make it.

 

20 hours ago, Grim_Destiny said:

While my suggestions are extensive, i have tried to stay true to the fact that is, afterall, an arcade game.

 

 

You have done a lot of thinking and hard work into your post , However i think you are over complicating the whole CV issue , All they really need is a set amount of squadrons and once they are gone that's it.

[arquata2019_]

i agree with you and read 1/3 of the file and all you writed (i'm busy rn) and i agree with you, even if this topic will get locked and sent to "general cv discussion" and even if you paste it there i never saw anything done about it...

[arquata2019_]

5 ore fa, El2aZeR ha scritto:

Quite frankly you are overcomplicating CV play to a point where it would make both the rework and RTS look highly popular.

with all those slots i agree with you also, but we always have to see it being used first.

hey @El2aZeR, do you want rts cvs back? (just a question btw)

[Grim_Destiny]

6 hours ago, Perekotypole said:

you've no idea how to play CVs, do you? CVs aren't that good at harrassing lone ships, but they are very good at killing ships that are under pressure from your teammates. It takes a long time for a CV to kill a DD in open water. But if your teammates can shoot her, all you have to do is spot, and your job at harrasing DD is done. Not to mention knowing where DD is gives your teammates a warning where from torpedoes might be coming. So there's a huge value in even briefly spotting enemy DDs. CVs are all about teamwork and that's why they are so overpowered. CV divisions are most nasty divisions you can meet.

You know just as well as I, that BBs moving away from allies are beyond friendly AA bubbles and you know (having 6000 battles) that is the point I am making. BBs moving away from allied AA support and going their own way does NOT preclude them from being engaged either. You know this as well.

 

As for the rest of your argument, you clearly know it`s highly situational. The utility of briefly spotting is not as clear cut as you make it out to be.

 

If I were to cover every situation and caveat my 11 page document would be 25 pages. I have to rely on experienced players understanding the nuances behind my comments and arguments.

 

I do agree that CVs should be all about teamwork, but most often they don`t play that way, because there are few incentives for it. Unless you are in a division with friends or clan mates.

 

 

5 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

Quite frankly you are overcomplicating CV play to a point where it would make both the rework and RTS look highly popular.

It is my goal to achieve both.

 

I want to combine what works now with what worked of the old system and then redo spotting and other systems to enforce greater cooperation, teamplay and more gameplay options for carrier players that do not require bombing other ships for XP. 

 

 

34 minutes ago, Winged_Cat_Dormant said:

What about a no CV mode? Et voila!

I think CVs are an important part of the game.

 

It`s a WWII naval warfare game. I feel it has to have CVs to be meaningful. I`m torn on submarines, but I do like the thought and they can work if implemented carefully and with great thought.

 

The case with CVs is to include them in a way that is balanced, offers something unique (DDs compared to BBs definately offer a unique playstyle and experience) and has something to offer the team. Right now the CVs, in my mind, don`t offer anything special or different enough to warrant having them in the game.

 

Currently the game works fine when CVs are not in the match. When you play a match without destroyers, you really miss having them around.

This very fact shows changes are required.

 

And the above is coming from someone who loves carriers and basically only play the game because of carriers. 

[arquata2019_]

10 minuti fa, Grim_Destiny ha scritto:

It`s a WWII naval warfare game. I feel it has to have CVs to be meaningful. I`m torn on submarines, but I do like the thought and they can work if implemented carefully and with great thought.

if cvs are balanced enough yes

[Bindolaf_Werebane]

OP props to you for taking the time to think and write such a post. Unfortunately:

 

1. Many of your suggestions are more suited to a simulator than an arcade game. 

 

2. RTS is not coming back,  whatever people may think (not to mention it wasn't much Verte than the rework).

 

3. A lot of the things you posted just... don't seem fun. I don't want to think of readiness, scramble times,  sorties and load-outs. Give me pew-pew!

[arquata2019_]

1 minuto fa, Bindolaf_Werebane ha scritto:

2. RTS is not coming back,  whatever people may think (not to mention it wasn't much Verte than the rework).

if only good people play rts cvs and they wipe out teams people play less

so they pay less

if everyone (even my cat) plays reworked cvs they can have a fun and engaging experience but people will certainly play a bit less

so they pay more (everyone plays cvs, so they pay for new premium cvs)

:(

2 minuti fa, Bindolaf_Werebane ha scritto:

3. A lot of the things you posted just... don't seem fun. I don't want to think of readiness, scramble times,  sorties and load-outs. Give me pew-pew!

never played the rts, but i want RTS back

 

2 minuti fa, Bindolaf_Werebane ha scritto:

1. Many of your suggestions are more suited to a simulator than an arcade game. 

as far as i read well yup (oh well, if this game turns into a simulator gave halland and smaland their missiles to pewpew aircraft even more)

don't ask me why i quoted your answer n2-n3-n1 lol