Proposal: enhanced CV Fighter mechanics

[1MajorKoenig]

Hi all,

 

lots of good discussion gets buried in the large CV thread / bin - for example an excellent suggestion by @El2aZeR on a better fighter model for CVs post rework. Hence I try to summarize it in a clean thread - hope you and WG will like it

 

 

1. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGE 

Make fighters part of your flight deck instead of the “afterthought” the current fighters are and change them in a way they become a tool to support the team against CV attacks instead of a cheap spotting consumable. Furthermore enhance the handling for the player.

 

 

2. CHANGED INGAME REPRESENTATION OF FIGHTERS

Firstly change fighters so they become like the rest of any planes and an actual part of the carrier’s flight deck. This means fighters get:

• HP like other planes, maybe similar to rocket planes
• speed like other planes - but no boost
• a squadron size
• deck space for this type
• Regeneration time like other planes 

 

This makes them “normal” planes as a first step. On top they get:

• “ammo” count: a certain amount of air-to-air ammo to be spent in aerial fights
• ”fuel” count: time the fighters can spend in the air before returning to the CV in seconds. This includes travelling to their assigned patrol area (“en route”)

sketch of fighter properties 

 

 

3. PUTTING FIGHTERS INTO ACTION

Rather than “dropping” fighter from a squadron out of the sky the CV player would assign a “patrol” area anywhere on the map - similar to the bird’s eye view we have when using a spotter plane - from the CV’s point of view. Deployment should work within known gameplay elements - eg. select squadron, get birds view presented on second press of squad button, place patrol area, eg like this:

 

 

Now what should happen next:

• fighter squadron takes off like any other squadron and begins travelling towards the assigned patrol area
• number of planes is subject to the usual availability rules (incl. regeneration)
• once the squadron arrives at the patrol area it will start circling and the fighter area is marked on the minimap

The fighter deployment view should be accessible from the CV hull or any squadron.

 

The patrol area should be larger than the current “consumable” Area - proposal would be twice the radius.
 

 

Open question: should the model allow for changing the patrol area while fighters are up in the air and within the “fuel” limit?

 

 

4. “HIGH ALTITUDE”

Fighters en route to their assigned patrol area fly higher than normal bombers (eg. like German DBs) - called “high altitude”. Special about “high” altitude:

• damage taken from AA clouds and AA DPS greatly reduced (eg. -80% - to be determined)
• No spotting of ships whatsoever 

 

Purpose is to prevent fighters from being exploited as cheap spotting help and let them focus on their actual task.

 

 

5. ENGAGING ENEMY PLANES 

Once the fighters take their patrol area any enemy plane entering the area will be engaged immediately. No delay like today. To engage the fighters however decent to normal altitude and are subject to all AA as per normal rules. 
 

Planes en route can engage as well but their patrol “vision” is greatly reduced (proposal 1/4 but to be determined).

 

This means fighters are pretty resilient to AA while en route or patrolling but they don’t spot. Once they engage the normal rules apply.

 

 

6. AI DOGFIGHT

Instead of simply “cancelling-out-each-other” the engaged planes perform an AI controlled dogfight. This could be relatively simple and similar to the auto dogfight from the RTS model.

 

It should be a bit less predictable like the current super-dull model though. 
 

Ammo and Fuel would be limited though. Once up fighters will evac.

 

The player can recall fighters even in a dogfight. Eg. select squadron, press “F” - normal rules would apply. Gain altitude, continue to take damage until “safe” altitude, return to CV.
 

 

7. RETURN TO CV

Fighters return to the CV if:

• fuel is consumed 
• ammo is consume
• player recalls fighters manually 

 

 

8. AOB / other considerations 

Bombers should receive AI rear gunners for rudimentary Defense against fighters

 

 

 

Closing remarks:

I always wanted fighters to be directly controllable with manual dogfighting but as it stands it doesn’t look like that would work well in the current model. Firstly it could create a lock down when the better player simply blows the other CV’s planes out of the air and secondly mitigation of damage is in the current model inferior to dealing damage. Meaning striking would be the more effective play style - somewhat defeating the purpose of manual fighters.

 

Regardless - the current fighter implementation is really poor. It feels like a complete afterthought while the team focussed on implementing the strike mechanics.

 

However some of us feel that there would be a relatively simple way to include fighters into the rest of the CV play properly and fix at the same time two more issue: being able to support the team closer with cover and remove the exploit that current fighters are misused as cheap spotting.

 

WG was relatively open to implement some additional improvements to the CV rework to address pressing shortcomings in the past year hence why I hope they will do something about fighters!!

 

 

So - dear WG - please take a look at some constructive discussions and proposals like this one and let us know what you think!

 

[1MajorKoenig]

Pinging:

 

@MrConway / @Crysantos / @Ev1n / @Sub_Octavian

[arquata2019_]

i. like. this.

ofc if wg wants this, but please wg, playerbase will give you even more money if you run @1MajorKoenig.exe!

no seriously, i really like the idea of strafing planes, fuel, etc

[Bindolaf_Werebane]

I like the idea of range, but all the rest is just... exhausting, OP. I appreciate the thought you out in this, but if I want to play that, I'll play IL-2 Sturmovik (with red Soviet mark of approval). I play WoWs for some pew pew, since tactics are put of the question. CVs are enough hard work right now, I don't need more "sim" in my game. 

[1MajorKoenig]

1 hour ago, Bindolaf_Werebane said:

I like the idea of range, but all the rest is just... exhausting, OP. I appreciate the thought you out in this, but if I want to play that, I'll play IL-2 Sturmovik (with red Soviet mark of approval). I play WoWs for some pew pew, since tactics are put of the question. CVs are enough hard work right now, I don't need more "sim" in my game. 

It wasn’t really supposed to be sim-heavy though... but thanks for the like anyway bud

 

1 hour ago, arquata2019 said:

i. like. this.

ofc if wg wants this, but please wg, playerbase will give you even more money if you run @1MajorKoenig.exe!

no seriously, i really like the idea of strafing planes, fuel, etc

Thanks dude!

 

I hope WG takes a look and thinks about fighters. I mean having something to support the team defensively would be great 

[arquata2019_]

@MrConway @El2aZeR is this idea approved? (i tag you two, but the latter seems smarter in cvs, sry conway, im being honest))))

[El2aZeR]

2 hours ago, arquata2019 said:

@MrConway @El2aZeR is this idea approved? (i tag you two, but the latter seems smarter in cvs, sry conway, im being honest))))

 

I have discussed it at length with @1MajorKoenig already and have nothing to add. It's a pretty good summary of what we talked about.

 

Unfortunately like all good feedback regarding CVs, regardless of RTS or rework, I'm afraid it will end up at the usual place.

 

[1MajorKoenig]

6 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

 

I have discussed it at length with @1MajorKoenig already and have nothing to add. It's a pretty good summary of what we talked about.

 

Unfortunately like all good feedback regarding CVs, regardless of RTS or rework, I'm afraid it will end up at the usual place.

 

It’s somehow sad if that’s the expectation of the players regarding their feedback - @MrConway

(EDIT: although the Gif is pretty funny)

 

Especially since there has been some back and forth on tuning and adjusting the (not so) new (anymore) CVs. The good part is that WG did actually continue working on CVs - so we would appreciate if the state of fighters would be reviewed 

 

At the very least some kind of reaction would be nice 

[arquata2019_]

Merry Christmas to you all, fellow forumites!

(i got something i wouldn't expect from a santa crate tho)

Spoiler

 

i spent 30 minutes figuring out how paint and paint 3d works, the image is very little, but i am learning it (i changed image without editing in one go, the image was way smaller)

[albin322]

2 hours ago, arquata2019 said:

Merry Christmas to you all, fellow forumites!

(i got something i wouldn't expect from a santa crate tho)

  Reveal hidden contents

 

i spent 30 minutes figuring out how paint and paint 3d works, the image is very little, but i am learning it (i changed image without editing in one go, the image was way smaller)

dude they are  on vecation they wont get back to this week and meaby not the next stop sapmming there names! 

[arquata2019_]

24 minuti fa, albin322 ha scritto:

dude they are  on vecation they wont get back to this week and meaby not the next stop sapmming there names! 

i know it's humoristic this post, what do you mean still? XD

[_HomTanks_]

@1MajorKoenig What you are missing is the general CV player skill (which they don't have) level. These changes may be logical for skilled CV players but the noob majority would get even worse in CVs with these changes. Unless your hidden agenda is to have less and less CV players and finally be left with handful of good players here and there, i don't see the point. 

[1MajorKoenig]

1 hour ago, Execute0rder66 said:

@1MajorKoenig What you are missing is the general CV player skill (which they don't have) level. These changes may be logical for skilled CV players but the noob majority would get even worse in CVs with these changes. Unless your hidden agenda is to have less and less CV players and finally be left with handful of good players here and there, i don't see the point. 

Fighters would still be AI so you wouldn’t necessarily be able to shut down anyone. Which indeed would be a problem 
 

But fighters would certainly be more tactically useful.

 

Basically they would lose something compared to today (spotting + and completely mindlessness in using them) but would gain something at the same time (some protection for your team). 
 

I wouldn’t say this concept would be very difficult or complex 

to use for the CV player. Maybe even a little more intuitive, no?

[_HomTanks_]

7 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Fighters would still be AI so you wouldn’t necessarily be able to shut down anyone. Which indeed would be a problem 
 

But fighters would certainly be more tactically useful.

 

Basically they would lose something compared to today (spotting + and completely mindlessness in using them) but would gain something at the same time (some protection for your team). 
 

I wouldn’t say this concept would be very difficult or complex 

to use for the CV player. Maybe even a little more intuitive, no?

I personally like the concept and if they will be AI controlled then it doesn’t matter much I guess (Don’t get me wrong, I am with the idea of getting rid of all tato  cv players if possible).

[arquata2019_]

11 minuti fa, Execute0rder66 ha scritto:

I personally like the concept and if they will be AI controlled then it doesn’t matter much I guess (Don’t get me wrong, I am with the idea of getting rid of all tato  cv players if possible).

so you want me dead?

[1MajorKoenig]

So @MrConway - Hope everyone is fresh and full of energy back from new year’s celebrations!

 

Is anyone from WG going to check this proposal or is it indeed going:

 

?

[hypsar]

love how eagerly wg/lesta has responded ...

did you include the way how it makes money for them? if not then they didn't even read it. 2 latter ones for sure ... and 2 first ones don't have a place at the table

its far easier to print new copy/paste prem ship ffs

[Prophecy82]

Good Luck with it @1MajorKoenig!

I hope they dont ignore you and you dont get the same answer as Fara did while Reeeework was still in testing: "Nope". 

But I doubt it....

 

Especially since "CVs are in a good spot" as it was stated in the last Q&A.

[MrConway]

23 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

So @MrConway - Hope everyone is fresh and full of energy back from new year’s celebrations!

 

Is anyone from WG going to check this proposal or is it indeed going:

 

?

 

We'll have a look, but direct control of fighter planes was never intended to be part of the CV rework and would require a major undertaking to get to work in a balanced way.

 

Thanks for reaching out though!

[lovelacebeer]

It’s a very interesting idea and certainly would be an improvement on what we have now, but I won’t hold my breath sadly WG appear to have no interest in anything resembling interest in what’s said here or anywhere else. 

[1MajorKoenig]

On 1/5/2021 at 10:05 AM, MrConway said:

 

We'll have a look, but direct control of fighter planes was never intended to be part of the CV rework and would require a major undertaking to get to work in a balanced way.

 

Thanks for reaching out though!

Hey Mr C - now that we got a chance to test the air superiority build after the captain skill rework - and it doesn’t seem viable - did you look at this proposal? Any chance for you to look at fighters from a little higher flight level (see what I did here)

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

On 1/5/2021 at 10:05 AM, MrConway said:

direct control of fighter planes was never intended to be part of the CV rework 

 

For good reason, as before the rework good CV players would simply de-plane bad CV players with their powerful fighters and hence take the unavoidable skill gap even further, to ridiculous levels. 

 

It would still be cool if Fighters in the rework would be a little more interesting to use though. They don't have to be incredibly powerful again, but it's a bit sad to see them almost useless either, because it's basically the only interaction between the two CV players. :) 

[1MajorKoenig]

3 minutes ago, __Helmut_Kohl__ said:

 

For good reason, as before the rework good CV players would simply de-plane bad CV players with their powerful fighters and hence take the unavoidable skill gap even further, to ridiculous levels. 

 

It would still be cool if Fighters in the rework would be a little more interesting to use though. They don't have to be incredibly powerful again, but it's a bit sad to see them almost useless either, because it's basically the only interaction between the two CV players. :) 

Exactly. We can’t have manual fighters - it creates more problems than it solves.

 

But making them more like the rest of planes and add a little here and there as proposed it would make the interaction more interesting 

[Pikkozoikum]

Point 6 is is actually my favorite. Overall it soudns a bit like of mix between RTS fighter and current design. I like "simulating" stats, stats like ammo, fuel etc.

Most sounds logically, though I guess, it's a too complex design for Wargaming

I think in the case for fighters, they won't add new mechanics, onyl adjust stats. Or in other words, they won't put much money into development of a new system. But that's just my assumption^^

[1MajorKoenig]

47 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

Point 6 is is actually my favorite. Overall it soudns a bit like of mix between RTS fighter and current design. I like "simulating" stats, stats like ammo, fuel etc.

Most sounds logically, though I guess, it's a too complex design for Wargaming

I think in the case for fighters, they won't add new mechanics, onyl adjust stats. Or in other words, they won't put much money into development of a new system. But that's just my assumption^^

Not even sure if it requires massive developments to get this part going. Certainly it would feel more “natural” if your fighters would be part of your deck and I think it is a fair request to make them more useable.

 

Especially since the Fighter builds after the skill rework are more of a funny joke than anything useful