Hybrids, how CV rework should have been..

[affie]

This might be a controversial subject, but I hope we can have a discussion about the flaws and what can be done to bring CV back to balance. Hear me out.

 

I recently got myself an Ise since I thought it looked like an interesting ship, a Kongo which traded mobility for flexibility. From the look of it (youtube-videos) it looked like the Ise had the same plane-mechanic as I and others suggested way back during the CV rework so I felt I had to give it a go.

 

Now I have played some battles in her and it feels just as I imagined back when I suggested this kind of mechanic, like an evolution of the capital ship using "controllable armaments" with longer reload time than the battleships it replaced.

 

You have to decide whether to scout or strike, your ship is susceptible for fire/flooding damage so you might have to abort strike and return to the ship to use damage control or heal and you can use extra planes in your squadron to mitigate AA-damage, if you lose a plane, you lose equal amount of striking ability for that strike. 

 

I would love for WG to try this mechanic on a testbed-CV and evaluate whether to carry out a "CV rework 2.0".

 

I believe this mechanic together with some kind of division limit of one ship per class or one ship per type, i.e you can't division with 2 pcs of same ship (for example 2 Klebers) or 2 pcs of same type (for example 2 battleships).

 

What do you think, could the hybrid-playstyle balance the CV-class?

[Isoruku_Yamamoto]

Exactly what aspect here is different from regular CVs then?

[geschlittert]

5 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

Exactly what aspect here is different from regular CVs then?

You shooting down planes actually limit the alpha strike. An FDR can lose 10/12 planes and still have the same alpha strike

[affie]

8 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

Exactly what aspect here is different from regular CVs then?

 

Below is what I found, but am sure someone else can find more stuff.

 

16 minutes ago, affie said:

You have to decide whether to scout or strike, your ship is susceptible for fire/flooding damage so you might have to abort strike and return to the ship to use damage control or heal and you can use extra planes in your squadron to mitigate AA-damage, if you lose a plane, you lose equal amount of striking ability for that strike. 

 

And to add to it you could remove the "scouting fighters"-consumable and allow for CV to have a plane type called interceptor where you actively can fly around and carry out attacks versus enemy planes.

 

Old CVs had multiple squadrons and most other classes have at least 3 armaments and multiple consumables, I can't see the problem in CV having maybe 4-5 different types of planes if used as armaments as on the hybrid-class if they have to manage repair and heal similar to the rest of us.

[Isoruku_Yamamoto]

6 minutes ago, geschlittert said:

You shooting down planes actually limit the alpha strike. An FDR can lose 10/12 planes and still have the same alpha strike

What people tend to overlook is just how easy it is to deplane post-rework CVs, its just that they dont deplane entirely. But losing 12 aircraft in FDR means he wont even be able to fly with a full squad after that. Yes, he can gwt single wings to attack, but have you ever tried using an actual CV with only single attack wings?

Would require a lot of changes, i think the main reason they didnt do that is cause a CV then would never be able to keep up with the pace of the game.

It would require doubling- tripling CV strike alpha i think, even for the FDR, to remotely balance the duration of one attack run out

[MementoMori_6030]

Vor 33 Minuten, affie sagte:

a Kongo

Nope, the Ise class was an evolution over the preceding Fuso class. The Kongos were battlecruisers-turned-fast battleships.

Zitat

with longer reload time than the battleships it replaced

It replaced no battleships. It was an additional class and part of the Eight-Eight-Fleet program.

Zitat

What do you think, could the hybrid-playstyle balance the CV-class?

Nothing can balance plane spammers which are not meant to be anywhere near the actual battle. WG would have to increase the time between strikes to enormous amounts, at which point even the most hardcore griefer would lose interest in his near-invulnerable plane factory. Regarding the hybrids, a mirrored MM and hard cap are definitely needed, as well as a notable increase in air strike replenishment time.

[Bratoev]

47 minutes ago, affie said:

And to add to it you could remove the "scouting fighters"-consumable and allow for CV to have a plane type called interceptor where you actively can fly around and carry out attacks versus enemy planes.

They already have Interceptors, you just have to build your captain for them.

 

Also how do you balance the speed and damage of player controlled interceptors and how useful they would be if the red CV decided to strike the other flank where you could not possibly respond in time? 

[Beastofwar]

All for additions to CV, so adding air supriority fighters is always a good idea. But removing stuff that is in game. No.

 

Hybrids are not CV and CV are not hybrids.

 

Although i would like CV to have player controlled and accuarate 10 km secondary guns ( approx the gun power of 3 DD's per side ) so they look more like hybrids......that would be nice.

 

 

[lovelacebeer]

The one thing I do like from OPs suggestion is that CVs would be susceptible to fire and flood again, back in the mists of time before the great rework we had a Captain skill to allow you to still launch planes even if your flight deck was on fire (albeit at a slower rate). 

 

I always liked this thinking it meant you ran a risk being closer to the action and also had to plan around were you the kind of player who was likely to want to keep a bit further forward. 

 

However WG have made it pretty clear they don’t think CV players are capable of controlling their own ships anymore.

[totally_potato]

48 minutes ago, MementoMori_6030 said:

Nope, the Ise class was an evolution over the preceding Fuso class. The Kongos were battlecruisers-turned-fast battleships.

It replaced no battleships. It was an additional class and part of the Eight-Eight-Fleet program.

Nothing can balance plane spammers which are not meant to be anywhere near the actual battle. WG would have to increase the time between strikes to enormous amounts, at which point even the most hardcore griefer would lose interest in his near-invulnerable plane factory. Regarding the hybrids, a mirrored MM and hard cap are definitely needed, as well as a notable increase in air strike replenishment time.

The only thing that Ise and other upcoming hybrids need, is a limit to the number in a div. The individual ship isn't that strong. Pretty easy to deal with it in my experience with a BB.

[Bindolaf_Werebane]

I like how everyone is ranting about CVs being broken (they are), but then "oooh, Ise! It's great and such balanced mechanics and interesting gimmicks". How quickly the "I didn't sign up to play warplanes" argument crumbled...

 

As for the OP, "You have to decide whether to scout or strike, your ship is susceptible for fire/flooding damage so you might have to abort strike and return to the ship to use damage control or heal and you can use extra planes in your squadron to mitigate AA-damage, if you lose a plane, you lose equal amount of striking ability for that strike"

 

This literally describes CV play. I personally wouldn't care for manual interceptors, manual secondaries or anything like that.

[Beastofwar]

2 hours ago, lovelacebeer said:

The one thing I do like from OPs suggestion is that CVs would be susceptible to fire and flood again, back in the mists of time before the great rework we had a Captain skill to allow you to still launch planes even if your flight deck was on fire (albeit at a slower rate). 

 

I always liked this thinking it meant you ran a risk being closer to the action and also had to plan around were you the kind of player who was likely to want to keep a bit further forward. 

 

However WG have made it pretty clear they don’t think CV players are capable of controlling their own ships anymore.

 

It would not be fair because CV players are away from ship 98 % of all time, and Ise players would use the ability ~10 % of the time ( if they know what they are doing ) as using the planes comes instead of main gun damage.

 

That is exactly why CV have auto-damage control and Ise does not.

 

But i would like to give up auto-damage control for 10-11 km accurate player direct controlled secondaries so i can kill attacking DD reliably with guns......That way a CV can be controlled like a hybrid, and more look like a hybrid too. Take some give some.

 

 

[lovelacebeer]

7 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

 

It would not be fair because CV players are away from ship 98 % of all time, and Ise players would use the ability 10 % of the time ( if they know what they are doing ) as using the planes comes instread of main gun damage.

 

That is exactly why CV have auto-damage control and Ise does not.

 

But as i said i would like to give up auto-damage control for 10 km accurate player controlled swcondaries so i can kill DD reliably with guns......so a CV can be controlled like a hybrid as well.

 

 

 

Admittedly I virtually stopped playing CVs after the rework as I don’t like the play style however it wasn’t difficult before in the RTS days to keep aware of your ship and your planes.

 

Honestly I find the attitude of WG that rework players cannot manage switching between controlling their planes and ship  extremely patronising.

[Bindolaf_Werebane]

10 minutes ago, lovelacebeer said:

 

Admittedly I virtually stopped playing CVs after the rework as I don’t like the play style however it wasn’t difficult before in the RTS days to keep aware of your ship and your planes.

 

Honestly I find the attitude of WG that rework players cannot manage switching between controlling their planes and ship  extremely patronising.

It's a nerf. Autopilot has killed me more times than other ships. All the automation is there to ensure balans.

[ghostbuster_]

1 hour ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

What people tend to overlook is how easy   it is just impossible is to deplane post-rework CVs,

 

there fixed it for you. 

 

or

1 hour ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

What people tend to overlook is just how easy it is to deplane post pre-rework CVs,

this. 

the orginal post wasnt true. 

 

[_Lupastro_]

30 minuti fa, Beastofwar ha scritto:

 

It would not be fair because CV players are away from ship 98 % of all time, and Ise players would use the ability ~10 % of the time ( if they know what they are doing ) as using the planes comes instread of main gun damage.

 

That is exactly why CV have auto-damage control and Ise does not.

 

But i would like to give up auto-damage control for 10-11 km accurate player direct controlled secondaries so i can kill attacking DD reliably with guns......That way a CV can be controlled like a hybrid, and more look like a hybrid too. Take some give some.

 

 

Your strenuous CV defense is moving
I'd also suggest to give them radar and hydro.

[ghostbuster_]

34 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

But i would like to give up auto-damage control for 10-11 km accurate player direct controlled secondaries so i can kill attacking DD reliably with guns......That way a CV can be controlled like a hybrid, and more look like a hybrid too. Take some give some.

 

 

again... you and your secondaries.  if you are in a CV and if you cant kill a DD with your planes which is 10 km away from your ship, maybe you should stop playing CVs?

 

this guy might be the pinnacle of incompetence.

[El2aZeR]

2 hours ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

What people tend to overlook is just how easy it is to deplane post-rework CVs

 

You're joking, right?

[Beastofwar]

49 minutes ago, _Lupastro_ said:

I'd also suggest to give them radar and hydro.

 

Would not be too far out for late or post WWII planes when taking realism into account.....

 

But the smoke hiding DD players would freak out.....

[arttuperkunas]

4 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

 

Would not be too far out for late or post WWII planes when taking realism into account.....

 

But the smoke hiding DD players would freak out.....

UK planes quite widely used radar from the mid war onward, and even "hydro" (i.e. sonobuoy) saw limited use. Of course, this has pretty much nothing to do with whether planes should have hydro or radar in WOWS. If we went that route, most allied battleships and cruisers would have radar.

[Beastofwar]

1 minute ago, arttuperkunas said:

UK planes quite widely used radar from the mid war onward, and even "hydro" (i.e. sonobuoy) saw limited use. Of course, this has pretty much nothing to do with whether planes should have hydro or radar in WOWS. If we went that route, most allied battleships and cruisers would have radar.

Yup

[affie]

2 hours ago, Beastofwar said:

 

It would not be fair because CV players are away from ship 98 % of all time, and Ise players would use the ability ~10 % of the time ( if they know what they are doing ) as using the planes comes instread of main gun damage.

 

That is exactly why CV have auto-damage control and Ise does not.

 

But i would like to give up auto-damage control for 10-11 km accurate player direct controlled secondaries so i can kill attacking DD reliably with guns......That way a CV can be controlled like a hybrid, and more look like a hybrid too. Take some give some.

 

 

I agree with you, since WG said during rework that CV players get bored by waiting 1 minute until they can launch their plane at the start if each battle etc, why not allow manual secondaries when you control the ship, similar to a very sluggish Atlanta at tier 10 or something to compensate as you mention.

 

It would also promite aggressive positioning of the CV to allow for faster strikes since you will reach your target faster.

[Makoniel]

5 hours ago, MementoMori_6030 said:

Nope, the Ise class was an evolution over the preceding Fuso class. The Kongos were battlecruisers-turned-fast battleships.

It's not about the ship, it's about the game design. It's "A Kongo" because you basically have the same 4x2 356 armament as the Kongo, one tier higher. 

 

[LemonadeWarriorITA]

7 hours ago, lovelacebeer said:

 

Admittedly I virtually stopped playing CVs after the rework as I don’t like the play style however it wasn’t difficult before in the RTS days to keep aware of your ship and your planes.

 

Honestly I find the attitude of WG that rework players cannot manage switching between controlling their planes and ship  extremely patronising.

Since when does WG do what the public wants? 
They are unable to do it, so that’s why they don’t put it in. They also need a note on how to breath otherwise the managers wouldn’t be able to cope with the difficult mechanism and die.

They are only patronising their own disability.

[Beastofwar]

1 hour ago, LemonadeWarriorITA said:

Since when does WG do what the FORUMS public wants? 

 

A  good part of the forums population come here only to complain. There is also a small but consistent core of almost professional mewlers.

 

The vast majority of the games players just play the game, enjoy it and never come in these forums.  The game is created for them.