Carriers: low risk/high reward game play style need to change

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

Aircraft carriers are the ships with the greatest surface area IRL which translated means that they are the ships that can be observed the furthest away however in WoWS they have smaller surface area than small cruisers and can launch wave after strike aircraft within gun range of cruisers and destroyers completely undetected and thus can not be engaged due to a combination of their own high speed and some absurd game detection mechanism when doing a stern or low angle chase - in effect making them near invincible under normal game circumstances when dealing with non CV classes of ships.

 

As it is now CV play on Tier VII and above is low risk high reward for those and in the hands of mediocre and above CV players their strike aircraft can and will completely cripple or sink all but the largest of battleships in one attack - especially the use of 2 or more TB squadrons against 1 ship in a manual short range two pronged attack from which there is no escape no matter what class of ship the target is extremely frustrating and unbalanced compared to every other class of ship, espcially so when the risk of making such an attack is nil to the CV players own ship.

To be honest I find that CVs are currently worse for the game than arty have ever been in WoT because arty are at least balanced by having bad mobility and bad camo value the higher the tier making it risiker and riskier to play arty the higher the tier, however in WoWS CVs are blessed with both excellent speed and camo value which creates a game meta for CVs that are completely different from all other classes in which they are able to make massive amounts of damage without having to fear retalliation from non CV ships.

Carrier sniping is currently the only reliably way of dealing with enemy carriers however that only further enhances the surviving CV players low risk/high reward style of play as he/she will be completely unchallenged,

The problem with CV TB squadron attacks is not the turn rate of their targets but the non RNG element of the attack run; the torpedo spread is perfectly aimed, alligned and timed with no random distribution of individual torpedoes and the aircraft can perform manuevres and make attacks from heights and by making popup attacks from islands and hills they would not be able to do IRL which makes a manual TB attack a skill based only action - the better the player the higher the damage however that is completely different from all other classes ships with the exception of launching ship borne torpedoes where RNG is a considerable and balancing element that prevents players from one shotting each other every salvo. 

 

In order to curb the CV's low risk/high reward style of play to a high risk/high reward one several issues have to be addressed:

 

-The CV's camo values  have to be nerfed to the worst of all classes of ships as they are the largest class of ships so that their chance of detection and destruction increases to the point where the CV players will have to spend at least just as much time looking for enemy ships hunting them as they spend on attacking enemy ships in order to remain afloat.  

 

-The number and makeup of squadrons also needs to be reduced and changed so that it will not be possible to have more than 2 TB squadrons in the air at the same time, preferebly only 1 squadron of each type but with a larger amount of aircraft in each squadron so that they retain the same number of active aircrafts availble as before only now in lesser aquadrons. 

 

- And/Or the TBs formation will have to be random and the torpedo spread random in order to lower the maximum number of hits possible

 

- When engaged by AA squadrons should always be using  the largest and least effective formation and torpedo spread.

 

- No torpedo attack when attacking over a landmass should be possible within at least 2 km of the landmass so that island/hill popup will not be possible.

 

- Increase the turn radius of all strike aircraft so that they will have a harder time enganging highly mobile targets

 

-When making torpedo attacks at extremely close range the torpedobombers will have to pass over their targets so that will have to subjected to more AA fire and thus an increased risk of losing aircraft making close drops a high cost/high reward style of play.

 

It is simply not fun to play when you get jumped by a wing of TB squadrons even when protected by a screen of CAs knowing that even if you begin to take evasive maneuvres when you spot the incoming squadrons you will at least take half your ships HP in damage no matter how well you turn and writhe in the failed attempt of dodging torpedoes dropped 500m from each side of your bow and to be quite honest I have to bite my hand not to call good CV players for [Edited] but then I remember that they are good players who in reality is just exploiting faulty and unbalanced game mechanics that massively favours that class of ships and I just push 'Return to port' without saying anything

 

IMHO I can't see how CVs can be equally balanced to all other classes of ships in this game without making massive changes to core game mechanics such as removing the detection system so that every player will have to spot their targets for themselves and the only ships visible on the minimap is one own's side and on screen the player will have to lock on the ship to make a positive ID of the enemy, that will force the CVs to.perform aerial reconnaisance in order to find their targets and they can never be sure where the targets will be when their strike aircraft reaches their target's last know position.

[Takeda92]

Get in with the times dude, the carriers in the last 3 patches received nothing but nerf. 

They already took the ability of IJN carriers to oneshot ships by nerfing the spread.. you can only land 1 out of 4 torps on a stationary target..on moving targets? 2 if you are lucky. Some high tier carriers also got they damage nerfed significantly.

They nerfed the distance the planes have to travel to drop torps and nerfed the turning circles of carrier to be the worst of all ships.

 

I suggest you start reading the patch notes, play your ship properly and stop making new whine threads... there are already tons of these thread so use the search option and stop bothering us with new threads please!

[OpCentar]

Well the camo on carriers is broken yes, I mean from 10km they are invisible while planes land on them? but having worst camo of all is a bit too much.

 

Give them the same or slightly better camo than BBs, they are supposed to move in order increase their survivability... they sure got the speed for it.

 

They didn't fix shooting torps trough islands? I think AA can still shoot down planes trough solid objects but both of those things should be fixed.

 

The rest is not necessary.

 

 

 

 

[NGC227]

This is simply madness, every day there is a guy who dont play cvs at all, asking for nerfs, at the end of that crazy bashing nobody will go for cvs lines, maybe just remove them from the game will be more simple then balancing them.

 

atomskytten, on 14 June 2015 - 05:31 PM, said:

Aircraft carriers are the ships with the greatest surface area IRL which translated means that they are the ships that can be observed the furthest away however in WoWS they have smaller surface area than small cruisers and can launch wave after strike aircraft within gun range of cruisers and destroyers completely undetected and thus can not be engaged due to a combination of their own high speed and some absurd game detection mechanism when doing a stern or low angle chase - in effect making them near invincible under normal game circumstances when dealing with non CV classes of ships.

 

As it is now CV play on Tier VII and above is low risk high reward for those and in the hands of mediocre and above CV players their strike aircraft can and will completely cripple or sink all but the largest of battleships in one attack - especially the use of 2 or more TB squadrons against 1 ship in a manual short range two pronged attack from which there is no escape no matter what class of ship the target is extremely frustrating and unbalanced compared to every other class of ship, espcially so when the risk of making such an attack is nil to the CV players own ship.

To be honest I find that CVs are currently worse for the game than arty have ever been in WoT because arty are at least balanced by having bad mobility and bad camo value the higher the tier making it risiker and riskier to play arty the higher the tier, however in WoWS CVs are blessed with both excellent speed and camo value which creates a game meta for CVs that are completely different from all other classes in which they are able to make massive amounts of damage without having to fear retalliation from non CV ships.

Carrier sniping is currently the only reliably way of dealing with enemy carriers however that only further enhances the surviving CV players low risk/high reward style of play as he/she will be completely unchallenged,

The problem with CV TB squadron attacks is not the turn rate of their targets but the non RNG element of the attack run; the torpedo spread is perfectly aimed, alligned and timed with no random distribution of individual torpedoes and the aircraft can perform manuevres and make attacks from heights and by making popup attacks from islands and hills they would not be able to do IRL which makes a manual TB attack a skill based only action - the better the player the higher the damage however that is completely different from all other classes ships with the exception of launching ship borne torpedoes where RNG is a considerable and balancing element that prevents players from one shotting each other every salvo. 

 

In order to curb the CV's low risk/high reward style of play to a high risk/high reward one several issues have to be addressed:

 

-The CV's camo values  have to be nerfed to the worst of all classes of ships as they are the largest class of ships so that their chance of detection and destruction increases to the point where the CV players will have to spend at least just as much time looking for enemy ships hunting them as they spend on attacking enemy ships in order to remain afloat.  

 

-The number and makeup of squadrons also needs to be reduced and changed so that it will not be possible to have more than 2 TB squadrons in the air at the same time, preferebly only 1 squadron of each type but with a larger amount of aircraft in each squadron so that they retain the same number of active aircrafts availble as before only now in lesser aquadrons. 

 

- And/Or the TBs formation will have to be random and the torpedo spread random in order to lower the maximum number of hits possible

 

- When engaged by AA squadrons should always be using  the largest and least effective formation and torpedo spread.

 

- No torpedo attack when attacking over a landmass should be possible within at least 2 km of the landmass so that island/hill popup will not be possible.

 

- Increase the turn radius of all strike aircraft so that they will have a harder time enganging highly mobile targets

 

-When making torpedo attacks at extremely close range the torpedobombers will have to pass over their targets so that will have to subjected to more AA fire and thus an increased risk of losing aircraft making close drops a high cost/high reward style of play.

 

It is simply not fun to play when you get jumped by a wing of TB squadrons even when protected by a screen of CAs knowing that even if you begin to take evasive maneuvres when you spot the incoming squadrons you will at least take half your ships HP in damage no matter how well you turn and writhe in the failed attempt of dodging torpedoes dropped 500m from each side of your bow and to be quite honest I have to bite my hand not to call good CV players for (edited) but then I remember that they are good players who in reality is just exploiting faulty and unbalanced game mechanics that massively favours that class of ships and I just push 'Return to port' without saying anything

 

IMHO I can't see how CVs can be equally balanced to all other classes of ships in this game without making massive changes to core game mechanics such as removing the detection system so that every player will have to spot their targets for themselves and the only ships visible on the minimap is one own's side and on screen the player will have to lock on the ship to make a positive ID of the enemy, that will force the CVs to.perform aerial reconnaisance in order to find their targets and they can never be sure where the targets will be when their strike aircraft reaches their target's last know position.

 

[Sharana]

Montana:

Detection from surface: 17.8km

Detection from air: 16.1km

Turning radius: 950m

 

Hakuryu:

Detection from surface: 15.7km

Detection from air: 14.3km

Turning radius: 1250m

 

What's wrong with that exactly?

 

About the rest like RNG, huge squadron and so on - sure why not, but how about those 27K damage torps showed on the PT server? You have to balance it out, because now it's not very far from how it should be in terms of damage. If you want that CV can't sink your BB for 20 minutes - I'm sorry you are in the wrong game. Some other - singleplayer with cheats will be better choice.

[Takeda92]

Montana:

Detection from surface: 17.8km

Detection from air: 16.1km

 

Hakuryu

Detection from surface: 15.7km

Detection from air: 14.3km

 

What's wrong with that exactly?

 

You should add the turning circles for these two.

[OpCentar]

Is that stationary detection or moving? I know it isn't linear across the tiers CV-BB detection ranges as I can spot a Kongo much farther away than a Bogue.

[Vanhal]

Now i'm starting to get curious again.

I guess it's time for my 12th game in a CV.

Bogue or Hosho, what do you recommend?

[Sharana]

Is that stationary detection or moving? I know it isn't linear across the tiers CV-BB detection ranges as I can spot a Kongo much farther away than a Bogue.

 

There is no difference between moving or not, it's not WoT, no bushes here.

 

Bogue is not large fleet carrier, it's small escort carrier. It's detection range is 10.1km with 16.2km for Kongo.

[OpCentar]

Yeah no bushes but rather giant smoke stacks puffing out black smoke while running full speed ahead...

 

In any case, at lower tiers that camo is too good. I mean if a cruiser makes the wrong turn he will not spot the carrier in open waters... a minute later he gets jumped by bombers and sunk.

[Deckeru_Maiku]

... maybe just remove them from the game will be more simple then balancing them.

 

I don't think it will be easy to remove these people from the game, 'though ot would of course help a lot.

[TomBombardil]

Hey atomskytten

 

I wanted to bring this topic under your atention "Skill in the CV class" As i elaborate certain points addressed in this totopic in it as well as comment this/you directly.

 

 

To atomskytten

• As many have said before me. Play the class before you post one sided (receiving) essays.
• Read Section “enemy movement & skill” of my original topic
• Torp over land masses:
  • see point 1.
  • Than you should also implement risk of hiding there, shallows/risk of flooding
  • Implement different arm range instead of approaches range will address this a little.
• CV = hard BB counter
• The ship itself is already really bad (as it should be)

 

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

Hey atomskytten

 

I wanted to bring this topic under your atention "Skill in the CV class" As i elaborate certain points addressed in this totopic in it as well as comment this/you directly.

 

 

To atomskytten

• As many have said before me. Play the class before you post one sided (receiving) essays.
• Read Section “enemy movement & skill” of my original topic
• Torp over land masses:
  • see point 1.
  • Than you should also implement risk of hiding there, shallows/risk of flooding
  • Implement different arm range instead of approaches range will address this a little.
• CV = hard BB counter
• The ship itself is already really bad (as it should be)

 

Well playing on the receiving end and looking at your CV stats which clearly shows that you consistently overperform in that class compared to all other classes in average and peak damage in addition to the much better survival rate is enough to be objectively able to tell that CVs are Low risk/High reward and OP at the present state so your remark with regards to my low numbers of games in CVs is really not valid, as for the other points I agree. Also if CVs aren't OP then there wouldn't be a maximum of 2 per team and no allowance for CV platoons - it's really quite obvious that if CVs were balanced equally with all other classes there wouldn't be a need to have a team and platoon cap on their numbers.

 

To reiterate: the problem is not bad CV dirvers the problem is the mediocre and above that will consistently influence the battle far above any other single non CV ship on their team which makes the class as whole OP that needs to be rebalanced so it performs equally to all other classes in damage dealing potential and survival which requires CVs to have their effective DPM lowered and ship detection and destruction chance increased. 

[NGC227]

Well playing on the receiving end and looking at your CV stats which clearly shows that you consistently overperform in that class compared to all other classes in average and peak damage in addition to the much better survival rate is enough to be objectively able to tell that CVs are Low risk/High reward and OP at the present state so your remark with regards to my low numbers of games in CVs is really not valid, as for the other points I agree. Also if CVs aren't OP then there wouldn't be a maximum of 2 per team and no allowance for CV platoons - it's really quite obvious that if CVs were balanced equally with all other classes there wouldn't be a need to have a team and platoon cap on their numbers.

 

To reiterate: the problem is not bad CV dirvers the problem is the mediocre and above that will consistently influence the battle far above any other single non CV ship on their team which makes the class as whole OP that needs to be rebalanced so it performs equally to all other classes in damage dealing potential and survival which requires CVs to have their effective DPM lowered and ship detection and destruction chance increased. 

 

 No comment, except i'm gonna sell my essex before he was totally destroyed by the incoming nerfs (shokaku is already selled)

[PhantomVyper]

To reiterate: the problem is not bad CV dirvers the problem is the mediocre and above that will consistently influence the battle far above any other single non CV ship on their team which makes the class as whole OP that needs to be rebalanced so it performs equally to all other classes in damage dealing potential and survival which requires CVs to have their effective DPM lowered and ship detection and destruction chance increased. 

 

Lets look at this premise of yours, shall we, you are a mediocre player, if we check your results, we can see that in carriers you have the following average damage:

 

Langley: 19.168

Bogue: 11.022

 

Now if we check the results for your other Tier IV classes, we can see:

 

Myogi: 24.901

Wyoming: 31.413

Kuma: 20.715

Yubari: 23.357

Phoenix: 24.416

Isokaze: 21.353

Clemson: 16.609

 

I'm not even going to bother posting your Tier V results, because your performance in the Bogue is abysmally bad.

 

Now, out of all the ships that you played, only in one did you perform worse than with a carrier. If they are so "low risk high reward" and if "mediocre players" can influence the battle so much in them out of kilt with their own individual worth, then why did you perform so badly? Where are your results showing that even a mediocre player can achieve such great results piloting carriers?

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

 

Lets look at this premise of yours, shall we, you are a mediocre player, if we check your results, we can see that in carriers you have the following average damage:

 

Langley: 19.168

Bogue: 11.022

 

Now if we check the results for your other Tier IV classes, we can see:

 

Myogi: 24.901

Wyoming: 31.413

Kuma: 20.715

Yubari: 23.357

Phoenix: 24.416

Isokaze: 21.353

Clemson: 16.609

 

I'm not even going to bother posting your Tier V results, because your performance in the Bogue is abysmally bad.

 

Now, out of all the ships that you played, only in one did you perform worse than with a carrier. If they are so "low risk high reward" and if "mediocre players" can influence the battle so much in them out of kilt with their own individual worth, then why did you perform so badly? Where are your results showing that even a mediocre player can achieve such great results piloting carriers?

 

I'm a bad player? I have never played the Bogus so it must be the Independance I guess, however it do nothing to refute my statement.

[morpheuss]

Aircraft carriers are the ships with the greatest surface area IRL which translated means that they are the ships that can be observed the furthest away however in WoWS they have smaller surface area than small cruisers and can launch wave after strike aircraft within gun range of cruisers and destroyers completely undetected and thus can not be engaged due to a combination of their own high speed and some absurd game detection mechanism when doing a stern or low angle chase - in effect making them near invincible under normal game circumstances when dealing with non CV classes of ships.

 

As it is now CV play on Tier VII and above is low risk high reward for those and in the hands of mediocre and above CV players their strike aircraft can and will completely cripple or sink all but the largest of battleships in one attack - especially the use of 2 or more TB squadrons against 1 ship in a manual short range two pronged attack from which there is no escape no matter what class of ship the target is extremely frustrating and unbalanced compared to every other class of ship, espcially so when the risk of making such an attack is nil to the CV players own ship.

To be honest I find that CVs are currently worse for the game than arty have ever been in WoT because arty are at least balanced by having bad mobility and bad camo value the higher the tier making it risiker and riskier to play arty the higher the tier, however in WoWS CVs are blessed with both excellent speed and camo value which creates a game meta for CVs that are completely different from all other classes in which they are able to make massive amounts of damage without having to fear retalliation from non CV ships.

Carrier sniping is currently the only reliably way of dealing with enemy carriers however that only further enhances the surviving CV players low risk/high reward style of play as he/she will be completely unchallenged,

The problem with CV TB squadron attacks is not the turn rate of their targets but the non RNG element of the attack run; the torpedo spread is perfectly aimed, alligned and timed with no random distribution of individual torpedoes and the aircraft can perform manuevres and make attacks from heights and by making popup attacks from islands and hills they would not be able to do IRL which makes a manual TB attack a skill based only action - the better the player the higher the damage however that is completely different from all other classes ships with the exception of launching ship borne torpedoes where RNG is a considerable and balancing element that prevents players from one shotting each other every salvo. 

 

In order to curb the CV's low risk/high reward style of play to a high risk/high reward one several issues have to be addressed:

 

-The CV's camo values  have to be nerfed to the worst of all classes of ships as they are the largest class of ships so that their chance of detection and destruction increases to the point where the CV players will have to spend at least just as much time looking for enemy ships hunting them as they spend on attacking enemy ships in order to remain afloat.  

 

-The number and makeup of squadrons also needs to be reduced and changed so that it will not be possible to have more than 2 TB squadrons in the air at the same time, preferebly only 1 squadron of each type but with a larger amount of aircraft in each squadron so that they retain the same number of active aircrafts availble as before only now in lesser aquadrons. 

 

- And/Or the TBs formation will have to be random and the torpedo spread random in order to lower the maximum number of hits possible

 

- When engaged by AA squadrons should always be using  the largest and least effective formation and torpedo spread.

 

- No torpedo attack when attacking over a landmass should be possible within at least 2 km of the landmass so that island/hill popup will not be possible.

 

- Increase the turn radius of all strike aircraft so that they will have a harder time enganging highly mobile targets

 

-When making torpedo attacks at extremely close range the torpedobombers will have to pass over their targets so that will have to subjected to more AA fire and thus an increased risk of losing aircraft making close drops a high cost/high reward style of play.

 

It is simply not fun to play when you get jumped by a wing of TB squadrons even when protected by a screen of CAs knowing that even if you begin to take evasive maneuvres when you spot the incoming squadrons you will at least take half your ships HP in damage no matter how well you turn and writhe in the failed attempt of dodging torpedoes dropped 500m from each side of your bow and to be quite honest I have to bite my hand not to call good CV players for [Edited] but then I remember that they are good players who in reality is just exploiting faulty and unbalanced game mechanics that massively favours that class of ships and I just push 'Return to port' without saying anything

 

IMHO I can't see how CVs can be equally balanced to all other classes of ships in this game without making massive changes to core game mechanics such as removing the detection system so that every player will have to spot their targets for themselves and the only ships visible on the minimap is one own's side and on screen the player will have to lock on the ship to make a positive ID of the enemy, that will force the CVs to.perform aerial reconnaisance in order to find their targets and they can never be sure where the targets will be when their strike aircraft reaches their target's last know position.

 

I'm sorry but this is nonsense, there have been enough nerfs on the CV's and a few of them unwarranted. The only strike carrier which can rule the battlefiled is an Essex class with a strike setup as the IJN CV's have been nerfed to death. Low risk? Really? If you play as a team and group up with cruisers and/or BB's, a same Tier carrier's planes will get shredded making it ineffective and when it runs out of planes, it becomes just a big battering ram. In WWII pilots tried to use land masses as cover when approaching enemy ships only to come over the top of the land masses especially when it was day light so they could not be seen in the sun and then they would attack. Its been a while since I've played the low Tier carriers but I always struggle to keep up with other ships and in relation to concealment you need to take into to account the concealment upgrade one might have on the ship and the ability you can purchase when your captain has enough experience.

 

I would like to think by now, most players know where a carrier hides so you can go and hunt it later on as for torpedos I'm afraid sometimes you just can't dodge them just like when you get too close to a DD you get punished as such not noticing the warning markers that planes are approaching and taking appropriate action will lead to death or severe damage. As for the AA, from Tier 6 and above CA's get abilities to make TB's and DB's panic which ruins their spread but once again you need to play as a team for this to work well. Don't punish CV's because people don't play as a team LEAVE MY CLASS ALONE! Its been nerfed enough as it is!

[AgarwaenME]

Really? You're using risk vs reward as an argument in a game like this? Does any ship have permadeath? No? Then it DOES NOT !")#(¤/¤(/"!#¤ BELONG AS ANY SORT OF !Q"=)(#/¤)(/!&¤!#" ARGUMENT.

 

Also, why would a CV based on a cruiser hull be more visible than that cruiser? Or a CV based on a BB hull be more visible than that BB? Particularly as they don't have the large superstructures with very visible silouettes.

 

"- When engaged by AA squadrons should always be using the largest and least effective formation and torpedo spread.

 

So.. as every ship at t5 and higher has some AAA, TBs would ALWAYS get the worst possible spread.. ye sure.

 

"- No torpedo attack when attacking over a landmass should be possible within at least 2 km of the landmass so that island/hill popup will not be possible."

 

So, the EXACT tactic used during the attack on Pearl Harbour should be disallowed because.. you want to have an easy safe spot. How about we rather make it impossible for large ships to even approach within several hundred meters of any shore as they'll easily go aground there? If you don't want to get attacked from behind an island, DON'T TRY TO HIDE BEHIND IT. 

 

"- Increase the turn radius of all strike aircraft so that they will have a harder time enganging highly mobile targets"

You want aircraft to struggle keeping up with warships. Wait.. did I actually read that, you want AIRCRAFT to struggle keeping up with WARSHIPS . As it is aircraft are already remarkably slow and clumsy compared to ships, but for some people that's still not enough 

 

"-When making torpedo attacks at extremely close range the torpedobombers will have to pass over their targets so that will have to subjected to more AA fire and thus an increased risk of losing aircraft making close drops a high cost/high reward style of play."

 

This is ALREADY THE CASE. And if you weren't so utterly incompetent and underqualified to talk about CV play you'd know what happens to attack aircraft after attack runs on high tier BBs.

[morpheuss]

Really? You're using risk vs reward as an argument in a game like this? Does any ship have permadeath? No? Then it DOES NOT !")#(¤/¤(/"!#¤ BELONG AS ANY SORT OF !Q"=)(#/¤)(/!&¤!#" ARGUMENT.

 

Also, why would a CV based on a cruiser hull be more visible than that cruiser? Or a CV based on a BB hull be more visible than that BB? Particularly as they don't have the large superstructures with very visible silouettes.

 

"- When engaged by AA squadrons should always be using the largest and least effective formation and torpedo spread.

 

So.. as every ship at t5 and higher has some AAA, TBs would ALWAYS get the worst possible spread.. ye sure.

 

"- No torpedo attack when attacking over a landmass should be possible within at least 2 km of the landmass so that island/hill popup will not be possible."

 

So, the EXACT tactic used during the attack on Pearl Harbour should be disallowed because.. you want to have an easy safe spot. How about we rather make it impossible for large ships to even approach within several hundred meters of any shore as they'll easily go aground there? If you don't want to get attacked from behind an island, DON'T TRY TO HIDE BEHIND IT. 

 

"- Increase the turn radius of all strike aircraft so that they will have a harder time enganging highly mobile targets"

You want aircraft to struggle keeping up with warships. Wait.. did I actually read that, you want AIRCRAFT to struggle keeping up with WARSHIPS . As it is aircraft are already remarkably slow and clumsy compared to ships, but for some people that's still not enough 

 

"-When making torpedo attacks at extremely close range the torpedobombers will have to pass over their targets so that will have to subjected to more AA fire and thus an increased risk of losing aircraft making close drops a high cost/high reward style of play."

 

This is ALREADY THE CASE. And if you weren't so utterly incompetent and underqualified to talk about CV play you'd know what happens to attack aircraft after attack runs on high tier BBs.

 

EXACTLY!!!

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

Really? You're using risk vs reward as an argument in a game like this? Does any ship have permadeath? No? Then it DOES NOT !")#(¤/¤(/"!#¤ BELONG AS ANY SORT OF !Q"=)(#/¤)(/!&¤!#" ARGUMENT.

 

Also, why would a CV based on a cruiser hull be more visible than that cruiser? Or a CV based on a BB hull be more visible than that BB? Particularly as they don't have the large superstructures with very visible silouettes.

 

"- When engaged by AA squadrons should always be using the largest and least effective formation and torpedo spread.

 

So.. as every ship at t5 and higher has some AAA, TBs would ALWAYS get the worst possible spread.. ye sure.

 

"- No torpedo attack when attacking over a landmass should be possible within at least 2 km of the landmass so that island/hill popup will not be possible."

 

So, the EXACT tactic used during the attack on Pearl Harbour should be disallowed because.. you want to have an easy safe spot. How about we rather make it impossible for large ships to even approach within several hundred meters of any shore as they'll easily go aground there? If you don't want to get attacked from behind an island, DON'T TRY TO HIDE BEHIND IT. 

 

"- Increase the turn radius of all strike aircraft so that they will have a harder time enganging highly mobile targets"

You want aircraft to struggle keeping up with warships. Wait.. did I actually read that, you want AIRCRAFT to struggle keeping up with WARSHIPS . As it is aircraft are already remarkably slow and clumsy compared to ships, but for some people that's still not enough 

 

"-When making torpedo attacks at extremely close range the torpedobombers will have to pass over their targets so that will have to subjected to more AA fire and thus an increased risk of losing aircraft making close drops a high cost/high reward style of play."

 

This is ALREADY THE CASE. And if you weren't so utterly incompetent and underqualified to talk about CV play you'd know what happens to attack aircraft after attack runs on high tier BBs.

 

CV's hulls are much higher than CAs and BBs so will both have a far bigger surface area and will be visible much further out than those which should be basic knowledge when discussing how far away ships can be seen and/or detected by eyes and radar and which should translate in this game to a very low camo rating - that is quite logical one should think and please refrain from making deragatory comments and personal attacks in the future.

 

Also if you compare your CV survival to your overall survival rate and CV average and peak damage vs the rest of your ships it is clear that playing CV is easy mode with a low risk/high reward element of play compared to all other classes and that saying otherwise is factually wrong.

 

[Seinta]

So you're saying that a CV hugging the corner of the map is a more profitable way to play than being second line support?

A CV staying close to the main force can much more quickly engage and 're-ergage  compared to a corner hugging CV that takes 3+ minutes to do one attack. Guess who is getting better reward and who is risking more.

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

So you're saying that a CV hugging the corner of the map is a more profitable way to play than being second line support?

A CV staying close to the main force can much more quickly engage and 're-ergage  compared to a corner hugging CV that takes 3+ minutes to do one attack. Guess who is getting better reward and who is risking more.

 

I haven't mentioned that point so I am curious where do you get that?

 

And yes CVs closer to the front lines will make much more damage due to what you describe and since their camo rating is so high it is a viable tactic which it shouldn't be IMHO. 

[AgarwaenME]

 

CV's hulls are much higher than CAs and BBs so will both have a far bigger surface area and will be visible much further out than those which should be basic knowledge when discussing how far away ships can be seen and/or detected by eyes and radar and which should translate in this game to a very low camo rating - that is quite logical one should think and please refrain from making deragatory comments and personal attacks in the future.

 

Also if you compare your CV survival to your overall survival rate and CV average and peak damage vs the rest of your ships it is clear that playing CV is easy mode with a low risk/high reward element of play compared to all other classes and that saying otherwise is factually wrong.

 

 

That's just.. wrong. CVs of the time weren't amazingly large (late war types were at the size of a BB), which isn't shocking given that most version were just CA or BB hulls with the superstructure removed (or not built in the first place) with a flight deck on top. Who had the most easily seen sillouetes? Well, battleships and cruisers, who by necessity were top heavy with artillery and range finders (and later radar), unlike CVs who only needed a small superstructure to direct flight operations from. Hell, most even placed their stacks in a different configuration keeping their visibility lower (and of course, smoke would be as great an indicator as anything concerning the ships size and form).

 

Also, again you conflate terms as risk vs reward with a game where there's NO actual risk. Risking the chance to sink DURING a battle doesn't mean you can talk about risk vs. reward as if it's a real thing in this game.

 

And you are also incredible ignorant, possibly you just chose to be, of the fact that CVs are the only ship that puts their only offensive means right into harms way on EVERY attack and where you can have other ships dedicated to killing your only offensive weapons before they can do anything. Somehow sending your planes in, knowing most won't make it back, is "no risk". A BB never "risks" being in a battle where he can't fire a single shell if the MM puts him up against a higher tier "anti-artillery BB" or a DD being in a battle against ships with weapons designed to blow up his torpedoes before they can get close. Aircraft are PART of a CV, they're not merely ammunition.

 

Basicly, you're just another clueless whiner. Shocker.

[Intercept3r]

Atomskytten I totally agree.U brought it to the core.Nothing to say.Hope they get nerfed more

[Deckeru_Maiku]

Just wanted to let y'all know that the larger drop circle implemented with 0.3.5 will be reversed to it's 0.3.1 state... oh, and manual drop will NOT become a captain's skill. You're still all possible victims.