Figment Beta Tester 3,801 posts 10,499 battles Report post #1 Posted May 6, 2022 Just going to sum up in a nutshell my thoughts about the game and its classes and mechanics here, since it's so obvious people like to put words in your mouth. There's more obviously, but yeah. Many of these topics I've done more extensively elsewhere, some I've not mentioned at all before, some I'm still pondering about the best implementation.c General mechanic changes: Goals: - Improve and stimulate stealth, initiative and aggressive play. - Make players shorten distances before engaging, overall decreasing the amount of enemies engaging one another at the same time to make it easier for individuals to make a last stand, rather than be dogpiled. - Mitigate effectiveness of CVs Radar - Slightly longer duration - Rotational detection - Intermittant localization (short periods of target visibility as the radar turns in circles) - Line of sight detection only - Works on surfaced subs, but provides less info about a sub at periscope depth (just a blip, no profile) Hydro - Not able to detect stationary ships over max hydro range -2km - Intermittant map detection at +1 to +2km from current range depending on captain skills - More effective against subs than it is now - In combination with onboard ASW creates ASW targeting indicators for subs up to a depth of 40m - Affects depth setting of depth charges to be closer to actual depth of submarine (better targeting than with new ping mechanic (see below)) ASW - All ships that can encounter subs should have some form of ASW Radio - larger effect on battles by being less available with fukll map overlap - visible spotting only for first hand information (includes aircraft) - map spotting only for second hand (relayed) information Smoke - More captain skills related to smoke to create trade-offs or changes to smoke - Thicker, but shorter duration cloud: slightly reduced detection (incl. while firing) compared to normal - Short duration thin barrier cloud with anti-radar capabilities - just shows one big barrier on the map when radared - Wider, shorter duration cloud (trade-off) - Smaller, longer duration cloud (trade-off) - Smoke deployable while remaining unseen at slightly higher speeds Goals: More variety in smokescreen effects and smoke DD gameplay (may be applied to Italian cruisers and BBs) New weather effects on maps: - Slow moving fog banks (act as smoke screens) - Low hanging cloud cover (acts as smoke screens against higher altitude aircraft only, would have to make an attack run to get under it) - Heavy fog conditions (overall reduction in visibility across the map) - Heavy snow and rain conditions (reduces aircraft range too) Captain skills - Package the too situational skills together (AA fighter, AA and ASW for instance) to make them more attractive - By packaging, create some room for more specialized options or alternate strengths (particularly for things like smoke screens) Goals: more variety that are also valid choices. AA: A2A fighters: - Less power distance between tiers of CV aircraft and fighters in general through luck based engagement rather than DPS and hp - Fighters from CVs and ships can be assigned to friendly ships, deployed to protect an area or circle one's own ship (default). When deployed from a CV they have to fly to that spot, from the CV. Not drop out of a bunch of aircraft. (Limits immediate spotting advantage over an area). CV deployed fighters can be deployed one squadron at a time while other squadrons are flying and return once their fuel runs out (bit more fuel than bombers). Hence they have limited range. (Basically like the older RTS fighters) - Fighters will engage enemy aircraft that are detected in a larger radius than the one they're circling from the moment that circle is touched and they've reached the circle themselves. Should be less engagement lag than currently the case. Ship AA: - More luck based AA than DPS based, allowing lower tier AA ships to also get a chance to kill aircraft of higher tier more consistently. Hit rate depending on angle of approach wrt to AA bubbles. Luck level increased at better AA ratings, but higher basic luck level for lower tier ships to compensate a bit for their lack of AA bubbles. Higher tier ships get better angle coverage and increased frequency of luck checks based on AA modules alive, making it harder to reduce damage by approach route for CV. Should be easier for CV to get a lucky low-damage-taken run against low tier AA ships, but should never be without danger. Approaching a broadside would be a lot more risky for a CV - and thus impactful for AA firing ships - but of course the chances of hitting with torps would be higher too. - Light to medium panic effect increasing the spread for enemy fighters upon activation of an AA boost (less severe than the old one) depending on AA rating of the ship. - Note that I'd have CV attacks lock in earlier, giving the target ship time to maneouvre and for instance decide to increase or decrease the amount of AA by angling at the oncoming aircraft, or opting to dodge. Either way, it gives targets a choice on how to fight back: eat away the CVs capabilities to sustain attacks, or try and dodge damage, or try to do a bit of both. General class changes (would not necessarily affect all ships of said class): BB: - Rudder reduced back to beta quality (less able to steer fast to dodge torps) - Slightly more effective torpedobarriers (% reduction) - Reduced % of damage from citadel hits on cruisers - More effective secondaries (in general, not for Schlieffen types). - Reduced accuracy at range - Torps instated for BBs that historically had them, regardless if it fits with the rest of the line (captain skill argument is crap IMO) - Fewer BB in regular MM per side (possibly allow BC to sit in for BB and cruisers alike, provided each side gets one) - Occasional BB only matches (get the excess amounts out of the queue, would probably be enjoyable for BB players) Goal: more CQC situations, less punishment for ships taking the initiative. DD: - Reduce radar range on DDs with radar a bit to off-set the power distance with smokescreen centric DDs. - Ping mode to detect submarines when in ASW targeting mode (for when hydro is not on the ship or in effect) - Ping mechanic let's enemy sub and nearby enemy vessels in line of sight (<5km) know where the pinging vessel is Cruisers: - Increased AA rating of nearby ships when an AA cruiser sails in proximity of other allied ships ("AA escort boost") - Reduced detectability (-4% tot -10%) compared to now for some ships, allowing improved firing from safety and easier disengagement and short range engagement with torps - Disappear from sight slightly faster (-3s to 5s depending on ship) - Ping mode to detect submarines when in ASW targeting mode (for when hydro is not on the ship or in effect) - Ping mechanic let's enemy sub and nearby enemy vessels in line of sight (<5km) know where the pinging vessel is Carriers: - Start of line at T5 - Optional alternative to T5 CV if T4 is a must: * Protected MM for ships with barely any AA at T3-4 * Severe hardcap limitation on amount of T4 and T5 CV matches per year after initial grind is concluded. Consider them training ships. - Shorter exp grind, with CVs at each tier again - More limited numbers of aircraft on board (more attrition sensitive), shot down aircraft cannot be replaced once the reserve is gone. - Fewer waves per sortie (at most two waves) - Fuel limitation on flight range to aircraft (either: sit too far back and your aircraft don't make it home, or: they auto-return home after a certain flight distance) - Must enter AA zone with aircraft to engage a ship (of course island cover and leading torps might still work around that) - Better AI pathing options and controls (including setting ships to reverse), goes for other ships too, but it's a must for this class - Able to switch between air and ship control more fluently without air having to return or having just AI control over your ship - Limited radio information sharing from aircraft (map knowledge, rather than direct visuals, unless first hand information) -> reduced direct effective spotting ability without reducing the ability to spot - Lock in attack decision making earlier in the attack akin to the RTS period - Removal of passive bonus to repair etc. - Reintroduction of deckfire delays (delaying rather than completely blocking air strikes. Disables switching squadrons. Provides extra vulnerability at close engagements) - Reintroduction of prelaunch squadron selection of squadrons as during RTS (makes it harder to adapt to the current situation, requires some forethought and more attrition sensitive) - Slightly higher HP to compensate if needed - Slightly improved secondary stats - ASW added: detection buoys deployable from torpedo bombers, creates localized hydro/ping until destroyed or expired (3mins) - ASW added: HE /AP bombers can be used for depth charge drops (less effective and fewer drops than current) - ASW added: Rocket bombers can engage submarines at periscope depth or on the surface Goals: Localize air power more to allow other flanks to have more initiative, reduce impact of aircraft spotting, force ships to engage at closer ranges, require CV to sail closer to the front line and thus in more relative danger, at max distance, reduce effectiveness of CV by reducing its angles on the target. Improve experience in lower tiers for poor AA ships. Subs: Aside from aforementioned changes to ASW on other ships - More forward starting position - Shorter radio distances to mimic isolation effects - Ping for situational awareness underwater beyond 2km, including map awareness beyond 3km., - The slower a sub sails, the more knowledge it can get about its surroundings through listening to engine sounds (a submerged sub gets basic map information of approximate ship locations on compass vectors, with a range estimate. Think of a circle divided in directional sections and distances, rather than ship silhouettes. Only at periscope depth can they actually start targeting ships). - Detection and targeting of subs is done with pings up to 8km away in the same map detection way, but become clear targets at 5-6km. Could be targeted with acoustic torpedoes, countermeasures like decoys could be available. - More fog of war if not pinging, but also less chance of being sighted - Different situational awareness levels and balance (actual use of a periscope to detect stuff at periscope depth for instance). - The more you ping, the more accurate your situational awareness, drawback: your enemy can home in on your position too (every next ping provides a more narrow direction and range estimate) - More diverse modules - Remove homing torps as standard torps, only for specific nations and with more limited arcs, range or speeds as special torpedo - More sensitive to surface ship hydro than today, avoid by deep dive - Deep dives (40+m) can cause spontaneous floodings if they take over 20-30s - Lower torp frequency (ship dependend) - Diving choice with more consequences (ballast and air tank) - Flooding and fires on board can affect need to surface by draining air and drag ship too much ballast - Oil spills and wreckage creating a path in the direction of flight (kinda implemented differently from what I'd do recently, but it gives a similar idea). - Possibly fake death oil spill by sub (counts as kill for enemy and costs sub captain exp./silver) Goals: major overhaul, more overextending sensitive glass cannon with ways to destroy them indirectly (by forcing them down), little bit more of an assassin. And yes, not going to happen, but hey. 8 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[I-J-N] Karasu_Browarszky [I-J-N] Players 13,025 posts Report post #2 Posted May 6, 2022 Some ideas look good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[LA_FR] Eikkuu Players 317 posts 6,313 battles Report post #3 Posted May 7, 2022 Il y a 16 heures, Figment a dit : Just going to sum up in a nutshell my thoughts about the game and its classes and mechanics here, since it's so obvious people like to put words in your mouth. There's more obviously, but yeah. Many of these topics I've done more extensively elsewhere, some I've not mentioned at all before, some I'm still pondering about the best implementation.c General mechanic changes: Goals: - Improve and stimulate stealth, initiative and aggressive play. - Make players shorten distances before engaging, overall decreasing the amount of enemies engaging one another at the same time to make it easier for individuals to make a last stand, rather than be dogpiled. - Mitigate effectiveness of CVs Radar - Slightly longer duration - Rotational detection - Intermittant localization (short periods of target visibility as the radar turns in circles) - Line of sight detection only - Works on surfaced subs, but provides less info about a sub at periscope depth (just a blip, no profile) Hydro - Not able to detect stationary ships over max hydro range -2km - Intermittant map detection at +1 to +2km from current range depending on captain skills - More effective against subs than it is now - In combination with onboard ASW creates ASW targeting indicators for subs up to a depth of 40m - Affects depth setting of depth charges to be closer to actual depth of submarine (better targeting than with new ping mechanic (see below)) ASW - All ships that can encounter subs should have some form of ASW Radio - larger effect on battles by being less available with fukll map overlap - visible spotting only for first hand information (includes aircraft) - map spotting only for second hand (relayed) information Smoke - More captain skills related to smoke to create trade-offs or changes to smoke - Thicker, but shorter duration cloud: slightly reduced detection (incl. while firing) compared to normal - Short duration thin barrier cloud with anti-radar capabilities - just shows one big barrier on the map when radared - Wider, shorter duration cloud (trade-off) - Smaller, longer duration cloud (trade-off) - Smoke deployable while remaining unseen at slightly higher speeds Goals: More variety in smokescreen effects and smoke DD gameplay (may be applied to Italian cruisers and BBs) New weather effects on maps: - Slow moving fog banks (act as smoke screens) - Low hanging cloud cover (acts as smoke screens against higher altitude aircraft only, would have to make an attack run to get under it) - Heavy fog conditions (overall reduction in visibility across the map) - Heavy snow and rain conditions (reduces aircraft range too) Captain skills - Package the too situational skills together (AA fighter, AA and ASW for instance) to make them more attractive - By packaging, create some room for more specialized options or alternate strengths (particularly for things like smoke screens) Goals: more variety that are also valid choices. AA: A2A fighters: - Less power distance between tiers of CV aircraft and fighters in general through luck based engagement rather than DPS and hp - Fighters from CVs and ships can be assigned to friendly ships, deployed to protect an area or circle one's own ship (default). When deployed from a CV they have to fly to that spot, from the CV. Not drop out of a bunch of aircraft. (Limits immediate spotting advantage over an area). CV deployed fighters can be deployed one squadron at a time while other squadrons are flying and return once their fuel runs out (bit more fuel than bombers). Hence they have limited range. (Basically like the older RTS fighters) - Fighters will engage enemy aircraft that are detected in a larger radius than the one they're circling from the moment that circle is touched and they've reached the circle themselves. Should be less engagement lag than currently the case. Ship AA: - More luck based AA than DPS based, allowing lower tier AA ships to also get a chance to kill aircraft of higher tier more consistently. Hit rate depending on angle of approach wrt to AA bubbles. Luck level increased at better AA ratings, but higher basic luck level for lower tier ships to compensate a bit for their lack of AA bubbles. Higher tier ships get better angle coverage and increased frequency of luck checks based on AA modules alive, making it harder to reduce damage by approach route for CV. Should be easier for CV to get a lucky low-damage-taken run against low tier AA ships, but should never be without danger. Approaching a broadside would be a lot more risky for a CV - and thus impactful for AA firing ships - but of course the chances of hitting with torps would be higher too. - Light to medium panic effect increasing the spread for enemy fighters upon activation of an AA boost (less severe than the old one) depending on AA rating of the ship. - Note that I'd have CV attacks lock in earlier, giving the target ship time to maneouvre and for instance decide to increase or decrease the amount of AA by angling at the oncoming aircraft, or opting to dodge. Either way, it gives targets a choice on how to fight back: eat away the CVs capabilities to sustain attacks, or try and dodge damage, or try to do a bit of both. General class changes (would not necessarily affect all ships of said class): BB: - Rudder reduced back to beta quality (less able to steer fast to dodge torps) - Slightly more effective torpedobarriers (% reduction) - Reduced % of damage from citadel hits on cruisers - More effective secondaries (in general, not for Schlieffen types). - Reduced accuracy at range - Torps instated for BBs that historically had them, regardless if it fits with the rest of the line (captain skill argument is crap IMO) - Fewer BB in regular MM per side (possibly allow BC to sit in for BB and cruisers alike, provided each side gets one) - Occasional BB only matches (get the excess amounts out of the queue, would probably be enjoyable for BB players) Goal: more CQC situations, less punishment for ships taking the initiative. DD: - Reduce radar range on DDs with radar a bit to off-set the power distance with smokescreen centric DDs. - Ping mode to detect submarines when in ASW targeting mode (for when hydro is not on the ship or in effect) - Ping mechanic let's enemy sub and nearby enemy vessels in line of sight (<5km) know where the pinging vessel is Cruisers: - Increased AA rating of nearby ships when an AA cruiser sails in proximity of other allied ships ("AA escort boost") - Reduced detectability (-4% tot -10%) compared to now for some ships, allowing improved firing from safety and easier disengagement and short range engagement with torps - Disappear from sight slightly faster (-3s to 5s depending on ship) - Ping mode to detect submarines when in ASW targeting mode (for when hydro is not on the ship or in effect) - Ping mechanic let's enemy sub and nearby enemy vessels in line of sight (<5km) know where the pinging vessel is Carriers: - Start of line at T5 - Optional alternative to T5 CV if T4 is a must: * Protected MM for ships with barely any AA at T3-4 * Severe hardcap limitation on amount of T4 and T5 CV matches per year after initial grind is concluded. Consider them training ships. - Shorter exp grind, with CVs at each tier again - More limited numbers of aircraft on board (more attrition sensitive), shot down aircraft cannot be replaced once the reserve is gone. - Fewer waves per sortie (at most two waves) - Fuel limitation on flight range to aircraft (either: sit too far back and your aircraft don't make it home, or: they auto-return home after a certain flight distance) - Must enter AA zone with aircraft to engage a ship (of course island cover and leading torps might still work around that) - Better AI pathing options and controls (including setting ships to reverse), goes for other ships too, but it's a must for this class - Able to switch between air and ship control more fluently without air having to return or having just AI control over your ship - Limited radio information sharing from aircraft (map knowledge, rather than direct visuals, unless first hand information) -> reduced direct effective spotting ability without reducing the ability to spot - Lock in attack decision making earlier in the attack akin to the RTS period - Removal of passive bonus to repair etc. - Reintroduction of deckfire delays (delaying rather than completely blocking air strikes. Disables switching squadrons. Provides extra vulnerability at close engagements) - Reintroduction of prelaunch squadron selection of squadrons as during RTS (makes it harder to adapt to the current situation, requires some forethought and more attrition sensitive) - Slightly higher HP to compensate if needed - Slightly improved secondary stats - ASW added: detection buoys deployable from torpedo bombers, creates localized hydro/ping until destroyed or expired (3mins) - ASW added: HE /AP bombers can be used for depth charge drops (less effective and fewer drops than current) - ASW added: Rocket bombers can engage submarines at periscope depth or on the surface Goals: Localize air power more to allow other flanks to have more initiative, reduce impact of aircraft spotting, force ships to engage at closer ranges, require CV to sail closer to the front line and thus in more relative danger, at max distance, reduce effectiveness of CV by reducing its angles on the target. Improve experience in lower tiers for poor AA ships. Subs: Aside from aforementioned changes to ASW on other ships - More forward starting position - Shorter radio distances to mimic isolation effects - Ping for situational awareness underwater beyond 2km, including map awareness beyond 3km., - The slower a sub sails, the more knowledge it can get about its surroundings through listening to engine sounds (a submerged sub gets basic map information of approximate ship locations on compass vectors, with a range estimate. Think of a circle divided in directional sections and distances, rather than ship silhouettes. Only at periscope depth can they actually start targeting ships). - Detection and targeting of subs is done with pings up to 8km away in the same map detection way, but become clear targets at 5-6km. Could be targeted with acoustic torpedoes, countermeasures like decoys could be available. - More fog of war if not pinging, but also less chance of being sighted - Different situational awareness levels and balance (actual use of a periscope to detect stuff at periscope depth for instance). - The more you ping, the more accurate your situational awareness, drawback: your enemy can home in on your position too (every next ping provides a more narrow direction and range estimate) - More diverse modules - Remove homing torps as standard torps, only for specific nations and with more limited arcs, range or speeds as special torpedo - More sensitive to surface ship hydro than today, avoid by deep dive - Deep dives (40+m) can cause spontaneous floodings if they take over 20-30s - Lower torp frequency (ship dependend) - Diving choice with more consequences (ballast and air tank) - Flooding and fires on board can affect need to surface by draining air and drag ship too much ballast - Oil spills and wreckage creating a path in the direction of flight (kinda implemented differently from what I'd do recently, but it gives a similar idea). - Possibly fake death oil spill by sub (counts as kill for enemy and costs sub captain exp./silver) Goals: major overhaul, more overextending sensitive glass cannon with ways to destroy them indirectly (by forcing them down), little bit more of an assassin. And yes, not going to happen, but hey. Nice ideas, I love it. I really love the reduce citadels damage against cruisers, too much overmatch in the game now... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[HAKUY] Yosha_AtaIante Players 8,032 posts 19,168 battles Report post #4 Posted May 7, 2022 17 hours ago, Figment said: - Shorter exp grind, with CVs at each tier again - More limited numbers of aircraft on board (more attrition sensitive), shot down aircraft cannot be replaced once the reserve is gone. - Fewer waves per sortie (at most two waves) - Fuel limitation on flight range to aircraft (either: sit too far back and your aircraft don't make it home, or: they auto-return home after a certain flight distance) - Must enter AA zone with aircraft to engage a ship (of course island cover and leading torps might still work around that) - Better AI pathing options and controls (including setting ships to reverse), goes for other ships too, but it's a must for this class - Able to switch between air and ship control more fluently without air having to return or having just AI control over your ship - Limited radio information sharing from aircraft (map knowledge, rather than direct visuals, unless first hand information) -> reduced direct effective spotting ability without reducing the ability to spot - Lock in attack decision making earlier in the attack akin to the RTS period - Removal of passive bonus to repair etc. - Reintroduction of deckfire delays (delaying rather than completely blocking air strikes. Disables switching squadrons. Provides extra vulnerability at close engagements) - Reintroduction of prelaunch squadron selection of squadrons as during RTS (makes it harder to adapt to the current situation, requires some forethought and more attrition sensitive) - Slightly higher HP to compensate if needed - Slightly improved secondary stats - ASW added: detection buoys deployable from torpedo bombers, creates localized hydro/ping until destroyed or expired (3mins) - ASW added: HE /AP bombers can be used for depth charge drops (less effective and fewer drops than current) - ASW added: Rocket bombers can engage submarines at periscope depth or on the surface Would completely kill off CV damage. No idea how you got to the conclusions that this would make them fair. You might aswell not have them in the battle at all. Do you realize how easy it is to dodge single strike CVs like the russians for good players? Reducing number of aircraft and amount of strikes per squadron (effectively making every CV single strike) will make it extremly easy to negate damage for any surface ship. Combine it with planes being permanently shot down and you get 30k avg CV damage at current AA levels. Do you realize that squadrons need hp buffer to get strikes through as AA usually always depletes some planes in the current iteration? You pay planes to strike. You can only regenerate a set amount of planes per 20minute battle. Plane numbers are already limited by battle time. Also "slightly higher hp" to cmpensate are you joking? What is slightly please? If a Halland has an AA dps of 500 and you buff plane hp by 10% then it would still not be enough to make planes survive in it's AA for even 2seconds longer. Now remember you saying planes are now limited and even less reserves than there currently are? You realize Halland can ambush planes with AA by staying dark until the planes are to close to disengage? Do you even think this through when making these suggestions? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[P-A-R] _Lupastro_ Players 1,012 posts 13,896 battles Report post #5 Posted May 7, 2022 18 ore fa, Figment ha scritto: Just going to sum up in a nutshell my thoughts about the game and its classes and mechanics here, since it's so obvious people like to put words in your mouth. There's more obviously, but yeah. Many of these topics I've done more extensively elsewhere, some I've not mentioned at all before, some I'm still pondering about the best implementation.c General mechanic changes: Goals: - Improve and stimulate stealth, initiative and aggressive play. - Make players shorten distances before engaging, overall decreasing the amount of enemies engaging one another at the same time to make it easier for individuals to make a last stand, rather than be dogpiled. - Mitigate effectiveness of CVs Radar - Slightly longer duration - Rotational detection - Intermittant localization (short periods of target visibility as the radar turns in circles) - Line of sight detection only - Works on surfaced subs, but provides less info about a sub at periscope depth (just a blip, no profile) Hydro - Not able to detect stationary ships over max hydro range -2km - Intermittant map detection at +1 to +2km from current range depending on captain skills - More effective against subs than it is now - In combination with onboard ASW creates ASW targeting indicators for subs up to a depth of 40m - Affects depth setting of depth charges to be closer to actual depth of submarine (better targeting than with new ping mechanic (see below)) ASW - All ships that can encounter subs should have some form of ASW Radio - larger effect on battles by being less available with fukll map overlap - visible spotting only for first hand information (includes aircraft) - map spotting only for second hand (relayed) information Smoke - More captain skills related to smoke to create trade-offs or changes to smoke - Thicker, but shorter duration cloud: slightly reduced detection (incl. while firing) compared to normal - Short duration thin barrier cloud with anti-radar capabilities - just shows one big barrier on the map when radared - Wider, shorter duration cloud (trade-off) - Smaller, longer duration cloud (trade-off) - Smoke deployable while remaining unseen at slightly higher speeds Goals: More variety in smokescreen effects and smoke DD gameplay (may be applied to Italian cruisers and BBs) New weather effects on maps: - Slow moving fog banks (act as smoke screens) - Low hanging cloud cover (acts as smoke screens against higher altitude aircraft only, would have to make an attack run to get under it) - Heavy fog conditions (overall reduction in visibility across the map) - Heavy snow and rain conditions (reduces aircraft range too) Captain skills - Package the too situational skills together (AA fighter, AA and ASW for instance) to make them more attractive - By packaging, create some room for more specialized options or alternate strengths (particularly for things like smoke screens) Goals: more variety that are also valid choices. AA: A2A fighters: - Less power distance between tiers of CV aircraft and fighters in general through luck based engagement rather than DPS and hp - Fighters from CVs and ships can be assigned to friendly ships, deployed to protect an area or circle one's own ship (default). When deployed from a CV they have to fly to that spot, from the CV. Not drop out of a bunch of aircraft. (Limits immediate spotting advantage over an area). CV deployed fighters can be deployed one squadron at a time while other squadrons are flying and return once their fuel runs out (bit more fuel than bombers). Hence they have limited range. (Basically like the older RTS fighters) - Fighters will engage enemy aircraft that are detected in a larger radius than the one they're circling from the moment that circle is touched and they've reached the circle themselves. Should be less engagement lag than currently the case. Ship AA: - More luck based AA than DPS based, allowing lower tier AA ships to also get a chance to kill aircraft of higher tier more consistently. Hit rate depending on angle of approach wrt to AA bubbles. Luck level increased at better AA ratings, but higher basic luck level for lower tier ships to compensate a bit for their lack of AA bubbles. Higher tier ships get better angle coverage and increased frequency of luck checks based on AA modules alive, making it harder to reduce damage by approach route for CV. Should be easier for CV to get a lucky low-damage-taken run against low tier AA ships, but should never be without danger. Approaching a broadside would be a lot more risky for a CV - and thus impactful for AA firing ships - but of course the chances of hitting with torps would be higher too. - Light to medium panic effect increasing the spread for enemy fighters upon activation of an AA boost (less severe than the old one) depending on AA rating of the ship. - Note that I'd have CV attacks lock in earlier, giving the target ship time to maneouvre and for instance decide to increase or decrease the amount of AA by angling at the oncoming aircraft, or opting to dodge. Either way, it gives targets a choice on how to fight back: eat away the CVs capabilities to sustain attacks, or try and dodge damage, or try to do a bit of both. General class changes (would not necessarily affect all ships of said class): BB: - Rudder reduced back to beta quality (less able to steer fast to dodge torps) - Slightly more effective torpedobarriers (% reduction) - Reduced % of damage from citadel hits on cruisers - More effective secondaries (in general, not for Schlieffen types). - Reduced accuracy at range - Torps instated for BBs that historically had them, regardless if it fits with the rest of the line (captain skill argument is crap IMO) - Fewer BB in regular MM per side (possibly allow BC to sit in for BB and cruisers alike, provided each side gets one) - Occasional BB only matches (get the excess amounts out of the queue, would probably be enjoyable for BB players) Goal: more CQC situations, less punishment for ships taking the initiative. DD: - Reduce radar range on DDs with radar a bit to off-set the power distance with smokescreen centric DDs. - Ping mode to detect submarines when in ASW targeting mode (for when hydro is not on the ship or in effect) - Ping mechanic let's enemy sub and nearby enemy vessels in line of sight (<5km) know where the pinging vessel is Cruisers: - Increased AA rating of nearby ships when an AA cruiser sails in proximity of other allied ships ("AA escort boost") - Reduced detectability (-4% tot -10%) compared to now for some ships, allowing improved firing from safety and easier disengagement and short range engagement with torps - Disappear from sight slightly faster (-3s to 5s depending on ship) - Ping mode to detect submarines when in ASW targeting mode (for when hydro is not on the ship or in effect) - Ping mechanic let's enemy sub and nearby enemy vessels in line of sight (<5km) know where the pinging vessel is Carriers: - Start of line at T5 - Optional alternative to T5 CV if T4 is a must: * Protected MM for ships with barely any AA at T3-4 * Severe hardcap limitation on amount of T4 and T5 CV matches per year after initial grind is concluded. Consider them training ships. - Shorter exp grind, with CVs at each tier again - More limited numbers of aircraft on board (more attrition sensitive), shot down aircraft cannot be replaced once the reserve is gone. - Fewer waves per sortie (at most two waves) - Fuel limitation on flight range to aircraft (either: sit too far back and your aircraft don't make it home, or: they auto-return home after a certain flight distance) - Must enter AA zone with aircraft to engage a ship (of course island cover and leading torps might still work around that) - Better AI pathing options and controls (including setting ships to reverse), goes for other ships too, but it's a must for this class - Able to switch between air and ship control more fluently without air having to return or having just AI control over your ship - Limited radio information sharing from aircraft (map knowledge, rather than direct visuals, unless first hand information) -> reduced direct effective spotting ability without reducing the ability to spot - Lock in attack decision making earlier in the attack akin to the RTS period - Removal of passive bonus to repair etc. - Reintroduction of deckfire delays (delaying rather than completely blocking air strikes. Disables switching squadrons. Provides extra vulnerability at close engagements) - Reintroduction of prelaunch squadron selection of squadrons as during RTS (makes it harder to adapt to the current situation, requires some forethought and more attrition sensitive) - Slightly higher HP to compensate if needed - Slightly improved secondary stats - ASW added: detection buoys deployable from torpedo bombers, creates localized hydro/ping until destroyed or expired (3mins) - ASW added: HE /AP bombers can be used for depth charge drops (less effective and fewer drops than current) - ASW added: Rocket bombers can engage submarines at periscope depth or on the surface Goals: Localize air power more to allow other flanks to have more initiative, reduce impact of aircraft spotting, force ships to engage at closer ranges, require CV to sail closer to the front line and thus in more relative danger, at max distance, reduce effectiveness of CV by reducing its angles on the target. Improve experience in lower tiers for poor AA ships. Subs: Aside from aforementioned changes to ASW on other ships - More forward starting position - Shorter radio distances to mimic isolation effects - Ping for situational awareness underwater beyond 2km, including map awareness beyond 3km., - The slower a sub sails, the more knowledge it can get about its surroundings through listening to engine sounds (a submerged sub gets basic map information of approximate ship locations on compass vectors, with a range estimate. Think of a circle divided in directional sections and distances, rather than ship silhouettes. Only at periscope depth can they actually start targeting ships). - Detection and targeting of subs is done with pings up to 8km away in the same map detection way, but become clear targets at 5-6km. Could be targeted with acoustic torpedoes, countermeasures like decoys could be available. - More fog of war if not pinging, but also less chance of being sighted - Different situational awareness levels and balance (actual use of a periscope to detect stuff at periscope depth for instance). - The more you ping, the more accurate your situational awareness, drawback: your enemy can home in on your position too (every next ping provides a more narrow direction and range estimate) - More diverse modules - Remove homing torps as standard torps, only for specific nations and with more limited arcs, range or speeds as special torpedo - More sensitive to surface ship hydro than today, avoid by deep dive - Deep dives (40+m) can cause spontaneous floodings if they take over 20-30s - Lower torp frequency (ship dependend) - Diving choice with more consequences (ballast and air tank) - Flooding and fires on board can affect need to surface by draining air and drag ship too much ballast - Oil spills and wreckage creating a path in the direction of flight (kinda implemented differently from what I'd do recently, but it gives a similar idea). - Possibly fake death oil spill by sub (counts as kill for enemy and costs sub captain exp./silver) Goals: major overhaul, more overextending sensitive glass cannon with ways to destroy them indirectly (by forcing them down), little bit more of an assassin. And yes, not going to happen, but hey. A dream. GJ 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[LMER] vaapad_master Alpha Tester 249 posts 5,978 battles Report post #6 Posted May 7, 2022 I'd remove carriers, submarines and superships. Instantly a much better game. 7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[COOOP] Shirakami_Kon Players 2,624 posts 12,776 battles Report post #7 Posted May 7, 2022 I'd just return the game back to post beta release without CVs and stealthfire and perpetually freeze the game in that state, done. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[2DQT] McBoatyFloaty [2DQT] Players 9 posts 7,753 battles Report post #8 Posted May 7, 2022 overall seems like really good changes but I would also like some form of rework to damage control party, for all classes Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[2DQT] McBoatyFloaty [2DQT] Players 9 posts 7,753 battles Report post #9 Posted May 7, 2022 12 hours ago, Yuu5Eleven said: Would completely kill off CV damage. No idea how you got to the conclusions that this would make them fair. You might aswell not have them in the battle at all. Do you realize how easy it is to dodge single strike CVs like the russians for good players? Reducing number of aircraft and amount of strikes per squadron (effectively making every CV single strike) will make it extremly easy to negate damage for any surface ship. Combine it with planes being permanently shot down and you get 30k avg CV damage at current AA levels. Do you realize that squadrons need hp buffer to get strikes through as AA usually always depletes some planes in the current iteration? You pay planes to strike. You can only regenerate a set amount of planes per 20minute battle. Plane numbers are already limited by battle time. Also "slightly higher hp" to cmpensate are you joking? What is slightly please? If a Halland has an AA dps of 500 and you buff plane hp by 10% then it would still not be enough to make planes survive in it's AA for even 2seconds longer. Now remember you saying planes are now limited and even less reserves than there currently are? You realize Halland can ambush planes with AA by staying dark until the planes are to close to disengage? Do you even think this through when making these suggestions? CVs aren't fair as they are, they break the game, stealth, overall naval tactics, with no counterplay or any skill involved in fighting the incoming strikes. this gives some downsides to CVs and some form of counterplay to surface ships. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[POP] MixuS [POP] Beta Tester 637 posts 12,005 battles Report post #10 Posted May 8, 2022 For love of all things holy, please stop quoting the whole post if you only have one line to comment. So many good ideas and only a few so-so ones that I would welcome every suggestion even without further refinement. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[BOATY] The_Chiv Players 1,592 posts 18,060 battles Report post #11 Posted May 8, 2022 7 hours ago, MastigosWilkins said: CVs aren't fair as they are, they break the game, stealth, overall naval tactics, with no counterplay or any skill involved in fighting the incoming strikes. this gives some downsides to CVs and some form of counterplay to surface ships. I am not defending CV's, but this is a wargaming. Since when in the last 100 years has war been FAIR. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Panocek Players 13,176 posts 13,617 battles Report post #12 Posted May 8, 2022 On 5/6/2022 at 7:54 PM, Figment said: - Improve and stimulate stealth, initiative and aggressive play. - Make players shorten distances before engaging, overall decreasing the amount of enemies engaging one another at the same time to make it easier for individuals to make a last stand, rather than be dogpiled. "Improving stealth" and "push for aggressive play" are at odds - you can't make informed decision if its worth committing to a push without knowing what lurks out there. On 5/6/2022 at 7:54 PM, Figment said: Radar - Slightly longer duration - Rotational detection - Intermittant localization (short periods of target visibility as the radar turns in circles) - Line of sight detection only - Works on surfaced subs, but provides less info about a sub at periscope depth (just a blip, no profile) That would require Radar to be either constantly active or have MUCH longer duration and range. Otherwise, no one sane would risk their ship only to have few blips and enemy ship locations refreshing every 3-5 seconds which would greatly diminish usefulness of the consumable. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[-GGS-] Sub_Human Players 634 posts 14,117 battles Report post #13 Posted May 8, 2022 17 hours ago, Toni112007 said: I'd remove carriers, submarines and superships. Instantly a much better game. Thinking about the other Wow. Maybe a WoWs classic? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Figment Beta Tester 3,801 posts 10,499 battles Report post #14 Posted May 9, 2022 On 5/7/2022 at 1:05 PM, Yuu5Eleven said: Would completely kill off CV damage. No idea how you got to the conclusions that this would make them fair. You might aswell not have them in the battle at all. Have you played during RTS CV periods? Single torp waves (depending on CV, could be multiple squadron strikes at once to ensure some hits) could annihilate ships depending on torp spread, amount of torps and angles. Besides, a lot of this is down to damage balance per hit. Which can be modified. I'm not going to comment on exact damage per hit or wave, as this is going to be different for various CV configurations and very much related to the effectiveness and average/optimal hit rate and attack rate of their aircraft and AA. You cannot say anything about this without playtesting and fine tuning. Note that the ships to be targeted would be closer by and not optimal targets. This will be taken into account in the AA (critical) hit rate balancing as well by the Mighty WG Spreadsheet Gods™. Quote Do you realize how easy it is to dodge single strike CVs like the russians for good players? Reducing number of aircraft and amount of strikes per squadron (effectively making every CV single strike) will make it extremly easy to negate damage for any surface ship. Combine it with planes being permanently shot down and you get 30k avg CV damage at current AA levels. You do realise that's partially because Russian aircraft strike from relatively far away to survive AA and thus reaction time is relatively high? You can't dodge a German strike if it's launched right on top of your broadside for instance. Again, this has more to do with response time balance than this particular design. Fewer waves also doesn't mean single waves. Shokaku for instance has a lot more waves than it needs. It would likely be more effective with fewer waves with more torps. Please also note that I've suggested BB turn times to be lowered, making them more vulnerable to air strikes in particular. Torp speed, torp damage, torp spread, torp depth (!), endurance (luck mitigation factor) of aircraft, airspeed, etc. are more than sufficient variables to play around with. I would suggest you can't comment on expected damage dealt without knowing the damage tables, longevity of CVs, amount of aircraft etc. People ran out of aircraft in CVs during RTS times, without doing little damage I might add. Two attack waves in short succession should IMO be the max to deal with at a time as a player, because otherwise you're tasking average and below players too much. That doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to hit better players, but since your range is reduced, there's a much better case to make hits from a wave a bit more reliable, though damage is up in the air for balancing. In short, you're overreacting and dropping to conclusions. Quote Do you realize that squadrons need hp buffer to get strikes through as AA usually always depletes some planes in the current iteration? In a hit luck check system without aircraft hp that's not true. ;) A module-hit-by-luck system can be tweaked to compensate for bad AA ratings much more easily than a hp system, since high levels of hp would simply overwhelm a low AA rating ship to the point it becomes pointless to even have it on. A luck system would also make it possible to balance this between specific units, hence inter-tier combat would be possible to be more fair, where before DPS vs HP would ensure a win in advance for the higher tiers (often without losses) when CVs from different tiers engaged one another. With a luck system you can boost the odds variables of a lower tier when faced with a higher tier or even a specific class quite easily for both A2A and A2G attacks. For instance, you could have ships with next-to-no AA have a higher base chance to hit modules of aircraft (with some modifiers) and critical hits that down the air, but only get a few chances to hit. While ships with a lot of AA could have a low base chance, but the sheer volume of fire giving a lot of hits and chances of critical hits. This way it would be a lot fairer to low rating ships and give them more validity, while they'd still be more vulnerable in general. Quote You pay planes to strike. You can only regenerate a set amount of planes per 20minute battle. Plane numbers are already limited by battle time. Some CV players lose next to no planes in the current setup. You mostly lose air to flak and this can be negated in the current AA meta. It's by no means as limited as it was during the RTS period. Regeneration as a form of replenishment is a bad design choice IMO. Quote Also "slightly higher hp" to cmpensate are you joking? What is slightly please? If a Halland has an AA dps of 500 and you buff plane hp by 10% then it would still not be enough to make planes survive in it's AA for even 2seconds longer. Now remember you saying planes are now limited and even less reserves than there currently are? You realize Halland can ambush planes with AA by staying dark until the planes are to close to disengage? I'm not talking about plane hp. Quote Do you even think this through when making these suggestions? Do you even read this through since you're not at all aware of what is being suggested? :/ You have no clue what has been suggested, because you're incapable of looking past current design and imagining a completely different damage system. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Figment Beta Tester 3,801 posts 10,499 battles Report post #15 Posted May 9, 2022 On 5/8/2022 at 9:55 AM, Panocek said: "Improving stealth" and "push for aggressive play" are at odds - you can't make informed decision if its worth committing to a push without knowing what lurks out there. What little it conflicts, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Surprise encounters improve gameplay experience IMO as it allows both for laying traps and anticipating traps. It requires planning and exit strategies, but it would create a much more dynamic gameplay. Scouting is an essential part of gameplay and currently, I would say it's far too easy, creating predictable, stale, cowardly and conservative play. There's currently little room for aggressive play without expedited punishment. But, we're also talking specifically about protection from long range strikes because those ships don't get immediate visuals on you if information on your position is relayed by radio through a second ship. It doesn't mean you're unaware of what's in your vicinity, rather than having to fear less for broadside strikes from some Yamato or Slava on the other end of the map. On 5/8/2022 at 9:55 AM, Panocek said: That would require Radar to be either constantly active or have MUCH longer duration and range. Otherwise, no one sane would risk their ship only to have few blips and enemy ship locations refreshing every 3-5 seconds which would greatly diminish usefulness of the consumable. Knowledge is power. Too much information power is crippling to units relying on stealth, so it can't be turned on constantly at a greater range, the suggestion to keep it on indefinitely and/or with greater distance would be absolutely devastating to the game playstyle balance fundamentals. Radar in this game is an extra information source that boosts the regular visibility range and overrules concealment ranges of ships. Hence you could argue it's a sanctioned wallhack feature. It's not meant to be a primary passive information source. We already have that in the form of regular line of sight spotting. Using radar from absolute safety has proven very detrimental for the gameplay of other units, obsoleting some or forcing them to become extremely conservative. There's ample use for concealment range overwriting in the open, especially if chances of being instagibbed or heavily crippled from exposure to ships is lower and aggressive play is more incentized. If anything, you could make the radar module a temporary concealment range reducer. Exposing ships say 3km closer than you'd normally spot them. That'd be a huge boon and would make it more useful in general, rather than just against close range stealth ships. As is, ambush play has been severely gutted, which is a lot worse than some radar ships having to use their gimmick in the open to expose invisi-ships (in smoke or out of detection range). This change would allow ambushes to become way more prevalent and hydro a more important counter tool than radar against close range ships, rather than being the poor man's radar + torp detector, which it is today. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Panocek Players 13,176 posts 13,617 battles Report post #16 Posted May 9, 2022 2 minutes ago, Figment said: What little it conflicts, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Surprise encounters improve gameplay experience IMO as it allows both for laying traps and anticipating traps. It requires planning and exit strategies, but it would create a much more dynamic gameplay. Scouting is an essential part of gameplay and currently, I would say it's far too easy, creating predictable, stale, cowardly and conservative play. There's currently little room for aggressive play without expedited punishment. I'm not so sure whether getting "sudden Thunderer appears" when you're in equally concealable cruiser coated in 30mm plating is a "gameplay improvement". And I'd say game gets passive the moment there is failure of spotting. When you see everyone in your flank, its much easier to determine whether to push. Sure, it sucks for concealment dependent ships, but its case of damned if you do, damned if you don't with whole Concealment mechanic being binary in action. Obviously, getting teammates to press W with you is entirely different matter. 6 minutes ago, Figment said: There's ample use for concealment range overwriting in the open For Moskva/Stalingrad, yes. Wandering into Petro/Des Moines headfirst, you WILL get within radar range even if you immediately start turning away. Radar Minotaur/Plymouth on other hand... ye, have fun with that. 12 minutes ago, Figment said: As is, ambush play has been severely gutted, which is a lot worse than some radar ships having to use their gimmick in the open to expose invisi-ships (in smoke or out of detection range). This change would allow ambushes to become way more prevalent and hydro a more important counter tool than radar against close range ships, rather than being the poor man's radar + torp detector, which it is today. With "more focus on ambushes" you will get even more stale gameplay as people would refuse to move anywhere out of fear "there might be bad people out there". High stealth ships like torpedo DD would operate as usual, bringing situation back to square one: if you don't have your own spotter slave do do (counter)spotting, you're not going to have fun. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WildWind84 Players 604 posts 15,961 battles Report post #17 Posted May 9, 2022 For start, first of all - just bring back in time of Odin's Dockyard (can't tell for earlier time because this time is first time when I hear about WOWS and saw). After that implemented some of ideas from autor of the post. EDIT: Idea about Hydro - NOT; also SUBS need to be moved from Random/Ranked or even from Coop. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Figment Beta Tester 3,801 posts 10,499 battles Report post #18 Posted May 9, 2022 5 minutes ago, Panocek said: I'm not so sure whether getting "sudden Thunderer appears" when you're in equally concealable cruiser coated in 30mm plating is a "gameplay improvement". Depends. Are you in his side with your nose pointed at it or is he in yours? 5 minutes ago, Panocek said: And I'd say game gets passive the moment there is failure of spotting. When you see everyone in your flank, its much easier to determine whether to push. Sure, it sucks for concealment dependent ships, but its case of damned if you do, damned if you don't with whole Concealment mechanic being binary in action. Problem is, knowing everything is basically cheating in a game like this. It's too much power to hold, especially over concealment units. Once exposed, they're relatively useless and ineffective for minutes if not dead as everyone reacts to the knowledge. As you said, a wallhack feature like current radar sure makes things easier to decide on a push or not for one side, but it also means ships avoid pushing when they would have the moment they know there's something somewhere. It's game changing. 5 minutes ago, Panocek said: Obviously, getting teammates to press W with you is entirely different matter. I think some don't have that button installed on their keyboard. :/ But if you can get into closer positions, it certainly becomes more appealing to try to close in. Especially for secondary heavy ships. 5 minutes ago, Panocek said: For Moskva/Stalingrad, yes. Wandering into Petro/Des Moines headfirst, you WILL get within radar range even if you immediately start turning away. Radar Minotaur/Plymouth on other hand... ye, have fun with that. You do realise that you too get to move up into better positions closer to the enemy when you're not as prone to broadside strikes from the other side of the map? I loved sitting close in my Cleveland, but constantly had to watch not for the units on this flank, but those I couldn't even see 20-25km out. 5 minutes ago, Panocek said: With "more focus on ambushes" you will get even more stale gameplay as people would refuse to move anywhere out of fear "there might be bad people out there". High stealth ships like torpedo DD would operate as usual, bringing situation back to square one: if you don't have your own spotter slave do do (counter)spotting, you're not going to have fun. I would wager most people liked pre-radar late beta stealth gameplay better. :/ It was a much more dynamic and rewarding game for high risk takers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[HAKUY] Yosha_AtaIante Players 8,032 posts 19,168 battles Report post #19 Posted May 10, 2022 On 5/9/2022 at 11:54 AM, Figment said: Do you even read this through since you're not at all aware of what is being suggested? :/ You have no clue what has been suggested, because you're incapable of looking past current design and imagining a completely different damage system. You are making to little suggestions then. If you need a whole redesign then please propose this while redesign and not just a few single elements. propose how every single cv line will differ from the rest in your redesign too. Then I can judge with my current experience. Until then I will always compare your ideas with the current design since you did in no way give enough information which would describe your whole new design idea 1 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[COOOP] Shirakami_Kon Players 2,624 posts 12,776 battles Report post #20 Posted May 10, 2022 I'd collect Fastmotion's best quotes and make a special captain like the Jingles one spouting those quotes at random. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Figment Beta Tester 3,801 posts 10,499 battles Report post #21 Posted May 12, 2022 On 5/10/2022 at 3:21 PM, Yuu5Eleven said: You are making to little suggestions then. If you need a whole redesign then please propose this while redesign and not just a few single elements. propose how every single cv line will differ from the rest in your redesign too. Then I can judge with my current experience. Until then I will always compare your ideas with the current design since you did in no way give enough information which would describe your whole new design idea The most important conceptual and principle balancing mechanics selected/changes have been mentioned already. But you opted to ignore even the most major changes earlier, while relating everything within the framework of the current system. That's not how it'll work. So I can't say your assessment and conclusions, subsequent behaviour and justification for that behaviour are correct. I propose you keep an open mind, and realise you're being very defensive out of fear of the unknown and due to making assumptions. I'm not out to neuter CVs into oblivion. I'm trying to make them more palletable to other players and define their role and interaction better. However, I understand you're in need of more information, fair enough. Just remember you can't expect me to draw up extensive damage tables for a system I'm not going to be balancing personally however, especially not if we consider the low chance of implementation and how much personal and situational interpretation it's going to leave regardless that will lead to off-hand dismissals. Besides, I have a life. ;P Still, we can get into some examples later if you want. Regardless, I'll try to write out what's in my head a bit more precise for you and hope you appreciate the effort I put into this. Please appreciate this is complex stuff to convey and cover in a way that's brief and clear to everyone (hint: it's never going to be easy to explain in short as it's complex). I've covered this in many separate topics throughout the years, so I sadly can't just link you to them. I'm sure I'm leaving out some inter-CV balancing details, so feel free to ask or make suggestions. The general gist is the following with respect to CVs: AA: The relation between AA and aircraft, the limitations imposed on range and volleys of attack are the primary difference with today where it comes to interaction between aircraft, friendly and target ships. Instead of hitpoint/dps basis, I would use a luck factor per offensive and defensive unit and checks for critical damage as an alternative to today's hp system, allowing a higher chance for low-AA rated units to shoot down air, while higher rated AA units get better protected AA angles to the sides especially and more checks at a lowered luck rate compared to low rating AA. Basically, there's more ships should be able to do to mitigate damage and more over, reduce the threat of CVs down the line by wearing down their airpower. Some AA ships will have improved influence over air strikes on them and in their vicinity by reintroducing the "panic" effect (at a less severe rate than during RTS, which was silly as you could go broadside on a stationary cruiser and miss all torps at times) that spreads the attack predictably slightly wider, improving dodge chances. It means aircraft would not have hp indicators anymore, instead they'd get module damage affecting their performance and whether or not they die. You could say that's akin to hitpoints for modules in the aircraft (say: wings, engine, fuel, fuselage, pilots, payload). A hit could be cripling and cause a crash or mid air explosion at worst, or make the chance of the next hit being critical higher. It could mean the first shots kills an aircraft, but it could also mean it takes 30 checks for a lucky pilot. Higher tier aircraft get slightly better odds. However, this also means you can make A2A between aircraft of different tiers more equal than if you'd simply boost both DPS and HP of a higher tier as is what WG has always done in the past (HP and DPS can never be balanced if one side always gets more of both after all). There was no way to overcome that without AA dps. With a module based system, this can be tweaked to be near even, even for lower tier aircraft. It means CVs can face +1 higher CVs again, thus making a case to reintroduce odd numbered tier CVs and make the tiering more even and progress better. Air approach angles should become more important in both attack and defense, giving the defenders a better chance to control the engagement to some degree, it'd be more about risk and exposure management vs attrition. Overall the main goal is to increase the sense of control for the target over the engagement, improve teamwork and increase the chance of engaging the CV directly by reducing the distance required to travel to reach it, while retaining the enjoyment of the CV player as a jack of all trades, despite of narrowing their focus and constraining their abilities to sections of the map and having to target more challenging targets. Live for CVs would improve in the following ways: Reduced exp grinds to the next tier MM at -1 to +1 tier, not -2 to +2 reducing AA gaps Much needed improved movement controls Improved captain AI and map controls (especially in terms of backing up and plotting courses at variations of speed) Proper switching from flight to sailing as in the RTS setup (just between ship and aircraft view). I would be inclined to have the old map method for aircraft with waypoints reinstated, so you can simultaneously control ship and aircraft as is required, especially when the ship is forced to be closer to the action Improved non-AA secondaries effectiveness (similar to the effectiveness of some German CV secondaries, but nothing too excessive, aircraft remain primary source of firepower and DDs must be able to approach), to compensate for its higher closer-to-frontline risk profile. Bit higher accuracy for non-AA secondaries Slightly greater range (depends on tier and CV) Improved A2A fighter benefits and control (see below) Higher hp or slower BB style heal to compensate for increased risks to ship (slower since CV will be more likely to stay in hiding) Reduced squadron size or hp of aircraft when you run out of air no longer affect your ability to get close Enemy CVs can't quick multi-drop A2A anymore Improved direct and indirect ASW capabilities MM time should be reduced Can enter ranked battles at odd tiers unless otherwise restricted Much higher exp gain for protecting allied ships from enemy air strikes Squadrons won't necessarily get instagibbed from enemy fighters engaging Note that reduced hit rate might result in compensation of damage per hit. Live for CV's will worsen in the following ways: Less mapwide engagement power Reduced match influence Higher chance of DDs breaking through Higher chance of losing caps, including HQ Having less flight range and time to engage means: Having to get closer to the frontline and thus brings one closer to effective enemy range Increases chance of detection and thus increases risks to the ship If you do not get closer, fewer targets will be available Having to make quicker decisions (engage or not engage) Worse optimal strike angles Less optimal target selection (having to engage in areas with multiple AA coverages instead of picking out just the easy targets) Being less able to keep targets scouted for a prolonged period of time Not being able to drop fighters on a whim Reduced spotting damage Reduced suppression of stealth ships Reduced perma-spotting (knowledge for the team) Normalised repair perks + reintroducing flight deck fires Fire more dangerous Worse repair rates mean burning becomes more dangerous Aircraft effectiveness reduces when on fire as they take longer to take flight Flooding more dangerous Submarines more dangerous as pings aren't auto-cancelled No regeneration of aircraft anymore: you can run out. Have to pre-select and rearm/reload your aircraft like in RTS times. No quick changing on the fly. No more quick multi-drop of A2A fighters by launching aircraft dropping A2A and skipping to the next air unit Enemy CV has more control over their fighters blocking your paths and protecting enemy ships Less picking on ships with low AA ratings Can't sealclub endlessly with low tier CV after going through the exp grind (can still have multiple low tier CV, so it's relative) Variations are just that. Variations of variables allowed to be varied within a general scope of fair competition, specializations and accompanying strengths and weaknesses. General premise behind a CV is being a jack of all trades, but that means it must be weaker at each job than other ships, so its combination is an equal. Its power should be projected and concentrated on the area it resides in and be less of a long distance threat to units on the other end of the map. Especially in terms of spotting. I cannot and will not jump to specific spreadsheet differences for each nation as this is a balancing issue that you can't discuss on forums very well as you have to tweak that in practice. I can however set limitations based on today's and the past transgressions of what should be considered reasonable attack waves to deal with. Aircraft For all aircraft, limitations are introduced compared to today. Aircraft will have fastly more limited radio ranges compared to today, in order to reduce the scouting ability and allow fleets and units to be detected, but not outright neutered or pulverized by the CV's allies or the CV itself by being near permaspotted. Range limitations by flight time (fuel). All aircraft will have a timer before they have to return to the CV. Radio limitations through direct and indirect information sharing. Being within radio range of an aircraft provides direct visibility on targets scouted by the aircraft. Being connected indirectly by another ship (or other aircraft squadron) provides map position and direction knowledge, but no visible target. Not being connected indirectly by another ship provides just blips on the map with unit type, but without directional information. This information will have to be requested/told by the players through this wild concept called chatting and teamwork. As such aircraft will be used to detect enemy positions and direct units towards one another, but less so to direct fire until ships are closer to one another. As such they'd act less as a passive force multiplier throughout the entire match. Torpedo bombers Amount of torpedoes in a wave: 2 to 5 (where tier level is slightly more relevant to the amount of torpedoes than the nation) Spread: converging slightly to diverging significantly The narrower the spread and higher the speed, the lower the potential damage per torp. Torpedo activation distances and speeds: similar for all CVs, similar to RTS era Waves: max. 2 in a row (not simultaneous as in RTS period) Reduced flight range, but slightly longer flight time than other aircraft due to longer lining up distance need Torpedoes may be deep water or regular torpedoes depending on nation. Can drop temporary/destructable ASW buoys that listen for subs using pings lighting up subs in the area intermittently AP Dive bombers Probably: Lowered citadel damage (down to ~60%-75% of today to reduce the devastating effect it can have in one strike). Better survival luck rate to resemble more protection from AA due to steeper attack angle Slightly sooner locking of attack distance on approach (akin to RTS period) to allow for maneouvring units to become a bit less vulnerable. Think of how Dutch air strikes can miss if improperly timed, but decision is made from a little more close up, so should be easier to time than Dutch air strikes. Reduced flight range, slightly more range than HE aircraft due to more precise lining up need If needed compensation for reduced citadel damage and approach locking: slight spread improvement in width direction of reticule slightly lowered chance of ricochets (slightly higher average damage for non-citadel hits). More reliable average damage. Can drop depth charges HE bombers Not much change wrt today, aside from distance being more limited Sooner locking of attack distance on approach (akin to RTS period) to allow for fast maneouvring units to become less vulnerable. Think of how Dutch air strikes can miss if improperly timed, but decision is made from a little more close up, so should be easier to time than Dutch air strikes. Reduced flight range, slightly more range than rocket aircraft due to lining up need Can drop depth charges AP rocket bombers Slightly more consistent damage Reduced flight range, slightly more than HE rocket aircraft due to lining up need. Can engage subs down to periscope depth with missiles that might cause flooding. HE Rocket bombers Not much change wrt today, aside from flight distance being more limited Most reduced flight range due to requiring little angling to do some damage and to protect DDs a bit extra Can engage subs up to 15m depth with HE explosions A2A fighters AI controlled, with more control for the player Can be called into specific areas using the map mode, but have to fly in from the CV. Can be attached to friendly ships as in the RTS era Can be relocated on the map if there's "flight time" left. Cruiser and BB controlled fighers can be deployed in the same way Engage swifter once detected aircraft approach their sphere of influence Limited flight/reposition time, but fixed minimal loiter time to protect an area. Any time not spent on relocating increase the loiter time once the fixed loiter time is used up. Can engage aircraft encountered on their path from CV to destination Increased Exp gain for shooting down enemy aircraft Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[OM] ghostbuster_ Players 4,996 posts 21,881 battles Report post #22 Posted May 12, 2022 On 5/7/2022 at 1:05 PM, Yuu5Eleven said: Would completely kill off CV damage. No idea how you got to the conclusions that this would make them fair. You might aswell not have them in the battle at all. Do you realize how easy it is to dodge single strike CVs like the russians for good players? Reducing number of aircraft and amount of strikes per squadron (effectively making every CV single strike) will make it extremly easy to negate damage for any surface ship. Combine it with planes being permanently shot down and you get 30k avg CV damage at current AA levels "oh no, CVs might start losing planes again" Quote Do you realize that squadrons need hp buffer to get strikes through as AA usually always depletes some planes in the current iteration? You pay planes to strike. You can only regenerate a set amount of planes per 20minute battle. Plane numbers are already limited by battle time. Also "slightly higher hp" to cmpensate are you joking? What is slightly please? If a Halland has an AA dps of 500 and you buff plane hp by 10% then it would still not be enough to make planes survive in it's AA for even 2seconds longer. Now remember you saying planes are now limited and even less reserves than there currently are? You realize Halland can ambush planes with AA by staying dark until the planes are to close to disengage? ehm, reminds me losing all the squadrons to a full AA worcester with suddenly activated def AA. or losing half to a mino which turned its AA on once you were within 7.2 km. or losing everything to a full AA grozovoi back in the RTS times, when AA was actually a thing. but hey there was an solution for this. you knew the locations of these ships and you didnt fly back there intil they get HE spamed and lost fair bit of their AA. why shouldnt it be the case with the reworked CVs? Quote Do you even think this through when making these suggestions? He did just as much as you did imo. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[WOTN] Faceoff Players 383 posts Report post #23 Posted May 12, 2022 On 5/6/2022 at 7:54 PM, Figment said: Just going to sum up in a nutshell my thoughts about the game and its classes and mechanics here, since it's so obvious people like to put words in your mouth. There's more obviously, but yeah. Many of these topics I've done more extensively elsewhere, some I've not mentioned at all before, some I'm still pondering about the best implementation.c General mechanic changes: Goals: - Improve and stimulate stealth, initiative and aggressive play. - Make players shorten distances before engaging, overall decreasing the amount of enemies engaging one another at the same time to make it easier for individuals to make a last stand, rather than be dogpiled. - Mitigate effectiveness of CVs Radar - Slightly longer duration - Rotational detection - Intermittant localization (short periods of target visibility as the radar turns in circles) - Line of sight detection only - Works on surfaced subs, but provides less info about a sub at periscope depth (just a blip, no profile) Hydro - Not able to detect stationary ships over max hydro range -2km - Intermittant map detection at +1 to +2km from current range depending on captain skills - More effective against subs than it is now - In combination with onboard ASW creates ASW targeting indicators for subs up to a depth of 40m - Affects depth setting of depth charges to be closer to actual depth of submarine (better targeting than with new ping mechanic (see below)) ASW - All ships that can encounter subs should have some form of ASW Radio - larger effect on battles by being less available with fukll map overlap - visible spotting only for first hand information (includes aircraft) - map spotting only for second hand (relayed) information Smoke - More captain skills related to smoke to create trade-offs or changes to smoke - Thicker, but shorter duration cloud: slightly reduced detection (incl. while firing) compared to normal - Short duration thin barrier cloud with anti-radar capabilities - just shows one big barrier on the map when radared - Wider, shorter duration cloud (trade-off) - Smaller, longer duration cloud (trade-off) - Smoke deployable while remaining unseen at slightly higher speeds Goals: More variety in smokescreen effects and smoke DD gameplay (may be applied to Italian cruisers and BBs) New weather effects on maps: - Slow moving fog banks (act as smoke screens) - Low hanging cloud cover (acts as smoke screens against higher altitude aircraft only, would have to make an attack run to get under it) - Heavy fog conditions (overall reduction in visibility across the map) - Heavy snow and rain conditions (reduces aircraft range too) Captain skills - Package the too situational skills together (AA fighter, AA and ASW for instance) to make them more attractive - By packaging, create some room for more specialized options or alternate strengths (particularly for things like smoke screens) Goals: more variety that are also valid choices. AA: A2A fighters: - Less power distance between tiers of CV aircraft and fighters in general through luck based engagement rather than DPS and hp - Fighters from CVs and ships can be assigned to friendly ships, deployed to protect an area or circle one's own ship (default). When deployed from a CV they have to fly to that spot, from the CV. Not drop out of a bunch of aircraft. (Limits immediate spotting advantage over an area). CV deployed fighters can be deployed one squadron at a time while other squadrons are flying and return once their fuel runs out (bit more fuel than bombers). Hence they have limited range. (Basically like the older RTS fighters) - Fighters will engage enemy aircraft that are detected in a larger radius than the one they're circling from the moment that circle is touched and they've reached the circle themselves. Should be less engagement lag than currently the case. Ship AA: - More luck based AA than DPS based, allowing lower tier AA ships to also get a chance to kill aircraft of higher tier more consistently. Hit rate depending on angle of approach wrt to AA bubbles. Luck level increased at better AA ratings, but higher basic luck level for lower tier ships to compensate a bit for their lack of AA bubbles. Higher tier ships get better angle coverage and increased frequency of luck checks based on AA modules alive, making it harder to reduce damage by approach route for CV. Should be easier for CV to get a lucky low-damage-taken run against low tier AA ships, but should never be without danger. Approaching a broadside would be a lot more risky for a CV - and thus impactful for AA firing ships - but of course the chances of hitting with torps would be higher too. - Light to medium panic effect increasing the spread for enemy fighters upon activation of an AA boost (less severe than the old one) depending on AA rating of the ship. - Note that I'd have CV attacks lock in earlier, giving the target ship time to maneouvre and for instance decide to increase or decrease the amount of AA by angling at the oncoming aircraft, or opting to dodge. Either way, it gives targets a choice on how to fight back: eat away the CVs capabilities to sustain attacks, or try and dodge damage, or try to do a bit of both. General class changes (would not necessarily affect all ships of said class): BB: - Rudder reduced back to beta quality (less able to steer fast to dodge torps) - Slightly more effective torpedobarriers (% reduction) - Reduced % of damage from citadel hits on cruisers - More effective secondaries (in general, not for Schlieffen types). - Reduced accuracy at range - Torps instated for BBs that historically had them, regardless if it fits with the rest of the line (captain skill argument is crap IMO) - Fewer BB in regular MM per side (possibly allow BC to sit in for BB and cruisers alike, provided each side gets one) - Occasional BB only matches (get the excess amounts out of the queue, would probably be enjoyable for BB players) Goal: more CQC situations, less punishment for ships taking the initiative. DD: - Reduce radar range on DDs with radar a bit to off-set the power distance with smokescreen centric DDs. - Ping mode to detect submarines when in ASW targeting mode (for when hydro is not on the ship or in effect) - Ping mechanic let's enemy sub and nearby enemy vessels in line of sight (<5km) know where the pinging vessel is Cruisers: - Increased AA rating of nearby ships when an AA cruiser sails in proximity of other allied ships ("AA escort boost") - Reduced detectability (-4% tot -10%) compared to now for some ships, allowing improved firing from safety and easier disengagement and short range engagement with torps - Disappear from sight slightly faster (-3s to 5s depending on ship) - Ping mode to detect submarines when in ASW targeting mode (for when hydro is not on the ship or in effect) - Ping mechanic let's enemy sub and nearby enemy vessels in line of sight (<5km) know where the pinging vessel is Carriers: - Start of line at T5 - Optional alternative to T5 CV if T4 is a must: * Protected MM for ships with barely any AA at T3-4 * Severe hardcap limitation on amount of T4 and T5 CV matches per year after initial grind is concluded. Consider them training ships. - Shorter exp grind, with CVs at each tier again - More limited numbers of aircraft on board (more attrition sensitive), shot down aircraft cannot be replaced once the reserve is gone. - Fewer waves per sortie (at most two waves) - Fuel limitation on flight range to aircraft (either: sit too far back and your aircraft don't make it home, or: they auto-return home after a certain flight distance) - Must enter AA zone with aircraft to engage a ship (of course island cover and leading torps might still work around that) - Better AI pathing options and controls (including setting ships to reverse), goes for other ships too, but it's a must for this class - Able to switch between air and ship control more fluently without air having to return or having just AI control over your ship - Limited radio information sharing from aircraft (map knowledge, rather than direct visuals, unless first hand information) -> reduced direct effective spotting ability without reducing the ability to spot - Lock in attack decision making earlier in the attack akin to the RTS period - Removal of passive bonus to repair etc. - Reintroduction of deckfire delays (delaying rather than completely blocking air strikes. Disables switching squadrons. Provides extra vulnerability at close engagements) - Reintroduction of prelaunch squadron selection of squadrons as during RTS (makes it harder to adapt to the current situation, requires some forethought and more attrition sensitive) - Slightly higher HP to compensate if needed - Slightly improved secondary stats - ASW added: detection buoys deployable from torpedo bombers, creates localized hydro/ping until destroyed or expired (3mins) - ASW added: HE /AP bombers can be used for depth charge drops (less effective and fewer drops than current) - ASW added: Rocket bombers can engage submarines at periscope depth or on the surface Goals: Localize air power more to allow other flanks to have more initiative, reduce impact of aircraft spotting, force ships to engage at closer ranges, require CV to sail closer to the front line and thus in more relative danger, at max distance, reduce effectiveness of CV by reducing its angles on the target. Improve experience in lower tiers for poor AA ships. Subs: Aside from aforementioned changes to ASW on other ships - More forward starting position - Shorter radio distances to mimic isolation effects - Ping for situational awareness underwater beyond 2km, including map awareness beyond 3km., - The slower a sub sails, the more knowledge it can get about its surroundings through listening to engine sounds (a submerged sub gets basic map information of approximate ship locations on compass vectors, with a range estimate. Think of a circle divided in directional sections and distances, rather than ship silhouettes. Only at periscope depth can they actually start targeting ships). - Detection and targeting of subs is done with pings up to 8km away in the same map detection way, but become clear targets at 5-6km. Could be targeted with acoustic torpedoes, countermeasures like decoys could be available. - More fog of war if not pinging, but also less chance of being sighted - Different situational awareness levels and balance (actual use of a periscope to detect stuff at periscope depth for instance). - The more you ping, the more accurate your situational awareness, drawback: your enemy can home in on your position too (every next ping provides a more narrow direction and range estimate) - More diverse modules - Remove homing torps as standard torps, only for specific nations and with more limited arcs, range or speeds as special torpedo - More sensitive to surface ship hydro than today, avoid by deep dive - Deep dives (40+m) can cause spontaneous floodings if they take over 20-30s - Lower torp frequency (ship dependend) - Diving choice with more consequences (ballast and air tank) - Flooding and fires on board can affect need to surface by draining air and drag ship too much ballast - Oil spills and wreckage creating a path in the direction of flight (kinda implemented differently from what I'd do recently, but it gives a similar idea). - Possibly fake death oil spill by sub (counts as kill for enemy and costs sub captain exp./silver) Goals: major overhaul, more overextending sensitive glass cannon with ways to destroy them indirectly (by forcing them down), little bit more of an assassin. And yes, not going to happen, but hey. Most of these are my thoughts exactly, This would force people to work as a team. And not just trying to get top rank and most kills and most dmg. You either have to rethink the reward system completely by removing dmg and kills, and just award points. I really want the stealth back to the game, it was destroyed when radar came. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[HAKUY] Yosha_AtaIante Players 8,032 posts 19,168 battles Report post #24 Posted May 12, 2022 I'm going to read this after work and give you a detailed response. What I can see at a glance however is that your system is far too complicated for the average player. The amount of things one would need to account for while playing will make dedicated players who understand this system fully far more powerful than your average CV player reintroducing once again (what is already here tbh) a massive skillgap between CV players and once again would tilt the scales in favor for the team with the better CV player. It introduces more problems than there currently are just by being so overly complicated. It doesn't help that you want to force players to get better at the game. This never works. There isn't a single game out there who produced a majority playerbase which is highly skilled. All your suggestions will achieve is an even smaller CV player population of very good players which will slowly be declining because of the non rewarding playstyle and inconsistent luck based AA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[SWN] Asatori Players 377 posts 11,666 battles Report post #25 Posted May 12, 2022 I'd change the development team. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
