How to properly balance CVs

[lankylad11_lankylad]

 

With this setups, US CV would be hilariously overpowered.

Due to the larger squadsize and healthpool, US bombers are barely influenced by denfensive AA-fire. You can still land 1-2 bombs with the divebombers and you barely recognize any changes from the already tight torpspread.

Giving US cv these numbers of squadrons at high-tier couldn't even make a IJN cv fighter-setup useful.

The only advantage IJN has, is the speed. Survivability, dps and especially ammo (1 ijn fightersquad can take down ~50% planes of your whole setup without strafe, while ijn has to reload after every squad) are much stronger on US cvs and the only way to counter them is strafe (too bad they nerfed it).

I like your idea of fighters beeing able to retreat. nothing is more frustrating when you get that us-squad down to 1 plane without loss and he still kills your whole 4 fighters because they ran out of ammo.

 

I know thats what i said.  you can't take US in the strike power direction because BBs would whine.  so instead i recommended US providing balanced loadouts so they could retain air superiority while having some striking potential and IJN going strike  not IJN Air Superiority and Strike

[lankylad11_lankylad]

I'm also waiting for them to reveal what they are going to do with carriers cos i dont want to grind out a Hakuryu for the goalposts to move completely.  i have already been burnt badly by getting a CV line to 10 only for the reason i got it there to be removed

[robihr]

only AS that i worry about except haku is saipan (well saipan doesnt even need to have AS). haku can cover large area with 4 fighters, while saipan has such fast fighters that most conventional luring tactics dont apply.

[Aotearas]

 

With this setups, US CV would be hilariously overpowered.

Due to the larger squadsize and healthpool, US bombers are barely influenced by denfensive AA-fire. You can still land 1-2 bombs with the divebombers and you barely recognize any changes from the already tight torpspread.

Giving US cv these numbers of squadrons at high-tier couldn't even make a IJN cv fighter-setup useful.

The only advantage IJN has, is the speed. Survivability, dps and especially ammo (1 ijn fightersquad can take down ~50% planes of your whole setup without strafe, while ijn has to reload after every squad) are much stronger on US cvs and the only way to counter them is strafe (too bad they nerfed it).

I like your idea of fighters beeing able to retreat. nothing is more frustrating when you get that us-squad down to 1 plane without loss and he still kills your whole 4 fighters because they ran out of ammo.

 

That's why I'd give the US a damage focus with dive bombers, which whilst still doing good damage plus fires, are not as potent as a torpedo bomber strike. So even when pushing through AA, they shouldn't be able to deal too much damage.

 

And like I said, only a rough example. Alternatively I wouldn't mind reducing the squadron aircraft counts to tweak the total AA and damage potential per squadron so it's not amplified too much by individual aircraft stats.

 

As always, I'm a CV newbie and I'm mostly throwing ideas around that I think might make for a better inter-CV balance without the imho boring air superiourity loadouts.

[Ishiro32]

Please excuse me for this short anwser, but I am a bit tired right now.

While I do agree with reason why you want to do it. I kinda would love for the fighter heavy CVs to still be a thing. There is something to this more defensive and supportish gameplay style that some people like. I just think execution is poor.
There is one thing which I think is the core of the issues with CV and your idea kinda adresses it in small way. Core issue is risk, CVs can fail spectaculary in such a way that it throws a whole team under a bus. It is one of the reasons why I dislike so much the sniper meta. It is one of the reasons why some people pick fighters decks to begin with... fear of losing a game for the whole team. Differences in impact is huge and with MM if enemy CV is better than you, not only will he do much more, but he will also hinder your performance. That's why you can have over 70% winratio in them just by playing solo.
There is also a bit of training issue. There are players on tier VIII who are not aware of the ALT attack, which is considered pretty much most basic skill you need to have to perform. Because game poorly explains everything it just makes problem bigger and bigger. Not to mention that training how to perform manual drop takes some time and you have so much stress to perform right now, you have so few drops to learn it. This is an issue.

Ehhh... tired... for the moment, that's all 

[Ictogan]

Btw guys keep in mind that the reason I'm suggesting this isn't for CV vs CV balance, it's to create a better basis for CV vs other ships balance by removing an element that CVs also need to be balanced against.

[Capra76]

Btw guys keep in mind that the reason I'm suggesting this isn't for CV vs CV balance, it's to create a better basis for CV vs other ships balance by removing an element that CVs also need to be balanced against.

 

If we're talking CV v other ships can I repeat my earlier question, what does a balanced CV look like and what is it balanced against?

[robihr]

 

If we're talking CV v other ships can I repeat my earlier question, what does a balanced CV look like and what is it balanced against?

 

500k average damage

 

but jokes aside, good question.

[lankylad11_lankylad]

 

If we're talking CV v other ships can I repeat my earlier question, what does a balanced CV look like and what is it balanced against?

 

a balanced CV means that another CV of a different nation and the same tier can challenge it effectively played well.  it also means that you can put a strike in on a same tier battleship and come away with at least two thirds of the planes that entered.  no way should attacking a lone unescorted BB of the same tier cost you an entire attack wing, as it does at the moment, often before your birds have put anything in the water

[lankylad11_lankylad]

Btw guys keep in mind that the reason I'm suggesting this isn't for CV vs CV balance, it's to create a better basis for CV vs other ships balance by removing an element that CVs also need to be balanced against.

 

you create balance in CV versus other ships by reverting AA changes in 0.5.6 and indeed even beyond that, nerfing the AA found on NC and Iowa further perhaps to 0.5.2 levels.  I'm happy with the balance against cruisers and destroyers, its just the AA of high tier battleships i have a massive issue with.  at the moment, an aircraft carrier is not allowed to punish a same tier battleship for sailing off alone without suffering heavily for it, even a same tier one, even a tier 10 CV against a tier 8 BB you have issues.  This is simply wrong.  The counter of CVs is NOT battleships, it might be 3, 4 BBs sticking together though but it is the defensive fire of cruisers.  The only CV i am interested in playing at the moment is Langley, once this is fixed i will bring my shokaku out.  Midway comes back out when the loadouts are fixed, and i may consider like a lexington at that point also.  now IJN ones tier 5 and up are simply better than US ones.  because that is totally how history panned out....  

[Aerroon]

Just remove them from the game.

 

Look at how many matches there already are without CVs.

 

At least I wouldn't be under the illusion anymore.

[159Hunter]

 

Yeah, but the main problem that I want to address here is that because of AS setups, CVs have to be balanced to be able to be able to do some damage even when playing against an AS CV and the enemy has a bit of AA. Without them, CV vs other ship classes could more easily be balanced imo.

 

I know bogue in AS is a thing, same goes for Lexington. But most other cv players I encounter are in strike / balanced (high tier US ) anyways. Now if that means you occasionaly encounter an AS CV then you will do less damage. It will take you a lot longer, and more positioning to do the damage, but you'll still do damage ( remember that Bogue in AS is 'special' as at that tier the amount of ammo is just ridiculously high, a lot less of that at higher tiers ).

Remember, a CV is not all about damage, you need to do spotting as well.

 

Look at team battles, most cvs might attempt a DD strike, or maybe a lone BB. But otherwise all they do is spot ( because AA is ridiculous ). So yeah, they might not end up at the top of their team, but they are a valuable asset for the team.

[lankylad11_lankylad]

 

I know bogue in AS is a thing, same goes for Lexington. But most other cv players I encounter are in strike / balanced (high tier US ) anyways. Now if that means you occasionaly encounter an AS CV then you will do less damage. It will take you a lot longer, and more positioning to do the damage, but you'll still do damage ( remember that Bogue in AS is 'special' as at that tier the amount of ammo is just ridiculously high, a lot less of that at higher tiers ).

Remember, a CV is not all about damage, you need to do spotting as well.

 

Look at team battles, most cvs might attempt a DD strike, or maybe a lone BB. But otherwise all they do is spot ( because AA is ridiculous ). So yeah, they might not end up at the top of their team, but they are a valuable asset for the team.

 

the ideal set up for lexington is 2/1/1 but WG apparently wont allow that.  i fail to see why that is overpowered.   Ranger had a big problem at tier 7 because 2/2/2 outclassed 1/1/1 because barrage and if you went 0/1/3 you lost, and if you went 2/0/2 you sacrifice all torpedo bombers, and still dont really gain proper air superiority because they can tie up fighters while they get through.  the latter works almost on lexington with 1000lb bombs, but they moved the problem of balance at tier 7 into tier 8 as well instead of fixing tier 7.  2/1/1 v 2/2/2 was perfectly balanced.  what we want to achieve is a situation where one nation is better at strike  and one nation is better at gaining air superiority WHILE STILL RETAINING SOME STRIKE POWER.  we simply haven't got that at the moment.  I mean US CVs being allowed to gain some aerial superiority without sacrificing torpedo bombers.  Barrage certainly doesn't help the situation here, because it allows an IJN AS deck to beat a USN one but the IJN AS deck gets torpedo and dive bombers and the US doesnt.  thats not fair.   as for doing spotting.  in a random battle, people play CVs to do damage to get credits and xp just as everyone else, and spotting is simply not rewarded.  a CV can do much better by focusing on smashing the enemy Battleships and getting them killed directly or indirectly.  WG need to change the way xp is rewarded to change this.  But high tier CVs are basically unplayable in the current patch anyway until they roll AA changes back.  As for high tier US AS setups, you wont see them till we get a 3/1/1 set up.  you can't gain proper air superiority over a Taiho/Hakuruyu set up that way anywaywith that 3/2/2 4/2/2 loadout.    

[lankylad11_lankylad]

what we need among aircraft carriers is the right balance between attack aircraft and battleship AA which they are designed to counter, but can't at the moment.  i.e a carrier should be able to get a strike off at a same tier BB without suffering too many casualties  on the way in, some on the way out is fair enough for the US ones so there is a cost but its not prohibitive.  We also need balance between carriers so each line has distinctive strengths and weaknesses. I'm hoping that if they nerfed Midway and Essex because they out damaged the IJN ones a lot, they will now look and see the IJN ones out damage US at every tier, while not killing too many less planes each game so do something about it in 0.5.7

[Ictogan]

 

I know bogue in AS is a thing, same goes for Lexington. But most other cv players I encounter are in strike / balanced (high tier US ) anyways. Now if that means you occasionaly encounter an AS CV then you will do less damage. It will take you a lot longer, and more positioning to do the damage, but you'll still do damage ( remember that Bogue in AS is 'special' as at that tier the amount of ammo is just ridiculously high, a lot less of that at higher tiers ).

Remember, a CV is not all about damage, you need to do spotting as well.

 

Look at team battles, most cvs might attempt a DD strike, or maybe a lone BB. But otherwise all they do is spot ( because AA is ridiculous ). So yeah, they might not end up at the top of their team, but they are a valuable asset for the team.

 

I don't really mind paying against them, but I feel like they are causing some rather large imbalances in the game. At tier 5 the CVs are just brokenly OP when there is no AS Bogue involved, yet AA at that tier can't really be buffed because AS Bogue it's a thing and drawing average damage down a lot.

 

At higher tiers I don't really see too much of an impact of AS CVs. I can't really say that I'm doing less damage in my Shokaku when I'm up against an AS Lexi.

 

And yes, they can be decent at team battles, but if neither team had one, they wouldn't really be need that much for it.

[RogDodgeUK]

moved to Ships / Aircraft Carriers

[Aerroon]

moved to Ships / Aircraft Carriers

 

Why was this moved?

 

The section for "Ships / Aircraft Carriers" quite literally states "GUIDES" on it. This is clearly not a guide.

[jonasnee]

 

Why was this moved?

 

The section for "Ships / Aircraft Carriers" quite literally states "GUIDES" on it. This is clearly not a guide.

 

the world is a weird place, why they called it guides over ship discussion is weird too me too.

[Dark_messiah93]

Uhm I have idea. Remove the special ability of fighters. Totally unbalanced and game breaking.

[HaganeNoKaze]

@Dark_messiah93 It's unbalanced on Saipan, but it's necessary for others, or USN will allways air supremacy if AA deck chosen. All CV should be able to deal with fighters, no matter what or setup in ennemy team.

Btw, US strike really need at least one fighter

 

[lankylad11_lankylad]

@Dark_messiah93 It's unbalanced on Saipan, but it's necessary for others, or USN will allways air supremacy if AA deck chosen. All CV should be able to deal with fighters, no matter what or setup in ennemy team.

Btw, US strike really need at least one fighter

 

 

agree and higher mid tier AS decks need a torpedo bomber.  please please please can we have 2/1/1 on ranger and lexington.  the thing i really don't like is the fact the US have to make huge sacrifices not to go stock, but stock is often insufficient

[th3freakie]

 

Why was this moved?

 

The section for "Ships / Aircraft Carriers" quite literally states "GUIDES" on it. This is clearly not a guide.

 

It's always thus. If someone makes a thread to discuss a class' role on the game within the larger context, the mods come and kick it to the abandoned parts of the forum. Same happened when I did a thread on carrier gameplay. The only thread that seems to have survived this fate was Kazomir's.

 

Not sure if it is done on purpose to silence dissent, or if the mods just can't be arsed to read the threads and mechanically put everything mentioning [class] in [class]'s subforum.

[Cadelanne]

Ictogan, the main issue is that you're basing your argument on the fact that strike wings are designed to be able to deal damages trough AS set up, which imo isn't true.

 

If you have fighter squads sticking to your strike wing, shooting at it, you'll never ever be able to deal damage. This isn't designed so strike setup pass trough AS setup while losing planes, mitigating it's damage. Tho strike setup can outsmart AS setup, which is what makes it playable. AS vs strike is all about brain and strategy and I think it's perfectly fine as it is.

 

Also, I agree that carriers should be able to have somehow custom loadouts. That way CV players could imagine more different strategies, and really play its own style.

 

Everyone know AA is OP and badly designed, even most BBs who have played carriers agree. There's no point in discussing this further.

[Art185]

How to properly balance CVs? Just remove them once and for all! There is no other class DESIGNED to have as much impact on a battle than CVs, which leads to a situation where the skill of the enemies CV and yours will decide which team will win... Right now a good CV can outplay every other class and win matches "alone" by having someone to cap, its absolutely retarded! 

Had so many rounds in the last days where one of the CVs was good and the other one could have just been a bot, according to his behavior... No single player should have such impact on rounds without every other player beeing able to counter act him. Which you cant right now cause of the non existent turn rate of planes, way too low arming time of their torps, too high speeds of CVs, too low spotting range of CVs, endless amount of reserve planes, complete RNG from AAs etc. etc....  A good CV player simply has a way to deal with every other class and player without the need of any skills (predicition/aim) just by clicking in his stupid RTS game.

 

[edited]

[Malim0o]

How to properly balance CVs? Just remove them once and for all! There is no other class DESIGNED to have as much impact on a battle than CVs, which leads to a situation where the skill of the enemies CV and yours will decide which team will win... Right now a good CV can outplay every other class and win matches "alone" by having someone to cap, its absolutely retarded! 

Had so many rounds in the last days where one of the CVs was good and the other one could have just been a bot, according to his behavior... No single player should have such impact on rounds without every other player beeing able to counter act him. Which you cant right now cause of the non existent turn rate of planes, way too low arming time of their torps, too high speeds of CVs, too low spotting range of CVs, endless amount of reserve planes, complete RNG from AAs etc. etc....  A good CV player simply has a way to deal with every other class and player without the need of any skills (predicition/aim) just by clicking in his stupid RTS game.

 

[edited]

 

No com......