Another CV rant....

[Nechrom]

This would lower their avg damage output incrementally since CV's have to deal with distance / flight time with each strike. But it might be something they could test on a PT, with small steps.

 

Since the CVs already have high average damage and unlike other heavy hitters like BBs have a lot more utility as well, I don't see it as a problem if their average damage goes down.

Increasing arming distance also has the added benefit of increasing TB survivability, helping to remedy something CV players like to complain about.

 

never played a cv: Tick

CV op:  Tick.

 

There is getting a pattern here...

 

Making crap up hoping no one calls him on it: Tick

[aboomination]

Battleships shouldn't be able to evade a torpedo drop anyways

 

IRL they could 

[Ragweek]

 

The drop distance is already significantly larger than what they would be IRL, about three to four times longer if my estimations are correct. Destroyers are already able to avoid drops unless the drops are executed in such a way that they are literally unavoidable which is something that very few CV players can do. Battleships shouldn't be able to evade a torpedo drop anyways, they have a strong AA to protect themselves. Cruisers also have the defensive fire or insane AA DPS themselves. That is not a nerf that is in any way necessary nor justifiable unless massive overhauls are made to the class interactions in game.

 

The CVs are primarily used for fleet reconnaissance and destroyer acquisition in clan wars as well as in ranked battles. If destroyers having their torpedoes spotted is a problem, then just reduce the range that the planes can spot their torpedoes so carriers will have to spot actively or their planes will miss the torpedo spreads.

 

Well said!

[dasCKD]

sure but you are the minority. plus, perfecting the art of torps and bombs is half the mastery of cv. fighters being neglected says a lot about their viability, cv simply dont want to play with AA builds as it severely limits their effectiveness and rewards. more targets would fix that, but giving cv more squadrons would make them even more potentially powerful, worsening the current situation of matchups even more

 

It'll make them more finicky and difficult to handle. Most CVs would probably prefer stronger squads over more squads if given the option. There is no real reason to have more than 2 torpedo squads IMO. 

hence why the 3 cv bots suggestion, now there is plenty of targets for your fighters to practice on 

 

Having fighters to shoot down is not any practice for going up against another skilled CV player who is also playing mind games with you. If I wanted to practice against stupid and easily manipulated CVs, I'll launch the training room.

[Ragweek]

 

Since the CVs already have high average damage and unlike other heavy hitters like BBs have a lot more utility as well, I don't see it as a problem if their average damage goes down.

Increasing arming distance also has the added benefit of increasing TB survivability, helping to remedy something CV players like to complain about.

 

 

Making crap up hoping no one calls him on it: Tick

 

I Apologises I see you have had 2% of your games in  a Cv.

 

Mayby I should edit my comment like you did....

[dasCKD]

IRL they could 

 

No they couldn't. For the simple fact that the general airdropped torpedo arming range is 50 meters (far smaller than the in game value) and a speed of 42 knots  (faster than in game CV torpedoes) whilst battleships are significantly less maneuverable than they are inside of the game.

[dasCKD]

Since the CVs already have high average damage and unlike other heavy hitters like BBs have a lot more utility as well, I don't see it as a problem if their average damage goes down.

 

CVs at tier 4 have less damage than their battleship counterparts despite the Langley being, tier for tier, the most powerful carrier in the entire game with the possible exception of the Zuiho. CVs are a class that is far harsher with their sorting when it comes to player skill, and so carriers average higher damage. Carriers are also not prone to sailing in straight lines into destroyer torpedoes and dying with no damage done.

[Ragweek]

 

No they couldn't. For the simple fact that the general airdropped torpedo arming range is 50 meters (far smaller than the in game value) and a speed of 42 knots  (faster than in game CV torpedoes) whilst battleships are significantly less maneuverable than they are inside of the game.

 

What torps have to arm before they show up in the game! Thats lies! HE torped my BB at point blank range!!!!! OP I cry!!!!!

[Ragweek]

 

 

CVs at tier 4 have less damage than their battleship counterparts despite the Langley being, tier for tier, the most powerful carrier in the entire game with the possible exception of the Zuiho. CVs are a class that is far harsher with their sorting when it comes to player skill, and so carriers average higher damage. Carriers are also not prone to sailing in straight lines into destroyer torpedoes and dying with no damage done.

 

The main reason why the average damage is a lot higher is that if a noob takes a CV . The chances are he will still be around at the end of the game. So giving a chance to do some damage. Where as a YOLOing DD or a broadsiding bb or Ca will die fast. Thus not reducing average damage. 

[Nechrom]

No they couldn't. For the simple fact that the general airdropped torpedo arming range is 50 meters (far smaller than the in game value) and a speed of 42 knots  (faster than in game CV torpedoes) whilst battleships are significantly less maneuverable than they are inside of the game.

 

And scale-wise, planes are on the order of magnitude faster than they would be.

In reality a flight would take a long time to set up a run and that is what a ship is avoiding, not the torpedoes themselves.

 

 

I Apologises I see you have had 2% of your games in  a Cv.

 

Mayby I should edit my comment like you did....

 

And for someone who played so few CV battles comparatively. Am I doing badly?

[Horin728]

Basically it comes down to this:

 

If you think CVs have too much power - then BLOODY PLAY ONE. Be the one with all the might and glory and gazilions of damage with no lost planes, getting double kraken every game. If you really think they are that OP, they should make tons of money and xp and produce so much enjoyment for the player who is in control of them, right?

 

[WingedHussar_Adler]

 

Maybe he was looking for a cheap money maker back then. Or maybe he's just too bad for high tier gameplay and we should embrace the fact that he stays at lower tiers.

And how does this invalidate his opinion that CV are OP and manual drops should go? Ofc that's partially silly but your answer is, too.

I do not share his opinion and want to see a more punishing and team-depending gameplay but the player base is just too ignorant for that to work.

Also two "wrongs" don't make a right  - and since those MM changes and the nerf to AFT, Murmansk isn't that much of a clubber anymore. In fact clubbers use t3,4 ships nowadays

 

 

Again, I don't see the connection to the OP here...

 

Having some pleb CV on your team and a great player on the other is indeed kinda frustrating. Ever played vs strangers123 in ranked? CV are very powerful and require your whole team to counter them effectively.

Which ofc very rarely happens, more so in ranked tho - thus both matches vs him were quite close and enjoyable defeats with him being the decisive factor.

The high skill ceiling of CV and the fact that teamwork can counter them to an extent are indeed valid problems when it comes to balancing this class, it's just not the arty clone many expect.

 

cv on t 5-6 and cv on t 9-10 are totaly differend things. You cann ot ask of nerf of class if you do not play it on max lvl. It is like you ask of increase of accuracy of BS brcause BS on tier 4 can not hit. 

[Nechrom]

 

CVs at tier 4 have less damage than their battleship counterparts despite the Langley being, tier for tier, the most powerful carrier in the entire game with the possible exception of the Zuiho. CVs are a class that is far harsher with their sorting when it comes to player skill, and so carriers average higher damage. Carriers are also not prone to sailing in straight lines into destroyer torpedoes and dying with no damage done.

 

And for every tier the CV climbs the damage leaderboards.

While carriers are not prone to sailing in straight lines into DD torps, they do have a tendency (at low tiers) to lose all/most of their planes if they mess up. Kind of works the same way.

[Ragweek]

You clearly are a good player. Much better than me in a bb or ca. 

 

however you are very inexperienced in a cv .

[mtm78]

Just. guys, WG has already used arming distance as a balancing aid so it's not like it's completely impossible for them to do so. If it's needed, I wouldn't know tbh I guess it takes someone who plays all classes to really make a judgement on that. Or someone who has access to all the statistics WG has, like dmg done by air launched torpedoes against each ship. 

 

 

What torps have to arm before they show up in the game! Thats lies! HE torped my BB at point blank range!!!!! OP I cry!!!!!

 

Full strike Haku -> 

 

 

 

Maybe WG should give back full strike loadout to IJN so the lone sailing BB would see this happen to them more often  

 

Basically it comes down to this:

 

If you think CVs have too much power - then BLOODY PLAY ONE. Be the one with all the might and glory and gazilions of damage with no lost planes, getting double kraken every game. If you really think they are that OP, they should make tons of money and xp and produce so much enjoyment for the player who is in control of them, right?

 

 

Don't use economy when everyone knows it's broken for CV's at the moment, you were doing so well with just telling people to play them and try to get those incredible high damage numbers.

 

I tried, I failed, I am not good at setting up manual drops. I stopped playing them after ARP plane kill missions because I lost a game where all I had to do was drop a BB who was sailing in a straight line and I dropped my torpedoes on an island I won't play a class where I am a detriment to my team ( wish more people would feel this way though ).

 

[dasCKD]

And scale-wise, planes are on the order of magnitude faster than they would be.

 

As are the ships. Have you looked at the distance you travel in a ship in 20 minutes? Most WW2 planes would be envious of that kind of cruise speed.

In reality a flight would take a long time to set up a run and that is what a ship is avoiding, not the torpedoes themselves.

 

The long run-up is already modeled in the game in the circle of no return as well as the run-up to the circle's boundary. The relative speeds of the planes and the ships are also not as they would be IRL. The torpedo planes that the Shokaku flies has a relative top speed higher than the fastest fighter in game right now. I'm not saying that the game should follow the performance of ships in real life, just that there is a reason that carriers rendered battleships obsolete in our world.

[Ragweek]

 

 

 

Full strike Haku -> 

 

 

 

 

 

A bb on his own. every high Tier cv captians dream.

 

I could show you a similar pic of simma's torps.....   Look how crappy they are now...

[Horin728]

I just with Midway had it's strike setup back to where it was...

[WingedHussar_Adler]

CVs have way too much influence for a single player.

Whether it's down to map control like spotting or doing lots of damage, they have way too high impact on the battle.

 

A lot of it comes from their ability to strike/spot virtually anywhere on the map. That's not something you can do a lot about without adding fuel mechanics or something similar. So I think they should be balanced in other ways.

Removing manual drop just lowers the skill ceiling and makes them more boring, so I'd instead just increase the arming range for their torps so they would have to predict maneuvers and give the target at least some chance to avoid.

I'd also completely remove the ability of planes to spot torpedoes. Not even 5% of CV players do it intentionally anyway, so there is almost no loss in making that change, and you end up giving torpedo DDs a small buff which they sorely need.

 

I wanted to post long post. But for what. Calling of a nerf to current meta can only retard or guy who plays on t 4-5. 

High tier cv is ship that you can easyiest lock down. I bet if you put 2 minotaurs side per side and exit game for 20 minutes cv could not kill them.

Cv is class that in current meta can only hunt dd and solo yolo noobs. 

 

[Nechrom]

You clearly are a good player. Much better than me in a bb or ca. 

 

however you are very inexperienced in a cv .

 

Inexperienced perhaps. But for all my inexperience, am I performing badly in CVs?

[dasCKD]

And for every tier the CV climbs the damage leaderboards.

 

Because their players either get better or quit. Battleships, cruisers, and destroyers performs more or less to their damage capacity (i.e. the damage that they are ABLE to do in one average game, the amount of fires they let burn, the amount of penetrating hits, etc.) but carriers have their damage tied down to player performance. Look at the average damage of the top players of the IJN carriers from tier 4 to tier 7. The difference of 3 tiers barely shifts the value of the damage done by 10k. A comparable difference in IJN battleships sees a difference of 50k in raw average damage. The CV damage scaling is basically a function of player skill, top performers of the class have nigh-identical performance across the tiers.

[dasCKD]

High tier cv is ship that you can easyiest lock down. I bet if you put 2 minotaurs side per side and exit game for 20 minutes cv could not kill them.

 

I bet I can. Give me a Hakuryu and two AFK Minotaurs and I'll show you.

 

 I'll sail the Hakuryu right up to them and let my secondaries do the rest 

 

[WingedHussar_Adler]

 

Because their players either get better or quit. Battleships, cruisers, and destroyers performs more or less to their damage capacity (i.e. the damage that they are ABLE to do in one average game, the amount of fires they let burn, the amount of penetrating hits, etc.) but carriers have their damage tied down to player performance. Look at the average damage of the top players of the IJN carriers from tier 4 to tier 7. The difference of 3 tiers barely shifts the value of the damage done by 10k. A comparable difference in IJN battleships sees a difference of 50k in raw average damage. The CV damage scaling is basically a function of player skill, top performers of the class have nigh-identical performance across the tiers.

 

how dmg translate to winrate? For instance usa cv t9 andt 10 are dooing high dmg but are LAST ships in winrate at t 9 and t10.. they are last of all ships and classes. 

Dooing 100.000 dmg to a solo yolo bb which he healed 40.000 does nothin for winrate. 

[albinbino]

CV's always ruin games, manual drop should be removed, even better remove CV's from the game altogether

 

When ever i drop it manually i miss entire target .

[Gudgeon]

 

I wanted to post long post. But for what. Calling of a nerf to current meta can only retard or guy who plays on t 4-5. 

High tier cv is ship that you can easyiest lock down. I bet if you put 2 minotaurs side per side and exit game for 20 minutes cv could not kill them.

Cv is class that in current meta can only hunt dd and solo yolo noobs. 

 

 

You are a polite chap aren't you. I made suggestions on preventing players with no clue playing CV's until they had developed some skills before playing randoms, and to stop them swinging the game balance and the team's chances of winning. I don't play CV's as I would be a total hindrance  to the team in them and I don't want that. Cut the crap about me playing T4/T5 etc and all the stat snobbery. I guess you exclusively play Tier 10 to stay away from the common people and enjoy an exclusive club. If so, don't criticize other people who can only aspire to your skill.