Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Hulkovius_Rex

Carriers

78 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
427 posts
4,871 battles

Carriers are unrewarding and UI makes them unfun and unplayable for me. I also fail to see how dragging tier 6 CV to fight against tier 8 ships is fun and engaging, or how removing manual drop for tiers 4-5 is gonna attract more new CV players

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,752 posts
9,922 battles

CVs don't need any in game buffs. Just stop nerfing them directly or indirectly and bring back the old CV economy like Blogis said

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
7,413 posts
13,825 battles

UI, economy and the balance between USN and IJN need fixing. Other than that, they're largely fine and performing their roles as intended.

 

Maybe introduce preferential +/-1 MM for CVs. As it stands right now a top tier CV in a match mostly populated by lower tiers is almost granted omnipotence, while it's incredibly painful for the CV the other way around, far more than with other classes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POMF]
Weekend Tester
2,269 posts
7,420 battles

 I also fail to see how dragging tier 6 CV to fight against tier 8 ships is fun and engaging

 

Well let's start with the fact you don't even take part in the battle. All you do is to risk your planes while not your ship so most of the time you will survive the battle whether or not you win or lose. Also playing vs lower tier ships that can't even do anything to your planes with their AA is totally fine by you right? But playing vs higher tiers? Oh now unplayable game ofc.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
427 posts
4,871 battles

 

Well let's start with the fact you don't even take part in the battle. All you do is to risk your planes while not your ship so most of the time you will survive the battle whether or not you win or lose. Also playing vs lower tier ships that can't even do anything to your planes with their AA is totally fine by you right? But playing vs higher tiers? Oh now unplayable game ofc.

 

If it aint unicum with tier 10 carrier, I can deal with it just by playing smartly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4,192 posts
9,509 battles

A more linear progression of AAA capabilities.

 

Same with CV alpha damage.

 

Add a consumable to refill some % of reserves (higher on low tiers) to offset more AAA at lower tiers. Allowing the people attacked to feel like they kill some significant amount of planes without leaving CVs without planes after 5 minutes (this really is mostly for show, but those who whine never did look at how losing even a few planes per attack is an issue when you have 24 in total).


Then fix the loadouts on t7+ USN CVs (make proper balanced loadouts that's "a bit more strike" or "a bit more fighter" and not the mess we have now).

 

Implement AP bombs (higher alpha, lower or no fire chance) as a selectable option for USN CVs to properly differentiate them from IJN.

 

Rework targeting to make dive bombers more fun to use, and rework the UI to be more responsive and predictable (the wonky UI is the real issue they should have focused on, not crapping over the learning curve for low tier CVs).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4,192 posts
9,509 battles

 

Well let's start with the fact you don't even take part in the battle. All you do is to risk your planes while not your ship so most of the time you will survive the battle whether or not you win or lose. Also playing vs lower tier ships that can't even do anything to your planes with their AA is totally fine by you right? But playing vs higher tiers? Oh now unplayable game ofc.

 

Sorry, are you really pretending that it's no issue for t6 CVs in t8 games because they'll "still survive the battle"? Because it's "fun" to sit in a corner of the map waiting for a battle you can't influence (unless the enemy works to allow you to)? A CV without planes is a 99% dead ship, and while you can in a few cases use your ship to cap with, you're generally just a liability that just have to keep running until the end of the game to not give the enemy free points.

 

And pretending that he's in favour of CVs being on the other end.. a sad strawman by you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,929 posts
7,756 battles

How do we fix them? Unlimited planes but with a cooldown? Increased damage? 

 

I see no evidence that carriers as a class can be designed to be balanced when it comes to random games, for CW/team battles yes as those are always playing as a coordinated teams but in random where most players don't even speak a common language no, there is no way to make CVs balanced in randoms.

We have to realise that most players, for a multitude of various reasons, simply are not able to team work to a degree that can prevent CVs from being super OP in randoms and will have to be ultranerfed to the point where that class will be utterly useless in CW/team battles in order to balance them with regards to randoms.

I am convinced that CVs should either be completely removed from the game, because the class can never be properly balanced as it will either have to be balanced for random play or for CW/team battles as a balance for both is simply not possible, or moved to a CV+escorts game mode only so that the class can be researched and used in CW/team battles.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
456 posts

 

I see no evidence that carriers as a class can be designed to be balanced when it comes to random games, for CW/team battles yes as those are always playing as a coordinated teams but in random where most players don't even speak a common language no, there is no way to make CVs balanced in randoms.

We have to realise that most players, for a multitude of various reasons, simply are not able to team work to a degree that can prevent CVs from being super OP in randoms and will have to be ultranerfed to the point where that class will be utterly useless in CW/team battles in order to balance them with regards to randoms.

I am convinced that CVs should either be completely removed from the game, because the class can never be properly balanced as it will either have to be balanced for random play or for CW/team battles as a balance for both is simply not possible, or moved to a CV+escorts game mode only so that the class can be researched and used in CW/team battles.

 

 

CVs are currently balanced towards Random Games. This is why they suck so hard as soon as there is some basic coordination/teanplay going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,111 posts
11,654 battles

 

CVs are currently balanced towards Random Games. This is why they suck so hard as soon as there is some basic coordination/teanplay going on.

 

 The pain when uptiered is real in a CV.

 

Woe to a T6 CV caught up in a hard T8 game. That was me last night and there was literally about 3 ships I could actually attack without getting face rolled. Played a hard T9 game in the Saipan earlier where the other T7 CV went AFK in despair :trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,873 posts
2,443 battles

I must admitt recent posts of atomskytten are making me crying for a downvote button.....

I see no evidence that carriers as a class can be designed to be balanced when it comes to random games,

 

let me get it straight - the fact that you "see no evidence" does not mean a flying crap to the factuall discussion on any balancing attempts.

 

and they can be balanced to random games [and CW/TB as well while at it] but doing so requires effort and drop of few really lazy moves in the core desing - like for example AAA being pure rng rolling machine with no input at any side, or the fact that [at least for IJN CVs] from the tier 4 to tier 10 torpedo bombers [your main weapon in those ships btw] are actually using exacly same torpedo with exacly same damage.

 

but in random where most players don't even speak a common language no, there is no way to make CVs balanced in randoms.

 

this is flawed argument. really flawed.

first of all lasttime I checked World of Warships was announcing itself as a TEAM base game with TEAMWORK being the main way to win - and you even get quite a few of those ingame tips giving you advices to how to play for the team and which ship is meant to have which role in a team. and you don;t have to have all the people speaking same language for all of htem being able to understand F commands which are there for that specific reason.

 

and people speaking different languages really bears little connection to developpers doing their job competently

 

We have to realise that most players, for a multitude of various reasons, simply are not able to team work to a degree that can prevent CVs from being super OP in randoms

 

fun fact - at the moment being no degree of teamwork is required to stop CV from "being super OP in randoms"

 

on the other side - unless you are born unicum you will have as a CV a hard time to pull out a DECENT match

yeah "super OP".. >.>

 

I am convinced that CVs should either be completely removed from the game,

 

yeah and while at it remove also DDs and cruisers because it requires a residue of brain to counteract these as well....

 

and BBs on the end - because those other BBs are firing at mah precious BB and they hurt it and not sailing broadside in perfect straight line is above my mind capabilities

 

this is exacly same quality "suggestion" and argument as your proposal over here

or moved to a CV+escorts game mode only so that the class can be researched and used in CW/team battles.

 

and this one is actually so lazy that it even sounds like WG idea......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BAZI]
Beta Tester
2,672 posts
8,724 battles

I must admitt recent posts of atomskytten are making me crying for a downvote button.....

 

let me get it straight - the fact that you "see no evidence" does not mean a flying crap to the factuall discussion on any balancing attempts.

 

 

Hes somewhat right though, imho.

 

Long-range-sniper classes that combine high (potential) burst damage with while not directly being at risk for most at the time, will always be under critique. Theres no way CVs can be designed to ever please the whole of the playerbase.

 

In their 2015 incarnation with weaker ship-AA and more TB squads they were madness. They shaped gameplay into blobfests and AA-only specialisations. In their current form CVs themselves suffer greatly when facing AA ships or when uptiered. In any way, if they keep their high alpha with the pretty accurate manual drop it will always feel super unfair to the targeted ship, because the target is not necessarily to blame when dropped. Skill disparity between beginners/noobs and experts is huge, which just amplifies the feelings on both sides in the respective situations.

 

On a sidenote, WoTs artillery-minigame (arty) never smoothly integrated into the 3rd person tankshooter the other classes were playing. Now WG is finally thinking of removing arty. While you cannot compare CVs to arty in every respect, I tend to believe the rts-minigame the CVs are playing does not fit seamlessly into the 3rd-person shipshooter the other classes are playing. And I personally fear it never will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
914 posts

When I first started playing the game I anticipated playing Carriers as my main focus, but I quickly learnt the biggest issue they face is they are actually dreadfully boring. I think over and above balance changes they need to totally rethink their whole role.

 

What I would like to see for game balance is land based air cover for both sides giving carriers more of a strategic role perhaps giving them the option to hit targets off map, or defend them, thus making air superiority roles viable again. The knock on to that would be aircraft in every battle and it would help especially the USN Cruisers that suffer from balancing due to high AA values and no aircraft!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
1,208 posts
15,028 battles

Carriers are unrewarding and UI makes them unfun and unplayable for me. I also fail to see how dragging tier 6 CV to fight against tier 8 ships is fun and engaging, or how removing manual drop for tiers 4-5 is gonna attract more new CV players

 

Its fun when you wreck them and get six kills 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
748 posts
11,447 battles

But CVs are needed for balance:

They spot DDs.

We had a drop on CV population,hydro everywhere, implementation of radar,radar CD cutted by half, radar implementation allowed RN cruisers to came in their form.

They punish lonely ships.

Huge buffs to AA (especially BBs) My Gneisenau can take down a full strike from a carrier up to tier 8 (except Strike Lexi, 27 planes is a bit too much)

They give a reason to be to AA ships.

Or at least they did, now everybody can take down planes even if not specced so when you spend some points on it or manage to use your brain and go with 1 or 2 other ships carriers can not attack you.

They force a dinamic gameplay.

Yamato bow on? Lets give him 21k lbs of bombs so he can start moving

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BLOBS]
Beta Tester
5,072 posts
9,812 battles

Long-range-sniper classes that combine high (potential) burst damage with while not directly being at risk for most at the time, will always be under critique. 

Because they don't understand that the actual CV is just an additional element you have to risk to get performance out of a class. You play agist the planes. The actual CV is just a additional element to kill the player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,299 posts
1,085 battles

 

snip snip

Carriers are no ordinary sniper-class/Artillery class, but first of all let’s make it clear that those archetypes can work and are working in many games. Unique aspect is the fact that CVs project their power and presence via fast short range planes. It is gameplay element that not only is making each CV attack telegraphed and obvious, but it let players interact with carrier even without directly engaging. Defeating ship means that it is no longer able to interact with the flow of the game and deplaned carriers while can try to cap, most often are treated as already out of the game.

 

There is no inherit flaw with this concept. Let’s see where it fails though.

 

Notice how key element in this whole equation are projected fast short range planes. Fact that every their move is telegraphed means that most attacks are expected. While this is good thing overall, when attack itself is undodgeable it can lead to frustration. Being unable to stop something you see coming is leading to feeling of powerlessness. That is why most often request to nerf CVs was AAA, since people wanted to get rid of this feeling. When you are in DD lack of AAA wasn’t really an issue because as a player you could actively evade giving you enough agency for this whole situation to feel ok. 

Other ships must rely on AAA which is mechanic that removes player agency. It boils down whole interaction between both players to something they have no active participation. Notice that in this situation regardless of end effect, one of the players will feel powerless and bad. Considering also that whole thing works on RNG and not dps and HP it makes whole thing just an unmitigated disaster.

 

That is why for the longest time I was highlighting AAA as the most important aspect of CVs that needs a rework. Whole interaction is toxic and WG made huge mistake by doubling down on it making it core of the counterplay.

 

Carrier concept is not flawed, but the design of it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AAO]
Tournament Organizer
232 posts
13,117 battles

How do we fix them? Unlimited planes but with a cooldown? Increased damage? 

 

No no no, you have it wrong. Let's fix carriers by:

 

  • Changing keybindings, removing a few in the process so you ARE FORCED to use the alternate key setup
  • Remove manual drop from T4/T5 (this will force CV players there to play high tiers where they have to buy permacamo)
  • Add unlockable fighters so CV's have a way harder time to strike ships if the enemy CV knows what he is doing. (Huge buff for AS spec)
  • Mention StarCraft controls a lot. Do nothing to increase the responsiveness of planes/UI.

 

Since the year of the CV (2016) turned into the year of AA buffs and the worst economy nerf in the history of WG, I sure am looking forward to the carrier rework here in 2017.

Edited by Domin1c
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BLOBS]
Beta Tester
5,072 posts
9,812 battles

Remove manual drop from T4/T5 (this will force CV players there to play high tiers where they have to buy permacamo)

How does that help the CV vs CV interaction?  If I have a 10 point commander I still deplane a new CV player and I still do significant damage  to new players once I  dealt with the enemy planes. The only difference is now sealclubber in non CVs are imun to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AAO]
Tournament Organizer
232 posts
13,117 battles

I never mentioned CV vs CV interaction, go make up something about that yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BLOBS]
Beta Tester
5,072 posts
9,812 battles

I never mentioned CV vs CV interaction, go make up something about that yourself.

Well the Problem with sealclubbing is that one CV is a clubber one is a new one. 2 skilled players cancel each other out and srew each other up. Low Tir CVs are balanced over atacks per game and the size of the maps too. As stated before their primary targets at T4 and T5 usally have enogh AA to inflict loses and/or are quite nibble at that level. The real problem takes only place if you can ignore the enemy CV and concentrate fully on on choosing unaided solo targets.

 

Then again you seem to have problems dealing with skilled CVs at lower level and don't want to be brothered them. You have the same prob with Imperator, Kamikaze, gremy and good Sigma Koenig too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,929 posts
7,756 battles

I must admitt recent posts of atomskytten are making me crying for a downvote button.....

 

let me get it straight - the fact that you "see no evidence" does not mean a flying crap to the factuall discussion on any balancing attempts.

 

and they can be balanced to random games [and CW/TB as well while at it] but doing so requires effort and drop of few really lazy moves in the core desing - like for example AAA being pure rng rolling machine with no input at any side, or the fact that [at least for IJN CVs] from the tier 4 to tier 10 torpedo bombers [your main weapon in those ships btw] are actually using exacly same torpedo with exacly same damage.

 

 

this is flawed argument. really flawed.

first of all lasttime I checked World of Warships was announcing itself as a TEAM base game with TEAMWORK being the main way to win - and you even get quite a few of those ingame tips giving you advices to how to play for the team and which ship is meant to have which role in a team. and you don;t have to have all the people speaking same language for all of htem being able to understand F commands which are there for that specific reason.

 

and people speaking different languages really bears little connection to developpers doing their job competently

 

 

fun fact - at the moment being no degree of teamwork is required to stop CV from "being super OP in randoms"

 

on the other side - unless you are born unicum you will have as a CV a hard time to pull out a DECENT match

yeah "super OP".. >.>

 

 

yeah and while at it remove also DDs and cruisers because it requires a residue of brain to counteract these as well....

 

and BBs on the end - because those other BBs are firing at mah precious BB and they hurt it and not sailing broadside in perfect straight line is above my mind capabilities

 

this is exacly same quality "suggestion" and argument as your proposal over here

 

and this one is actually so lazy that it even sounds like WG idea......

 

Carriers can not work as intended in WoWS unless in CW or team battles just like communism can never ever work; the assumptions behind them are based on the requirement that 100% of the players/population act ideally which can be theoretically proven to be impossible thus it wil be impossible to attain those ideals.

Translated to WoWS it means that team work will never work as intended because of language barriers, players not wanting to team play, players not being able to see the benefits of team play and a host of reasons too many to list.

 

As carriers as a class require 100% of the players to be working as team to be able to properly balance them it will never be possible for Wargaming to balance carriers for random play thus, depending on whether CVs are in random play or CW/team battles they will either be OP in random or UP in CW/team battles for the simple fact that if the CVs are balanced perfectly for random teams with zero teamwork they will be more or less worthless in CW/team battles and if perfectly balanced for CW/team battles they will be massively OP in randoms. With the current situation with randoms where 12 solo players on each team are the norm it is impossible to have balanced CVs in both randoms and CW/team battles.

This is what some players can't grasp and this is why those players kick and scream when their precious carriers are getting balanced simply because of said players inability to see the broad picture with regards to CVs as class.

Carrier players have to get into their heads that the CV class can not force team work and dynamic playstyle on random players because of human psychology dynamics, language and cultural issues together with an almost limitless pool of reasons which prevent team work from happening - the belief that CVs will make players work together is based on fallacious reasoning and assumptions that only exist under ideal situation i.e. only in dreams and fantasies, not in the real world where it counts.

 

Wargaming has to decide whether carriers as a class will have to be balanced for the chaotic world that is random play or for CW/team battles as it can be theoretically proven that a class such as carriers can never be balanced for both scenarios and never fully for random games because of the chaotic nature of the player base.

Personally my advice to WG would be to balance carriers for CW/team battles only, remove them from normal random play and place carriers in their own CV vs CV game mode where multilple CV on each side can play against each other together with non CV players that like to play as escort ships for the carriers so that they can be reasearched and bought like the other ships. The CV vs CV game mode should be made player selectable as  the Encounter and Assault game modes in WoT are and in normal random mode the CVs strike aircraft could be replaced by a single use airstrike equipment slot as used in WoT in SH with arty/airstrikes.

Edited by atomskytten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BLOBS]
Beta Tester
5,072 posts
9,812 battles

As carriers as a class require 100% of the players to be working as team to be able to properly balance them.

100% teamplay reduce CVs to providing Vision while countering the enemy CV providing the same. You just have to look at some tournament plays to see that.

 

Plus nobody wants 100% teamplay. The unpredictability of random is what makes or breaks Wows. Teamplay and efectiv play equals bow tanking paddling backward and 2 teams siting static in smoke. The 1St who does the slightest mistake loses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×