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

Shower thought: CV strike power balance in AA

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
55 posts
10,698 battles

So... I didn't find this cropping up in a search, so here goes.

Some situations CV strikes can be problematic because of the massive damage they can do. CVs have the potential to delete from full health any ship they like, unless they get uptiered. This is pretty much riskless for the CV or their planes unlike surface ships that have to get close for torps or broadside for salvoes. Yes, this can be countered by team play and clumping round an AA cruiser, but that just doesn't happen.

I thought I might have stumbled across a good change:

Manual AA Focus (clicking on the squad) will always induce panic in that squad.
Defensive Fire will induce panic in all squads in range
CVs restricted to 0/+1 MM (prevent uptiered slaughter and prevent top tier utter domination)

This gives more room for skilled mitigation by increasing damage RNG on prioritised squads and allowing for easier evasion of torps/bombs due to panic spread.

The only downside I can see is current US CV loadouts only have single squads of strike aircraft, so this would kinda screw them. And the sticky focus they introduced for planes that leave and return might be an issue.

 

This might even encourage people more to group up to overlap AA auras and communicate to panic more planes.


Cue frothing pro/anti CV ranting...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,752 posts
9,924 battles
21 minutes ago, Blood_Vessel said:

Manual AA Focus (clicking on the squad) will always induce panic in that squad.

 

As a captain skill? Or a standard game thing? I think it would be a good idea if it is a captain skill, perhaps induce panic plus slightly increase the effectiveness of AA guns even more to make the skill worth while. If its a standard game thing then nah since you already increase AA guns effectiveness by selecting a target.

 

edit: Maybe add on to the manual AA fire skill the "always induce panic when selected"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SICK]
Weekend Tester
4,684 posts
9,234 battles
24 minutes ago, Blood_Vessel said:

So... I didn't find this cropping up in a search, so here goes.

Some situations CV strikes can be problematic because of the massive damage they can do. CVs have the potential to delete from full health any ship they like, unless they get uptiered.


Cue frothing pro/anti CV ranting...

 

 

And yet again people are generalizing tier 9 and 10 (arguably tier8) CV issues with the class as a whole.

Please tell me how to delete from full health a ship using 2 mid tier DBs and a TB.
Even an IJN CV with two TBs would need an immobile target in order to focus all 8-10 torpedoes on one spot, as a moving target would only eat at most 4.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WOTN]
Quality Poster
2,088 posts
14,054 battles
7 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

Please tell me how to delete from full health a ship using 2 mid tier DBs and a TB.

Detonations :P

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OSC]
Players
1,991 posts
11,497 battles

So Basicly you wanna i win button as trier 4 captain skill? And you call that skillful game. This game is full of #&!#&

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HABIT]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts
50 minutes ago, Blood_Vessel said:

Manual AA Focus (clicking on the squad) will always induce panic in that squad.
Defensive Fire will induce panic in all squads in range
CVs restricted to 0/+1 MM (prevent uptiered slaughter and prevent top tier utter domination)

 

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the 0 MM (aka getting in a match of their respective tier) the "top tier domination" you want to prevent? So in the end you ask for a general +1 MM for CVs which doesn't really (or rarely) work for tier X CVs. Other CVs of lower tiers might also have problems if the battle is filled with more higher tiered ships.

Although I agree that things like a Hiryu strike setup vs. a New York sucks.

 

If I am not imstaken Defensive Fire already induces panic in all squads in range. So this is nothing to discuss about.

 

I am not so sure about the Manual Focus. It kind of looks appealing but (and I know this game is suipposed to be balanced for solo players) if you have a division or even a group of ships and the players know about the mechanic they still can panic a whole strike setup without even activating Defensive Fire which, if you go a stop further, makes AA skilled/equipped CAs obsolet in this matter. They will still shoot down more planes than other ships but you don't need them anymore to make a strike more difficult/less accurate.

 

I also don't think that CVs need an (indirect) nerf. Well, maybe some high tier ones and the aforementioned situation with the New York and the Hiryu as an example should get a look at. But all in all it is not really necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
716 posts
10,669 battles
1 hour ago, Blood_Vessel said:

Yes, this can be countered by team play and clumping round an AA cruiser, but that just doesn't happen.

 

This is your answer, it stopped happening because of all AA bufs that were going on, thats why there aren't many CV's left. But if you are one of those who just yolo or hug a border away from your team, you deserve to die from a CV in a single attack just so you would not waste space...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
[SCRUB]
Players
3,207 posts
10,386 battles
1 hour ago, Blood_Vessel said:

So... I didn't find this cropping up in a search, so here goes.

Some situations CV strikes can be problematic because of the massive damage they can do. CVs have the potential to delete from full health any ship they like, unless they get uptiered. This is pretty much riskless for the CV or their planes unlike surface ships that have to get close for torps or broadside for salvoes. Yes, this can be countered by team play and clumping round an AA cruiser, but that just doesn't happen.

I thought I might have stumbled across a good change:

Manual AA Focus (clicking on the squad) will always induce panic in that squad.
Defensive Fire will induce panic in all squads in range
CVs restricted to 0/+1 MM (prevent uptiered slaughter and prevent top tier utter domination)

This gives more room for skilled mitigation by increasing damage RNG on prioritised squads and allowing for easier evasion of torps/bombs due to panic spread.

The only downside I can see is current US CV loadouts only have single squads of strike aircraft, so this would kinda screw them. And the sticky focus they introduced for planes that leave and return might be an issue.

 

This might even encourage people more to group up to overlap AA auras and communicate to panic more planes.


Cue frothing pro/anti CV ranting...

 

:cap_wander:

 

No.

Don't give players any more tools against CVs.

If "average" players don't focus squads or don't even attempt to manoeuvre (unless it's too late), they deserve to be deleted from the battle.

And don't give WG any ideas like these.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[1ST]
[1ST]
Beta Tester
55 posts
4,239 battles

The only thing I agrea with is the +1/-1 MM, which would gain all.

 

Otherwise I find 1 click "I winn" buttons so rewarding...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,244 posts
14,317 battles
1 hour ago, Blood_Vessel said:

1....Some situations CV strikes can be problematic because of the massive damage they can do...

 

2. CVs have the potential to delete from full health any ship they like, unless they get uptiered....

 

3. This is pretty much riskless for the CV or their planes unlike surface ships that have to get close for torps or broadside for salvoes...

 

4. Manual AA Focus (clicking on the squad) will always induce panic in that squad.

From my perspective (Mid-Tier DD player)

 

1. Agreed, but Japanese DDs can cause massive damage also, as can other DDs.

2.  Not generally, it does happen, but usually it is because the player has made a mistake or multiple ones.

3. Risk-less? It doesn't appear that way to me.

4. I like this option,as a DD player why wouldn't I, but it might throw off game balance too much.  If a CV cross drops my DD he should hit a torpedo, but if I can make one of them panic?  An interesting idea.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
54 posts
13,696 battles

The problem with special MM for a single class of ship at a tier, is that it doesn't work with divisions. (It can be abused)

 

I think a better solution to the MM problem in general would be to get a better mix of ship tiers in each match. For example A tier 7 carrier should not be in a mostly T5/6 game, but at the same time a T8 carriers shouldn't find themselves as the only T8 ships in a T9/10 game either. This is just an example, and I think the same should be true for other classes as well. For example recently I was in a T6-8 match where there was just a single T6 ship: A Nürnberg. That's not really fair for that player either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
55 posts
10,698 battles
4 hours ago, Exocet6951 said:

 

 

And yet again people are generalizing tier 9 and 10 (arguably tier8) CV issues with the class as a whole.

Please tell me how to delete from full health a ship using 2 mid tier DBs and a TB.
Even an IJN CV with two TBs would need an immobile target in order to focus all 8-10 torpedoes on one spot, as a moving target would only eat at most 4.

 

DOT stacking? You don't need the capacity to alpha strike it to death with a CV.

2 mid tier DB and a TB... okay - stack flags on your CV (India Xray, Victor Lima (+ fire chance) and Juliet Whiskey Unaone (+flooding))

Drop any ship you like with your DBs and most times you will get multiple fires and induce a Damage Control, which you then wait for cooldown and torp for flooding = at very least 48 seconds of uncontrolled flooding = dead.

Or you can see what people are shooting at and leech of a cruisers fires to induce Damage Con, then strike away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
55 posts
10,698 battles
2 hours ago, DerKleine said:

The problem with special MM for a single class of ship at a tier, is that it doesn't work with divisions. (It can be abused)

 

I think a better solution to the MM problem in general would be to get a better mix of ship tiers in each match. For example A tier 7 carrier should not be in a mostly T5/6 game, but at the same time a T8 carriers shouldn't find themselves as the only T8 ships in a T9/10 game either. This is just an example, and I think the same should be true for other classes as well. For example recently I was in a T6-8 match where there was just a single T6 ship: A Nürnberg. That's not really fair for that player either.

 

I hadn't considered that...

Still, IMO it is hugely out of whack if you get a Shokaku in a T6 game or god forbid a strike Hakuryu in a T8...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NKK]
Beta Tester
615 posts
6,296 battles
4 hours ago, Exocet6951 said:

 

 

And yet again people are generalizing tier 9 and 10 (arguably tier8) CV issues with the class as a whole.

Please tell me how to delete from full health a ship using 2 mid tier DBs and a TB.
Even an IJN CV with two TBs would need an immobile target in order to focus all 8-10 torpedoes on one spot, as a moving target would only eat at most 4.

Yeah, take a Ranger or Lexington with Fighters, so that you can do anything besides striking, and try to delete a ship. Even in strike mode you will have a hard time.

And it's not like there aren't other ships that can delete ships in one salvo cough *battleships* cough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OSC]
Players
1,991 posts
11,497 battles
2 minutes ago, Blood_Vessel said:

 

I hadn't considered that...

Still, IMO it is hugely out of whack if you get a Shokaku in a T6 game or god forbid a strike Hakuryu in a T8...

How much dmg will that t8 ship get from Haku if he sticks near Des Moines? Or Montena or Minotaur or Hindenburg?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
55 posts
10,698 battles
1 minute ago, 15JG52Adler said:

How much dmg will that t8 ship get from Haku if he sticks near Des Moines? Or Montena or Minotaur or Hindenburg?

 

You can get enough planes through with a strike Haku unless you're under multiple strong AA or Def Fire, and you can bait that and wait out the cooldown.

So, granted, it is much tougher, but it is TX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NKK]
Beta Tester
615 posts
6,296 battles
Just now, 15JG52Adler said:

How much dmg will that t8 ship get from Haku if he sticks near Des Moines? Or Montena or Minotaur or Hindenburg?

Yes, it seems only non-CV players that think a CV has a nuke button to press over an enemy ship and kill her.

Just try to play CV and do all things a CV can do at once:

-Spot, and keep enemy destroyers spotted.

-Cover your fleet.

-Manual strafe enemy fighters.

-Move around enemy ships AA, even those you don't see.

-Make a manual attack, while saving other bombers for a 2nd manual attack to make DoT stick.

-Move your ship around the map so it doesn't get caught.

 

Dedicated CV players have my utmost respect, playing CV is a real strain compared to a regular ship.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
7,430 posts
13,838 battles
4 hours ago, Blood_Vessel said:

This gives more room for skilled mitigation by increasing damage RNG on prioritised squads and allowing for easier evasion of torps/bombs due to panic spread.

 

You are not supposed to be able to evade a strike, as you're getting punished for your mistakes.

You're basically asking for a "get-out-of-jail-free" card in case you screw up.

 

4 hours ago, Blood_Vessel said:

Yes, this can be countered by team play and clumping round an AA cruiser, but that just doesn't happen.

 

Too bad, next you're gonna tell me you want to nerf torpedoes because people can't WASD. Or nerf DoT because people can't manage DCP and repair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OSC]
Players
1,991 posts
11,497 battles
9 minutes ago, Blood_Vessel said:

 

You can get enough planes through with a strike Haku unless you're under multiple strong AA or Def Fire, and you can bait that and wait out the cooldown.

So, granted, it is much tougher, but it is TX.

Strog aaa ca will decimate strike planes and eaven if he strike strike will not be fatal. A can bet dmg will be less than good salvo from 12 BS guns.  CV enforce team play. And if team plays together CV will not dominate you. 1 strong AAA and one medium will [edited]CV. If bouth have defensive button they can avoid all dmg. Balanced isnt it? Imagine that 2 ca have buttons "all BBS shell will miss"  would it be fair?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SICK]
Weekend Tester
4,684 posts
9,234 battles
1 hour ago, Blood_Vessel said:

 

DOT stacking? You don't need the capacity to alpha strike it to death with a CV.

2 mid tier DB and a TB... okay - stack flags on your CV (India Xray, Victor Lima (+ fire chance) and Juliet Whiskey Unaone (+flooding))

Drop any ship you like with your DBs and most times you will get multiple fires and induce a Damage Control, which you then wait for cooldown and torp for flooding = at very least 48 seconds of uncontrolled flooding = dead.

Or you can see what people are shooting at and leech of a cruisers fires to induce Damage Con, then strike away.

 

Ah DoT stacking...
So your nothing short of "deleting people from full hp" is doing damage on a first run, then hoping the fully repairable fire(s) from the second DBs finish off a target?

Also, aerial torpedoes have a laughably low flooding chance.
Trying to rely flooding is like trying to rely on citpens to kill a BB using a cruiser. Sure it can happen, but lets face it, that's just an a cherry on top of a cake.


So your ENTIRE argument hinges on using repairable DoT damage to kill something.
Remind me how that's deleting someone, and how that's doing something no other ship can do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[W_I_G]
Players
3,168 posts
9,352 battles

only good thing OP mentioned is limited MM for CV cause you either get too strong AA for CV, or you get too weak AA for CV with +/-2MM. and then balance all planes HP and AA around that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
3,780 posts
10,685 battles
17 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

 

Ah DoT stacking...
So your nothing of "deleting people from full hp" is doing damage on a first run, then hoping the fully repairable fires() from the seconds DBs finish off a target?

Also, aerial torpedoes have a laughably low flooding chance.
Trying to rely flooding is like trying to rely on citpens to kill a BB using a cruiser. Sure it can happen, but lets face it, that's just an a cherry on top of a cake.

(...)

 

This. DoT stacking requires you to manage a good DB strike (as in "3+ fires good" - a BB with half a brain won't insta-repair 1-2 fires repair when he knows there are TB unaccounted for) followed by a good/lucky TB strike (torps that strike mid-ship almost never cause flooding, even landing torps on bow/stern are often duds). Oh, and the OP also claimed all that to be "riskless" while staggering your attack (first DB then TB or the reverse) increases your (already noticeable) losses considerably, not to mention giving the enemy lots of time to react - floatplane fighters are often launched too late to intercept a strike but they sure as hell won't be late for the follow-up attack. Not to mention that there are usually enemy CV fighters around and while good planning can give you a "free" strike, you generally won't get the second one unless

a) you have air superiority already

or

b) enemy BB is so far out of position that it's not even funny

 

DDs and cruisers are more likely to realistically get nuked by a CV, but the latter are also the class with the most anti-CV tools and the former... well, these are also the most likely to come out of the encounter with no damage taken at all. But yes, I could agree cross-drops on DDs are somewhat overpowered (with additional problem of their all-or-nothing nature). In fact, if I was going to buff anything against CVs, the idea of chosen-target-panic (perhaps as a consumable) could be added but as a DD-only thing, and with very short range, giving DDs more opportunity to live through a good cross-drop. Or, perhaps even better but more mot game-y, DDs could get some special quality reducing damage taken from airdropped torpedoes.

 

The other classes? Well, we're getting into specifics but...

 - AA skills should be toned down A LOT. Instead good AA ships should just get good AA that doesn't require full spec to start doing anything. A difference between AA-specced and NOT AA-specced ship should be noticeable (skills are there to twak your ship, after all) but not nearly as great as it is now, where the same ship can be either a terror of the skies or a prey for CVs based just on what skills the captain has; no other aspect of the game is as severely affected by these choices

 - AA stacking from groups of ships should be reduced. Especially at more than 2. It's good to reward cooperation but it's bad when ship blobs/lemming trains become complete no-fly zones

 - a ship that shoots AA (unless in smoke) should ALWAYS be revealed; catching enemy planes deep in your AA range should be a result of good planning and use of "disable AA" option, not a feature of some ships that simply aren't seen when firing AA

 - CV alpha should be nerfed

 - CV flooding chance should be buffed

 - CV plane responsiveness should be buffed

 

Basically, CVs are currently a big bucket of all-or-nothing. They can't approach certain ships (when AA specced). They can't approach ship groups. They rely on RNG a lot to get their floodings. But they also admittedly have loads of alpha when they catch an enemy they CAN hit with a good strike.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×