Jump to content


How could carriers be made to be more fun?


  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

Jakajan #1 Posted 04 May 2017 - 09:25 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 888
  • Member since:
    09-26-2015

Looking at carriers in a more game mechanic way, how could carriers be made more fun to control?


These are just my opinions, not all of these are good.

 

Allow us to define control groups and group our torpedo bombers and dive bombers into tighter groups. A Hakuryu has 8 groups right now. I would like to have the ability to group them into 2 groups of fighters, 1 torpedo bomber and 1 dive bomber squad for quicker in air command issuing. They could still be seperate squads but all able to be selected from a single hot key.

 

Strafing is too strong, it puts American tier 6-8 CV at a huge disadvantage against Japanese CV. I would like to see straffing nerfed or removed from it's current form. The most number of fighters that carriers should be able to kill in one straffe should be maybe equal to the number of fighters in the squadron that is strafing. So a US squadron could shoot down max of 7 planes with an average number of say 3.5 and Japanese squadrons would shoot down a max of 5 planes in a straffe with an average of 2.5, this is with the aircraft superiority skill.

 

Change the torpedoes that planes use to slowly get better and faster as tiers climb, even a 1 knot improvement or 100 damage per tier would be welcome. Give the US torpedoes a better rate of climb of maybe 2 knots per tier and 300 damage per tier while the Japanese get more bombers. So the top end US torpedoes would do about 12k damage and travel at a speed of 52 knots with torpedo acceleration. This is scary and rightfully effective. Japanese torpedoes would do about 9.2k damage and travel at a top speed of like 46 knots at the top end. So yeah, don't make the torpedoes massively better but make them incrementally better like how german destroyer boat torpedoes start good but slowly get "better".

 

Personally I would start here. I would also make some adjustments to improve auto drops so that people who are potatoes are not quite as terrible. Also I would not be opposed to an auto straffe of sorts.



MrDeaf #2 Posted 04 May 2017 - 09:31 AM

    Admiral

  • Members

  • 10,955
  • Member since:
    07-16-2015

lower skill ceiling

A single ship should not be able to influence the outcome of a match so heavily.


Subscribe to this Thread or Youtube for the latest videos.

The Corgiolis Effect: When you notice you need more torpedoes on your ship


Jakajan #3 Posted 04 May 2017 - 11:11 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 888
  • Member since:
    09-26-2015

View PostMrDeaf, on 04 May 2017 - 09:31 AM, said:

lower skill ceiling

A single ship should not be able to influence the outcome of a match so heavily.

 

Yep, that is why I was calling for the nerfing of straffe and improvement of auto drops. Also regenerating hangars might be good so that losing planes just means a reduced temporary attack power now, with longer term ability to recover and not be dominated for as long.

SgtSullyC3 #4 Posted 04 May 2017 - 11:31 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,027
  • Member since:
    01-01-2016
I think that there should be just one attack. No more manual and automation. Auto is useless against anything but high tier Battleships that can't turn. Manual is good but has a steep learning curve. Same goes for regular attacks and strafing. They need to make one kind of attack. I like what they are doing with the Kaga TB squads.

T1-3: Erie, Smith, Derski, G-101, Katori, St. Louis, Bogatyr, Friant, South Carolina

T4-6: Izyaslav, Clemson, Danae, Yūbari, Kaiser, Kamikaze, Königsberg, Omaha, Kongo, Bogue, Duca D'Aosta, Cleveland, Aoba, Perth, Ryujo, Dunkerque

T7-9: Shiratsuyu, Sims, Mahan, Atlanta, Belfast (gift from YureiKuma), Ranger, Saipan, New Orleans, North Carolina, Alabama, Lexington, Iowa, Missouri

 

GoalsIJN: Hiryu, Mogami - USN: Benson, Baltimore, Essex - HMS: Leander, Fiji - VMF: Podvoisky, Budyonny - MN: Emile Bertin, La Galissonnière


Jakajan #5 Posted 04 May 2017 - 11:36 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 888
  • Member since:
    09-26-2015

View PostSgtSullyC3, on 04 May 2017 - 11:31 AM, said:

I think that there should be just one attack. No more manual and automation. Auto is useless against anything but high tier Battleships that can't turn. Manual is good but has a steep learning curve. Same goes for regular attacks and strafing. They need to make one kind of attack. I like what they are doing with the Kaga TB squads.

 

You pose an interesting point. Are you suggesting removing auto attacks and only having manual ones? I don't think that wargaming would do that, but it would make the interface way easier.

 

I would still like it if fighters automatically strafed when selecting a target.


Edited by Jakajan, 04 May 2017 - 11:37 AM.


Umikami #6 Posted 04 May 2017 - 12:16 PM

    Lieutenant Commander

  • Beta Testers

  • 2,582
  • Member since:
    05-14-2013
why would you make USN torpedoes do more damage than IJN torpedoes when the opposite was true?

HMS_Formidable #7 Posted 04 May 2017 - 12:28 PM

    Ensign

  • Beta Testers

  • 1,016
  • Member since:
    09-25-2012

Perhaps some flavor for the different nations?

 

Perhaps a Japanese CV, on 50% or less health, could launch 'kamikaze' strikes with its aircraft? (increased chance of hits, guaranteed loss of aircraft?)

Perhaps Later US and mid-RN carriers can get some sort of detection bonus for Radar Fighter Control?

 

Dunno. CV play seems very limited, frustrating and 'flavorless' to me atm

Just tried it again for the first time since closed beta.

Didn't engage me for long


Edited by HMS_Formidable, 04 May 2017 - 12:29 PM.

http://www.armouredcarriers.com/title/

 

It is often said that the battleship died because it was vulnerable:
this cannot be correct since the new capital ship, the carrier, was far more vulnerable.
The battleship died because it had very little capability for damaging the enemy.

— Brown, D. K: Nelson to Vanguard: Warship Design and Development 


mohawkdriver #8 Posted 04 May 2017 - 12:33 PM

    Commander

  • Members

  • 3,716
  • Member since:
    09-06-2013
Make them visible from across the map, and make detonations apply to them.  That would make them more fun and enjoyable...for me.

Palladia #9 Posted 04 May 2017 - 12:54 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 727
  • Member since:
    08-16-2015

View Postmohawkdriver, on 04 May 2017 - 12:33 PM, said:

Make them visible from across the map, and make detonations apply to them.  That would make them more fun and enjoyable...for me.

 

If you,  as someone who primarily captains cruisers,  has issues with CV's then that's a learn to play issue, bud.

pewpewpew42 #10 Posted 04 May 2017 - 12:56 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Members

  • 1,633
  • Member since:
    02-28-2016

View PostHMS_Formidable, on 04 May 2017 - 07:28 AM, said:

Perhaps a Japanese CV, on 50% or less health, could launch 'kamikaze' strikes with its aircraft? (increased chance of hits, guaranteed loss of aircraft?)

 

Before someone freaks out, I'm sure this guy is not advocating for a real kamikaze attack. I like the idea of a more accurate, more fragile strike pattern as a dynamic option. However, I'd make the number 10%.


light.png

Jakajan #11 Posted 05 May 2017 - 12:43 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 888
  • Member since:
    09-26-2015
Reason for US Torps doing more damage is currently they get 6 tp bombers in the air at high tier compared to ijn 12. Could scale up dove bombers more I guess.

noobmaster29 #12 Posted 05 May 2017 - 02:12 AM

    Seaman

  • Members

  • 35
  • Member since:
    01-11-2016

More "Fun"? For the CV players or for the ones facing it? 

 

Fun for me would be to implement 220 loadout for Ranger and Lexington and bring back 122 loadout for Midway and Essex....................(But that certainly won't be fun for the receiving end)



Palladia #13 Posted 05 May 2017 - 03:08 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 727
  • Member since:
    08-16-2015

View PostJakajan, on 05 May 2017 - 12:43 AM, said:

Reason for US Torps doing more damage is currently they get 6 tp bombers in the air at high tier compared to ijn 12. Could scale up dove bombers more I guess.

 

This is never,  at any point,  balanced.  From sheer damage output to ease of use,  IJN torpedo bombers are always better.  This is supposedly balanced by USN dive bombers dealing more damage but with it being HE and subject to some pretty awful rng is this rarely the case in my experience.

Jakajan #14 Posted 05 May 2017 - 11:15 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 888
  • Member since:
    09-26-2015
Well I have not played many high tier US carriers, though back when I could do manual drops on the Langely I found the spread of 6 torpedoes to be very impressive indeed. I am looking forwards to getting independence so i can actually straffe and do manual attacks again.

Carrier_Lexington #15 Posted 05 May 2017 - 01:34 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,145
  • Member since:
    12-25-2014

View PostJakajan, on 05 May 2017 - 06:15 AM, said:

Well I have not played many high tier US carriers, though back when I could do manual drops on the Langely I found the spread of 6 torpedoes to be very impressive indeed. I am looking forwards to getting independence so i can actually straffe and do manual attacks again.

 

Yeahh... Those were the days...

 

Sadly, once you get to high-tiers, you usually only have 4 bombers by the time you get through their AA, IF that much...


"Heresy!"


BigJohnsonLogan #16 Posted 07 May 2017 - 11:16 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 56
  • Member since:
    06-21-2013

View PostJakajan, on 04 May 2017 - 09:25 AM, said:

Looking at carriers in a more game mechanic way, how could carriers be made more fun to control?


These are just my opinions, not all of these are good.

 

Allow us to define control groups and group our torpedo bombers and dive bombers into tighter groups. A Hakuryu has 8 groups right now. I would like to have the ability to group them into 2 groups of fighters, 1 torpedo bomber and 1 dive bomber squad for quicker in air command issuing. They could still be seperate squads but all able to be selected from a single hot key.

 

Strafing is too strong, it puts American tier 6-8 CV at a huge disadvantage against Japanese CV. I would like to see straffing nerfed or removed from it's current form. The most number of fighters that carriers should be able to kill in one straffe should be maybe equal to the number of fighters in the squadron that is strafing. So a US squadron could shoot down max of 7 planes with an average number of say 3.5 and Japanese squadrons would shoot down a max of 5 planes in a straffe with an average of 2.5, this is with the aircraft superiority skill.

 

Change the torpedoes that planes use to slowly get better and faster as tiers climb, even a 1 knot improvement or 100 damage per tier would be welcome. Give the US torpedoes a better rate of climb of maybe 2 knots per tier and 300 damage per tier while the Japanese get more bombers. So the top end US torpedoes would do about 12k damage and travel at a speed of 52 knots with torpedo acceleration. This is scary and rightfully effective. Japanese torpedoes would do about 9.2k damage and travel at a top speed of like 46 knots at the top end. So yeah, don't make the torpedoes massively better but make them incrementally better like how german destroyer boat torpedoes start good but slowly get "better".

 

Personally I would start here. I would also make some adjustments to improve auto drops so that people who are potatoes are not quite as terrible. Also I would not be opposed to an auto straffe of sorts.

 

The CV is most fun when it is NOT in the match. Keep it in your port, play with it's modules and consumables when you are bored, but do NOT click Battle.

 

Play a Real ship Class.



HMS_Formidable #17 Posted 08 May 2017 - 09:51 AM

    Ensign

  • Beta Testers

  • 1,016
  • Member since:
    09-25-2012

View PostBigJohnsonLogan, on 08 May 2017 - 08:46 AM, said:

 

The CV is most fun when it is NOT in the match. Keep it in your port, play with it's modules and consumables when you are bored, but do NOT click Battle.

 

Play a Real ship Class.

 

Yeah, I think the Germans and Italians said exactly the same thing....

http://www.armouredcarriers.com/title/

 

It is often said that the battleship died because it was vulnerable:
this cannot be correct since the new capital ship, the carrier, was far more vulnerable.
The battleship died because it had very little capability for damaging the enemy.

— Brown, D. K: Nelson to Vanguard: Warship Design and Development 


Carrier_Lexington #18 Posted 08 May 2017 - 01:43 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,145
  • Member since:
    12-25-2014

View PostHMS_Formidable, on 08 May 2017 - 04:51 AM, said:

 

Yeah, I think the Germans and Italians said exactly the same thing....

 

And the crew of Yamato.

"Heresy!"


mohawkdriver #19 Posted 08 May 2017 - 02:32 PM

    Commander

  • Members

  • 3,716
  • Member since:
    09-06-2013

View PostPalladia, on 04 May 2017 - 12:54 PM, said:

 

If you,  as someone who primarily captains cruisers,  has issues with CV's then that's a learn to play issue, bud.

 

I have no issues with CV's, 'bud'.  In fact, I drool when CV's are in the game.  You'll never hear me whine about CV's being OP or any other class of vessel for that matter.

 

Cheers!



_JollyRodge_ #20 Posted 12 May 2017 - 11:24 AM

    Seaman

  • Members

  • 27
  • Member since:
    08-20-2015
tbh, I'd actually like to see fighter strafing have an effect on ships. Historically, fighters would have taken targets of opportunity, like cruisers and destroyers, even if it didn't do much. I had tried out the 2-0-1 loadout on USS Independence and once the weaker DBs are all shot down, there's not much for the fighters to do after clearing the skies but to play spotter for allies. If there's any allied ships left.

"I can do this all day."

-Captain Steve Rogers

USN: Omaha, Texas, Farragut, Arizona, Independence, Pensacola, Atlanta, Indianapolis, North Carolina, Iowa,

 IJN: Kuma, Hosho, Kamikaze, Kongo, ARP Kongou, ARP Haruna, ARP Kirishima, ARP Hiei, ARP Takao, Southern Dragon,

French: Duguay-Trouin, KGM: Graf Spee, Bayern, RN: Emerald, Leander





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users