Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'cv'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Surveys
  • General WoWS Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Team Play
    • Support
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Player Modifications
  • Support
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests
  • Support


  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Found 509 results

  1. Basicly in early tiers, when everyone has the same amount of squadron or almost the same amount, USN CVs has absolute advantage over IJN CVs because the difference between the strength of their fighter planes. I have searched around in the forum and seems like in later tiers IJN CVs tends to have more squadrons of figthers and it gets balanced out. but before that, especially in tier 4 and 5, with hosho and zuiho, its extremely hard to play as IJN CV because you tends to have your fighters competely rekt'd by USN fighters every fight and have their fighters eat all remains of your other squadrons. You will have to play extremely smarter than them, bait them into friendly aa range, outnumber them in a 2cvs vs 2cvs game, and you will STILL LOSE THE DOGFIGHT most of the time if you are up against USN fighters. and there is nothing about play style or what so ever at these 2 tier. because your enemy has absolute advantage over you. and it gets extremely unfun to play against USN CVs as IJN CVs because you tend to lose the air combat every time, tho there exist chances that the rest of your team may make a difference to the outcome of the game. maybe IJN CVs are balanced or even overpowered at later levels, but at early level they tend to have too much disadvantage and you will have to out-smart your enemies a lot to have your foot on the same ground. IJN and USN early tier CVs balances really requires a rework.
  2. So this is kinda weird... I'm having a lot of fun in Ranger. Like, a lot. I know the battles in Random aren't a lot (though it feels like more) it's been pretty consistent throughout. In both modes I average right around 70k dmg. And I noticed a few things: 1: I might not be a bad CV captain. I've gone up against other Rangers and did really well against them. (in the 4 Randoms I have, half were against Ranger's and the other Hiryu's. I've come out on top against all 4. Near top of the team in all battles. 2: Ranger is not the worst Tier VII CV. I think it's actually Hiryu. I've whipped them around like wet toilet paper every time I see one. Like they just get slaughtered. 3: I want Midway. I've never had this much fun with CV before, and now I want more. ... ... Am I becoming a Carrier Main?
  3. So I have been looking at the Halsey mission tasks and unfortunately for me I see that for some of them they require CVs at T9-T10. I just unlocked the Lexington and will have to grind up to the Midway. Wargaming finally got me, the last two ship lines I have not finished yet. I can already feel the cancer spread through my body. I am a decent player in past CVs but I can already feel the anger in chat. Good luck to all who gets me on the team.
  4. I've really been enjoying running Ranger in co-op games today. It's kind of relaxing, and I'm enjoying myself. It makes me really want Enterprise so I could run it in co-op too. I know the nightmare starts in randoms, and I am not that confident in my capabilities to try it yet. So, for now, I will continue to enjoy my time in coop with my new carrier.
  5. So thanks to a rare SUPERCONTAINER that was kind enough to give me 50,000 free exp I now own USS Ranger CV-4. I've heard a thing or two that this ship is less than great, but I haven't gotten much of a chance to play her all that much. All I know is she has 1 Fighter, 1 TB, 2 DB. I'm not likely to torture myself in Randoms, so I'll likely stick to Co-op for awhile, at least until I can figure out where she works and doesn't (and how to handle 2 DB squadrons at the same time). Any tips for a new Ranger captain? Anything I should know, or any tricks you know of that would ease along the adjustment into higher-tier CV play? Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks!
  6. What Wows is us pretty much getting excited for a new ship line, i.e., British and French battleships. But this forum is to see what the upcoming new trees will be. There has been quite the talk about German carriers and they already have the Graf Zeppelin as a premium tester ship. So I'm putting my doubloons on German CV's
  7. I just got out of a game that I had blacklisted a CV due to the last time I ran into him, he was AFK for half the match (sort of - he launched about 3 minutes in, had his planes hover over his CV, when myself and others started asking what's up, he then moved his planes elsewhere, he engaged after about 6 minutes into the game at which point he suicided his in air planes, moved his CV to a corner and asked me how I would like him to play. I responded simply, just play the game and all is good. He didn't launch another plane. That kind of AFK). So this guy was in a match with me again and was still at the beginning again. I warn the team, "be ready for an AFK CV" at which point he responds and starts somewhat playing the match. I figure cool, despite his almost 40% win ratio (it's 41%) with an average of 16k damage over almost 2,500 battles, I truly am OK with this. I do not stat shame, I never have and I never will. The game has a variety of players, with different lives that can play for different lengths, etc. etc. etc. So I don't stat shame anyone, even this guy with his smug "oh well" attitude as he is throwing out a fishing line and not using his planes. However, I looked up our opponents CV and his average was great. 59% win ratio, 61k average damage and a ton more games than the guy I blacklisted. This got me thinking... While I am not a fan of an MMR system, I've played a lot of other truly competitive games in other genres (MMORPG's, FPS's, etc.) it works sometimes, but has its downfall and I don't think it would work in WoWs for the majority of the player base. What I do think would work is a somewhat adaptation to it coupled with the current Match Making system. The adaptation would be perhaps a 5% +/- or whatever number the Dev's/data crunchers thought would be appropriate. If after "X" amount of time above the current CV rule in the MM, then the CV in que would revert back to the old MM system. The reason I see this as an issue is because a 19% difference in Win Rate, depending on who one talks to is huge. Some make try to explain it away as "my teams fault", but over 2,500 battles, that's a lot of blame to be put on others. The other area in this specific match was a 45k average damage difference. Given the role a CV plays, it literally can make or break a team. Thoughts?
  8. Well lets see a 72 percent winrate enemy saipan vs a 49 percent winrate needs to practice in coop for about 10 years ranger. enemy didn't need anyother ships other then the Colorado he was dived with . This CRAP is utter [edited].
  9. How Do I Defend My Teammates?

    As a CV player, I've always prioritized killing enemy fighters over enemy bombers. My logic for this is that: once the enemy CV's fighters are down, my bombers will have a much less dangerous run at the enemy ships no enemy fighters means I can kill the enemy bombers without interference from enemy fighters While I'm pretty competent at winning fighter duels most of the time, I've come to realize that my fleet defense, aka my capabilities of defending my teammates from the enemy CV's bombers, are much less so. In fact, I'd call myself close to completely incompetent at surface defense. Even after I've swept the enemy fighters aside and cleared a path for my own bombers, the enemy CV is usually able to attack one of my teammates, and oftentimes able to escape with most, if not all, of his bombers intact. It's especially frustrating when said enemy CV gets a dev-strike achievement for said attack. Usually, this is due to one or more of these six reasons: my fighters are maimed from killing the enemy fighters and thus have to replenish their numbers and ammo in order to restore effectiveness my fighters are grouped together around one cap in order to provide fighter support to each other, meaning at least one other cap is open for enemy bombers my fighters are busy dogfighting enemy fighters (and thus I don't strafe out to intercept bombers for fear of losing the dogfight) the teammate being targeted is deep behind enemy lines/isolated and thus too far for my fighters to reasonably intercept in time the teammate being targeted is within the AA zone of ships like Montana or Moskva (aka I don't want to unnecessarily lose fighters) I mess up a strafe as the bombers make a sudden turn and then I'm helpless while they attack the teammate (granted, this one's mostly my fault, but I don't think clicking on the bombers is adequately effective at stopping an attack, either) I feel as though part of my abysmal 41% wr in Essex after 152 battles, despite doing over 12k the average server damage and 7 more planes shot down on average, has to do with this lack of competence regarding fleet defense (as for my time in Taiho, my defense for my 31% wr is that I've only played 32 battles in it and quite a few of them involved stock modules). How do I better defend my teammates without compromising air superiority? Is my doctrine of prioritizing enemy fighters wrong? How should I correct my playstyle?
  10. Discussion Point: This is intended to be a discussion point - not a flamefest about WoWs CVs in general. Please take that to another post. I realize that WoWs is not a simulator - some of these thoughts are arguable difficult to do and may make CVs even more RTS. All of this is mute to some degree because WG has a CV rework in progress. IRL, CVs and planes had limitations that are not reflected in WoWs CV play. These limitations if in place could* have made CVs more acceptable. Debate my list and add your thoughts. Torpedo spotting: pilots traveling thousands of feet in the air should not be able to spot a torpedo (exception: torpedo bombers which are hugging the deck to drop torpedoes - but only near their flight path) slower/deep water torpedoes should be significantly harder to spot (less wake) pilots engaged with the enemy or under fire by AA are focusing on staying alive - not spotting torpedoes. And even if they do see the torpedo: are they really taking time to radio anyone when they are trying to stay alive? Ship spotting: If the ship is not moving or moving slow: it can easily be missed by a pilot. If a ship is near an island the ship could 'blend' with the seafloor and be missed. ( the wake would blend with the waves ) Many ships massed together is easier to spot than single ships. As with torpedo spotting, if a pilot is taking fire - is the pilot really sending detailed information or just trying to stay alive. Misidentification: is that a CL or large DD? Ships got misidentified all the time especially at distance Cloud cover: that random cloud could easily block visibility of a ship even though the pilot is passing right over it. Minor squalls dropping rain can gray out a ship and result in it not being seen or misided Getting course and speed right is hard. Flight level differences: Fighters should be able to attack DBs or TBs but not both at the same time - there should be a time penalty if switching from TBs to DBs: DB fly at altitude, TB fly at the deck. Part of the reason for the IJN loss at Midway was that all the fighters were low attacking the USN TBs. When the DBs came in the DBs had no problem hitting the IJN CVs. Strafing: If still in the game is should only affect 1 kind of plane. Planes should be able to fly low to avoid detection or high to do a DB attack. Partial damage: Rather than just have air combat show up as a plane loss or no effect, have planes be damaged. i.e. planes go through a green, yellow, dead stage. Yellow planes: need to land within X seconds. travel slower Planes scattering: When making attacks and taking losses, the pilots would make their attack and get away. Planes would travel low to avoid detection while racing home. In game, WoWs could have made it so that once a squadron takes 25% damage after payload launching, it automatically fragments into individual planes that scatter, avoid the fighters, and returns to the CVs. Fighters could chose to chase a few unlucky planes but wouldn't be able to get them all. When under AA fire, have torpedo drops be truly random. Intelligent pilots: IRL a pilot is not going to just fly directly over a AA CA ignoring his mates getting blasted out of the sky. A squadron should be able take a path that avoids direct stupid routes. (note: this would reduce the RTS) If a primary target is hard to get to have the pilot drop on a target of opportunity. Be able to give a plane route with orders to attack first enemy/ first DD / etc. Make a squadron immune to strafe if the enemy fighters have been engaged or are considered 'known'. IRL strafing only worked as a surprise attack against an enemy flying in formation. Not against dogfights nor against planes that are coming in at random angles. I could probably think of more things ... but considering that CVs got that rework coming... I should do something else. Cheers!
  11. -Beating the Dead Horse- So, I am a relatively new player to this game... I have played on and off over a couple of years, and recently got addicted again and have started grinding my way down most of the US lines in earnest. I missed a lot of the development of this game, and I do feel like CV's performed a lot differently a couple of years ago then they do now. I used to see far more cv's in matches than I have seen after playing roughly 500 games in 2 weeks. After looking through a variety of posts, I see CV's are a very controversial topic in this community, (though thankfully not as badly as artillery in WOT). Have CV's been rebalanced recently? Are they in the process of being rebalanced? Do they have a place in competitive play in clan wars or high tier ranked battles gameplay? I have a lot to learn, but as I progress my ways up the tiers, I hope to become a much better captain. This really is a fun game, and deserves more attention than it currently gets. Thanks for your opinion on this topic... although you are already probably tired to death of discussing it... again.
  12. NOTE: I am not trolling anyone here. I am asking WG a question on a public forum. Since: CVs are so unbalancing CVs are declining in popularity CVs are in need of a major rework that will take time to properly play-test and balance according to Jingles, within 6 months CVs will be effectively dead due to normal players boycotting them the rework requires going to a more FPS style not a RTS approach. Questions: What is WG planning on doing to stop further damage to the player base while the rework is being performed? What is the timeline on the rework? How is WG planning on introducing / easing into the alternative play mode? While rework is in progress is WG planning on near-term removal of: CVs while the rework is in progress and refund of premium CVs fighter strafe fighters some other mechanics that WG knows will not survive the rework I hope as players we can get some sense of work in progress. I hope WG doesn't introduce an entirely new play mode all at once. As I understood it CVs at first appeared balanced but that was only because of player inexperience. A new mode with the same hidden power imbalance is not any better than the current situation. [To players defending current CV play mode: this post is not meant to trigger you or invite a defense of CVs; this is for WG]
  13. What line was your first objective

    Personally mine is USN BB's. Why? I live in canada so that and UK where the closet representation. Also big bad BB's lol
  14. CV players hold a great responsibility in battle: how we manage ourselves vs that of the enemy CV can oftentimes decide the outcome of a battle. It is a CV's job to spot enemy ships for their teammates to attack, attack enemy surface ships and soften them up/outright kill them, and defend our team against enemy air attack. With that being said, CV players do have their limits, and they are not supposed to be an omnipresent deux-ex-machina that saves potatoes from meeting their demise. If you do potato and die for it (we all do at some point, but it's the frequency of such mistakes that sets apart players), do not cuss out your CV in chat. For instance, tonight I had a teammate in a Charles Martel who decided that the best thing to do on Twin Brothers was to sail alone down the channel when there were carriers and several enemy battleships, cruisers, and destroyers with good AA. Despite my protests (to which he called me a [edited] boy), he proceeded to sail down the channel even though several battleships and cruisers (tier 9/10, mind you, so they all had rather powerful AA and very good guns) had already been spotted on the other side, waiting for him to poke his bow out. He never got to that point, however, as the enemy Taiho decided that he would make a fine appetizer. Despite attempts by my Essex's fighters to interfere (hampered by the presence of enemy fighters and several good AA ships), the lack of room inside the channel meant that there was really no chance he would survive. As has become typical fare for us CV players, said Martel's captain now proceeds to declare me useless, despite my protests and strained efforts to defend him (even if he insulted me and played incompetently, he still at least was a teammate, so I had to at least try to defend him). At that point, I had stopped listening to him, so all he got in chat was "*laughs*". We won that fight despite a fierce struggle and a very competent enemy CV (who was divisioned with a kidd), I compliment the 4 players that had surpassed me in base xp (I was fifth), and in dead last, with less than 300 xp to his name on a win, is the Charles Martel captain. Yeah, I don't regret not doing more to try and save him from himself.
  15. As Much As I Look Down On Asashio...

    That ship now has thoroughly embarrassed me by completely surprising and sniping me in a CV. An Asashio, while having only detected me for 1 minute before I killed the planes spotting me, managed to make me eat 5 torpedoes and basically accomplish a CV snipe (no dev-strike though, since the torpedo spreads were staggered) while I myself, as the CV, never saw the guy until 1 minute after I had died. To whoever was that Asashio, I applaud thee, for you have accomplished what many more versatile and outright better ships have not: snipe me in a tier 9+ CV from full health to nothing.
  16. Hey everyone, Isaac here! Just wanted to make a video going over some of the better ideas in response to a facebook post on the World of Warships Dev Blog about what we as a community would like to see in a CV rework. Sorry it's such a long video, I did mean to try and make it shorter, but the multiple windows I was using to view the comments covered up my Bandicam timer. RIP my video length. And with having the response of my subscribers enjoying my more off-the-cuff style of videos, it kinda lapsed..... plus I kinda can get off on tangents/rants. Sorry! Not much to actually watch in the video and you could probably listen to it while alt+tabbed and playing Warships or other games in a different window. Anyway, what are your thoughts and opinions on some of the things I covered? Do you agree with some of the ones that the community has come up with? Do you disagree with them? Do you have your own ideas you'd like to see or would like to offer? Leave a comment in the comments section of the video or a post here on the forums and let's try to get this feedback back to WarGaming on their forums along with their Dev Blog Facebook post! Dev Blog Post: https://www.facebook.com/WorldOfWarships.NA/posts/2083103431904850 As always, Captains, take care!
  17. The Seventh Carrier

    While I was in the Navy i had a series of book call "The Seventh Carrier" by Peter Albano. I was wondering if any of you have seen or read it? Below is a small part of the first book in the series. It is a strange "what if" fictional story, About a Japanese CV left over from WWII, who's crew still thinks the War is on. What do all think of this type of "what if"? http://allthetropes.wikia.com/wiki/The_Seventh_Carrier It is the first day of December, 1983. Ted ‘Trigger’ Ross is a very long way from his past as a World War II hero, as forty years later he travels aboard the steamer Sparta, through the Bering Sea. Then, as if from nowhere come Japanese aircraft, Zeros, World War II vintage — and nearly four decades after that war ended, they are heading straight for Sparta. As they undertake their strafing run, destroying the blood-soaked Sparta and killing most of her crew, Trigger Ross is hurled out of calm normality and back into the horrors of war. Because for the crew of the carrier Yonaga, World War II has not yet ended. The crew of the carrier Yonaga are samurai, and that means following orders, even to the death. And the crew of the Yonaga have orders to attack Pearl Harbor. Orders that have never been revoked, and which must therefore be carried out. As Ross, a prisoner on board the Yonaga, finds himself carried back towards his homeland, he draws upon all his inner strength and understanding — of Japanese culture, and of warfare — in a desperate bid to avert disaster. Meanwhile the American authorities, baffled by repeated reports of ships attacked by Zeros, search for answers. Brent Ross, Trigger’s son, believes his father lost at sea. Having heard tales of Japanese ‘holdouts’ many years after World War II, Brent suspects that something similar may be afoot. Brent is right. But how long will it take his superiors to realise that? As the Americans seek answers, and Brent seeks support for his theory, the Yonaga travels on, relentlessly, getting ever closer to Pearl Harbor. The original attack on Pearl Harbor was made by six Japanese carriers: now the seventh is on her way. And the Americans, for whom World War II ended almost forty years previously, are completely unprepared for any attack. Will the Yonaga reach her destination? And if she does — what then? Peter Albano (1922-2006) was a US writer who served in the US Navy 1942-1946; he is known mainly for the nine-book Seventh Carrier sequence of military adventures staring the World War Two Japanese aircraft carrier Yonaga.
  18. I really wanted to wait and see if Pigeon was going to bring back rewards for visiting museum ships, but my groupon was running out. So I went to visit the USS Hornet yesterday and had a pretty interesting trip, including a behind the scenes tour from a surprisingly generous and knowledgeable docent. I took some pictures in glorious 4k resolution if anyone is interested in seeing them (Except of the restricted areas. I didn't want to push my luck). The album can be viewed here. I also went to the USS Iowa back in December. If anyone is interested in those they can be found here.
  19. CV rework and Azure Lane

    I would like to see a nice rework on the CV sooner rather than later, and with the upcoming Azure Lane collab heading our way, how many are looking forward to putting your AL captain on your new CV when this all gets done?
  20. One of the worst experiences that solo CV players come up against is fighting those cancer divisions that tend to start popping out at around tier 7. At tier 7, these tend to come in the form of Saipan—Atlanta—Belfast and evolve all the way up to Hakuryu—Des Moines—Minotaur. Even AA-spec destroyers of certain nations can become almost Baltimore-like levels of AA. It's rather difficult to effectively contest the air or surface battle when some cheeky AA-spec Grozovoi and Des Moines lock down all the contested caps and make air superiority, spotting, or attacking nigh impossible, doubly so when the enemy CV is using these AA-spec div-mates to protect his bombers from fighter attack and you can't even attempt to strafe without flying within 1-2 km of an AA-spec Des Moines. Even the team clumping up together in one cap doesn't help, as this just makes them prime bait for torpedoes and cruisers spamming from behind islands. How does one deal with these situations?
  21. Hello all, Really surprised no one seems to be talking about the massive upcoming CV gameplay changes mentioned in Waterline 1.1 That opening statement about going to Action gameplay from RTS gameplay is the biggest change the game has ever seen. That seems to me to be a colossal paradigm shift.
  22. So I recently glanced back at my thread on a UK CV line and considered either narrowing down or expanding on aircraft. And to that end, having also posted a couple premiums that would feature such aircraft - Where would the community stand on bringing in twin engine aircraft? And beyond that, at least in a limited role and reworked a bit - jets? So, here's where my heads at on this idea. Especially when it comes to the attack planes with rare exception, these are generally going to be more a tier 9/10 idea, as CV's quite literally get bigger. Obviously, things tested and actually flown from a CV would be on the list (Naval Hornet/Mosquito's, PBJ's, F7F, etc) however for a navy that did not, using those planes as sort of a guideline maybe fill in with aircraft that are similar in weight, size, etc. The question then is do they become "progression" aircraft (the next you unlock in the tech tree) or optional aircraft, similar to the AP/HE choice of USN, or the torp options on higher tier IJN DD's. In terms of optional I think the advantage would depend on the aircraft. So for example a PBJ may be slower, but better HP and defensive DPS while if the F7F was optioned as an attack plane, maybe it boasts an edge in speed at the cost of something else. In terms of armament, keep them closer to what already exists just so damage doesn't get crazy if something has a higher payload. While I'm sure none of them can carry 4000 pounds of bombs or really insane things like tallboys -figured I'd cut that off before anyone suggests it. Unless Wargaming wants to nerf CV Alpha damage to a point that 4000 pounds of bombs or a tallboy roughly equals or is maybe only a little higher than it is now. As for heavy fighters, which you again have some of those same aircraft, talking Naval Mosquito's, F7F's, XF5U, Ki-102, etc. And Jet's fall into a similar line of thinking for me here albeit, dialed up further. While some may not have managed to work this way historically in the HF category, in game HF's and Jet Fighters would essentially function as interceptors. Lower DPS and (in most cases) HP [Less time on target, lower maneuverability, in the case of jets also more fragile engines and all], but gaining more speed to run down bombers, and out run fighters. Ideally, strafing would be fixed, or the DPS low enough that the strafe's aren't as devastating and problematic, but basically if say, all 3 were in game current fighters would be the slowest, but the best at taking out any aircraft type in combat. Jet's would be the fastest and great for running down bombers even if your planes are kind of out of position from scouting, a fight, rearming, whatever. But while they can deal with bombers, not as great against the regular fighters. HF's would sorta fall into the almost "just right" category. Not as fast as a jet, but not as slow as a single engine plane. Not the best vs a regular fighter, but better than a jet is. It would again come down to Progression vs option. The line down the tree is easy enough, we used to have jet's and I think some twin engines (been a while). In terms of options done right there would hopefully be no "best" option by default between 2 or 3 options. Jet's are faster and can catch bombers, but aren't necessarily killing them faster, and at a disadvantage in a fight with HF or regular fighters. Regular fighters will kill the bombers faster, if they catch them and does better in a fight against HF and jets, but that speed being slower can be a pain. Sure HF are faster than fighters and better in a fight than jets, but they aren't faster than a jet nor do they have as great an advantage in a fight as a fighter. Someone, were we to go back to CV's having 2 loadout options, running an AS option may prefer fighters or HF because having more means they don't need speed to try and cover an area and can opt for the more effective destroyers, whereas a strike loadout may prefer HF or jets because it has 1 less fighter group to cover the same area. Or maybe it's reversed and because they have more AS leans on HF or jets because they have more groups even though the damage is lower while Strike leans more on fighters and HF because they are stronger overall in a fight. So, what do you guys think? Would you like to see where maybe the Navy doesn't cancel things and we see PBJ's and XF5U's taking off Essex and Midway class CV's? Duels between the F7F and the Mosquito/Hornet? FH-1 Phantoms/F2H Banshees/F9F Panthers squaring off against Sea Vampires/Meteors of the UK or from Japan the Kikka and possibly a jet powered version of the J7W1? A Midway with tougher dogfighting Corsairs vs one with faster jet interceptors in a clash of old vs new?
  23. CV match

    So, just driving Hiryu against a Ranger today on Neighbors, I checked his WR real quickly, and saw he was a 43% WR to my 62% in those respective ships (I won’t name him, feel free to check me). During the game, some DDs pushed up the A cap and headed along the north side thinking they would have an EZ CV kill. I stayed with my fleet, and the 2 DDs eventually were arrived at our team that was cooped up near C cap, I thought this was a sure defeat, as we were cornered, meanwhile I destroyed an enemy Ashitaka and did my best to keep the air squads at bay drawing some ire, as I accidentally got a green Kamikaze R spotted. The enemy CV, although knowing strafing, was ignorant to its nuances, and was losing planes steadily, as the noose appears to tighten, I desperately spot the DDs, just as they came and met several DD hunters, and boom go their last DDs. Things start looking up, we then finally cap B, and our DDs begin running amuck their BBs, the BBs delete CA/CLs, and our CA/CLs start killing a little of everything. By the time I’m done spotting and go to strike something, only 4 ships are left, and one was almost dead, a Nurnberg, a Poopsicola, and the Ranger. I was planning on getting the Nurnberg, it then the enemy CV said something like, “Your ghost CV is hacking, I quit (I’m a CV, not an airfield).” This then allows me to go snipe him, I missed 2 torps when he was stationary, thinking he would move, no problem, the DBs are on the way, and he dies. By the time my strike planes were back, it was gg, the only ship left was a Nurnberg on 1.3k health. P.S. I wasn’t using any hacks other than the autopilot/WASD hacks kindly provided to me by WG. EDIT: His Ranger WR was under 30%, but only 7 battles, the 43% was his Hiryu WR, 45-47% was his average WR.
  24. Brainstorming the CV Rework!

    Hi folks! After all the gnashing of teeth and tears about the upcoming carrier rework (without knowing the detail), I figured we could try our hand at making an educated guess about what exactly Wargaming has in mind. Please note this is not the place to come to talk about how you hate the CV rework, the game, or life in general. If you wish to just complain, there is already a thread right here and please feel free to post your rage there. Note, you are more than welcome to complain in that thread AND post your guess in this one! :) Anyone can post, although if you are actually privy to what that change is, don't. Aside from not being fair to the rest of us, you'd also lose your access to juicy secrets and no one wants that. Here's how *I* think they'll implement it. And I admit how I'd like to see it. Note the whole elevation aspect which I REALLY hope gets added to the game. - Two modes ... the standard full map mode (M) already in game, and third person point of view behind carriers or planes. Carriers and planes will still be selectable using number keys. Doing so will cycle the view between each one as well as which one you are controlling at the time. - Carrier control will be done the same way as all other ships: Mouse to pan around, and WASD to move. R for DCP and T for DF. Basically, what it is now. - Plane control on the other hand will be derived from World of Warplanes (or WT if you're more familiar with that): Mouse controls all movement with W and S for throttle and mouse clicks for shooting or dropping bombs. - Map mode can be used to auto fly any squadron/carrier where you want it to go, with full waypoint control just as it is now. And on top of that, there will be an option to control *elevation* (more on that later). Climbing up will slow down the planes. Climbing down will make them go faster. - You can only ever directly control a single unit at a time. So no issuing commands to multiple units all at once like you do currently. One squadron will need to finish a bombing run before you can switch to another unit to do a bombing run. - Inactive units (the ones you are not controlling) will steer clear of enemy AA. So if you have a squadron in holding position and an Atlanta pushes forward, that squadron will fall back to safety out of that AA bubble. Those planes can still take losses before that happens, though. Planes will not be invulnerable. BOMBERS: - Bombers can fly very high, as in way above AA cover. But they will simply not be able to bomb anything at those heights. They will need to drop down. - Torpedo bombers will have trapezoid style drop pattern like they do now. Above a certain height, that pattern will be red indicating they can't drop torps into the water without them simply detonating on impact. They will need to fly much lower. Once they are in the green zone, the lower they drop, the tighter the pattern gets. But obviously if they are very low, they'll be flying through heavy AA. The further out the drop, the water the pattern at target like it is now. Torpedo bombers will not be able to accurately drop from outside AA range, so Wargaming will likely make that drop pattern quite wide. - Dive bombers will use an aiming ellipse or circle just like it is now. Drop from too high up and that circle will be HUGE and you'll be very unlikely to hit anything. Drop from too low and you risk getting shredded by AA before getting the drop off. - In both cases, it will show you where the bombs/torpedoes will actually go rather than just a point on a ship. It's not auto click. You need to choose where it lands. BUT just like for the rest of the ships, there will be a time on target so you can try and judge where those bombs will land based on how fast you think the target ship will be sailing or whether you think they'll try a turn and dodge. - As you can see, this will indeed be very skill based, but very different from what it is now. The dropping and time on target will be much more familiar to surface ship players who will have an intuitive understanding of "ship will be here in 5 seconds, so I'll lead by x amount". And current CV players should have no troubles understanding it except instead of the current "dive bombers will overhead at this time", it'll be more like "dive bombers release bombs which will on target at this time" FIGHTERS: While the above I find likely based on what we heard, this section on fighters is pure guesswork. Overall, I don't believe you'll have the full manual control on fighter engagements like you will with bombers. But knowing HOW to control those fighters will still be very very important. - Like bomber squads, fighters can change elevations. This is very important. - If you use M (map) to tell the fighter where they will go, they will go to that spot and create an area of control. Within that area, they will attack any and all enemy planes that enter it. - You can also select a target for those fighters to defend. Either a ship or a friendly bomber squad. Or even another fighter squad if you wish to have multiple fighter squads clumped together. This could be useful by placing a fighter squad around a friendly cruiser's AA bubble where the double whammy of fighters and AA could make extremely short work of enemy planes. - You can also simply click on enemy bombers to force your fighters to chase them and engage everything around those bombers. Same with enemy fighters. This will be the ONLY way that your fighters will engage with enemy planes within enemy AA. Might be worth it. Might not. You decide. - Enemy bombers that get engaged by fighters will automatically slow down but still keep pushing to indicated destination. They'll of course defend themselves with their tail guns. This is very similar to what we have now. - Here is the tricky part: If the fighters engage a target at lower elevation, they will drop down to that level and have a significant DPS boost. If they engage an enemy at higher elevation, they will rise to that elevation but have a DPS penalty. This is basically an abstraction of the concept of energy in fighter engagements. Remember that it slows down your plane (horizontally) to move up to a certain elevation, so if you're in a hurry for fighters to go anywhere, you may need to fly low to get there fast, but there will be a penalty. Note, this also applies to fighter on fighter engagements. If one fighter squad has a big altitude advantage over another, the lower planes will die much quicker. Don't engage in dogfights with fighters above you! Fly your fighters towards friendly AA first! - I'm not sure they'll offer direct manual control of fighter squads in third person view. Could be that they'll be limited to M (Map) control, although you'll likely be able to go third person to watch the action up close. SPOTTING: This is actually fairly easy! - Spotting range on ships and torpedoes will be the same by sea AND air. - But spotting will be dependent on height too now. So if a DD's spotting range is 6km, you're never going to spot them if you fly too high. And remember, it's 6km in a straight line, so think trigonometry here. If you're flying your planes at 6km, you'll spot that DD when you're literally flying *directly* overhead. Want to spot them sooner? You'll need to drop down. So do you drop lower, lose energy and risk falling into an AA bubble just to spot that elusive DD in A cap? - As you can see, DDs will be A LOT harder to keep spotted than they are now. And you won't be able to spot torpedoes at all unless you're flying 1km above that DD, lol. And if you fly your planes too low, enemy fighters attacking them will be at a huge advantage. So yeah, that's about it. Was fun brainstorming this. The above keeps things fairly complex, but removes the really nasty levels of micro and entirely removes fighter strafing from the game as losing three full squads in two seconds is no fun for anyone. What about the rest of you? How do YOU think it'll be designed? Toss in your thoughts!