Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
AdmiralMudkip

Looking at Carrier Gameplay from Other Naval Games...

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

114
[NLIST]
Members
618 posts
8,201 battles

I remember some topics saying how carrier gameplay was great at games like Steel Ocean and Navy Field. 

 

So I decided to check out the carrier gameplay and in order to find a game with different mechanics of sort, I decided to look at the following games:  Battlestations Midway and Pacific, Steel Ocean and Navy Fields 1 and 2.

 

And my preliminary (first impression) results is that... they don't look too different of sorts. Aside from Battlestations Midway and Pacific where you can get into a dog fight and command planes, I find that some of World of Warships' carrier gameplay stem from the naval games that preceded it. 

 

So help me out here fully so I can understand. What did the previous naval games did better than World of Warships in terms of carrier gameplay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
862
[KNTAI]
[KNTAI]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
3,176 posts
7,789 battles

I can't say what the difference between WoWS and previous naval games in terms of carriers since I only played them in Battlestations Pacific previously, but I can at least explain my grippes with how WoWS carriers are handled.

 

The controls for WoWS CVs feel blocky; I don't feel as precise commanding units in WoWS as I do in other RTS titles, like Company of Heroes and StarCraft. It's not so much the turning circles of plane squadrons themselves (which does screw up even the more experienced CV players at times), but the responsiveness of commands don't give the kind of feedback I'm accustomed to. With how manual attacks work, you have to telegraph the movement with reasonable space before the area of attack in order to pull off the action in a timely fashion, or else you get locked into the aforementioned turning circle that is guaranteed to ruin your planned attack.

 

Unit selection is also finicky at times: it's not uncommon for me to accidentally set a waypoint for my carrier instead of for my squadron, despite having the squadron(s) originally selected, so I have to manual steer my carrier for a moment before re-selecting my squadrons to control. Also, there is no way to set control groups to organize air groups, which can make it even more of an annoyance when you start getting more squadrons to handle at higher tiers. I frequently split my squadrons into independent groups of two in order to force the enemy CV to split his attention as well if he has any intention of intercepting my bombers. Because of the lack of a control groups option, I have to select my groups in accordance to their position on the number keys while holding down shift, which is a nuisance when a single key press can achieve the same thing as three.

 

Perhaps a lesser problem is how CV vs CV fighter battles are mostly number games, since fighters are not allowed to disengage once they are attacked by an enemy fighter. You can turn a dogfight to your advantage by engaging the fight near friendly ships, but that also has the assumption that the opposing CV willingly dives into that disadvantageous situation, which is not a reliable instance. The interaction of the CV against other CVs is too shallow for my liking: I hope the incoming rework also addresses this issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
270
[BS]
Alpha Tester
586 posts
1,053 battles

 

While I understand the desire,  balancing that would be a massive pain.

 

Not anymore of a pain than the current system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
114
[NLIST]
Members
618 posts
8,201 battles

 

Not anymore of a pain than the current system.

 

You have a good point. However balancing the current system and (assuming WG implements it for the sake of argument) your system are two different things. I'm just waiting to see which of the CV rework proposals are the "closest" to WG's carrier reworks! xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,367
Members
2,688 posts
4,560 battles

 

Not anymore of a pain than the current system.

 

A lot more of a pain then the current system.  Current system just has to be balanced for twelve torpedo bombers max.  Having the ability to launch nothing but torpedo bombers opens up an entirely new kettle of fish.  And I have played games where people can control their AA versus your largely AI planes.  It isn't fun.  

 

We all know the CV system needs a rebalance but I just don't think tearing out the new system and putting in a new one is the way to go.  For one it would take to long and CV's need help fast.  For two you have to keep in mind that a lot of CV players aren't going to be open to a change of that magnitude.  

 

Also Mudkip brings up a good point.  It would be an insane amount of balancing on top of having to implement an entirely new system.  Thats a lot more work then just making the current system more workable.  Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater and all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×