Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
NoZoupForYou

Why You (And I) Suck at Carriers. Also, win a Kaga

55 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,157
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
1,426 posts
4,720 battles

Why you (and I) suck at CVs.  Discuss.

 

 Sums up the growing CV skill gap and how both WG and our own expectations have widened the skill gap in carrier play.  

 

Also, win a Kaga.  Link for giveaway in the video description.

 

 

 

 

  • Cool 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
262
[5IN]
Members
1,784 posts
8,105 battles

+1 Zoup, nice video.  So true.  It's funny that this video came out today because last night I decided to try and finish some campaign tasks requiring CVs.  I rage sold mine a few months ago after so much frustration.  I re-bought Zuiho to do these missions.  well, I didnt rage sell it yet, but dang its no fun.  I played 2 matches, and both games had 2 USN CVs on the other side..  AS Bogues at that.  Its no fun running out of aircraft, but live and learn.

 

b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,302
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
4,112 posts
8,676 battles

Thanks Zoup I will have something to watch when I get off from work. +1

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
89
[WFSDL]
Members
610 posts
8,273 battles

I agree, bring back manual drop for T4-5. Also need to balance load outs. Just those two things would make CV's a "little" better to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
165
[PVE]
Members
376 posts
8,189 battles

^same here. I rage sold mine as well at tier 6 a while back. Had IJN and USN CVs but I just can't find any fun in the amount of sheer micro-management it takes to be successful. Managing fighters vs fighters, location of enemy and your own attack planes, chasing DD's down all at the same time is tiring match after match. It literally gives me a physical headache. Plus the weak USN fighters getting strafed out of the sky early in a match isn't even a little bit "fun and engaging." Does make me wonder who thought this was fun. Some real Masochists in the CV design studio there at WG.

Oh and how about a tier 6 CV in a tier 8 match? The only targets that don't auto delete planes are DD's. Again, where's the fun?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,302
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
4,112 posts
8,676 battles
3 minutes ago, injunmick said:

I agree, bring back manual drop for T4-5. Also need to balance load outs. Just those two things would make CV's a "little" better to play.

I have only played the Langley and Hosho the main reasons for this is above, we need manual drop back and balanced load outs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,269
[NERO]
Members
3,542 posts

Remove manual drops entirely if what you're concerned about is skill gap. Move the auto drop to be between current auto and manual in terms of accuracy. So long as there's a manual option that vastly out performs auto, there will always be a significant skill gap. You'd need to remove strafing too.

So what it comes down to is this. Do you want to remove the skill gap, or do you want to discourage anyone from playing CV that isn't naturally good at it and a fast learner?

The only other option, really, is to make CV the only ship with a skill based matchmaker. Only pair potato with potato and so forth. Lopsided skill in CV captains is the primary reason for blowout losses from my experience, and that is why newbie CVs tend to quit. They get blamed (accurately) for being the link in the chain that failed the team. 

Edited by TTK_Aegis
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,818
[V_KNG]
Beta Testers
9,268 posts

WG side is most important, the biggest roadblock to playing a good game of CV. Yes, some people make them work and work well. The biggest issue I have is the interface/map views. It's maddening actually to anyone who has played a lot of RTS games. I also agree revoking manual drops/manual strafe from 4/5 hugs. 

 

I am still taking my T6 carriers (IJN/USN) to coop to learn manual drops. The interface/map drives me nuts when working manual control... so progress is slow. I haven't rage sold either of them and won't... but the interface makes it much more challenging than is needed.

 

After all - what other ship type/class has such a high learning curve? If you compare it to arty in WOT, you realize the learning curve is even greater. It is the most challenging type/class of ship to play in WoWS - but if you're good or better than good, the rewards are close to complete control of the battlefield.

 

Which is why, most likely, a control interface redo is not a priority target (so it seems). Make it an easier interface and game balance goes out the window. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,157
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
1,426 posts
4,720 battles
1 minute ago, TTK_Aegis said:

Remove manual drops entirely if what you're concerned about is skill gap. Move the auto drop to be between current auto and manual in terms of accuracy. So long as there's a manual option that vastly out performs auto, there will always be a significant skill gap. You'd need to remove strafing too.

So what it comes down to is this. Do you want to remove the skill gap, or do you want to discourage anyone from playing CV that isn't naturally good at it and a fast learner?

The only other option, really, is to make CV the only ship with a skill based matchmaker. Only pair potato with potato and so forth. Lopsided skill in CV captains is the primary reason for blowout losses from my experience, and that is why newbie CVs tend to quit. Because they get blamed (accurately) for being the link in the chain that failed the team. 

If WG could, I think they should make CV matchups and only CV matchups skill based. As I stated, it's the one place where a huge difference in skill matters.  As far as the skill gap, all players should be learning to manual drop.  Not having that function at t4 and t5 has artificially increased the skill gap.  I wouldn't remove one or the other.  There is a time and place for both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
487
[-1]
Beta Testers
1,795 posts
18,678 battles
27 minutes ago, Chaos_EN2 said:

I have only played the Langley and Hosho the main reasons for this is above, we need manual drop back and balanced load outs.

I agree 100% 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,302
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
4,112 posts
8,676 battles
10 minutes ago, NoZoupForYou said:

If WG could, I think they should make CV matchups and only CV matchups skill based. As I stated, it's the one place where a huge difference in skill matters.  As far as the skill gap, all players should be learning to manual drop.  Not having that function at t4 and t5 has artificially increased the skill gap.  I wouldn't remove one or the other.  There is a time and place for both.

Well said, and I agree 100%.

But knowing my luck this will be the ship I win off of you Zoup, LoL since I hardly play CVs LoL.

Edited by Chaos_EN2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,269
[NERO]
Members
3,542 posts
12 minutes ago, NoZoupForYou said:

If WG could, I think they should make CV matchups and only CV matchups skill based. As I stated, it's the one place where a huge difference in skill matters.  As far as the skill gap, all players should be learning to manual drop.  Not having that function at t4 and t5 has artificially increased the skill gap.  I wouldn't remove one or the other.  There is a time and place for both.

I see your side of the argument for sure, but you can't really disagree that removing the skill shot as an option eliminates the skill gap more surely than more strongly encouraging people to learn the skill shot does. Some people (a lot of people) will never be able to pull it off, and of those who can, there will be a huge variance between people who lay the manual drop exactly where it should be, as close as possible to the target, and those who place it even slightly off from ideal. That's not even getting into those who can cross drop perfectly, at all, or not at all. 

There's a difference between wanting to eliminate the skill gap, and wanting to more strongly encourage people to either get good or leave. "Get good or leave" is what CV play currently is. Bringing manual drops back to low tier won't change that at all. All it'll do is make sure low tier is once again "Get good or leave" too.  

Edited by TTK_Aegis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,157
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
1,426 posts
4,720 battles
5 minutes ago, TTK_Aegis said:

I see your side of the argument for sure, but you can't really disagree that removing the skill shot as an option eliminates the skill gap more surely than more strongly encouraging people to learn the skill shot does. Some people (a lot of people) will never be able to pull it off, and of those who can, there will be a huge variance between people who lay the manual drop exactly where it should be, as close as possible to the target, and those who place it even slightly off from ideal. That's not even getting into those who can cross drop perfectly, at all, or not at all. 

There's a difference between wanting to eliminate the skill gap, and wanting to more strongly encourage people to either get good or leave. "Get good or leave" is what CV play currently is. Bringing manual drops back to low tier won't change that at all. All it'll do is make sure low tier is once again "Get good or leave" too.  

And this touches on how part of the blame lies on us.  In my video I said if you really want to be good at CVs, it requires commitment.  Either you learn manual drop, or don't.  If you don't, you'll never be as good as someone that does.  But that's not really skill gap per se.  There's a difference between players wanting to be good and not having the ability, which is where I think we are at with interface, etc., and players having the ability but just not being willing to do what's needed.  The skill gap as I see it is one artificially in place due to limitations caused by WG, I.e. T4 and T5 autodrop and interface.  It's just too hard for beginners to get into it.  That's the skill gap as I see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,269
[NERO]
Members
3,542 posts
3 minutes ago, NoZoupForYou said:

And this touches on how part of the blame lies on us.  In my video I said if you really want to be good at CVs, it requires commitment.  Either you learn manual drop, or don't.  If you don't, you'll never be as good as someone that does.  But that's not really skill gap per se.  There's a difference between players wanting to be good and not having the ability, which is where I think we are at with interface, etc., and players having the ability but just not being willing to do what's needed.  The skill gap as I see it is one artificially in place due to limitations caused by WG, I.e. T4 and T5 autodrop and interface.  It's just too hard for beginners to get into it.  That's the skill gap as I see it.

Personally I find my biggest problem is that the way the map is presented makes it hard for me to judge distances and aim well. If I'm zoomed in enough to aim well (especially with DBs) then I'm zoomed in too far to see accurately how far away my squadron is to calculate lead time. It's especially a problem in any dimly lit map. I find Ocean hard to see from the god's eye view. 
I don't typically have issues with vision so I'm not sure why this is a problem for me in CV play, but I'd love to see an option that highlights ships so I can more easily see them against the water.
I'd also like to be able to assign flights to on the fly custom groups like you can in an RTS. If you can do that for carriers, I've never figured out how, but I'd love to be able to hit two keys and swap between all fighters and all torp bombers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,669
[TBW]
Members
6,319 posts
11,869 battles

I figured that I would do CV's after I got all of the other ships, but the new ship lines just keep coming to quick to grind them all out. I have a big credit problem also being a collector (167 ships). The exchange rate for credits is really tremendously awful. I bought the Enterprise but have yet to even play a game in her, so if I win the Kaga, she will most likely sit in port for a year or so until I get to tier ten with all of the other ships and decide to truly learn the CV line. Losing manual drops in tiers 4 and 5 did not help me want to learn the CV line. I have been trying to get my 300 plane kills in the Yamamoto campaign. You guessed it, Zero kills, I haven't seen a CV in any of my tier 8-10 battles yet. I could use a CV to get the plane kills, thus ensuring a CV will be in the game. That of course would mean jumping into the Enterprise with no upper tier experience (Zero, Zip, Zilch, Nada). My team would have so much fun if I came up against Fem, I can see the battle chat already.

Edited by Sovereigndawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
780
[MIA-I]
[MIA-I]
Supertester
2,712 posts
4,689 battles

To be honest...  I kinda enjoy the lower tiers because of the lack of manual drop.  Simplifies carrier play.  Now I'm not saying it was good for the playerbase, but it's good for me, less stuff to focus on and micro-manage.  I play the carriers in Co-Op from time to time and the lack of strafe has made it immensely easier and simpler in my mind.  I mean without strafe it's just intercepting bombers and the like, and if my fighters come across an enemy fighter squadron?  Drag them and engage them over a friendly AA ship.

I've tried doing carriers in random from time to time, I feel bad doing it because I'm so abysmal at them and it screws the team really.  Some times I'm lucky and find out I'm against a player who's similar skill set and it's a good fight and chess match.  But other times I come across a player who obviously knows what they're doing and it really sucks being in game, being thwarted and unable to do anything because you're just getting shut down left and right and knowing the team is getting picked apart because of you lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,669
[TBW]
Members
6,319 posts
11,869 battles

I was playing the CV line a little bit but when they took the manual drops away at the lower tiers I quit playing them completely. Having to learn how to strafe and manual drop at the upper tier levels would mean that I would just get my butt kicked and then of course the team suffers. I am a team player and don't want the team to start with an obvious disadvantage (me).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,669
[TBW]
Members
6,319 posts
11,869 battles
1 minute ago, vonKaiser said:

To be honest...  I kinda enjoy the lower tiers because of the lack of manual drop.  Simplifies carrier play.  Now I'm not saying it was good for the playerbase, but it's good for me, less stuff to focus on and micro-manage.  I play the carriers in Co-Op from time to time and the lack of strafe has made it immensely easier and simpler in my mind.  I mean without strafe it's just intercepting bombers and the like, and if my fighters come across an enemy fighter squadron?  Drag them and engage them over a friendly AA ship.

This was the plus side for me too. It's also the reason I haven't moved past tiers 4 and 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
948 posts
5,544 battles

For me, it's the ping. Setting up fighter strafes is quite difficult with triple digit ping. Manual dropping TB/DB is doable though, in fact it's quite easy... too easy. T7 IJN is a nightmare though considering half the time it's a Saipan on the other side...

Edited by reaper_swpz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
842
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,370 posts
7,948 battles
37 minutes ago, TTK_Aegis said:

Remove manual drops entirely if what you're concerned about is skill gap. Move the auto drop to be between current auto and manual in terms of accuracy. So long as there's a manual option that vastly out performs auto, there will always be a significant skill gap. You'd need to remove strafing too.

So what it comes down to is this. Do you want to remove the skill gap, or do you want to discourage anyone from playing CV that isn't naturally good at it and a fast learner?

 

+1 to you Zoup and TTK. National balance is an issue, both ways because USN can actually wreck IJN with fighters, some of the better players can make use of 1,1,1 at tier 8 to good effect, I get a match without OP AA levels, I can use AS to wipe a shokaku's planes from the sky just point and click due to far superior fighters, forbid I use strafe, and then just stagger the 2 DB's on larger ships to make him wait as he burns to use DCP, or he uses it, then burn him. The one disagreement I have is that strafe should not be removed, it should be reworked. It should become a group debuff so if someone groups bombers, you maybe down 1-2 of 16, but you screw up their accuracy to reduce hits, which was strafing's original intent, a debuff, and make it a temporary DPS debuff against fighters (the idea is your breaking these groups, fighters and bombers, out of their formation and scattering), to maybe help keep fighters a little more than point and click because while I'm fine with it, too many would whine about it if fighters were point, click, hope you have the better planes via upgrades, skills, and RNG. 

 

The only other potential disagreement is reducing auto drop range. That would have to be ship buy ship and really, only I think USN because IJN has multiple TB's. And realistically, the IJN focus should be the capital ships and if you can't hit a BB that you cross drop on, you either need to reevaluate your tactics/play level or found the guy that's really good and paying attention. But then again, as each nation needs a flavour according to Wargaming, I'm a proponent of with the 4 lines I know we can work out, and I know aircraft for IJN being the BB hunter, CV's as well, UK being favoured more toward BB hunting, but better than IJN vs a DD. USN being similar to UK but reversed, a bit more apt at DD hunting than the previous 2, but can put some hurt on a BB, and Germany, as the GZ looked and possibly had potential for had it been handled right, a DD hunter. Germany having the most accurate DB's (best tool vs a DD) and IJN the worst (which they already are) and IJN having the best set up's in TB's and all to more easily damage a BB, reducing groups/ability to Germany with no TB's. They dial in German (think that needed to be just a little smaller) and USN drop circles, plus the higher plane numbers per group, you get that effectiveness vs a DD and more hits on a BB, meaning more chances of a fire and possibly a little more damage. Thing is, HE DB's can work, and can be effective against a BB, the problem is Wargaming needs to balance CV's, and part of that is AA strong enough CV's waltz through AA unhindered, but not what we have right now where you try to stagger attacks and you lose whole groups to a lone ship dropping maybe 1-2 bombs. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
819 posts
3,823 battles

I'm terrible because I refuse to manually drop torpedoes. I play for the fun and sport of it. So I like to give my targets an opportunity to avoid my torpedoes if thier willing to react, cause there is no fun in having 5+ torpedoes hit you despite your best efforts in taking evasive action. Plus I like using the Kaga's dive bomber(strike) loadout so I'm bad for using that to.

Edited by Magic_Fighting_Tuna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27
[ISLA]
Beta Testers
332 posts
7,045 battles
2 hours ago, NoZoupForYou said:

Why you (and I) suck at CVs.  Discuss.

 

 Sums up the growing CV skill gap and how both WG and our own expectations have widened the skill gap in carrier play.  

 

Also, win a Kaga.  Link for giveaway in the video description.

 

 

 

 

 

I think why most people suck at cv and my self included is that its a ship with such a learning curve from manual drops to strafing out of dog fights and how to get your planes on the right ship at the right time.   These ships are the most heavily RNG base ship in the game. From AI aa on enemy ships to how they drop the pay load, ie dive bombers.  I been in matchs where i have lost a full fighter squadron to the same ship with a lower tier of fighters because of rng (and no it was not a strafe ) .  These ship are expensive compaired to all other ship in the game for xp to credits needed.   And the fact that the economy for these ships suck so bad, ie:  kill 4 ships do 150k damage do tons of spotting shoot down lots of planes and your still middle of the score board for xp.   Some game mechanices need a change like strafing in a vets hand you can own any load out with this ability, all you need to do is have rng and good game knolage on your side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27
[ISLA]
Beta Testers
332 posts
7,045 battles
40 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

 

+1 to you Zoup and TTK. National balance is an issue, both ways because USN can actually wreck IJN with fighters, some of the better players can make use of 1,1,1 at tier 8 to good effect, I get a match without OP AA levels, I can use AS to wipe a shokaku's planes from the sky just point and click due to far superior fighters, forbid I use strafe, and then just stagger the 2 DB's on larger ships to make him wait as he burns to use DCP, or he uses it, then burn him. The one disagreement I have is that strafe should not be removed, it should be reworked. It should become a group debuff so if someone groups bombers, you maybe down 1-2 of 16, but you screw up their accuracy to reduce hits, which was strafing's original intent, a debuff, and make it a temporary DPS debuff against fighters (the idea is your breaking these groups, fighters and bombers, out of their formation and scattering), to maybe help keep fighters a little more than point and click because while I'm fine with it, too many would whine about it if fighters were point, click, hope you have the better planes via upgrades, skills, and RNG. 

 

The only other potential disagreement is reducing auto drop range. That would have to be ship buy ship and really, only I think USN because IJN has multiple TB's. And realistically, the IJN focus should be the capital ships and if you can't hit a BB that you cross drop on, you either need to reevaluate your tactics/play level or found the guy that's really good and paying attention. But then again, as each nation needs a flavour according to Wargaming, I'm a proponent of with the 4 lines I know we can work out, and I know aircraft for IJN being the BB hunter, CV's as well, UK being favoured more toward BB hunting, but better than IJN vs a DD. USN being similar to UK but reversed, a bit more apt at DD hunting than the previous 2, but can put some hurt on a BB, and Germany, as the GZ looked and possibly had potential for had it been handled right, a DD hunter. Germany having the most accurate DB's (best tool vs a DD) and IJN the worst (which they already are) and IJN having the best set up's in TB's and all to more easily damage a BB, reducing groups/ability to Germany with no TB's. They dial in German (think that needed to be just a little smaller) and USN drop circles, plus the higher plane numbers per group, you get that effectiveness vs a DD and more hits on a BB, meaning more chances of a fire and possibly a little more damage. Thing is, HE DB's can work, and can be effective against a BB, the problem is Wargaming needs to balance CV's, and part of that is AA strong enough CV's waltz through AA unhindered, but not what we have right now where you try to stagger attacks and you lose whole groups to a lone ship dropping maybe 1-2 bombs. 

yes i total agree with strafe as a debuff it would fix cv vs cv game play.  But would also would like to see if debuff ships to maby reduce accuracy of aa for a set time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
9,434 posts
11,601 battles

Like I have been advocating, we need separate pacific war type of mission where you have 4 cv per side with rest being aa escort.    experience the true   CV war in all its glory and see if anyone want to play that.   if no one want that, we know   CV player just wants to wack the mole .      

 

I've been advocating auto drop and getting rid of strafe to reduce skill gap for a while as well. if you are going full arcade mode,  you might as well make it a  unlimited respawn but cool down based on loss.     4 per squadron.     by adjusting autodrop, you could adjust the number of squadron   for balance.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,850
[O7]
Supertester, Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
10,660 posts
7,555 battles

It might help you to not sit in enemy AA auras, also instead of attacking one squad at a time if you have all your attack squads attack at the same time it reduces the damage you take from AA because each AA aura can only damage one squad. So instead of attacking with three dive bombers one at a time where the AA can focus each one individually attack with 2-3 of them together so the AA does not hit your squads as hard. Conserving reserves is an important part of playing CVs and losing planes to enemy AA when they were not doing something important is just giving away planes for free which are a rather limited resource. 

 

Also keep an eye out after you play CV games and see what has high AA values on the loading screen so you know what ships to avoid. Most times high tier USN BBs for example have good AA but some spec into other things hoping that CVs will just assume they have good AA and not attack and ships people generally assume have bad AA like Nagatos and Amagis for example can have pretty decent AA if they spec completely in AA so its just good to check when the battle is loading. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×