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

Why CVs are doing well, ( and why they should stay that way)

25 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,364 battles

This is a thread designed to explain why CVs are performing so well, why they have powerful "point and click torps," and why they should stay that way. I will draw on what I say in other threads, so don't be surprised if you see something that looks like I've said it before.

Starting this off, I first want to state a point, CVs do not counter any ship, ship type, or build, instead, they specifically counter bad team play. Therefore, a CV's success should be dictated by how well the enemy team performs, not how the team is composed. Currently, the NA meta is very sloppy, with no consistent team play, ships do not cover each other and often spread all over the map. This is the kind of meta CVs are designed to counter, and they do so well. The reason that matches currently come down to the better CV so often is that each team does not try to actively group up and counter the enemy CV, meaning CVs often have the optimal situation for a game. 

There are often complaints about CVs that refuse to cover for their team, and that is justified, however, CVs cannot, and do not, provide cover to everyone. Often a ship is isolated from friendly warships and quickly meets its demise, what is to be done about this? Nothing, this is what CVs are designed for, CVs punish warships that do not play as a fleet, and reward good play. How about permanently spotting DDs? Often DDs should stay with their fleets even if there is not an enemy CV, so the friendly ships can provide help against other DDs and radar ships. However, none of these actions are often done as of the current meta, and CVs strike with near impunity.

Now, as to the ability for a CV to win games, there are three limiting factors that, when working together, can reduce the enemy (or friendly) CV to a non-factor:

Team cohesiveness and teamwork.

Skill of CVs

Tier.

I'll explain on each of these and how they relate to each other.

Spoiler

A: team cohesiveness is probably the biggest factor in a game that has CVs, which is why it's helpful for a CV to remind players to protect each other. Team cohesiveness affects spotting, capture, and, most importantly for this discussion, CV damage and spotting. The more decisive and coherent your team is, the less important CV skill is.

B: Which leads us to the next factor, CV skill, there are two kinds which rarely come together and each helps the team in separate ways. These are; anti-air skilled CVs, who focus their micro towards fighters. Which defends their team from damage and neutralizes the enemy CV's attacks. And there is damage based CVs, which destroy enemy ships, which remove obstructions from friendly flanks, as well as defending friendly ships from other surface ships. Ideally, a CV player can do both, but due to the high level of micro required, this is a rarity. Generally, Anti Air CVs rely on their team to win, and destroy surface ships, while damage oriented CVs rely on team cohesiveness to defend their team from air attack. However, both struggle when down tiered and rely on team cohesiveness more when bottom tier, and rely on team cohesiveness less when bottom tier.

C: Which finally brings us to tier, the capacity for a CV to carry is based on tier and team cohesiveness, you can be the best CV player ever and still fail when bottom tiered against a cohesive team even with a potato CV. However, a potato CV can literally be AFK and the enemy team will lose if the team is cohesive and dedicated to winning, as well as top tier. 

 

As you can see, Cvs heavily rely on teamwork in order to win and do badly when their team does not work well as a team.

By now, some of you are probably thinking, a ship that is designed to impact the gameplay of the entire enemy team! That sounds OP!!! 

And you're about half right. You see, the CV is a tool to encourage good team play, and as such, it must be able to severely punish bad team play. This is why CVs can one shot basically any ship in the game, however, as previously stated, the really suffer against a cohesive team. Now, a lot of times this is brought up, people say, "Well, we can't stay in groups, it reduces flexibility." No. No it doesn't, when DDs are close to the fleet, screening torpedoes, CA,s are helping defend the DDs and BBs, and BBs are staying with the team and taking damage, all the while impenetrable to AA attack. Then you have an incredibly powerful fighting force, not what we have now. (individual ships scattered around the map, incoherently firing at random targets, and ditching teammates for fear of damage) Now, often this is also looked down on, but I'm not talking about a single lemming train, instead, large groups of ships, possibly up to three, that stay together and provide each other with defense.

Now, obviously, CVs aren't working. Teams are still flopping, and they're still OP. How can we stop this? First of all, most teams don't try to co-ordinate AA defense at the beginning, a big help would be placing the next to the CVs name a tag telling players that this is a threat, and to stay near other ships to avoid air attack. Next, put a tip in the little tips tab of the loading menu advising players on how to avoid air attack.

Nerf AA, now this is fairly controversial, and it is, however, currently an AA build can make you a no-fly zone for planes, something that should be accomplished by two or three ships working in concert. However, to balance this, increase arm times of TBs.

Edited to remove the sensationalist title, bad suggestions added an argument defending a point and added suggestions done by another player.

Edited by megadeux
  • Cool 1
  • Bad 6

Share this post


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

make it standard mode only when CV is present.  that will keep everyone together in lemming train.     because that is what  you are asking.    CV actually causes ship to hide and huddle together at high tier, rather than  team play.     if you want dynamic play, you have to nerf CV to be balanced with other class of ships.  or get rid of them completely and put them in their own mode. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
147
[_ARP_]
[_ARP_]
Beta Testers
564 posts
5,215 battles
9 minutes ago, megadeux said:

This is a thread designed to explain why CVs are performing so well, why they have OP point and click torps, and why they should stay that way. I will draw on what I say in other threads, so don't be surprised if you see something that looks like I've said it before.

Starting this off, I first want to state a point, CVs do not counter any ship, ship type, or build, instead, they specifically counter bad team play. Therefore, a CV's success should be dictated by how well the enemy team performs, not how the team is composed. Currently, the NA meta is very sloppy, with no consistent team play, ships do not cover each other and often spread all over the map. This is the kind of meta CVs are designed to counter, and they do so well. The reason that matches currently come down to the better CV so often is that each team does not try to actively group up and counter the enemy CV, meaning CVs often have the optimal situation for a game. 

There are often complaints about CVs that refuse to cover for their team, and that is justified, however, CVs cannot, and do not, provide cover to everyone. Often a ship is isolated from friendly warships and quickly meets its demise, what is to be done about this? Nothing, this is what CVs are designed for, CVs punish warships that do not play as a fleet, and reward good play. How about permanently spotting DDs? Often DDs should stay with their fleets even if there is not an enemy CV, so the friendly ships can provide help against other DDs and radar ships. However, none of these actions are often done as of the current meta, and CVs strike with near impunity.

Now, as to the ability for a CV to win games, there are three limiting factors that, when working together, can reduce the enemy (or friendly) CV to a non-factor:

Team cohesiveness and teamwork.

Skill of CVs

Tier.

I'll explain on each of these and how they relate to each other.

A: team cohesiveness is probably the biggest factor in a game that has CVs, which is why it's helpful for a CV to remind players to protect each other. Team cohesiveness affects spotting, capture, and, most importantly for this discussion, CV damage and spotting. The more decisive and coherent your team is, the less important CV skill is.

B: Which leads us to the next factor, CV skill, there are two kinds which rarely come together and each helps the team in separate ways. These are; anti-air skilled CVs, who focus their micro towards fighters. Which defends their team from damage and neutralizes the enemy CV's attacks. And there is damage based CVs, which destroy enemy ships, which remove obstructions from friendly flanks, as well as defending friendly ships from other surface ships. Ideally, a CV player can do both, but due to the high level of micro required, this is a rarity. Generally, Anti Air CVs rely on their team to win, and destroy surface ships, while damage oriented CVs rely on team cohesiveness to defend their team from air attack. However, both struggle when down tiered and rely on team cohesiveness more when bottom tier, and rely on team cohesiveness less when bottom tier.

C: Which finally brings us to tier, the capacity for a CV to carry is based on tier and team cohesiveness, you can be the best CV player ever and still fail when bottom tiered against a cohesive team even with a potato CV. However, a potato CV can literally be AFK and the enemy team will lose if the team is cohesive and dedicated to winning, as well as top tier. 

As you can see, Cvs heavily rely on teamwork in order to win and do badly when their team does not work well as a team.

By now, some of you are probably thinking, a ship that is designed to impact the gameplay of the entire enemy team! That sounds OP!!! 

And you're about half right. You see, the CV is a tool to encourage good team play, and as such, it must be able to severely punish bad team play. This is why CVs can one shot basically any ship in the game, however, as previously stated, the really suffer against a cohesive team. Now, a lot of times this is brought up, people say, "Well, we can't stay in groups, it reduces flexibility." No. No it doesn't, when DDs are close to the fleet, screening torpedoes, CA,s are helping defend the DDs and BBs, and BBs are staying with the team and tanking damage, all the while impenetrable to AA attack. Then you have an incredibly powerful fighting force, not what we have now. (individual ships scattered around the map, incoherently firing at random targets, and ditching teammates for fear of damage) 

Now, obviously, CVs aren't working. Teams are still flopping, and they're still OP. How can we stop this? First of all, most teams don't try to co-ordinate AA defense at the beginning, a big help would be placing the next to the CVs name a tag telling players that this is a threat, and to stay near other ships to avoid air attack. Next, put a tip in the little tips tab of the loading menu advising players on how to avoid air attack.

Lastly, remove AS CVs, They don't help matters, instead, they nullify the point CVs have in the game. By nullifying the enemies strikes they give license to ships to act out of the group, they also frustrate new CV players, and also nullify the effect they have on the other team. When the enemy team knows that they can expect to take very little damage from even the most egregious abandonment of team play, they have no reason to stay in the group. 

First point, when you say that a CV can "basically" one shot any ship in the game, this is not even close to true. Teams flopping and having blowout or quick games most of the time has nothing to do with CV players. Say that CVs are OP because of it is ridiculous. 

Second, Why would you put a tag next a CV players name to tell them its a threat. If players can't realize what is a threat, then that is something that the players need to learn about. If someone can't properly identify what is a threat and how to deal with it, then they will need to learn that, or that threat will kill them most of the time. If you look at your minimap, you can usually tell where a strike is going and should be able to try to deter it.

Last, why would you remove AS CVs. There is nothing wrong with being able to counter enemy strikes. By suggesting that you remove them, I feel as though you had a CV player that was AS and destroyed your strike setup. Granted an AS carrier in terms of damage to enemy ships will contribute less, people tend to underestimate the importance sometimes of having air superiority.

I don't agree with anything that you said, but this is my opinion after playing CVs and the experience that I've had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,364 battles
36 minutes ago, Panic512 said:

First point, when you say that a CV can "basically" one shot any ship in the game, this is not even close to true. Teams flopping and having blowout or quick games most of the time has nothing to do with CV players. Say that CVs are OP because of it is ridiculous. 

Second, Why would you put a tag next a CV players name to tell them its a threat. If players can't realize what is a threat, then that is something that the players need to learn about. If someone can't properly identify what is a threat and how to deal with it, then they will need to learn that, or that threat will kill them most of the time. If you look at your minimap, you can usually tell where a strike is going and should be able to try to deter it.

Last, why would you remove AS CVs. There is nothing wrong with being able to counter enemy strikes. By suggesting that you remove them, I feel as though you had a CV player delete your strike

I am accurate in saying this, almost all ships in game can be taken out by DoT stacking or straight up torpedo strike.

No, but teams do flop when they spread out more, which is also what allows CVs to strike ships easily. 

I meant in the match loading screen, I found that reminding players to group up generally works, so I figure people need to be reminded.

That was a matter of opinion, and I stated my reasons why, my reasoning may be faulty, but my observation is that if CVs are designed to promote team play, having a CV that counters a CV is ridiculous.

36 minutes ago, Panic512 said:

I don't agree with anything that you said, but this is my opinion after playing CVs and the experience that I've had.

Really? So You don’t agree with me when I state that the best way to counter a CV is to have a team that provides one another with AA support? That a team that works in coherent groups works better then one that doesn’t? And that CVs don’t counter a specific ship, but instead work best against disorganized teams?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
471 posts
12,484 battles

It's been said many many times. The problem with CVs is the uneven skills of the drivers and the uneven abilities of the lines. You get an expert in a IJN cv and anything other than an expert on the other team and you know you will lose 80% of the time.

CVs are despised because no one ship carries the game half as well as a cv played well when the competition is weaker.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
877
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,451 posts
8,107 battles

They are performing well "At times" not overall. And the problem is not strictly a teamwork issue, CV's do in fact have too much striking in certain scenario's. They are at best bi-polar because of their design, and the way, as we discussed elsewhere, Wargaming has tried to fix issues that are not in fact the right one or really issues. And they do in fact have a ship they counter - CV's and BB's. Next time your in Queue, however over the CV Icon that basically tells it it's role. It says "Attack large surface ships" and Wargaming has stated they do want CV players focused more on attacking larger ships, not DD's. 

As I said there, manual TB strikes can be far too effective, which is a problem, and Wargaming acknowledged it at the 2 tiers they can't really further buff AA. Which, all the AA buffs have caused issues at higher tiers where yeah, now the lone wolf Rambo goes solo and even if he's taking some hits, still has the AA to decimate my planes without them even dropping their ordnance. And 2 ships is unapproachable, which I get teamwork, I get I should lose planes attacking more than one ship more than a lone one, not the way I do though. AS has only ever been an issue because of Wargaming's absolute failure at fixing IJN and USN fighter balance and dialing in the accuracy of USN HE DB's to actually be effective and no buffs to their HP either as DB's have to go through all the AA to attack. Just today I have a top tier match where in what time I had before the team folded fairly quick 71k damage, the other 2 losses because tier 9 and 10 ships were present held under 50k just because even though I'm attacking singled out ships where I can planes aren't getting through AA. Yesterday with DB's doing most of the work I dealt over 150k because top tier and it was a slugfest and the rest again, lower numbers from fast folds and AA shredding planes. And that's 150k I'm not using manual drops, save one ship in that match cause he parked in smoke. And CV vs CV is an issue because of strafing deleting planes.

Wargaming needs to finally address the USN and IJN fighter imbalance by lowering USN DPS and upping it's HP a bit, while upping IJN DPS and maybe lower it's ammo a little. They need to increase the accuracy of USN HE DB's and up USN attack plane HP a little. They need to remove or change manual TB to be at a range that can be dodged at it's closest, closer to what auto drop range is. They need to bring back USN AS and change up IJN's set up's so that the "AS" set ups of each nation have a matching count of fighter groups, and strike planes that fit their nation's flavour, and "Strike" set ups that again, match fighter group counts and trade that fighter for an extra strike group. Because we should have the choice of do we want to be able to cover our team better but take a slight hit in strike ability or have the strike ability but harder to cover the team. And having a difference of at max 1 group of fighters between the As and Strike set up players using strike should know how to deal with AS. AA needs to be nerfed across the board, but some positive changes to it such as recombining AA and Sec mod 2 into one, and maybe consider a 1x or 1.1x DF AA to BB's that won't increase AA damage, or by much, but can disrupt accuracy of attacks on them should they find themselves alone for any reason with fighters unable to cover them. Strafing needs to become a debuff to fighter DPS and bomber accuracy so it's not fighter vs fighter being totally RNG dependent and boring but not an out right punishment that forces micromanagement and creates a massive gap in skill.

 

Fixing CV's is not as simple as "Nerf CV's", "Teamwork, stop lone wolfing", "Remove AS", "Nerf AA" and the like, you break it down, fixing CV's basically requires changing every ship in the game because AA needs to be changed, CV's need changes in base balance and mechanics and yes, players mentalities and ultimately they will need to actually work together. People who play CV's, people who play other classes, they need to be willing to give and take to fix CV's, and some may have to give more than others. We can't have both sides entrenched, or really at this point any of the sides because this includes pro's vs joe's and USN vs IJN, that they need X and/or the other needs Y. There needs to be some compromise by everyone because that is the only way this works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,364 battles
12 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

They are performing well "At times" not overall. And the problem is not strictly a teamwork issue, CV's do in fact have too much striking in certain scenario's. They are at best bi-polar because of their design, and the way, as we discussed elsewhere, Wargaming has tried to fix issues that are not in fact the right one or really issues. And they do in fact have a ship they counter - CV's and BB's. Next time your in Queue, however over the CV Icon that basically tells it it's role. It says "Attack large surface ships" and Wargaming has stated they do want CV players focused more on attacking larger ships, not DD's. 

As I said there, manual TB strikes can be far too effective, which is a problem, and Wargaming acknowledged it at the 2 tiers they can't really further buff AA. Which, all the AA buffs have caused issues at higher tiers where yeah, now the lone wolf Rambo goes solo and even if he's taking some hits, still has the AA to decimate my planes without them even dropping their ordnance. And 2 ships is unapproachable, which I get teamwork, I get I should lose planes attacking more than one ship more than a lone one, not the way I do though. AS has only ever been an issue because of Wargaming's absolute failure at fixing IJN and USN fighter balance and dialing in the accuracy of USN HE DB's to actually be effective and no buffs to their HP either as DB's have to go through all the AA to attack. Just today I have a top tier match where in what time I had before the team folded fairly quick 71k damage, the other 2 losses because tier 9 and 10 ships were present held under 50k just because even though I'm attacking singled out ships where I can planes aren't getting through AA. Yesterday with DB's doing most of the work I dealt over 150k because top tier and it was a slugfest and the rest again, lower numbers from fast folds and AA shredding planes. And that's 150k I'm not using manual drops, save one ship in that match cause he parked in smoke. And CV vs CV is an issue because of strafing deleting planes.

Wargaming needs to finally address the USN and IJN fighter imbalance by lowering USN DPS and upping it's HP a bit, while upping IJN DPS and maybe lower it's ammo a little. They need to increase the accuracy of USN HE DB's and up USN attack plane HP a little. They need to remove or change manual TB to be at a range that can be dodged at it's closest, closer to what auto drop range is. They need to bring back USN AS and change up IJN's set up's so that the "AS" set ups of each nation have a matching count of fighter groups, and strike planes that fit their nation's flavour, and "Strike" set ups that again, match fighter group counts and trade that fighter for an extra strike group. Because we should have the choice of do we want to be able to cover our team better but take a slight hit in strike ability or have the strike ability but harder to cover the team. And having a difference of at max 1 group of fighters between the As and Strike set up players using strike should know how to deal with AS. AA needs to be nerfed across the board, but some positive changes to it such as recombining AA and Sec mod 2 into one, and maybe consider a 1x or 1.1x DF AA to BB's that won't increase AA damage, or by much, but can disrupt accuracy of attacks on them should they find themselves alone for any reason with fighters unable to cover them. Strafing needs to become a debuff to fighter DPS and bomber accuracy so it's not fighter vs fighter being totally RNG dependent and boring but not an out right punishment that forces micromanagement and creates a massive gap in skill.

 

Fixing CV's is not as simple as "Nerf CV's", "Teamwork, stop lone wolfing", "Remove AS", "Nerf AA" and the like, you break it down, fixing CV's basically requires changing every ship in the game because AA needs to be changed, CV's need changes in base balance and mechanics and yes, players mentalities and ultimately they will need to actually work together. People who play CV's, people who play other classes, they need to be willing to give and take to fix CV's, and some may have to give more than others. We can't have both sides entrenched, or really at this point any of the sides because this includes pro's vs joe's and USN vs IJN, that they need X and/or the other needs Y. There needs to be some compromise by everyone because that is the only way this works.

11

My conversation with you was interesting, to say the least. However, this is simply pointing out my personal experience, which is;

A: CVs don't have a single class they target. (the large surface ship thing is pretty meaningless, considering the other ships have fairly inaccurate "roles" too.)

B: As far as I could recall the best counter to CVs is teamwork.

C: therefore the best way to lower CV output and complaining is to increase teamwork.

My title was sensationalist, and probably the post was badly written, so I'm going to edit it soon. I have tried suggesting AA nerfs before and they almost never work out, (last thread got nuked.) 

That is an interesting idea, (the one outlined in bold) I'd like to see that occur.

 

Edited by megadeux

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,976
[SYN]
Members
14,456 posts
10,465 battles
12 hours ago, Prothall said:

It's been said many many times. The problem with CVs is the uneven skills of the drivers and the uneven abilities of the lines. You get an expert in a IJN cv and anything other than an expert on the other team and you know you will lose 80% of the time.

CVs are despised because no one ship carries the game half as well as a cv played well when the competition is weaker.

Tables have turned now.

Midway is back to being hella OP again.

2/3/3 Hak can't compete with the 2/2/2 Midway fighters, while 4/2/2 Hak still has issues against Midway fighters and now has severe lack of strike power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,364 battles
Just now, MrDeaf said:

Tables have turned now.

Midway is back to being hella OP again.

2/3/3 Hak can't compete with the 2/2/2 Midway fighters, while 4/2/2 Hak still has issues against Midway fighters and now has severe lack of strike power.

Not quite, since IJN still rule mid tier, and Tier 4, 5, and 9 are a struggle, so I'd say its almost balanced, (or at least mixed.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,590
[PSP]
Members
6,304 posts
8,927 battles

It's not the CV's per se that are unbalanced, it's the CV players. The CV is the single ship in WOWS where the disparity between a single good and bad player can usually determine the outcome of a game.

Case in point: I was just in a game this morning where both teams had a Ranger. Our CV driver spent the entire game trying to attack a group of three battleships, which killed his planes each and every time. All the while, we were begging him so send a plane over to the other side to spot for us because a DD had us spotted and the enemy was lighting us up from long range with impunity. However, he  never ceased his plane train to those three BBs. Finally, a cruiser followed the path of his returning planes then spotted and killed him.

Conversely, the other team's CV player was obviously a unicum, not only did he fly his planes in from random directions, thus keeping us wondering where he was actually located, after a strike he would leave a squadron to spot while his other planes went back to reload. Only when he had another squadron ready to attack, did he send the spotter itself back to reload. He got a Kraken and came in top on his team too. 

Edited by Snargfargle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,364 battles
Just now, Snargfargle said:

It's not the CV's per se that are unbalanced, it's the CV players. The CV is the single ship in WOWS where the disparity between a single good and bad player can usually determine the outcome of a game.

 Case in point:, I was just in a game this morning where both teams had a Ranger. Our CV driver spent the entire game trying to attack a group of three battleships, which killed his planes each and every time. All the while, we were begging him so send a plane over to the other side to spot for us because a DD had us spotted and the enemy was lighting up up from long range with impunity. However, he  never ceased his plane train to those three BBs. Finally a cruiser followed the path of his returning planes then spotted and killed him.

Conversely, the other team's CV player was obviously a unicum, not only did he fly his planes in from random directions, thus keeping us wondering where he was actually located, after a strike he would leave a squadron to spot while his other planes went back to reload. Only when he had another squadron ready to attack, did he send the spotter itself back to reload. He got a Kraken and came in top on his team too. 

I stated exactly why a skill imbalance was an issue, I've had plenty of games in which the enemy team was well co-ordinated, and thus no one was really a target, skill wouldn't have solved that. I've had other games (most games) where they don't even try, and thus its a race for damage and counterplay among the CVs, and the teams are all just cannon fodder. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,590
[PSP]
Members
6,304 posts
8,927 battles
3 minutes ago, megadeux said:

its a race for damage and counterplay among the CVs, and the teams are all just cannon fodder. 

Damage isn't so much of an issue as is spotting. Spotting is where a good CV player benefits his team and a bad CV player detriments his. 

Edited by Snargfargle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,364 battles
Just now, Snargfargle said:

Damage isn't so much of an issue as is spotting. Spotting is where a good CV player benefits his team and a bad CV player detriments his. 

Spotting is something that I doubt could be fixed easily, however you can deny the enemy CV spotting by keeping your DDs close to the team. That's about as close to counterplay as you can get besides being a CV and spotting for your team, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
471 posts
12,484 battles

So 11 ships have to play a passive bunched up game to counter ONE ship. DDs are supposed to scout ahead, take caps and spot. You are letting the play of one ship tell everyone else how to play.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,364 battles
9 minutes ago, Prothall said:

So 11 ships have to play a passive bunched up game to counter ONE ship. DDs are supposed to scout ahead, take caps and spot. You are letting the play of one ship tell everyone else how to play.

No, they can play as passively or aggressively as they want, I play IJN BBs, and there are plenty of ways to stay in a group and still be aggressive. And if you're going to say that, then DDs have the same effect, how passively or aggressively a DD plays dictated how the rest of the fleet plays. 

And besides, I stated that I didn't mean that all players would be in one, or even two areas, but instead ships should stay with each other, not spread out without any cover being offered to others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
125
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
196 posts
5,790 battles

OP's points are mostly correct in my opinion...  the fundamental issue is that the average WoWs random player has little clue what they are doing.. and frankly they do not adjust their playstyle accordingly when a CV is present.  OP suggests more teamwork... but this is randoms we are talking about - people who have no clue, simply don't care, or a combination of both.  

I agree in principle- complimenting # of ships stick together (which they should do regardless of CV - dd scouts, cl/ca backs up with consumables (radar/hydro/defensive) & dpm, battleship backs up both with alpha) - than CV is less important.  Fundamentally, this is the most impotant thing - and is why many divisions often bring a mix of ships since they synergize better than bringing all of 1 class.  (the classic 3 BB's is almost guaranteed a below avg div)

I also contend that vision is the most important difference between a good cv and bad cv player.  The main reason why CV's are considered overpowered or whatever.. is by players who refuse to change their playstyle when a CV is present.  They play as a solo ship and sail to wherever they feel like similar to what they would do with no cv... and then they get singled out.  Not only that but I'd argue that below avg players generally slot hydro whereas more experienced players slot defensive aa - thus roughly eliminating CV as a major threat for them.  Frankly, if CV's were much more present (which they seem to be increasingly more lately) than more defensive would be used, thus, reducing their effectiveness.  

If anything should be done with cv's - it should imo just be a spotting reduction.  In turn, you could also globally reduce AA ranges to compensate- or something to this affect - this may limit the ability for the better cv driver to provide an unbalanced amount of vision and spotting versus the less skilled cv - which as I stated in my opinion is the deciding factor in win/losses when there is a large CV skill disparity.

Edited by Simers72
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,789
Members
9,978 posts
15 hours ago, megadeux said:

This is a thread designed to explain why CVs are performing so well, why they have powerful "point and click torps," and why they should stay that way. I will draw on what I say in other threads, so don't be surprised if you see something that looks like I've said it before.

Starting this off, I first want to state a point, CVs do not counter any ship, ship type, or build, instead, they specifically counter bad team play. Therefore, a CV's success should be dictated by how well the enemy team performs, not how the team is composed. Currently, the NA meta is very sloppy, with no consistent team play, ships do not cover each other and often spread all over the map. This is the kind of meta CVs are designed to counter, and they do so well. The reason that matches currently come down to the better CV so often is that each team does not try to actively group up and counter the enemy CV, meaning CVs often have the optimal situation for a game. 

There are often complaints about CVs that refuse to cover for their team, and that is justified, however, CVs cannot, and do not, provide cover to everyone. Often a ship is isolated from friendly warships and quickly meets its demise, what is to be done about this? Nothing, this is what CVs are designed for, CVs punish warships that do not play as a fleet, and reward good play. How about permanently spotting DDs? Often DDs should stay with their fleets even if there is not an enemy CV, so the friendly ships can provide help against other DDs and radar ships. However, none of these actions are often done as of the current meta, and CVs strike with near impunity.

Now, as to the ability for a CV to win games, there are three limiting factors that, when working together, can reduce the enemy (or friendly) CV to a non-factor:

Team cohesiveness and teamwork.

Skill of CVs

Tier.

I'll explain on each of these and how they relate to each other.

  Reveal hidden contents

A: team cohesiveness is probably the biggest factor in a game that has CVs, which is why it's helpful for a CV to remind players to protect each other. Team cohesiveness affects spotting, capture, and, most importantly for this discussion, CV damage and spotting. The more decisive and coherent your team is, the less important CV skill is.

B: Which leads us to the next factor, CV skill, there are two kinds which rarely come together and each helps the team in separate ways. These are; anti-air skilled CVs, who focus their micro towards fighters. Which defends their team from damage and neutralizes the enemy CV's attacks. And there is damage based CVs, which destroy enemy ships, which remove obstructions from friendly flanks, as well as defending friendly ships from other surface ships. Ideally, a CV player can do both, but due to the high level of micro required, this is a rarity. Generally, Anti Air CVs rely on their team to win, and destroy surface ships, while damage oriented CVs rely on team cohesiveness to defend their team from air attack. However, both struggle when down tiered and rely on team cohesiveness more when bottom tier, and rely on team cohesiveness less when bottom tier.

C: Which finally brings us to tier, the capacity for a CV to carry is based on tier and team cohesiveness, you can be the best CV player ever and still fail when bottom tiered against a cohesive team even with a potato CV. However, a potato CV can literally be AFK and the enemy team will lose if the team is cohesive and dedicated to winning, as well as top tier. 

 

As you can see, Cvs heavily rely on teamwork in order to win and do badly when their team does not work well as a team.

By now, some of you are probably thinking, a ship that is designed to impact the gameplay of the entire enemy team! That sounds OP!!! 

And you're about half right. You see, the CV is a tool to encourage good team play, and as such, it must be able to severely punish bad team play. This is why CVs can one shot basically any ship in the game, however, as previously stated, the really suffer against a cohesive team. Now, a lot of times this is brought up, people say, "Well, we can't stay in groups, it reduces flexibility." No. No it doesn't, when DDs are close to the fleet, screening torpedoes, CA,s are helping defend the DDs and BBs, and BBs are staying with the team and taking damage, all the while impenetrable to AA attack. Then you have an incredibly powerful fighting force, not what we have now. (individual ships scattered around the map, incoherently firing at random targets, and ditching teammates for fear of damage) Now, often this is also looked down on, but I'm not talking about a single lemming train, instead, large groups of ships, possibly up to three, that stay together and provide each other with defense.

Now, obviously, CVs aren't working. Teams are still flopping, and they're still OP. How can we stop this? First of all, most teams don't try to co-ordinate AA defense at the beginning, a big help would be placing the next to the CVs name a tag telling players that this is a threat, and to stay near other ships to avoid air attack. Next, put a tip in the little tips tab of the loading menu advising players on how to avoid air attack.

Nerf AA, now this is fairly controversial, and it is, however, currently an AA build can make you a no-fly zone for planes, something that should be accomplished by two or three ships working in concert. However, to balance this, increase arm times of TBs.

Edited to remove the sensationalist title, bad suggestions added an argument defending a point and added suggestions done by another player.

 

Your entire argument is based on team play...something that has NEVER existed on this server, and never will.

And it's no one's fault but WG......

They tried to make WOT on Water, and failed to understand the difference between the two games. They took a game the begs for team play, and made it into a solo game.

1. The drivers for the game reward players more for grinding damage than they do for playing as a team, since 99% of the player base can't carry a 12 on 12, they really don't have much choice. (Remember the game is all about the grind)

2. Random as the primary game type was the worst idea ever, the game should have started around a small team battle and scenarios in order to teach better team work.

3. Port chat disabled by default......:Smile_facepalm:

4. The player base that is attracted to this game has little in common with most combat games I've played, it's older, like me, and far less concerned about winning than the average player base.

Finally...WG has been trying to force the player base into playing more, and becoming the hardcore gamers they think this game needs. If CV's are just another poor attempt at this...they need to be removed. 

WG needs to wake up and realize that you can't MAKE a player base, you can only attract and adapt to what you get...until they learn that.....they will continue to struggle with retention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,364 battles

Generally after a reaction like this I see the error of my ways, apologize and lock the thread, but I believe strongly about this, and know I'm right. 

I'm not posting this as a AA is OP thread, and this is not a while thread. I'm simply stating that the best way to counter CVs Is having a good team that works together. There are so many battles I've played where the enemy team's CV was a potato, but the enemy team worked together in a decisive, c coherent manner and won, while stopping me from spotting, or dealing damage. I know that currently the meta in NA favors CVs and ditches good team play like I've described, and can see no reason why people think what I've said is inaccurate. 

I play all ship types, and have almost never been nuked by a CV, why? Because I know to stay with friendly ships, give them support, and push forward to help give them backbone, and in return I am essentially immune from AA attack. This has remained consistently true among all ship types I play, and see no issue with it.

I'm an utterly selfish gamer, who plays for fun, and even I understand that if I play in this manner, I get more rewards. There is no reason players should support each other besides from fear of being destroyed by CV focus fire, or running into to many ships alone, and the knowledge that this produces rewards. There seems to just be forgetfulness among players on how to avoid a strike, because they never seem to try to group up unless reminded. That would suggest to me that players need to be notified that this is the best way to play.

Edited by megadeux

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,541
[OO7]
Alpha Tester
6,745 posts
3,490 battles

I agree that the problem isn't CVs (other than bugs, and balance between each other), but a lack of team work.

WarGaming cannot force people together, and frankly shouldn't.

In my opinion the appropriate action is to let them sink. Then they come to the forums and declare the following:

* CVs ruin the game

* Unicums in divisions ruin the game

* Unicums running solo ruin the game

* Unicums are interested in stats and not having fun or getting better.

* Unicums say mean thins sometimes about other players in the privacy of their own TeamSpeak where no one can hear them. And sometimes on Twitch.

* Unicums cannot be trusted for help because they're trying to hard and don't know how to have fun! All theu care about is winning! 

* Losing is no fun

* The *deragatory remark* and their *derogatory remark* clans are ruining this game with their toxicity.

* People are gross, and I shouldn't have to play with them or listen to what they say, but also this entire community is awful because it won't listen to me when I say something that Unicums insist they have advice to be better at, but why would I listen to a bunch of try hards?

* Simple elbow rubbing sarcasm and trolling is over my head.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
426
[STP]
[STP]
Beta Testers
2,036 posts
11,229 battles

People sometimes forgot this game is about teamwork...

6 hours ago, megadeux said:

Not quite, since IJN still rule mid tier, and Tier 4, 5, and 9 are a struggle, so I'd say its almost balanced, (or at least mixed.)

agreed, finnaly some usn cv can beat ijn, you suffer util TX in USN line, its a good reward in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,893
[O7]
Supertester, Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
10,730 posts
7,718 battles

The two primary issues I have with the current version of CVs

  1. Excessively shut down torpedo boat play
  2. Almost exclusive focus on striking surface ships rather than interdicting enemy CV strikes

 

The first issue is that CVs not only have the ability to spot destroyers  for large amounts of time (some permanently if they dont take smoke) but they can also spot the primary method of attack those destroyers have (Torpedoes) extremely easily with little effort. On top of that the effect of the attacks is significantly less since the DD has to stay closer to friendly ships and so is forced to make attacks at long range or simply be out of range to effectively attack ships. CVs above all other issues in the game is the primary reason for me personally to not play IJN DDs more often than I do and for more reasons than I mentioned but primarily those two reasons. CVs and IJN DDs not only primarily focus the same ships in the same situations but the very presence of an enemy CV means that an IJN DD cant contribute in any significant way without significant risk. 

 

The new "balanced" USN loadouts with 1 fighter at most tiers has removed the vast majority of a CV to protect its fleet from enemy attack. Not to say that AS loadouts were effective or that people were protecting fleets with their fighters before, but the current situation makes using fighters to protect strikes the natural tactic adopted by most CV captains which turns games into CVs trying to out strike their opponents using the surface fleet as meat shields. Dont get me wrong its always kind of been this way with the majority of CVs but this change just emphasizes how little value there is put on protecting your allies from planes. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,497
Beta Testers
6,868 posts
4,189 battles
9 hours ago, megadeux said:

My conversation with you was interesting, to say the least. However, this is simply pointing out my personal experience, which is;

A: CVs don't have a single class they target. (the large surface ship thing is pretty meaningless, considering the other ships have fairly inaccurate "roles" too.)

B: As far as I could recall the best counter to CVs is teamwork.

C: therefore the best way to lower CV output and complaining is to increase teamwork.

My title was sensationalist, and probably the post was badly written, so I'm going to edit it soon. I have tried suggesting AA nerfs before and they almost never work out, (last thread got nuked.) 

That is an interesting idea, (the one outlined in bold) I'd like to see that occur.

 

 

A. They don't target a single class, this much is correct. They do however target every class.  There isn't a ship in the game that a determined and skilled CV can't kill.

 

B. Yes and no.  Clumping into a ball so the 11 non CV players are stacking their AA makes it hard to strike them. However, it makes them a sitting duck for DD torps, gives up total map control and also reduces AP damage to zero since you have no angles.  Technically you can nearly take the CV out of the game but it comes at a huge cost and it's not good team play.

 

C. Incorrect.  The best way to balance CVs is implementing any number of the changes suggested.  Deciding one role and making them good at that for instance, removing shared vision.  Once CVs don't require special MM they will be balanced.

 

Currently CVs are nearly 50% of their total team strength, it needs to be close to 1/12.  The only debate is how to get there.  

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,541
[OO7]
Alpha Tester
6,745 posts
3,490 battles

You don't need 11 ships in a blob, just 2-3 depending on your AA capability.

The bigger issue with AA is that it is too easy to destroy by large HE radiuses and when you spec into it or take DF over hydro then every single point and module spent is a wasted resource without a CV present.

CVs can only be balanced around good AA setups, but the penalty for taking AA instead of another skill is way too high when the CV doesn't show, which happens more often than not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
877
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,451 posts
8,107 battles
11 hours ago, megadeux said:

My conversation with you was interesting, to say the least. However, this is simply pointing out my personal experience, which is;

A: CVs don't have a single class they target. (the large surface ship thing is pretty meaningless, considering the other ships have fairly inaccurate "roles" too.)

B: As far as I could recall the best counter to CVs is teamwork.

C: therefore the best way to lower CV output and complaining is to increase teamwork.

My title was sensationalist, and probably the post was badly written, so I'm going to edit it soon. I have tried suggesting AA nerfs before and they almost never work out, (last thread got nuked.) 

That is an interesting idea, (the one outlined in bold) I'd like to see that occur.

 

Don't misunderstand, I do agree that regardless, part of it is people need to work as a team, even with the changes I suggest, the best counter is still teamwork, and always will be. It's just a matter of there are many things broken with them that teamwork alone will never fix and well, actually exacerbates the issue as to why CV players say they are over nerfed. Because of those cases where attacking a lone ship is basically at best, total losses with some damage, at worst total with no damage, so 2 is just that much worse. My tone likely sounds harsher than intended, but that's frustration with Wargaming an in some areas, the community because you have the ones like what Madwolf05 says and then the CV player equivalent who are so dead set it has to be their way that no one is willing to compromise.

 

And glad someone else likes the idea cause other than one positive reaction, possibly you, not sure if it was explained worse or not that was not well received. And I had to try and explain some of it more since there seemed to be misunderstanding.

And the problem with just "nerf AA" is that the players against it aren't wrong - so long as CV players have manual torpedo drops. Mechanics aside your talking about 48k+ damage from USN, higher from IJN, dropped at a range that can't be dodged and can cause flooding to boot. I mean, yeah, BB'scan delete cruisers with a few citadel hits, and do think AP overall maybe needs a slight nerf to make it a tad less common, but those can still overpen the citadel and typically RNG and maneuvering can maybe get you to dodge it and even if you get to an angle bounce it if it hits. There is 0 protection from manual drop in the hands of players that know it other than AA downing planes because while I do try to avoid using because of my belief it is broken and unfair, I still know how to drop so turning in your still eating most/all of them. It'd be fair to recombine the Sec mod 2 and AA mod 2, especially because they have overlap anyway and were once a thing, that ships can have a bit more AA range without trading secondaries range if they get their AA power cut. And if they are still too strong, maybe a DF AA that has very little/no damage buff just to try and limit damage and increase dodge chance once or twice (similar to how CV's usually only have 1-2 charges of DF AA) for the BB's. But CV players have to be willing to give up manual TB drops and many don't. They are insistent that auto drops are useless, which they aren't, I use them and if it's that much of an issue, Wargaming can tweak them to be more effective, and some that DB's are not viable as a damage source, namely for USN, which even in their current state I'm able to get games over 100k, highest the last couple days, still a loss sadly, was 168k and over half of it was from DB's and the resulting fires. People on both sides of all the CV arguments, Pro vs Joe, IJN vs USN, CV vs other class, they have to be willing to compromise and give stuff up. Problem is, many aren't it seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×