Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Admiral_Thrawn_1

Wargaming's current CV ideas?

13 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,268
[RKLES]
Members
7,195 posts
8,951 battles

After reading a lot of threads and post last couple months I have come to the conclusion that to appease all the different groups of complainers that Wargaming might have settled on what they feel is a possible solution to most of them?

Nerf the regular CVs to make them less OP and make the surface ships happier.

Add new OP premium CVs as well as maybe buff existing premium CVs, that way CVs Captains get their buffs and OP CVs  they want without it spiraling out of control and ending up on the hands of all players  since you will need to pay for the privilege to be OP CV And of course Wargaming gets their profits.

Also the complaints about too many BBs being around gets addressed with Deep Water Torps and AP Bombs ( personally I am fine with lots of BBs since they make for larger and therefore easier targets to hit lol)

And of course adding the DPs and AP to CVs is ineffective against DDs so the complaints from DDs gets addressed.

And have heard some of the premium CV planes have lower HP and more planes in hangar to compensate which addreses the complaints about AA not downing enough planes lol. 

Have I left anything out or is this a good summary of current direction Wargaming is heading in effort to please everyone? :Smile_Default:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13
[0O0O0]
Members
139 posts
21 battles

My guess...

 

It's impossible to balance in the current game(air). Would take some crazy rework of everything and the engine. 

If WG balanced CVs it would Beed an entire game rework, they don't do that. They plug away, they are Russian...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50
[KNFA]
Beta Testers
214 posts
3,333 battles

Well they keep saying there is a major re-work of CVs coming and they have a few different play styles and hopefully UI ideas they are looking at which means anything they currently do with CVs is just simply to help everyone be less frustrated with them until the rework happens. Hopefully they might start letting us in on those ideas soon so we can see they are actually trying instead of this "oh we are working on it" excuse they keep using. NoZoupForYou interviewed one of the developers and he said he had been trying some of them out so hopefully that is a good sign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
63
[DENY2]
[DENY2]
Members
64 posts
1,767 battles

From when I can see the biggest CV issue you is player skill differences yes some CV captains who are just outstanding players, and you have some CV players you are subpar, and of course your average CV players. Where if you have 2 average CV players playing against each other their skill level for the most part will cancel each other out. But when you have your OP carrier player going up against a average or subpar player we have all seen how that ends.

Now I know I'll catch grief for what I'm about to say, but I believe scrafing needs to be removed seems to me that this would benefit the average and subpar players and restrict the ability of an OP player to continually wipe out his opponents aircraft.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
873
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,445 posts
8,092 battles

If that was their solution, which actually fixes NOTHING and enrages EVERYONE, it would be the single dumbest idea ever short of giving all existing players and those who sign up a Kitakami, with 20 second torp reloads, with all maps being reduced to 10 km x 10 km.

The answer to all but the DD spotting problem is painfully simple, they just don't want to change cause it means admitting THEY.WERE.WRONG.

The answer of USN AS and "inability to do damage", which the damage thing was somewhat false by the way, is not "one set up with 1 fighter till tier 9 and 10" - It's lower USN DPS to a reasonable level (it's DPS is too high for it's planes per group) and make it's DB groups (that currently have the same or worse dispersion as IJN DB's) a bit more accurate, which solves 90% of that issue because the other 10% is AA.

The answer to "OP CV's" is not and has never been "Buff AA" except maybe during early Alpha when they first appeared with jets at the highest tiers. From the time the game went live, CV's had only ONE thing that truly made them OP, manual drop torps - and those have been an issue since introduced, there was a time we didn't have them at all and still did 200k+ damage. AA has been buffed repeatedly to counter this mechanic instead of the obvious answer, remove or rework the mechanic. Except for the disparity of USN vs IJN fighters because strafe was removed as well and "boring" to some this generally improved things at lower tiers. Another option, that allows their return to those tiers and solves the issue and has been done before, IJN used to have an even shorter arm time, is change the arm/resurface time of the torps so that they CAN'T be dropped 1km or less away. Can't hit a moving ship at say 2 km or more with manual and auto drop, sorry, that's on you and your lack of aiming skills unless dispersion, both native to TB's and caused by DF AA and fighters, left the gap large enough. 

Anyone saying "AA isn't downing enough planes" is playing a different game then I am - my ARIZONA, which is not known for AA downed a few of the TB's from a Saipan, with tier 9 planes that was picking on me yet NEVER sunk me (hell, before match end I was in guns range and firing on him). Manual drop fixed or gone, AA needs a nerf - period. When a BB can go alone, with no fear of a CV because it can destroy the entire attack wave before they even drop, that's a problem. and "lower tier" and "AA build" are not reasons at all that should be a thing, the freaking Bismarck was brought down because of antiquated freaking BIPLANES. AA should be powerful enough to down SOME planes, but weak enough a CV can attack lone ships with minimum fear of losses since planes are our ammo (literally, they are registered as ammo). You want protection from CV's you should need to be near some other ships for flawless defense, not take a couple skills and some upgrades.

I don't need AP bombs or torps of any kind to damage or take down a BB, I, with my average at best CV skills, could take them down even with the crappy HE bomb dispersion we currently and had back with just the AS loadout. Even post USN change for those that were incapable of taking ships down without torps, most matches half or more of my damage is from DB's, all I really need with a properly balanced AS loadout is slightly more accurate DB's with HE bombs that can get through AA of a single ship and not butchered by it.

An issue you missed is the player skill gap - which is caused by strafing, which is again, a simple bloody fix - rework it to a DPS debuff to enemy fighters, and an accuracy debuff to bombers, that returns back to normal over time. If that is not an option, DRASTICALLY reduce the DPS multiplier so getting caught in it costs you 1-2 planes from a group max, say, 12 max from an entire Shokaku strike force and escort, not 24+, preferably less. And if for some insane reason THAT isn't an option they can work in game, which shouldn't be because strafe used to be less effective, then just bloody remove it and have us deal with balanced fighters and trying to choose when and where we fight and if having to just play tactically and not "lol auto delete" is too boring for some, which was part of why it was even added" well, too bad. 

Another, is our inability to attack when on fire - Emergency Takeoff, especially with a penalty that makes the skill useless and better to spend credits on DCP II and all, should be a mechanic, not a 3 point captain skill. The captain skill at 3 points should be a significant reduction to how long the rearm penalty is when on fire from the mechanic. There was no issue with our planes taking off and/or landing before other than at the time CV's themselves were OP, which was what needed fixing and was, and some salty as hell players they couldn't kill the CV before it killed them when they ran it down. 

And IF, you fix fighter imbalance, loadouts, buff USN DB accuracy, player skill gap, manual drops, nerf AA, and whatever may be possible to fix DD spotting, and somehow all that returned us to CV's being the OP death gods they were when first released, there are still 2 options once you exhaust reasonable buffs to AA - option 1. give BB's, and if needed the other DD's, a DF AA consumable with a 1-1.2x multiplier max -being meant to simply debuff bomber accuracy a couple times at most, with little or no buff to actual chance to down planes. Or, option 2. which would be the last, last ditch one in my opinion if they were still OP even after the previous change, nerf CV damage then if it's still too high.

 

There is no need to have some drastic game engine overhaul like Not_Slak_ suggests, everything that needs to be done can and has been done before for the most part. It can work while still keeping 2 or more lines feeling unique. If they had the data and numbers, they could likely do  it tomorrow.

The problem is that Wargaming would have to admit they were wrong to implement manual drops as they did, on how the flavours they chose worked in game, a great many things. That CV players are all about buffing their ships and nerfing AA or the others, but won't accept nerfs to there ships, and that the same reversed argument holds true to Cruisers, DD's and BB's, buff them, nerf CV's fine, otherwise don't want to hear it. CV's, in both lines, need to take somethings that are, or could be viewed as, nerfs, with some direct or indirect buffs. DD/CA/CL/BB players, need to be willing to eat some nerfs to AA as CV's get a mix of nerfs and buffs, with some possible offsets such as secondary and AA mod 2 being recombined (so you get secondary and AA range not either/or) and the fact torps aren't getting dropped on your doorstep where any fool with enough practice knows the range at which to drop so you can't dodge it at all. Hell I barely use the mechanic and can still do it if I feel like being a :etc_swear:. But there are too few of us, if there is anyone besides me, willing to be reasonable and compromise on changes or even try and hash it out and find a compromise that appeases all well enough, which is doubly sad given it's the bloody NA server. Too many are stuck on "CV's get nerfed" or "CV's get buffed" and are too unwilling to yield those points or the like because they are too entrenched and afraid to lose essentially. Too unwilling to allow changes that long term is better for them because at it's face it looks bad for them. Too many unwilling to see the other sides argument and valid points simply because they conflict with there views and feelings. Fixing CV's is going to take compromise, but no one wants to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
821 posts
3,891 battles

All they needed to do was add a fighter to US strike packages, which is what they did by defualt, by  adding a DB to stock

Only problem is they eliminated any/every other option , so US CV's have no choice, no options , no variety , and no way to beat multi-fighter packages. The old AS mod for US CV's could do so. Now, to get that,you have to BUY it. Which I think was the whole point of the change.

MY POV/IMO is talking of Tiers 6-9 , the change did not affect low teirs and actually improved the Bogue(which did not even need it). Now with US CV you get to Bogue thinking all is great, but then the Indy should be warning of things to come, then Ranger and Lex(and Essex) become strong drivers to BUY your way out of that misery(which you wiull see when you run into multi fighter packages flown by people who know how to use them) . Saipan is great , Enterprise I have heard is alright), and Midway is killer (i have heard). Indy Ranger and Lex though? no you have no ch]oice anymore , except extreme suffering or buying. 


 

 

Edited by Strachwitz666

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
821 posts
3,891 battles
5 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

 

An issue you missed is the player skill gap - which is caused by strafing, which is again, a simple bloody fix - rework it to a DPS debuff to enemy fighters, and an accuracy debuff to bombers, that returns back to normal over time. If that is not an option, DRASTICALLY reduce the DPS multiplier 

Another, is our inability to attack when on fire - Emergency Takeoff, especially with a penalty that makes the skill useless and better to spend credits on DCP II and all, should be a mechanic, not a 3 point captain skill. 

And IF, you fix fighter imbalance, loadouts, buff USN DB accuracy

 

besides me, willing to be reasonable and compromise on changes or even try and hash it out and find a compromise that appeases all well enough, which is doubly sad given it's the bloody NA server. Too many are stuck on "CV's get nerfed" or "CV's get buffed" and are too unwilling to yield those points or the like because they are too entrenched and afraid to lose essentially. Too unwilling to allow changes that long term is better for them because at it's face it looks bad for them. Too many unwilling to see the other sides argument and valid points simply because they conflict with there views and feelings. Fixing CV's is going to take compromise, but no one wants to.

Right,   with the mess they have made, they need to remove strafing. That would remove a good bit of the multi fighter problem. Besides,   Squadron Formation Strafing never worked in real war . The only fools who used it were the Russians while fighting the Finnish Air force,  where they took 200+ to 1  losses, in air battles. Which is why I used the "fools" term, not any intent toward a national "slur". If a tactic   is  losing 200 planes to one , obviously whatever  tactic  used, does not work and caused horrendous losses to the side using it . For a game to use/include such a tactic I just don't know,. But they also include " unrotated projectile" AA as an powerful weapon , when it in fact was a worse than useless weapon( shooting down at best possibly 1 or 2 planes in total out of 20,000-30,000 IIRC of these weapon platforms emplaced/mounted)" . And these may have in fact lead to the destruction of the HMS Hood from an ammo  fire of those same rockets .

Get rid of strafe , most of the problem with CV warfare is solved, add a 2 fighter option to US CVs at tier 6-9 you have a  balanced game . Hard to do?  nope Less profitable? yea, as less Saipans(being the only fix) are sold.  But in the long more people will like the game and CV warfare and stay playing longer. But obviously short run profits seem to blind any good fix. and the constant anti-US CV bias seems to actually exist. And most people outside Russian probably don't know  much of the actual use of squadron strafing in real air war and simply how the tactic did not work. ( note:the Germans used "Barrage firing against 4 engine bomber formations, but that combat environment was/is far removed  from CV air warfare )

 

Don't understand what penalty you are talking about with Emergency take-off. There is none , I see.

 

As to people wanting to nerf carriers further,  IMO most just hate CV's, and want super AA and unsinkable ships, or ship that cannot be affected  by CV at all because they simply are sorry players against them and don't play CV's themselves as well. Play balance to them is basically "I win'. Such dullness and lack of competitive spirit  IMO does not deserve any consideration in a competitive war-game. Sadly,  often  such droning/complaining/selfishness though sheer bulk and repetitiveness , wins out , and the game is less for it , like the situation we have now.

Edited by Strachwitz666
post was a mess,still is, ugh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16
[-IA-]
Beta Testers
81 posts
3,067 battles

WOWP (World of Warplanes) crossover! The CV's planes are flown by real people!

Just kidding!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
361
[-I-]
Members
1,719 posts
10,452 battles
2 minutes ago, CHBanger said:

WOWP (World of Warplanes) crossover! The CV's planes are flown by real people!

Just kidding!

 

Could you. Effing. Imagine. How horrendous that would be. "Hey, let me just send these fighters over here....wait, where are you going? No, that's not the right way, that's a giant mountain. Don't crash into the mountain. DON'T CRASH INTO THE MOUNTAI!!@#!@#?!@#?!@3

It would be super impractical, but one big global crossover clan battle map would be pretty damned cool. You play WoWP to clear the air over a contested territory or provide some sort of bonus or another, have a WoWs battle to move your fleet around from island to island, and then the fleet drops off the tanks and you WoT to take the land territory, etc. Again, absurdly impractical, but still cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
873
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,445 posts
8,092 battles
3 hours ago, Strachwitz666 said:

Get rid of strafe , most of the problem with CV warfare is solved, add a 2 fighter option to US CVs at tier 6-9 you have a  balanced game . Hard to do?  nope Less profitable? yea, as less Saipans(being the only fix) are sold.  But in the long more people will like the game and CV warfare and stay playing longer. But obviously short run profits seem to blind any good fix. and the constant anti-US CV bias seems to actually exist. And most people outside Russian probably don't know  much of the actual use of squadron strafing in real air war and simply how the tactic did not work. ( note:the Germans used "Barrage firing against 4 engine bomber formations, but that combat environment was/is far removed  from CV air warfare )

 

Don't understand what penalty you are talking about with Emergency take-off. There is none , I see.

 

As to people wanting to nerf carriers further,  IMO most just hate CV's, and want super AA and unsinkable ships, or ship that cannot be affected  by CV at all because they simply are sorry players against them and don't play CV's themselves as well. Play balance to them is basically "I win'. Such dullness and lack of competitive spirit  IMO does not deserve any consideration in a competitive war-game. Sadly,  often  such droning/complaining/selfishness though sheer bulk and repetitiveness , wins out , and the game is less for it , like the situation we have now.

Actually, more profitable. CV's require skill sets not compatible with other ships. Right now people are tending to abandon the tech tree line flat out, meaning less reason to train captains meaning no trainers needed. If people want to grind the line, they may keep more ships, they keep more ships they need more captains, meaning they need trainers, meaning more sales. There are also LIMITED examples of the in-gameexample of strafing working to that effect, but only against groups paying little-no attention. 

 

Go look at the skill in-game. It should have the tool tip it adds 100% to rearming time. If it lacks the tool tip it needs it put there but it basically doubles the time it takes to arm planes if the CV is on fire. Hence, not worth the trade off.

 

Also, there are certain specific nerfs that CV's do need, like the changes to manual torpedoes as most would call that a nerf. It's not outside the realm of possibility that MAYBE, they will in the long run need a damage nerf. USN needs it's fighter DPS nerfed that's for sure. It's not that CV's need buffs, or nerfs, but that they need the right ones and at this point, combination of the two. The biggest issue is that neither side is right or wrong here. CV's, in certain scenarios because of things like manual TB drops are OP as hell, two USN TB squadrons are a bit much as is even 3 IJN TB groups with how things currently work. But then you have scenarios none of those planes reach the lone ship at A because it has that much AA power. CV's need the right changes in both directions, buffs and nerfs. 

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
781
[NG-NL]
Members
5,015 posts
8,240 battles

Well, for most part what WG can do:

 

1) Allow US CV line to purchase a 2-1-1 (or 2-2-1) for T6-8 if they'd rather that than 1-1-2

2) Nerf strafing dps to be 1.5X multiplier so it doesn't shred bombers

3) Add extra code. MB/secondaries cannot do surface-to-surface and AA duties simultaneously.  Would be very helpful with Neptune/Minotaur since their MB doubles as long-range AA, and give both ships a weakness teamwork can exploit.

4) Change DF to only cause bomber panic, DPS bonus has to be selected in port and requires both AFT and the AA range module

5) Planes are immune to ctrl + LMB AA DPS bonus when Evasive Maneuvers skill is active

6) Reduce plane prep time slightly.

 

However, above is assuming playerbase knows to stay in groups and other basic anti-CV tactics. Most of the complaints come from snowflakes that can't stand being deleted or heavily damaged by very accurate bomber attacks, so those we ignore. On the other hand, there are some reasonable issues, like the fact AA can be destroyed by HE spam (RN BBs are the worst offender since 2-3 salvos will kill 100% of AA, especially cruisers) even with AA/secondary module HP and PM skill, and manual TB drop is harder to dodge because planes out-run your rudder (especially on T8-10 BBs).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
821 posts
3,891 battles
20 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

Actually, more profitable. CV's require skill sets not compatible with other ships. Right now people are tending to abandon the tech tree line flat out, meaning less reason to train captains meaning no trainers needed. If people want to grind the line, they may keep more ships, they keep more ships they need more captains, meaning they need trainers, meaning more sales. There are also LIMITED examples of the in-gameexample of strafing working to that effect, but only against groups paying little-no attention. 

 

Go look at the skill in-game. It should have the tool tip it adds 100% to rearming time. If it lacks the tool tip it needs it put there but it basically doubles the time it takes to arm planes if the CV is on fire. Hence, not worth the trade off.

 

Also, there are certain specific nerfs that CV's do need, like the changes to manual torpedoes as most would call that a nerf. It's not outside the realm of possibility that MAYBE, they will in the long run need a damage nerf. USN needs it's fighter DPS nerfed that's for sure. It's not that CV's need buffs, or nerfs, but that they need the right ones and at this point, combination of the two. The biggest issue is that neither side is right or wrong here. CV's, in certain scenarios because of things like manual TB drops are OP as hell, two USN TB squadrons are a bit much as is even 3 IJN TB groups with how things currently work. But then you have scenarios none of those planes reach the lone ship at A because it has that much AA power. CV's need the right changes in both directions, buffs and nerfs. 

Oh Yes I see the ingame tool tip on emergency take-off about 100% , . Tell tell the truth I thought it doubled the speed of service not extended the time taken . Never used the thing, would never use the thing even w/o that or if it doubled how fast the plane got ready (which is what I thought it did) . Because repair can kill a 1st fire and you can get what you got ready  launched, and  if you are set afire again that fast(before repair loads again) where such a skill might be of use, you got far worse problem of being sunk and or having multiple ships firing at you.   You are right it is a useless skill , moreso if you are correct in it being four times slower service time than I though it had.

 

as to nerfing USN fighter DPS , HELL NO. Even if we still had multiple fighter squads. While US fighter were/are "better" becuase of larger squadrons, the whole style of the game was an opponent better get in their licks before US fighters(especially AS fighter packages) took care of the opposing fighters.  Nothing wrong with one side doing better at damage for most of the game till the other side won air superiority,  it was a game in itself. Of course now they have reduced US CV's to one fighter and you want to nerf that ?

As to maunal tropedo drops , no I think that was fine, It gave the Japanese an advantage there(which can be tied to historic truth). What was and still is missing is better US Dive bombers, which was a strength of US side historic, should be reflected in game , both to hold historic, (Dauntless sunk more warships than anything else) and to balance  against the  Superiority of Japanese multi-squad/manual torp drops. But US bias rules , that(improved US Db's) will never happen. However your lobbying of dropping US fighter DPS probably is already planned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
873
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,445 posts
8,092 battles
23 hours ago, Strachwitz666 said:

as to nerfing USN fighter DPS , HELL NO. Even if we still had multiple fighter squads. While US fighter were/are "better" becuase of larger squadrons, the whole style of the game was an opponent better get in their licks before US fighters(especially AS fighter packages) took care of the opposing fighters.  Nothing wrong with one side doing better at damage for most of the game till the other side won air superiority,  it was a game in itself. Of course now they have reduced US CV's to one fighter and you want to nerf that ?

As to maunal tropedo drops , no I think that was fine, It gave the Japanese an advantage there(which can be tied to historic truth). What was and still is missing is better US Dive bombers, which was a strength of US side historic, should be reflected in game , both to hold historic, (Dauntless sunk more warships than anything else) and to balance  against the  Superiority of Japanese multi-squad/manual torp drops. But US bias rules , that(improved US Db's) will never happen. However your lobbying of dropping US fighter DPS probably is already planned.

 

No, I don't want to nerf the current set ups fighter and just have it as it is but worse, I want the whole damn thing fixed. That was an abridged list compared to my usual because it was 2 things that need nerfs I could list off the top of my head at the time. I would see AS loadouts returned to USN and IJN's CV's loadouts reworked so, if we take Lex and Shokaku, both have an AS loadout that is 2,x,x and strike that is 1,x,x. Only way you lose out at all is if you take strike and go against AS, as it has always been. IJN would likely take ammo nerfs on it's fighters, they don't stay in the fight as long though unlike now, where USN has an let's say 7% advantage in shoot down down chance, to get the first kill, IJN now has say 1-2% advantage, but has less ammo and DPS drops faster when it loses planes to any source, where as USN has more ammo, better HP (less chance AA will down it), and lower DPS drop off as it has now already, so it can stay in the fight and have a bit more flexibility on where it can engage. USN would still have the edge in the skies through durability essentially, in terms of health and ammo, and IJN would have initial edge but more likely to lose planes or have to return overall due to less ammo. Which, as you bring up in the other part is in fact historic truth as well. I would have USN DB's get their accuracy dialed in to be more effective so the other end of why AS loadouts were removed, not enough damage, is fixed along with buffed HP and/or nerfed AA. Which, would help in taking down ships, though more via burning them down over time unless your hitting DD's and light cruisers that these bombs can actually deal damage. Sure, things align as it is I can deal 80k+ with HE DB's as it is, but that alignment needs to be a bit less rare. IJN planes have numbers, USN has, for lack of a better word, quality, when it comes to attack planes going after a ship and getting through AA.

To which IJN would still have it's torp advantage just in sheer numbers vs USN and the ability to use cross drop. Manual drop, especially now that all USN CV's have TB's, and at high tiers 2 of them with 12, tightly packed torps, has never favoured IJN or been any edge for them, while they used to more commonly have TB's where as USN at times wouldn't, it has always been a broken and easily exploited mechanic for anyone with TB's on their ship. That has led to all the AA buffs which - because they never got any HP buffs to compensate, nerfed USN DB's ability to deal damage. I don't care what nation they are, no CV, at all, should be able to drop torps effectively point blank on enemy ships. If that somehow overly nerfs IJN, which I play without using manual drops and generally do fine because I can hit them from 2-3 angles at one time, make it the strike set up get's another TB group or trade one of the near useless DB's it has for it. No skin off my nose they add another IJN one with lines so broad you can sail a bloody BB through. Torps will always have a slight edge on HE DB's because the damage is instant and limited ability to repair, unlike fire that can be full repaired. Hell, reverse the current TB damage since IJN's is lower at the moment because I agree IJN's focus should be the TB's, which are by far better for taking down capital ships, and USN focused more on DB's that are better for taking out DD's and cruisers which, as I recall, are the ship type other than transports mostly taken out by just DB's like the Dauntless in the pacific other than at Midway lighting up the 4 IJN carriers which, they could still do in game. 

 

I don't want to see USN just out right nerfed, nor IJN, I don't want them to lose their "flavour" as Wargaming calls it - but one curb stomping everything in the skies with limited ship striking ability was bull, and Wargaming took the worst option to fix it, same goes for said other one decimating anything in the seas if unchecked. We have 3 guaranteed lines, we have 4 possible lines, and 2 potential branch lines, I want them all to be different, but I want them all to have an equal ability to contest the air, and an equal ability to damage ships because that is also accurate to history other than late war when countries like Japan and Germany were running out of resources and trained pilots, neither of which is a factor in game and should not be. I want balance and fair play for all, not one nation or the other. It's one thing for IJN to have an edge hitting ships, for USN to have an edge in controlling the skies, that's it, an edge, it's another to flat out dominate. That's why AS has been removed, with Manual Drops and those torps AA has been buffed, why Midway lost the 2 TB setup to begin with. I would see those first 2 effectively reversed. I would turn the clock back to Alpha testing before manual drop and what we call strafing were added, even if they stay but strafing DPS boost is nerfed to not be an auto delete and Manual Drop an extended minimum range so we can't drop at 1 km from the ship, hell do it and give IJN back it's slightly shorter arm range long as it's reasonable (IJN used to be able to drop closer to .5 km), when IJN and USN could both deal out damage, and the only two real fixes that were needed were AA (nerfs at mid tier, buffs at high tier) and fighter balance (USN has always stomped IJN, it used to actually be worse) are effectively made to balance it out. I would see a return of the days that it didn't matter you were an AA build Iowa - if you went alone you'd take more planes down and have better chances than others against the CV's attack but you would not be immune like they basically are now. That DPS be balanced through tiers as well that we may go back to having 2 CV's in a game but not be an issue for lower tiers vs higher the way it has been. That the best defense against a CV be teamwork, not set your ship up to go "lol, no fly zone". I don't want CV's to reattain the status they had as gods of death back in the day, but I would see them returned as an actual threat in-game, be it a newer player or long time players like me.

If your still against my ideas, oh well, I'm not gonna convince you most likely and, odds are, your not gonna convince me. Hell, thumbs down this post as well if your still against me, I don't care. But as to that "DPS nerf" being slated - doubtful because GZ has a set up high in fighter count, looking like 8-9 with AS and at one point a test variant had more, and it wiped my AS Lex's fighters from the sky. So I doubt they will be nerfing it any time soon as they clearly have no idea how their own game works and about to make the same bloody mistake on a German CV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×