Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Ruthless4u

May seem like a dumb CV question ( probably is)

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
678 posts
362 battles

I see the debates on squadron load outs for CV's. Wargaming decides what how many and what type of squadrons each carrier has, with little options for the player other than what Wargaming gives us.

So my dumb question of the day

Why can't CV players choose how many of each squadron type they want for their CV's?  If I have 4 squadrons available and I want all 4 to be DB's why can't I have that? Or All fighters? How about 2 fighters and 1 TB and 1DB?

I feel something like this would really allow CV players to customize their load outs to their playstyle and be more fun for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
541 posts
1 minute ago, Ruthless4u said:

Running into 5+ fighter squadrons

Like that would be common :) It would be fun to do once in a while but everyone would run TBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,143 posts
4,964 battles

Because DB's would never be used. You'd only ever spec for TB's and FTRs. 

DB's stay inside a ships AA bubble the longest for the least amount of returns. 

TB's are high burst damage and IF the CV feels comfortable launching Long range strikes, say against a BB parked with an island blocking one side, those TB's would be just as effective as ones with a close proximity drop. But they'd be in and out of the AA bubble pretty quickly. 

And FTRs. Simply counted other CVs and have the ability to scout as effectively as DBs. But are faster in exchange for their ability to attack a surface ship. 

Nobody would pick DBs. Or would go 100% FTR to troll DDs and other CVs with the way MM works. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,112
[TSG4]
Volunteer Moderator, Privateers
3,865 posts
21,304 battles
51 minutes ago, Ruthless4u said:

I feel something like this would really allow CV players to customize their load outs to their playstyle and be more fun for them.

Game design as it is. If you play IJN CV, you can research and change the Flight Control Mod 1 to 2/3, each with different load out.

 

The Enterprise (USN CV premium) had the option to switch DB from HE to AP at the beginning of the game.

 

Also, please no more neft to any CV line!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
352
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
5,234 battles
22 minutes ago, Ivlerlin said:

Because DB's would never be used. You'd only ever spec for TB's and FTRs. 

DB's stay inside a ships AA bubble the longest for the least amount of returns. 

TB's are high burst damage and IF the CV feels comfortable launching Long range strikes, say against a BB parked with an island blocking one side, those TB's would be just as effective as ones with a close proximity drop. But they'd be in and out of the AA bubble pretty quickly. 

And FTRs. Simply counted other CVs and have the ability to scout as effectively as DBs. But are faster in exchange for their ability to attack a surface ship. 

Nobody would pick DBs. Or would go 100% FTR to troll DDs and other CVs with the way MM works. 

I pick DBs, I hate TBs. DBs mainly HE ones are great against DDs in caps. If you are attacking a BB AA bubble you are waisting planes that could be used to keep a cap from being by harassing and spotting enemy DDs while friendly ships take the cap. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,143 posts
4,964 battles
2 minutes ago, GreyFox78659 said:

I pick DBs, I hate TBs. DBs mainly HE ones are great against DDs in caps. If you are attacking a BB AA bubble you are waisting planes that could be used to keep a cap from being by harassing and spotting enemy DDs while friendly ships take the cap. 

You're not wrong. But at some point during the match there maybe no other targets than BBs and CACLs. 

I'm just prefacing a point that IF the option came about that CVs could tailor their Loadouts, DB's would hardly be picked except by the Experienced CVs that have been forced to already learn their strengths and weaknesses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
352
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
5,234 battles
Just now, Ivlerlin said:

You're not wrong. But at some point during the match there maybe no other targets than BBs and CACLs. 

I'm just prefacing a point that IF the option came about that CVs could tailor their Loadouts, DB's would hardly be picked except by the Experienced CVs that have been forced to already learn their strengths and weaknesses. 

Exactly toward the end after the AA has been knocked off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
678 posts
362 battles
8 minutes ago, ObiwankzKenobi said:

Game design as it is. If you play IJN CV, you can research and change the Flight Control Mod 1 to 2/3, each with different load out.

 

The Enterprise (USN CV premium) had the option to switch DB from HE to AP at the beginning of the game.

 

Also, please no more neft to any CV line!

No point if it's not complete control of your squadron makeup. Otherwise it's about as usefull as the garbage package system on World of tanks console.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
691 posts
7,037 battles

Allowing players to customize their squadron loadouts would create a prisoner's dilemma which pushes players towards trolly fighter heavy loadouts.

Consider a situation in which players have the choice between taking A: fighter heavy loadout or B: a TB heavy loadout. If both take loadout B, then both get to make lots of strikes and all is well. However, if one player takes loadout A, and one takes loadout B, then the player with more fighters will be able to destroy the enemy's planes while also making lots of strikes with his fewer, but unharrassed, TBs. Meanwhile, if the other player also takes the fighter heavy loadout (B), you still benefit from also taking the fighter heavy loadout (B), since any additional TBs you bring will simply be shot down. As such, you always benefit more from taking a fighter heavy loadout, regardless of what the opposing CV brings.

 

Now, the way that prisoner's dilemmas are usually avoided is via communication/reprisal. However, because CV players never meet each other again, either before or during the game, this cannot happen in WoWs.

However, there is the point that any fighters beyond what is needed to shoot down the enemy fighters are "wasted". Furthermore, shooting down all the enemy fighters is only worth so much if you don't have ANY bombers to make your own strikes with (this was the big issue with the old USN AS loadout). As such, it is likely that everyone would run with just enough fighters that they'd feel confident fighting against a full fighter loadout. Better players might take a few more TB, but the standard would probably be to take 2 TB+ fill the rest with fighters.

In other words, the meta would soon devolve into a boring quagmire with even less variety than we have today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,848
[ARRGG]
[ARRGG]
Members
5,770 posts
1 hour ago, Ruthless4u said:

I see the debates on squadron load outs for CV's. Wargaming decides what how many and what type of squadrons each carrier has, with little options for the player other than what Wargaming gives us.

So my dumb question of the day

Why can't CV players choose how many of each squadron type they want for their CV's?  If I have 4 squadrons available and I want all 4 to be DB's why can't I have that? Or All fighters? How about 2 fighters and 1 TB and 1DB?

I feel something like this would really allow CV players to customize their load outs to their playstyle and be more fun for them.

Only DUMB Question is the one never asked

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,248
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
38,100 posts
30,874 battles
1 hour ago, Ruthless4u said:

I see the debates on squadron load outs for CV's. Wargaming decides what how many and what type of squadrons each carrier has, with little options for the player other than what Wargaming gives us.

So my dumb question of the day

Why can't CV players choose how many of each squadron type they want for their CV's?  If I have 4 squadrons available and I want all 4 to be DB's why can't I have that? Or All fighters? How about 2 fighters and 1 TB and 1DB?

I feel something like this would really allow CV players to customize their load outs to their playstyle and be more fun for them.

If CV players could choose their squadron types, Dive Bombers would no longer exist.

 

Imagine 6 squadron CV such as found in Tier VII-VIII.

Lexington - 3 US fighter squads, 3 US torpedo bomber squads, and tell the RNG-fest DBs to go f-ck themselves.

 

Keep in mind guys, at launch, Strike Specs used to have ZERO fighter units and deleted ships left and right.  Shokaku, Hiryu at Strike Spec used to be 0/3/3.  You read that right.  3 TB, 3 DB units, and they deleted ships like it's cool.  Zuiho at Tier V used to be 0/3/1.  Check this old Notser vid of Zuiho in her former glory and look at that spec.

 

Zuihu used to be the Tier V War Goddess.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,143 posts
4,964 battles
3 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

If CV players could choose their squadron types, Dive Bombers would no longer exist.

 

Imagine 6 squadron CV such as found in Tier VII-VIII.

Lexington - 3 US fighter squads, 3 US torpedo bomber squads, and tell the RNG-fest DBs to go f-ck themselves.

 

Keep in mind guys, at launch, Strike Specs used to have ZERO fighter units and deleted ships left and right.  Shokaku, Hiryu at Strike Spec used to be 0/3/3.  You read that right.  3 TB, 3 DB units, and they deleted ships like it's cool.

It was cool. Until you decided to take a break and run AS and we're dumped into a 1vNone CV match. 

Back when spotting didn't grant exp.. Or if it did very little for CVs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,248
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
38,100 posts
30,874 battles
3 minutes ago, Ivlerlin said:

It was cool. Until you decided to take a break and run AS and we're dumped into a 1vNone CV match. 

Back when spotting didn't grant exp.. Or if it did very little for CVs. 

It was why Strike was more popular.  Even in a CV vs CV match, well played Strike can still have a telling effect in the face of even AS CVs.  I was always amazed what 0/3/3 Hiryu used to do to my teams, even if I was playing AS Ranger against them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
408
[NWOC]
[NWOC]
Members
1,094 posts
21,214 battles
39 minutes ago, CLUCH_CARGO said:

Only DUMB Question is the one never asked

Agreed. There is no such thing as a dumb question, only a dumb answer.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,201
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,971 posts
13,731 battles
2 hours ago, Ruthless4u said:

I see the debates on squadron load outs for CV's. Wargaming decides what how many and what type of squadrons each carrier has, with little options for the player other than what Wargaming gives us.

So my dumb question of the day

Why can't CV players choose how many of each squadron type they want for their CV's?  If I have 4 squadrons available and I want all 4 to be DB's why can't I have that? Or All fighters? How about 2 fighters and 1 TB and 1DB?

I feel something like this would really allow CV players to customize their load outs to their playstyle and be more fun for them.

 

Game balance, and trying to keep CV's from all looking and playing alike by giving them some national traits. Also, within 2 seconds of giving CV captains the choice, there'd be exactly one load out that would work, and everything else would simply be a way for a captain to make his ship nearly useless. There's too many ways for players to do that with captain skills and upgrades as it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
86
[WTFB]
Members
278 posts
2,734 battles

As a person who would like to play CVs, but WG won't make them, I wouldn't just pick TBs. I would most likely have fighters, with one of each strike squadron. Pop a ship with DBs, wait for DCP to pop, then tag them with TBs.

I'm both sad, and very glad we can't do this. But I still want my dang CVs! Make them up if you have too, just give me some sweet, sweet CV love. Mmmmmmmm, CV love.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,867
[GUTS]
[GUTS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,377 posts
29,412 battles

I firmly believe loadouts should mirror historical.

US would have 1 or 2 fighters, 2 DB and 1 torp squadron.

 

Note, Lexi had 15 DB, 16 fighters, 15 scout bombers and 12 TB.

To equate this to WOWS, I would recommend 3 loadouts options:

2 DB, 1 F and 1 TB.

1 DB, 2 F and 1 TB.

And a new plane type, historical.

1 DB, 1 F, 1 TB and 1 bomber.

Bomber would be less accurate than DB, but would carry AP bombs that are dropped from altitude resulting in higher survivability in a warships AA umbrella. They would also fly faster than normal DB and carry 2x250lb bombs.

.....

Keeping with historical loadouts, your plane types retain historical total aircraft carrier and squadrons would be resupplied with remaining planes. For example, the 2 DB loadout would have 15 DB plus 15 scout bombers giving the total dive bomber strength of 30 planes.

....

The ability to keep type of plane squadrons hitorical and hanger capacities historical will not effect game play.

The balancing comes from number of planes per squadron launched in flight, durability of planes, speed and accuracy of weaponry.

 

Giving a player choices in his load outs will give him flexibility on playstyle and how HE/SHE participates in a match.

....

On a side note, tier 4 & 5 carriers should NEVER face tier 6 & 7 carriers unless they are given manual controls back for that match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×