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

Honest CV fighter fix suggestion

7 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
8 posts
1,159 battles

It's quite common knowledge that the affairs of CV fighter combat is more or less, broken. The method that fighters use to score which planes get shot down and then the awful addition of strafing made CV combat at higher levels.... terrible. I myself have re-purchased my Ryujo and haven't bothered progressing my US cv line anymore than it is. The fact you see MANY cv's in the low tiers and hardly ANY in the high tiers should show that there is, in fact, a problem.

Instead of just complaining about it, I offer my suggestion.

Maneuver decks for fighters.

The concept goes as such, a CV captain has a CV only tree added. This tree has 3 branches, Offensive, Neutral and Defensive. Each unlock gives a card to be slotted into a fighter 'deck' (see the pun?).

Offensive cards give a bonus to damage, but a negative number to defense. A neutral card gives a little bit of both and an defensive card gives 0 damage and a decent defense bonus.

Each fighter gets two decks, an offender deck and a defender deck. In real air combat the merge was most important, if you managed to merge at the right time and angle to get behind the enemy squadron, you had the upper offensive hand and in game your fighters would use the 'offender deck'. Where selected cards (by the player) would be randomly drawn a long with the defender card of the defending squadron. Depending on how a deck is built the defending squadron can more or less evade the initial attacker merge card. The defending squadron pulls randomly from the 'defender deck' until a card is canceled out, IE no damage taken, then both squadrons would play a card from the 'offender deck'. Which ever deck does the most damage will pull the next card from the 'offender deck' and place the other squadron on defense. The mechanic that adds a level of skill and decides who is an offender and whom is the defender should work as, when the planes merge, who is behind whom? If both squadrons merge head on, both play 'offender' cards, if a squadron manages to come up at let's say 8 o-clock on an enemy squadron, they would play an 'offender' card and the enemy squadron would play a 'defender' card. This would of course add a level of skill to fighter combat and make positioning important.

Card suggestions could be tiered and maybe even upgraded. They could also be made into real cards given out as promotions.
Further more fighters could be given a support role with a card slot being taken up to give utility, such as 'recon', increases sight range, but gives a -25% ammo, +25% sight and visually adds drop tanks to the model. Or a 'strafe shipping' card that enables a fighter to strafe a ship lowering it's AA potential for a certain amount of time allowing the strike craft to attack easier. But once again, this card would make the fighter squadron less potent in air to air combat.

Further more, this could be added to bombers as well, with offender and defender cards helping in avoiding AA and fighters.

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_combat_manoeuvring)
(
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_fighter_maneuvers)

Neutral

Neutral positions generally occur when both opponents spot each other at the same time. Neither the pilot nor the opponent have the advantage of surprise. Neither has the ability to point the nose of their aircraft at the opponent with sufficient range to employ forward firing ordnance (missiles/guns) prior to the opponent presenting a threat of a similar manner. Each is focused on converting to an offensive situation while forcing their opponent into a defensive.[28]

Offensive

An offensive position generally occurs when the pilot gets sight of the opponent first. With the advantage of surprise, the pilot can maneuver into a better position to attack the opponent, making it more difficult for the enemy to evade the attack.[28] Common tactics include increasing altitude and attempting to place the fighter directly between the sun and the opponent. This helps put the pilot in a dominant position, primarily concerned with prosecuting their advantage for a kill. An offensive position is generally defined as the ability to get above or behind the enemy. The pilot is able to create an energy advantage, providing the ability to swoop down on the opponent and spray the area with bullets while using the speed to climb back to a safe altitude. The attacker also has an orientation-related advantage, being able to press the attack while avoiding the enemy's weapons.[29]

Defensive

A defensive position usually occurs when the pilot spots the attacker late. Usually below or ahead of the opponent, the pilot is in a weak position, primarily concerned with denying a shot to the opponent and converting to a neutral position. The secondary goal is either to escape or to achieve a dominant position. If the attacker is at an energy disadvantage, the defender will likely use the speed to disengage, but, if the attacker is moving much faster, the defender will usually maneuver in order to force a dangerous overshoot. A dangerous overshoot happens when an attacker flies out in front of the defender, causing their roles to be reversed.[28]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,779 posts
5,641 battles

I guess you have no idea about game programming. That would be more code writing then the game itself.  A.I. is not that sophisticated that it can think for itself. They may tweek the CV's, add some controls, But to rewrite the air combat system would be 5 years of ground up programming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
418
[NATO]
Beta Testers
1,767 posts
5,805 battles

Or you could just get rid of player controlled fighters, have a CV CAP and only use bombers.

This would reduce the micromanaging load CV players like myself find trying at times

This would reduce CV's ability to loiter over caps and spot DD's which ruin DD players games

This would begin to lower the high skill ceiling of CV's

This would eliminate high ping/lag issues that result in players with less than stellar connections suffering at the hands of those who do have good connections.

Im not the first person to suggest this, but it does have its merits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,483
[PSP]
Members
6,039 posts
8,582 battles

I don't think that a lot of you actually get the point about CVs, which is that it takes a really good player to play them well. It's not the fault of those who have taken the time to learn how to spot, plan, know AA ranges and dangerous ship types, group, lock, strafe, and strafe out that they might get matched against a lazier CV player who hasn't bothered to learn any tactics or manual controls but just points and clicks at any ship or plane he sees, letting the AI shoot for him. CVs are not "broken" they just require more skill than other ship types to play really well. If you don't like facing someone who has invested more time and effort into learning and becoming skilled than you then either don't play CVs or only play low-tiers where there is no alt-dropping and strafing.   

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,470
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
3,037 posts
12,522 battles

I respect that you offered a solution along with the description of the problem, but I don't think turning CV air combat into a card game is the correct solution for this type of game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
8 posts
1,159 battles
17 hours ago, Edgecase said:

I respect that you offered a solution along with the description of the problem, but I don't think turning CV air combat into a card game is the correct solution for this type of game.

But the current rolling of the dice is working so well? It's literally a dice roll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
7 posts
4,949 battles

CV play is just fine.  It takes skill to get the torpedo offsets right or to use Alt-Drops for bombers, but that just takes experience.  The strafing option for fighters, however, is just wrong on many levels.  It's not realistic.  Aircraft operate in 3 dimensions so a strafing run of fighters against other aircraft makes no sense.  If the target squadron drops 50 meters in altitude the aggressor squadron's bullets would fly overhead.  It's a 2D mindset in a 3D environment. Secondly it creates far too much damage to the target squadron and assumes that the target squadron would not maneuver.  It should be eliminated for aircraft-to-aircraft play.  However, it would be a wonderful addition for fighter-to-ship.  Damage would be minimal so it would only be useful against a DD, but it could be used, especially for fighters shooting .50Cal or 12.5mm ammo and above. That type of ammo can do some considerable damage, especially if it were API or HE rounds.  It could also be used against CVs with fighters on deck (if there were such a condition).  Lastly, many WWII carrier based fighters were equipped to carry smaller bombs. That could be made a refit option should the captain choose it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×