Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
stardestroyer001

[Survey Results] 2017 "Year of the CV"

9 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
79 posts
7,362 battles

Good morning! In February I ran a survey in two parts regarding last year’s “Year of the CV” to get as much player feedback as possible regarding the changes, as well as CV gameplay and balance feedback. Thank you to everyone who participated in the surveys and provided feedback in the comment box or on Reddit. Special thank-yous to /u/NoZoupForYou for tweeting the link, /u/danorou for his excellent and repeated assistance with survey creation and data analysis, and leyland1989 for data analysis.

Below are the summarized results from the survey. The full results are at the bottom of this post.


Summary Results


Respondents Data
The survey was split into two parts, which ran consecutively for about 1 week each. There were 280 respondents for part I, and 271 respondents for part II. The majority of respondents submitted the survey within the first day.

Also, I decided not to have respondents register emails. I am hoping people didn’t submit more than once.

General Questions and 2017 New Features

  • Of people who play CVs, 57% of respondents find CVs fun to play, while 35% find CVs economically rewarding to play. The largest group were respondents who found CVs fun to play but not rewarding (40%).
  • 75% of respondents do not enjoy playing Tiers 4-5 CVs after the removal of the manual attack function. Furthermore, 57% of respondents feel that balance has worsened as a result of this change.
  • 49% of respondents believe balance hasn’t changed as a result of the commander skills rework. Players are picking the same 5 skills now. There were more reported varieties in skills prior to the rework.
    The new skills (Emergency Takeoff, Evasive Maneuvers) were poorly received, and were voted the least useful CV skills.
  • 63% of respondents believe that the new flight control loadouts are the primary contributing factor to balancing the USN CV line. The USN CV rework is viewed as a general success, with respondents finding the class has been buffed as a whole to better stand against the IJN CVs.

Specific CVs
Respondents were asked to vote specific CVs on a scale of overpowered, strong, balanced, weak, and underpowered.

  • 50% of respondents believe Kaga is strong (21% voted “overpowered” and 18% voted “balanced”).
  • 63% of respondents voted that Saipan is overpowered (26% voted “strong”). This opinion was shared amongst all experience levels.
  • Further, about 43% believe that Saipan should lose her special “Get Out of Strafe Free Card”. An alternative is to lose the ability when the fighter squadron has 4 planes. Some experienced CV players voted to reduce the fighter ammo capacity instead.
  • 34% believe Enterprise is balanced (31% voted “strong”).
  • 33% believe Midway is strong, and 31% believe she is overpowered.

CV Balance

  • 55% of respondents believe that CVs are strong when top-tier, and 45% believe CVs are weak when bottom-tier.
  • 57% of respondents believe 2v2 CV games are less enjoyable, and 60% believe 2v2 CV games are less balanced.
  • 58% of respondents think that 3-player divs with a CV are extremely strong.
  • Respondents were asked if balance would be affected if CV matchmaking were changed so CVs would always be middle-tier (where applicable). 61% believe this change would improve balance.
  • There was 57% agreement with the proposal to change aircraft spotting mechanics (see here).
  • 72% of respondents believed that skill-based matchmaking would improve balance. However, only 52% would be satisfied with the (likely) increase in queue time.
  • 55% of respondents believe fighter DPS probability to destroy a plane is too unpredictable.
  • 58% of respondents agree that a cooldown timer of some form should be added to strafes.

Economy, UI, and Miscellaneous

  • When asked what single factor should increase CV XP and credit income, 59% of respondents believe that spotting should be the single factor.
  • 86% of respondents voted in favour of a mandatory, in-game CV tutorial.
  • The top 3 improvements for the CV UI are: get rid of bugs (plane looping and behaviour), reduce the lagging UI and response time, and to show enemy and friendly AA ranges. Other top picks were audio and visual improvements and better alerts.

Written feedback

  • A lot of respondents noted the skill imbalance between CV players is a significant problem for CV balance.
  • Many respondents noted the wide range of AA strength. This is frustrating for surface ships as well, especially ships with weak AA. AA fluctuates wildly depending on MM’s placement of the CVs in the battle lineup. Further, some respondents noted that Defensive AA is too potent, and either its AA DPS multiplier or its panic effect should be reduced in strength.
  • There were many comments on the plane spotting problem. There were a lot of calls to change it to be more passive (debuff enemy ship concealment), some want it changed so plane spotted ships are only visible on minimap, while some people proposed a complete overhaul. This is definitely a point which CV and non-CV players would like to have changed.
  • /u/Stratmania made a couple good points regarding the changes made last year. AP DBs are of dubious use at higher tiers. There are quite a few bugs to work out regarding their effectiveness against T10 CAs vs. BBs, and their performance under panic effect.
  • There were a few proposals for flight control loadout changes, such as switching to a point-based system with limits. A couple respondents want the IJN line to lose their AS loadout option. 3/1/1 Ryujo has very strong air control.
  • I received this comment regarding CV and surface ship balance, which I will simply quote:
    Quote

    The bottom line is CVs and surface ships should be playing the same game, not one where surface ships are playing a game of soccer of which the outcome is irrelevant, and instead relies on a game of chess going on between CVs in another room that decides the game.

     

Demographic Comparisons

  • A majority of players find CVs are economically unrewarding, regardless of their experience (number of battles in a CV).
  • CV players of medium experience found the addition of strafe-out is worse for balance, while experienced CV players are equally divided. Strafe and strafe-out are plagued with UI problems as well as player skill differences, and experienced CV players can better utilize this tool to gain an advantage.
  • While Saipan is regarded as overpowered by CV players of all experience types, experienced players can better counter Saipan. As a result, some experienced CV players believe the number of times Saipan fighters can strafe-out should be reduced (by reducing ammo capacity), rather than remove the special ability.
  • As CV players’ experience increases, so does their opinion on spotting. More experienced CV players want to be rewarded for this team benefit.
  • When asked if skill-based MM would improve CV balance, all groups had a majority agreement that it would improve balance. Interestingly, more respondents from the experienced CV group voted that it would worsen balance than any other demographic group.

Full Results
The full results in chart form can be found below. The charts are interactive! Hover the cursor over the graph elements to display the number of votes and percentages.

Survey Part I Answers | Survey Part II Answers

Second, I created comparison charts of select questions from both Parts, based on the respondents’ range of battles played in a CV. The links are here:

Part I Comparison Charts | Part II Comparison Charts

Third, for those who are interested in the demographics of both surveys, they are linked here:

Part I Demographics | Part II Demographics

Finally, if you are interested in looking at the Google Sheets spreadsheets for either survey part, send me a PM.


Closing Remarks
I didn’t list my own conclusive thoughts on the results of the survey in this post. I’d rather this post remain unbiased, so the reader can draw their own conclusions. My conclusions will be in a comment below.

It is my sincere hope that WG takes the data and results from this survey and uses it as part of their 2018 CV rework. There were a lot of great player ideas that were submitted to this survey, as well as good comment chains in the Reddit posts earlier (click here for part I and here for part II), as well as other suggestions made over the last couple months, such as Farazelleth's thoughts on CV balancing, beachedwhale1945's High level bomber proposal, and a discussion on UI suggestions. That being said, I encourage WG to take their time and test any CV changes extensively. I don’t think I am the only one when I say, I’d like to see this “2018 Year of the CV” done right.

An identical copy of this post is also on Reddit.

And that’s all. Please feel free to comment below. I’ll be around if anyone has questions.

Edited by stardestroyer001
  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
354
[D12]
[D12]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,083 posts
8,964 battles

You must have a white background because your font and colors don't work on the dark one.  Not going even waste my time to get it so I can read the font.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,719 posts
3,130 battles
8 minutes ago, Nachoo31 said:

You must have a white background because your font and colors don't work on the dark one.  Not going even waste my time to get it so I can read the font.

Yeah, you have to highlight everything just to read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
79 posts
7,362 battles

I'm not sure I follow. I checked the OP, the text is default color, and the background is default color too.

 

EDIT: I now know what you mean, not sure how to fix it. I'll work on that now.

Edited by stardestroyer001

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
245
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
1,347 posts
9,543 battles

Interesting, despite what gets posted on the forums, players don't think that CV's are as far out of whack as the forums would lead one to believe. Also interesting that I agree with most of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
79 posts
7,362 battles
1 hour ago, Nachoo31 said:

You must have a white background because your font and colors don't work on the dark one.  Not going even waste my time to get it so I can read the font.

 

59 minutes ago, devastator5000 said:

Yeah, you have to highlight everything just to read it.

Should be good now, let me know if anything is still showing up dark. My apologies. 

Edited by stardestroyer001

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
354
[D12]
[D12]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,083 posts
8,964 battles

It works.  I was playing CVs but I got tired of getting micromanaging the planes, having to use Strafe mechanics to carry a match.  To me, CV is more of a job than other classes.  Mistakes are shown and people are not forgiving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
1,542 posts
26 battles

Thank you for taking the time to compile this @stardestroyer001. I can see a lot of time and effort went into this and it is very much appreciated. We always love to hear feedback as it helps us to improve our game going forward! 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40
Members
400 posts
2,441 battles

cvs are a troll class to play.  All it takes is 1 cruiser specced for anti air, and your planes are useless.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×