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

Suggestions for CV Balance - From a CV main player

9 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

68
[STW-D]
Members
206 posts

There have been many topics about CVs already but few from players who mainly play CVs.  Rather than remaining silent, I wish to add my perspective to improving the current state of CV play in the game.  (Disclaimer: The following is in my opinion, and I only wish to improve CV balance, with hopefully a minimum of programming changes from WarGaming.)

My background: Started playing Oct 2015 DDs, but switching to CV main when I finally got the hang of them.  I've had thousands of CV games on the NA server, another few thousand on the EU server, and a few hundred on the CIS (Russian) and SEA (Asian) servers.  I'm an above-average CV player stats-wise, and I play in division as well as solo.

I believe most of us can agree that the CV is the most influential ship of the 12 on a team.  That's why there is a maximum of 2 per team tiers 4-7, and only 1 per team tiers 8-10 with 'mirror matchmaking'.

I believe most of us can agree that there is a significant skill difference among CV players.  Not only can the average player defeat the novice, but the super-unicum can also dominate the unicum player.

I believe most of us can agree that a CV division has additional advantages to a non-CV division.  For example, ships in a CV division KNOW that there will be a red CV in the game, so they can consider their ships, modules, and flags accordingly.  Ships in other divisions may, or may not have a CV in a game.

With a consideration to ease of implementation by WarGaming, here are my suggestions to improving balance:

(1) Limit the possibility of 2 CV players meeting each other to only once per day.  Currently, it seems that MatchMaking limits the possibility of 2 CV players playing against each other to a maximum of twice per day.  Sometimes, these two battles can be back to back, as both CV players re-que at about the same time after their first game.  Due to the CV skill variations, this means that a CV player who was just dominated by another will have the same matchup in their very next game.  This is not necessary, or fun, for either CV player.  (Programming algorithm: Change maximum meetups between CV players from 2 to 1 daily)

(2) Limit CV divisions to the same tier.  Matchmaking can be affected by the CV being 1 tier lower than the other 2 ships in the CV division, sometimes making the CV division more influential in the outcome of the game.  For the sake of balance between all the ships on the team, remove this possibility.  (Programming algorithm: As division is being created, client confirms that all ships are same tier as CV before "Battle" button is active.)

(3) Match CV divisions to other CV divisions by giving preferential matchmaking for SOLO CV players to go against other SOLO CV players.  Often, a CV division will bring some nice AA-heavy ships to the battle.  (Not always the CV guy's fault, as full-AA ship guys often looks for a CV guy to division with to get some planes.)  To balance the influence of these divisions, match then against each other.  (Programming algorithm: Give SOLO CV players selective matchmaking, so matchmaking will only put them against other SOLO CV players for the first 3 minutes of their que time.  After that, the SOLO CV player will be matched against any CV divisions.  This means that a SOLO CV player may have to wait longer in que, but I don't think they will mind, nor will their future teammates, for the sake of improved balance.)

(4a) Change the +2/- 2 Matchmaking in games with a CV division to +2/-1.  This would remove ships 2 tiers below the CV division tier from the game, making the CV division less influential and the game more balanced.  For example, if the CV division is Saipan-Atlanta-Atlanta (so common on the Asia server), there would be no tier 5's in the match, as the possible tiers for that CV division game would be limited to 6, 7, 8 and 9.  (Programming algorithm: Alter MM routines.)

or (4b) Change the +2/-2 Matchmaking in games with a CV division to +2/-1 where the CV division is never the top tier (except tier 10).  This goes beyond (4a) in limited the influence of the CV division by having a ship, or ships, at least 1 tier above the CV division in each their games.  Going back to the Saipan-Atlanta-Atlanta division, there would always be at least 1 tier 8 in the game, possibly more.  This may improve balance more than (4a).  (Programming algorithm: Alter MM routines so the top tier in a game with a CV division is 1 or 2 tier above the CV division's tier.)

(5) Give a reminder to CV players at tier 6 and above about manual (ALT) attacks after a game where they did not use it.  So after going through a game where the tier 6+ player did not use a manual/ALT attack, either with fighters, bombers, or torp planes, a pop-up shows up in port (like the coupon pop-ups) saying something like "We noticed you did not use any manual/ALT attacks in your last CV game.  Click here if you would like to see a Wargaming tutorial:"  In all likelihood, this CV player just finished a game where his planes were dominated by the red CV player, and his teammates had an unpleasant experience with this CV skill gap.  Offer that CV player the basic gameplay knowledge that they need at that level.  (Programming algorithm: Perhaps it's possible to keep track if the ALT key has been pressed during a CV game, and trigger a pop-up for each CV game, tier 6+, it hasn't.  The video should focus on the basics of ALT attacks, including how to it, and giving an example of why they might want to do it.  No need for additional strategic details-just the basics.  e.g. This is how you use ALT for a fighter strafe, see how the red bomber squadron disappears.  This is how you use ALT for your torp planes, see how much closer you can drop your torps on the red ship.  This is how you use ALT attack for bombers, see how much smaller your dropping oval is, unless you're in a premium CV... Thank you for watch the video, and good luck in your next CV battle captain!)

 

I hope this community, and Wargaming, may feel that some of my suggestions would be helpful to improve balance and be fairly easy to implement from a programming aspect. 

Thank you for reading,

Seaman_Rookie

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,202
[-K-]
Members
6,590 posts
10,949 battles
10 minutes ago, Seaman_Rookie said:

I believe most of us can agree that the CV is the most influential ship of the 12 on a team.  That's why there is a maximum of 2 per team tiers 4-7, and only 1 per team tiers 8-10 with 'mirror matchmaking'.

Remember the early days when MM allowed a CV on one team and not the other?  Talk about imbalance.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,705
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
11,250 posts
16,589 battles
55 minutes ago, Seaman_Rookie said:

I wish to add my perspective to improving the current state of CV play in the game.

I will give you this: most of your suggestions are original, and not the same old whining about how CVs are either totally Op or totally hosed. I'd like to comment on them one at a time.

57 minutes ago, Seaman_Rookie said:

(1) Limit the possibility of 2 CV players meeting each other to only once per day. 

I disagree with this because 1). It puts even more restrictions on an overloaded MM, which we certainly do not need and 2). I don't think CV captains need to be protected but rather given as many opportunities to improve their game as every other type of ship driver in the game, so eliminate the rule that says CV captains cannot see each other any number of games per day. 

1 hour ago, Seaman_Rookie said:

(2) Limit CV divisions to the same tier.

I agree with this completely, and would go as far as to make it this way for ALL divisions, period. Nothing is more frustrating than to see your team lineup and see a bottom tier ship in a division has drug two other ships into the game who are a tier lower than he is. 

1 hour ago, Seaman_Rookie said:

(3) Match CV divisions to other CV divisions by giving preferential matchmaking for SOLO CV players to go against other SOLO CV players.

I oppose this because, again, it slows down matchmaking and I am definitely against that. Also, CV players should have the same risks when entering a match as everyone else. 

1 hour ago, Seaman_Rookie said:

(4a) Change the +2/- 2 Matchmaking in games with a CV division to +2/-1 or (4b) Change the +2/-2 Matchmaking in games with a CV division to +2/-1 where the CV division is never the top tier (except tier 10). 

Again, opposed, more unnecessary loads on an already overworked MM. Again, CVs should have the same risks as every other player in the game when they sign into a match, sometimes you get good luck and sometimes you don't. 

1 hour ago, Seaman_Rookie said:

(5) Give a reminder to CV players at tier 6 and above about manual (ALT) attacks after a game where they did not use it.

My opinion on this is that manual attacks should be removed altogether, from all Cvs, so ... no.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,466
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,270 posts
9,891 battles
1 minute ago, Umikami said:

I will give you this: most of your suggestions are original, and not the same old whining about how CVs are either totally Op or totally hosed. I'd like to comment on them one at a time.

I disagree with this because 1). It puts even more restrictions on an overloaded MM, which we certainly do not need and 2). I don't think CV captains need to be protected but rather given as many opportunities to improve their game as every other type of ship driver in the game, so eliminate the rule that says CV captains cannot see each other any number of games per day. 

I agree with this completely, and would go as far as to make it this way for ALL divisions, period. Nothing is more frustrating than to see your team lineup and see a bottom tier ship in a division has drug two other ships into the game who are a tier lower than he is. 

I oppose this because, again, it slows down matchmaking and I am definitely against that. Also, CV players should have the same risks when entering a match as everyone else. 

Again, opposed, more unnecessary loads on an already overworked MM. Again, CVs should have the same risks as every other player in the game when they sign into a match, sometimes you get good luck and sometimes you don't. 

My opinion on this is that manual attacks should be removed altogether, from all Cvs, so ... no.

I'm going to have to mirror his replies except for the manual attacks one. They should stay, but they need to be fixed or more accurately, manual drop needs a nerf, and strafe needs a nerf/rework. Strafe should have the damage buff near removed (maybe a very slight one) and simply scatter bombers, causing their accuracy to be off, and Fighters, causing their DPS to be a bit lower, for a fixed time. Bonus points if they could make it work similar to gun bloom in Tanks where the accuracy dials back in over time (not sure on if the DPS coming back over time would be doable or easy). Drastically lowers the skill gap, no more auto delete and less losses - least less rapidly, still has an effect on fighter battles, still helps protect friendly ships from grouped bombers.

As to manual drop well - as insane as people may think I am to say it as a CV player, at this point I'm actually all for nerfing CV alpha damage. Which would allow us to keep manual drops as, but remove the massive damage/auto delete on anything but the most unlucky of DD's. That said, dropping the Alpha damage, Buff DB accuracy on all except GZ and maybe Saipan - but namely USN cause DB's are supposed to be their thing right now, increase chance of flooding on torps and fire on bombs, and most importantly - nerf AA which has been buffed to counteract OP manual drops. Manual drop will still hurt more obviously at point blank, barring good aim with auto drops, a bit of an edge to the skilled player, but shifting away from just absolute troll amounts of direct damage that understandably angers non-cv players, to being a bit more like cruisers/DD's wearing ships down over time with fires and floods. And when I say "Nerf AA" I mean a real nerf. CV's are still going to at least lose some planes when attacking, but even a ship like Des Memes won't be totally immune to air attack on it's own.BB goes out on his own, we can send our DB's in first to soften the AA up then bring in TB's or TB's first cause they'll repair floods and then set them on fire. Not having to mass planes together cause a lone ship focuses on the group can delete even without any kind of DF AA (Des, Mino, Iowa, Mo).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles
2 hours ago, Umikami said:

I will give you this: most of your suggestions are original, and not the same old whining about how CVs are either totally Op or totally hosed. I'd like to comment on them one at a time.

I disagree with this because 1). It puts even more restrictions on an overloaded MM, which we certainly do not need and 2). I don't think CV captains need to be protected but rather given as many opportunities to improve their game as every other type of ship driver in the game, so eliminate the rule that says CV captains cannot see each other any number of games per day. 

I agree with this completely, and would go as far as to make it this way for ALL divisions, period. Nothing is more frustrating than to see your team lineup and see a bottom tier ship in a division has drug two other ships into the game who are a tier lower than he is. 

I oppose this because, again, it slows down matchmaking and I am definitely against that. Also, CV players should have the same risks when entering a match as everyone else. 

Again, opposed, more unnecessary loads on an already overworked MM. Again, CVs should have the same risks as every other player in the game when they sign into a match, sometimes you get good luck and sometimes you don't. 

My opinion on this is that manual attacks should be removed altogether, from all Cvs, so ... no.

Agree with you on everything but that last part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51
[CUTE]
[CUTE]
Members
100 posts
6,117 battles
5 hours ago, Umikami said:

My opinion on this is that manual attacks should be removed altogether, from all Cvs, so ... no.

Sure, while we are at it make main-battery guns fire like secondaries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,705
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
11,250 posts
16,589 battles
1 hour ago, xKSNx said:

Sure, while we are at it make main-battery guns fire like secondaries.

Main gun batteries are not OP, as they give their target an opportunity to both dodge and fire back; manual drops allow for neither. But everyone is entitled to an opinion; thank you for sharing yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51
[CUTE]
[CUTE]
Members
100 posts
6,117 battles
2 hours ago, Umikami said:

as they give their target an opportunity to both dodge and fire back

image.png.29c92ae17e269b3f5fdcd27e7f21197a.png

 

As your a new CV player, looking at your lack of experience on that account with them, i understand and sympathize with your understanding of manual drops, and how they may seems broken and unstoppable to you.

But as you progress into the higher tiers, ANY mistakes are not forgiven and flying into the wrong AA will be a blunder and permanent on your fighter reserves. 

On the other hand, the trade off for the extreme Anti aircraft abundance in some higher tier CA's, is the awesome  power nothing in the game can match.

So, any talk of removing manual is frowned upon by many of the experienced players that put effort and time into their carriers.

 Other's opinions are to be respected, but you should know the pain and stress playing T10 CV may cause.

 

 

Edited by xKSNx
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,705
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
11,250 posts
16,589 battles
10 minutes ago, xKSNx said:

As your a new CV player, looking at your lack of experience on that account with them, i understand and sympathize with your understanding of manual drops, and how they may seems broken and unstoppable to you.

I understand that AA has gone crazy, and that Def AA modules can wreak havoc on any CV squadron. My opinion of that is that they should have adjusted the manual drops long before they started buffing AA, because the AA buffs were not given out equally across the national lines and now some ships have overpowered AA and some have inadequate AA. They should have adjusted the CVs because that would have been equal for every ship that the CV saw in a match. Instead they embarked on this random "this ship gets it and this one doesn't" policy of buffing some and ignoring others, which has not worked out as planned. 

Of course, the other side of that is that no AA in the world will save a ship that has 6 torps dropped 0.5 K away from it, leaving it no time whatsoever to dodge the spread. Manual drops are rapidly achieving the status of the early IJN torp "walls of skill", which got them nerfed into near uselessness. WoW has a history of not wanting to ever reverse any decision it previously made, regardless of how bad it was, which is why they have buffed AA to the point it is now; they don't want to admit they have (again) screwed CVs up. CV players can defend their manual drops until the cows sail home, but if the complaints continue they will go the way of "stealth firing" and "walls of skill" and WoW will do it the same way they have implemented every other change ... with a hammer.

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.

×