Jump to content

53 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
6 posts

 

Introduction

This topic is entered in the game play section of the forum because it not only concerns Aircraft Carrier game play but overall game play in WOWS.

 

The vaunted WOWS "Carrier rework" has been mentioned on and off over the past two years. During that time the current state of affairs of Aircraft Carriers in WOWS has not been significantly altered by meaningful changes let alone improvements. The only two noteworthy changes with regard to Carriers that have been implemented are (1) the new Flight Modes of the USA Carriers that was introduced at the end of 2017 and (2) the vastly increased number of new ships with very powerful Anti-Aircraft setups and/or Defensive Fire AA (for example ALABAMA, MASSACHUSETTS and the five new USA light cruisers).

 

As a result there remains a virtual absence of meaningful WOWS Carrier changes to address some of the major Carrier related issues. The vaunted WOWS "Carrier rework" will in all probability not be implemented until somewhere around late 2019 at best, in other words it is a long term event. In order to improve the Carrier game play that currently exists in the short and medium term, that is in 2018-2019, some plausible solutions can be proposed and implemented to address the most serious issues for the benefit of both the opponents and proponents of Carriers in WOWS.

 

This topic therefore aims to offers such possible and plausible solutions for the 2018-2019 short to medium term to improve Carrier game play from the perspective of both the opponents and proponents of Carriers. The solutions proposed are intended to be ones that can/should be fairly easily implemented by WOWS Developers with a minimum of effort and all need to lie within the framework of the current Carrier and general WOWS game play and game play mechanisms.

 

In other words, the solutions proposed in this topic are NOT intended as radical solutions which are a full departure of the current WOWS Carrier game play and current overall WOWS game play. Instead the solutions proposed want to build on the strengths and possibilities of the current WOWS Carrier game play and current overall WOWS game play.

 

 

The Current Carrier Related Major Issues

Spoiler

 

The major Carrier related issues which most Carrier proponents and opponents can more or less agree upon are:

 

  1. Handling multiple Carrier Squadrons in WOWS is apparently so difficult to master for most Carrier players that as a result higher skilled Carrier Commanders have a significant advantage over lower skilled Carrier Commanders. The result of which is that higher skilled Carrier Commanders can dominate lower skilled Carrier Commanders and consequently in some matches the whole enemy fleet, that is especially the case if the Carrier is top tier in a match. If both fleets have higher skilled Carrier Commanders they more or less cancel each other out UNLESS one of these Carrier Commanders is using a Carrier which is significantly weaker than the other Carrier due to the Flight Mode setup and the Aircraft specifications and Aircraft reserves. This is especially the case with USA Tech Tree Carriers which by design are overall weaker in WOWS than the Japanese Carriers and with the Premium USA Carriers which by design are overall stronger than all other Carriers and Premium Carriers in WOWS at their respective Tiers.

 

  1. Tech Tree Carriers: Japanese Carriers are generally significantly more flexible and powerful in terms of tactics, fighters, bombers and aircraft Flight Modes than USA Carriers. Most (but not all) Tech Tree Carriers are inferior to Premium Carriers.

 

  1. Premium Carriers: the USA Premium Carriers (SAIPAN, ENTERPRISE) are generally significantly more flexible and powerful in terms of tactics, fighters, bombers and aircraft Flight Modes than the Japanese and German Premium Carriers (KAGA, GRAF ZEPPELIN).

 

  1. Divisions which consist of higher skilled Carrier Commanders and higher skilled Commanders in battleships, cruisers or destroyers with a high Anti-Aircraft rating (including mounted Defensive Fire AA and with their ship Commanders specialized in the Anti-Aircraft role) can often times decide the outcome of match when faced by an enemy Carrier that is not in such a Division. This is due to the high Anti-Aircraft rating of the ships in such a Division, they can effectively create NO FLY zones for the opposing Carrier and at the same time can create FREE FLY zones for the Carrier in their Division. If the shipmates in such a Division close the range to enemy ships that then allows the Carrier in such a Division to bomb and sink any target that engages his Division shipmates within the protective AA range of his Division shipmates. The enemy Carrier Commander cannot intervene with his Fighters because the concentrated heavy Anti-Aircraft fire of such a Division prevents this.

 

  1. Tier 5 Carriers cannot use manual Aircraft attacks (Fighter "strafing", manual Bombing attacks) but the matchmaking process matches them with Tier 6 Carriers which are allowed to use manual attacks. This extremely handicaps a new and novice Carrier Commander when he is matched with a highly skilled Carrier Commander in a Tier 6 Carrier which is capable of using manual Aircraft attacks. As a result new and novice Tier 5 Carrier Commanders or players that might have been interested in learning how to use Carriers are likely to lose the motivation and interest in Carriers in WOWS when being repeatedly humiliated and beaten via manual Aircraft attacks by a highly skilled Carrier Commander in a Tier 6 Carrier. This issue affects the "recruiting" and "retaining" of Carrier Commanders in WOWS and thus affects Carrier game play indirectly in terms of Carrier player base.

 

  1. For various reasons most players that command a Battleship, Cruiser and/or Destroyer cannot adjust their game play when they are faced by an enemy Carrier. Instead they play a match the exact same way as if the enemy Carrier is not present. The most painful obvious result of this are battleships, cruisers and destroyers that go into a match with low and weak Anti-Aircraft ratings and then also choose to sail all alone outside the range of the Anti-Aircraft fire of other ships in their fleet. A solitary ship with a low Anti-Aircraft rating is generally the preferred target of a higher skilled Carrier Commander during a match. The results of this bad for game play, two of the most common examples are: (1) Destroyers rushing ahead of their fleet at the start of a match into capture points where they are either spotted permanently by Carrier Aircraft and as a result sunk by the guns of the enemy fleet or they are outright sunk by Carrier Aircraft (2) Battleships sailing all by themselves on the right or left of a map where they are easily sunk by Carrier Aircraft.

 

  1. Carrier Aircraft have superb spotting abilities virtually unmatched by anything else in WOWS. A higher skilled Carrier Commander can use these spotting abilities to give the fleet that he is part of a significant advantage over the opposing fleet if he is opposed by a lower skilled Carrier Commander. The result of which can translate into the fast and early destruction of enemy destroyers due to continued spotting. The loss of destroyers usually prevents the enemy fleet from capturing points on the map, which in effect almost guarantees loss of the match for the opposing fleet.

 

  1. A higher skilled Carrier Commander is able to focus and sink the most important enemy ships when he is opposed by a lower skilled Carrier Commander. The lower skilled Carrier Commander is usually unable to prevent this. The loss of the most important ships usually almost certainly guarantees the loss of the match for the opposing fleet.

 

  1. A higher skilled Carrier Commander is able use his Fighter and Bomber Squadrons to more or less completely stop enemy Aircraft Squadrons from having a meaningful impact on the match when he is opposed by a lower skilled Carrier Commander. The higher skilled Carrier Commander when faced by a lower skilled Carrier Commander will: (1) use his Fighter Squadrons to shoot down the majority of the enemy Fighter and Bomber Squadrons (2) use his Bomber Squadrons to quickly sink enemy ships.

 

  1. The number of ships with very strong Anti-Aircraft fire ratings and the number of ships with Defensive Fire AA has during the past 1-2 years steadily increased to the point that - especially at Tier 8, 9 and 10 - the very strong but program (computer) controlled passive Anti-Aircraft Fire in many matches forces Carrier Commanders to: (1) either hold off attacking with their Bombers till the last 10 minutes or so of the match until many ships have been sunk by the battleships, cruisers and destroyers of the fleet or (2) attack with bombers in the first 10 minutes of the match and risk losing every single bomber to the very effective but passive Anti-Aircraft fire of Tier 8, 9 and 10 ships. This makes Carrier play increasingly less interesting as more and more ships with very strong passive Anti-Aircraft fire are introduced. While bombers need to be ordered around via direct human player control the Anti-Aircraft fire in WOWS is in contrast and by design passive, meaning it does not need any actions from a human player. That the activities of a human Carrier player can be countered at Tier 8, 9 and 10 - and even fully negated in fact - by passive program (computer) controlled Anti-Aircraft fire (for example by WORCESTER, MINOTAUR) is not "good game design" for a Player-versus-Player based game.

 

  1. A higher skilled Carrier Commander is able use his Bomber Squadrons to very heavily damage destroyers, cruisers and battleships. In some cases sink them with one attack. The ability to attack and bomb so effectively by the highly skilled Carrier Commander is however only gained by these Carrier Commanders after having spent a great deal of time and having played thousands of matches with Carriers in WOWS. The proponents of Carriers in WOWS know how much effort it took them to gain that bombing ability, the opponents of Carriers usually miss the Carrier game play experience to fully understand how much time and effort it has taken the highly skilled Carrier Commanders to gain that bombing ability. The result of this is that Carrier opponents due to their lack of actual Carrier game play experience have no understanding of and as a result no respect for the demonstrated ability of the highly skilled Carrier Commanders. Indeed many of these Carrier opponents have a very emotional and very negative opinion of highly skilled Carrier Commanders and Carriers in WOWS in general. These Carrier opponents have an even more negative opinion of the lower skilled Carrier Commanders which are still in the process of learning to become better Carrier Commanders. While this issue is an indirect one, it does affect the "recruiting" and "retaining" of Carrier Commanders in WOWS and thus affects Carrier game play indirectly in terms of Carrier player base.

 

  1. For various reasons most players that command a Battleship, Cruiser and Destroyer do not setup and specialize their ship and ship-Commander in an Anti-Aircraft role. That translates into such players not being able to grasp the difference between "nice to have" and "essential to have" choices, in other words an error in terms of priorities is made by such players. These players prefer either "Hydro Acoustic Search" and/or other skills/modules/consumables for both their ship and their ship commander etc. over Anti Aircraft skills/modules/consumables. Even though the WOWS Developers have handed Battleship, Cruiser and Destroyer Commanders many very effective options to defeat enemy Bomber Aircraft, the majority of them simply refuse to make use of the Anti-Aircraft ship modules and Consumables (for example Auxiliary Armaments Modification, AA Guns Modification, Defensive Fire AA) and Anti-Aircraft related Commander skills (for example Basic Firing Training, Advanced Firing Training, Manual Fire Control for AA Armament etc.) While this is understandable for various reasons it is also an inexcusable error that is made by these players. Every player has to make a choice when outfitting his ship and training his ship Commander, it is either one specialization or the other. Apparently it is difficult for most players to differentiate between "nice to have" and "essential to have". Typically "nice to have" items such as "Hydro Acoustic Search" and a ship module that gives 7% less dispersion of the main guns (which translates typically into 22 Battleship main gun hits instead of 20 Battleship main gun hits in a match) are more important for these players than their ship being able to defeat and actually survive an enemy Bomber Aircraft attack which has the potential to sink their ship with one strike. Not maximizing the Anti-Aircraft fire setup of a ship is more or less comparable to building a car without a seat belt and airbag but with luxury leather seats instead. Normally you do not need the seat belt and the airbag in your car, but when you are in a car accident you need them to survive since the leather seats cannot keep you alive in a car accident. It is the same with Anti-Aircraft setups for ships in WOWS: a ship needs them to beat off enemy Bomber Aircraft attacks when facing an enemy Carrier. As a result of these players preferring "nice to have" items over "essential to have" items WOWS Developers seem to increasingly want to appease these sort of bad decision making players by introducing new ships which have it all (Radar, Hydro Acoustic Search, Defensive Fire AA, high AA rating) like the latest new five USA light Cruisers and latest two USA Premium Battleships. Although this issue is not recognized by all players, this is in fact a major issue that substantially increases the effectiveness of Carriers in WOWS.

 

  1. Various ships with very effective AA setups (for example KIDD, NEPTUNE, MINOTAUR, WORCESTER etc.) can remain invisible to a Carrier Commander while they in the meantime totally destroy Carrier Aircraft Squadrons in about 1-2 seconds. This is not only bad for Carrier game play for various reasons but it also further handicaps new and novice Carrier Commanders. This issue affects the "recruiting" and "retaining" of Carrier Commanders in WOWS and thus affects Carrier game play indirectly in terms of Carrier player base.

 

  1. The Aircraft Carrier User Interface (UI) is plagued by several bugs that have been there more or less since the alpha/beta stage of WOWS and that still remain unfixed up till now. Two of the most unfortunate Carrier UI bugs are (1) when fast switching between Aircraft Squadrons the game selects the Carrier itself instead of the Squadron that the actually player which leads to the Carrier getting a movement command towards the enemy fleet instead of the Aircraft Squadron getting that movement command (2) Sometimes a friendly Fighter Squadron that is locked in Fighter Combat no longer responds to player commands, the only way to undo that is by clicking on the enemy Fighter Squadron(s) that the friendly Fighter Squadron is locked in combat. There really is no possible viable excuse to not fix these sort of Carrier User Interface bugs over the last two year period.

 

  1. Some non-USA Battleships in WOWS have been intentionally made particularly vulnerable to AP Bombs. Some of these vulnerable Battleships are among the most popular Battleships in WOWS (for example the British, Italian and German ones), which does not make sense from a game play balancing point of view and also reinforces a negative image of Carriers for many Battleship players. Generally the newer the Battleship is in WOWS the more resistant it is to AP Bombs and the more Aircraft it is able to shoot down in WOWS matches. Repeated training room testing with GRAF ZEPPELIN AP Dive Bombers using 500 kg (1000 lb) AP Bombs has been able to determine that in WOWS the following Battleships are particularly vulnerable to AP Bombs: all British Battleships up to and including Tier 8, all Italian Battleships up tot and including Tier 8, all German Battleships up to and including Tier 9, all French Battleships up to and including Tier 7, all USA Tech Tree Battleships up to and including Tier 8, all Japanese Battleships up to and including Tier 8. Remarkably resistant to AP Bomb damage are the newest Tier 8 USA Premium Battleships ALABAMA and MASSACHUSETTS as well as the Tier 9 USA Battleships IOWA and MISSOURI. These four USA Battleships also inflict the highest Battleship AA damage at their respective Tiers. Of the Tier 10 Battleships the most resistant to AP Bomb damage is the Tier 10 USA Battleship MONTANA which also inflicts the highest Battleship AA damage at Tier 10. Something does not seem in order here when looking at the actual authentic horizontal deck armour of these USA Battleships when compared to their contemporaries in WOWS. Take for example the extreme AP Bomb resistance of the ALABAMA and MASSACHUSETTS - as to a degree also that of the IOWA and MISSOURI. That does not seem to make sense when examining the actual authentic horizontal deck armour layout of these ships in WOWS compared to other non-USA Battleships in the game. According to WOWS Developer statements over the past two years all ships in WOWS are meant to have authentic armour protection that matches their real world equivalents. It makes even less sense when examining the results of real world AP Bomb results by Aircraft Carriers, for example the TIRPITZ which in one bombing attack was actually hit by up to 16x direct and near AP Bomb hits from Carrier Aircraft demonstrated a remarkable real world resistance to Carrier Aircraft AP Bombs. The real world TIRPIRZ in one attack received 13x direct AP Bomb hits from 227 kg (500 lb) and 726 kg (1600 lb) AP Bombs of which at least three were the heavy 726 kg (1600 lb) AP Bombs. Currently the heaviest AP Bombs in WOWS are only 500 kg (1000 lb) AP Bombs. Of these 13x direct AP Bomb hits only 5x AP Bombs actually managed to penetrate the "weather deck" horizontal armour and of those 5x AP Bombs not one was able to damage let alone penetrate the "main citadel deck" horizontal armour. In other words not even heavy 726 kg (1600 lb) AP Bombs were able to inflict the amount of damage required to defeat the citadel armour and sink the TIRPITZ let alone put her out of action. In WOWS however Battleships that have less horizontal Deck Armour than the Tier 8 Premium TIRPITZ, like the Tier 8 USA Premium Battleships ALABAMA and MASSACHUSETTS, are almost immune to AP Bombs while the Tier 8 Premium TIRPITZ can be very heavily damaged by AP Bombs and even sometimes sunk in one strike by 2x or more Squadrons of AP Dive Bombers. For some reason USA Battleships in general and USA Premium Battleships in particular get a preferential treatment that makes them almost immune to AP Bombs in WOWS which these Battleships do not deserve based on their authentic horizontal deck armour arrangement when compared to that of their contemporaries. The example of the real world demonstrated resistance of the TIRPITZ to even 726 kg (1600 lb) Bombs makes clear that something is not in order here in WOWS. Premium USA Battleships should not get a preferential treatment over non-USA Battleships simply to drive up sales. And punishing Battleships players for not choosing a Tier 8-10 USA (Premium) Battleship when facing AP Bombers creates a "no real choice" situation which indirectly negatively impacts on the image of Carrier players as well. This is because Battleship players that prefer non-USA Battleships for whatever reason will continue to have an increasingly negative opinion of Carriers when their favourite non-USA Battleship is the main target of AP Bombs because USA Battleships are generally avoided as AP Bomber targets by skilled Carrier Commanders.

 

  1. There are advanced Fighter "strafing" tactics in WOWS that most Carrier players are not even aware of that they exist because they are not adequately "taught" to the Carrier players in WOWS. In the around 1500 ranked and random matches that I have played with a Carrier at Tier 8 I have noticed that around up to 80 percent of the opposing Carrier Commanders do not even use Fighter "strafing" at all, let alone the advanced Fighter "strafing" tactics. The advanced Fighter "strafing" tactics that I refer to are commonly described as "Strafe-Out Tactics" and "Counter-Strafe-Out Tactics". In WOWS there is no decent introduction and guide to learning these crucially important advanced Fighter "strafing" tactics and also no reward driven incentive in the form of WOWS missions and rewards to teach them to new and novice Carrier Commanders. It is therefore not a surprise that both the basics of "strafing" and the advanced Fighter "strafing" tactics are used by so few new and novice Carrier Commanders in WOWS, as a result this adage is pertinent to this issue: "If the learner has not learned then the teacher has not taught". A Carrier Commander that knows how to "strafe" has such a huge advantage over a Carrier Commander that does not know how to "strafe" that the former usually easily shoots down the majority of the Aircraft of the latter. When a new and novice Carrier Commander repeatedly loses his Aircraft to Fighter "strafing" without even understanding why that is happening it is demoralizing. I have played on more than one occasion against new and novice Tier 8 Carrier Commanders that recalled all their Aircraft to their Carrier after heavy losses to my Fighter "strafing" and which they refused to even let their Aircraft take off again for the rest of the match. These "strafing" tactics affect the "recruiting" and "retaining" of Carrier Commanders in WOWS and thus affect Carrier game play indirectly in terms of Carrier player base. The WOWS Forum, WOWS Community Contributor instruction videos and the WOWS WIKI are only consulted by a minority of the WOWS player base so these cannot compensate for the almost complete absence of meaningfully "teaching and mission-rewarding" both "strafing" and the advanced Fighter "strafing" tactics.

 

I added a detailed description of the "Strafe-Out Tactics" and "Counter-Strafe-Out Tactics" on the WOWS WIKI: http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Aerial_Combat

 

"Strafe-Out Tactic" Description

One of your Fighter Squadrons can engage, or be engaged by, an enemy Fighter Squadron via a mouse button left-click which then "locks" your Fighter Squadron into that Fighter engagement. Via the "Strafe-Out Tactic" it is possible to "break the "lock" of a Fighter engagement by giving a "strafe" command in any direction but it will cost the Fighter Squadron ammunition and one of its Fighters in return. When your Fighter Squadron "strafes out" of the Fighter engagement the enemy Fighter Squadron will receive a "stun lock" which prevents them from moving for a few seconds. The "Strafe-Out Tactic" allows a Fighter Squadron to "strafe out" of a Fighter engagement at any time. The tactic is especially useful when a friendly Fighter Squadron is "locked" in a Fighter engagement and is either losing that Fighter engagement, or is in danger of being "strafed" by another enemy Fighter Squadron or in order to prevent the friendly Fighter Squadron from being destroyed when running out of ammunition. The Premium Tier 7 Aircraft Carrier Saipan is currently the only Carrier that can let a Fighter Squadron "strafe out" of a Fighter engagement without losing a Fighter in the process. There is an additional major tactical advantage that the "Stafe-Out Tactic" offers which presents itself when a friendly Fighter Squadron "strafes out" of a Fighter engagement: the enemy Fighter Squadron that remains "stun locked" and thus stationary for a few seconds can be easily "strafed" by another friendly Fighter Squadron during those few seconds.

 

"Counter-Strafe-Out Tactic" Description

One of your Fighter Squadrons can engage, or be engaged by, an enemy Fighter Squadron via a mouse button left-click which then "locks" your Fighter Squadron into that Fighter engagement. If the enemy Fighter Squadron then uses the "Strafe-Out Tactic" in order to "strafe out" of that Fighter engagement it is possible to use the so-called "Counter-Strafe-Out Tactic" by selecting your Fighter Squadron and giving ONE movement command (not an attack or "strafing" command) in the direction where the enemy Fighter Squadron is "strafing out", this will allow your Fighter Squadron to get out of the "stun lock" that they normally receive when an enemy Fighter Squadron "strafes out" of a Fighter engagement. Then give your Fighter Squadron a "strafe" command in the same direction so that your Fighter Squadron will start "strafing" the enemy Fighter Squadron either immediately or shortly thereafter. Do not place the "strafe" command too close or your Fighter Squadron will first circle around to get into position. If executed properly the "Counter-Strafe-Out Tactic" will allow your Fighter Squadron to "strafe" the enemy Fighter Squadron as it "strafes out" of the Fighter engagement.

 

 

 

Proposed Short and Medium Term Carrier related Solutions

The individual solutions proposed in this section are to be regarded as possible solutions for the short to medium term to improve Carrier game play from the perspective of both the opponents and proponents of Carriers. The idea is to offer solutions that should be fairly easily to implement by WOWS Developers with a minimum of effort and that lie within the overall framework of the current Carrier and general WOWS game play and game play mechanisms. As such these solutions are intended to build on the existing strengths and possibilities of the current WOWS Carrier game play and current overall WOWS game play.

 

SPOTTING SOLUTION (Alternative A)

Spoiler

 

Carrier Aircraft can only spot enemy ships for their own Carrier and they can not spot enemy ships for the entire friendly fleet. In other words whatever the Carrier Aircraft spot is only visible to the Carrier Commander that owns the Carrier Aircraft. This is not unlike for example the current "Radio Location" Commander skill which also only indicates the direction of the nearest enemy ship to the player that has a ship Commander with "Radio Location". This solution will solve the problem that Destroyers that rush to a Capture Point at the start of a match are constantly spotted by Carrier Aircraft and consequently then targeted by the entire enemy fleet. The CARRIER SHIP itself of course will still be able to spot ships just like all other ships only the spotting by CARRIER AIRCRAFT is proposed to be changed.

 

 

SPOTTING SOLUTION (Alternative B)

Spoiler

 

Bombers without Bombs/Torpedoes and Fighters without Ammunition can not spot enemy ships and enemy Aircraft. This solution will eliminate a major game exploit that Carriers with fast Bombers can currently make use of when they are commanded by highly skilled Carrier Commanders. For example in ranked matches highly skilled SHOKAKU Carrier Commanders let their fast Dive Bombers drop their bombs to turn them into impossible to shoot down very fast spotting Aircraft. Currently in WOWS a Bomber without torpedoes/bombs gets a massive speed increase and as a result the fastest Bombers fly at considerably higher speeds than even the fastest Fighters in the game. This exploit for example gives highly skilled SHOKAKU Commanders impossible to shoot down spotting Aircraft that can keep the entire enemy fleet spotted for the duration of a ranked match.

 

 

FIGHTER SOLUTION (Alternative A)

Spoiler

 

Carrier Fighter Squadrons are turned into player controlled variants of the current Catapult Fighters without them having the ability to fight other enemy Carrier Fighter Squadrons so they can only protect a friendly ship from enemy Bombers when they are assigned to a friendly ship by clicking on that ship and only for as long as they have ammunition to do so, this Fighter "guard" mechanism is currently already implemented in WOWS. In other words the Fighter "strafing", Fighter "click combat" and Fighter "click Bomber escort/guard" ability are removed from Fighters in WOWS and only the "ship protection" or "ship guard" element of Fighter combat is maintained.

 

"Strafing" down enemy Aircraft is the part that I enjoy the most in the current WOWS Carrier play so this is a solution that I do not propose lightly. For game play purposes however I think this solution is best because highly skilled Carrier Commanders simply will fully dominate the novice Carrier Commander due to their expertise in "strafing". To further add to that issue some Carriers have been equipped with Fighters with superior stats in WOWS and/or have more Fighters than other Carriers (ENTERPRISE for example) which further increases the Fighter "strafing" and Fighter "ammunition" imbalance between Carrier Commanders even when they are of an equal skill level. The resulting total Air Superiority – often even Air Supremacy – will let the highly skilled Carrier Commander punish the entire enemy fleet with his Bombers as a result. New and novice Carrier Commanders that repeatedly have all their aircraft "strafed" out of the match by a highly skilled Carrier Commander will over time stop using Carriers which is an issue that negatively affects the "recruiting" and "retaining" of Carrier Commanders in WOWS. In the around 1500 ranked and random matches that I have played with a Carrier at Tier 8 I have noticed that around up to 80 percent of the opposing Carrier Commanders do not even use Fighter "strafing" at all, let alone the advanced Fighter "strafing" tactics. Again, the current aspect of Carrier game play which I find the most interesting and most fun is Fighter "strafing", but I have to acknowledge that the current "strafing" mechanism is bad for "recruiting" and "retaining" of Carrier Commanders in WOWS and it simply favours highly skilled Carrier Commanders too much to the extreme.

 

 

FIGHTER SOLUTION (Alternative B)

Spoiler

 

Fighters never run out of ammunition in Fighter "click combat", instead Fighter ammunition is ONLY used for "strafing" and not for Fighter "click combat". Currently Fighters that have used up their last ammunition cannot disengage from Fighter "click combat" and the game forces them to remain in Fighter "click combat" until there are all destroyed or until the enemy Fighters run out of ammunition as well. This mechanism is not only difficult to understand and manage for new and novice Carrier Commanders but it also gives a clear advantage to Fighters in WOWS that are designed to be equipped with have large amounts of ammunition (typically USA Fighters in WOWS). The current WOWS Fighter ammunition expenditure mechanism punishes Fighters that in WOWS are designed equipped with little ammunition (typically Japanese and German Fighters) twice because: (1) Fighter with little ammunition cannot "strafe" often which severely limits their ability to protect their fleet (2) A full strength Fighter Squadron that consists of 4-6 Fighters that by design have little ammunition will all be totally destroyed in Fighter "click combat" by an enemy Fighter Squadron consisting of 1-2 Fighters when it runs out of ammunition without the player being able to do anything about it. The proposed solution addresses the current Fighter ammunition imbalance/limitations and increases the "comfort level" of Carrier play (especially for new and novice players) which as a win-win also benefits the whole fleet that the Carrier is part of.

 

 

FIGHTER SOLUTION (Alternative C)

Spoiler

 

Fighters without ammunition get a speed boost (just like Bombers also currently get in WOWS when they have dropped their Bombs/Torpedoes) and they automatically disengage from Fighter "click combat" and they get a +75% Hit Point increase when they run out of ammunition. Currently Fighters that have used up their last ammunition cannot disengage from Fighter "click combat" and the game forces them to remain in Fighter "click combat" until there are all destroyed or until the enemy Fighters run out of ammunition as well. This mechanism is not only difficult to understand and manage for new and novice Carrier Commanders but it also gives a clear advantage to Fighters in WOWS that are designed to be equipped with have large amounts of ammunition (typically USA Fighters in WOWS). The current WOWS Fighter ammunition expenditure mechanism punishes Fighters that in WOWS are designed equipped with little ammunition (typically Japanese and German Fighters) twice because: (1) Fighter with little ammunition cannot "strafe" often which severely limits their ability to protect their fleet (2) A full strength Fighter Squadron that consists of 4-6 Fighters that by design have little ammunition will all be totally destroyed in Fighter "click combat" by an enemy Fighter Squadron consisting of 1-2 Fighters when it runs out of ammunition without the player being able to do anything about it. The proposed solution addresses the current Fighter ammunition imbalance/limitations and increases the "comfort level" of Carrier play (especially for new and novice players) which as a win-win also benefits the whole fleet that the Carrier is part of.

 

 

INVISIBLE SHIP AA FIRE SOLUTION

Spoiler

 

When an enemy ship uses its AA Fire it should be spotted by the Carrier Aircraft it fires on, even when it is in smoke BUT it should then only be visible to the Carrier and not to the entire fleet that the Carrier is part of. Just like the "Radio Location" Commander skill that only indicates the position of the closest enemy ship only to the player that has a ship Commander that has the "Radio Location" skill. For new and novice Carrier Commanders, and even for experienced ones, it is often times impossible to notice than a hidden enemy ship is using its AA against Carrier Aircraft. As a result ships with strong AA setups like MINOTAUR, DES MOINES, WORCESTER can totally destroy a full Squadron before the Carrier Commander has had the time to get it out of range of that hidden ship. That means that especially new and novice Carrier Commanders, but even experienced ones too, have no player friendly visual indication that warns them that their Aircraft are going to be destroyed in about 2 seconds unless they withdraw them out of range of the hidden enemy ships. Currently all ships in WOWS get a clear visual indication that they are being fired upon in the form of shell tracers, but the Carrier Commander currently gets no clear unmistakable visual warning that his very limited amount of Carrier Aircraft are about to be destroyed in about 2 seconds by AA from a fully hidden ship. The proposed solution increases the "comfort level" of Carrier play (especially for new and novice players) and addresses the imbalance of passive not human controlled AA invisibly eliminating the active human controlled Aircraft of a Carrier Commander in about 2 seconds.

 

 

DEFENSIVE AA FIRE SOLUTION

Spoiler

 

A ship that uses the "Defensive AA Fire" Consumable is changed from colour RED into Colour BLINKING YELLOW. For new and novice Carrier Commanders, and even for experienced ones, it is often times difficult to impossible to see if an enemy ship is using the "Defensive AA Fire" Consumable. That means that especially new and novice Carrier Commanders, but even experienced ones too, have no player friendly visual indication that warns them that their Aircraft are going to be destroyed in about 2 seconds unless they withdraw them out of range of the enemy ship using "Defensive AA Fire". Currently all ships in WOWS get a visual warning that they are being tracked by the "Radar" Consumable or a visual warning that they are tracked via the "Radio Location" Commander skill, but the Carrier Commander currently gets no clear unmistakable visual warning that his very limited amount of Carrier Aircraft are about to be destroyed in about 2 seconds by "Defensive AA Fire" from an enemy ship. The proposed solution increases the "comfort level" of Carrier play (especially for new and novice players).

 

 

DESTROYER PROTECTION SOLUTION

Spoiler

 

All Tier 6-10 Destroyers will receive the Destroyer type "Defensive AA Fire" Consumable. This solution will protect Tier 6-10 Destroyers from Bombers during the first 5 critical opening minutes of a match when they rush forward to capture a sector without the help of friendly Cruisers and Battleships. Highly skilled Carrier Commanders currently can too easily take out the all important Destroyers in the first 5 minutes of the match which in most cases already decides the outcome of the match. This solution increases the "comfort level" of Destroyer play (especially for new and novice players) in WOWS.

 

 

CRUISER AND BATTLESHIP PROTECTION SOLUTION

Spoiler

 

All Tier 6-10 Cruisers and Battleships will receive a new Consumable type called "Concentrated AA Fire" which is incapable of damaging and destroying enemy Aircraft within range of their AA but which instead decreases the chance to hit of all Bombers within range of their AA by 75% AND all Cruisers and Battleships that currently have access to "Defensive Fire AA" will have that Consumable removed and replaced by the new "Concentrated AA Fire" Consumable. A ship that uses the "Concentrated AA Fire" Consumable is changed from colour RED into Colour BLINKING ORANGE. This solution will protect solitary Cruisers and Battleships from Bombers during the first 5 critical opening minutes of a match. Highly skilled Carrier Commanders currently can too easily take out solitary Battleships and Cruisers in the first 5 minutes of the match which is both bad for game play and for the morale of dedicated Battleship and Cruiser players, this to a large extent contributes to the antipathy that dedicated Battleship and Cruiser players have developed towards Carriers. A major advantage of the new "Concentrated AA Fire" Consumable is that Battleships and Cruisers can prevent enemy Bombers from sinking them with one strike while the Consumable is active. The regular AA of the Cruisers and Battleships can still damage and destroy enemy Bombers but the "Concentrated AA Fire" Consumable does not increase the lethality of the AA which is something that the "Defensive AA Fire" Consumable does. Instead the "Concentrated AA Fire" Consumable practically prevents the enemy Bombers from doing lethal damage while the "Concentrated AA Fire" Consumable is active. This means that a new and novice Carrier Commander will not see all his Bombers shot down in 1-2 seconds which is the currently the case if he attacks a Cruiser or Battleship that is equipped with the "Defensive Fire AA" Consumable. This solution increases the "comfort level" of Cruiser, Battleship and Carrier play (especially for new and novice players) which is a win-win for all these ship types in WOWS.

 

 

UNIQUE AND LEGENDARY COMMANDER CARRIER SKILL SOLUTION

Spoiler

 

Unique and Legendary Commanders get a +5% bonus to the "Aircraft Servicing Expert" (so that means "+10% to HP of carrier-based aircraft" and "-15% to servicing time of carrier-based aircraft") and "Dogfighting Expert" (so that means "+15% to combat performance of fighters for each tier of difference between them" and "+15% to fighters ammunition") skills. Currently the unique and legendary Commanders in WOWS get no bonus to any Carrier related skill. This further makes Carriers less interesting for all players of WOWS. The signal given off by excluding Carrier skills from unique and legendary Commander skill advantages is that Carriers are a forgotten and unwanted class in WOWS.

 

 

COMMANDER CARRIER SKILL LEVEL 1 SOLUTION

Spoiler

 

The "Evasive Maneuver" Commander skill is changed into "-10% to detectability of strike aircraft" and "+75% to HP of strike aircraft" and "-10% to airspeed of strike aircraft". These changes will make the skill at least somewhat useful. The current setup of the "Evasive Maneuver" Commander skill is so bad that it is essentially useless because "strafing" enemy Fighters can still easily still shoot returning Bombers down even when they have 75% more Hit Points. With the proposed changes to the skill the "Evasive Maneuver" Commander skill becomes a more attractive skill during both attack and return of the Bombers but it still significantly handicaps the Carrier Commander due to the lower speed of the Bombers.

 

 

COMMANDER CARRIER SKILL LEVEL 2 SOLUTION

Spoiler

 

The "Expert Rear Gunner" Commander skill is changed into "+10% to average damage per second of self-defense armament for aircraft with rear gunners" and "+10% to HP of strike aircraft" and "-10% to airspeed of strike aircraft". The current setup of the "Expert Rear Gunner" Commander skill is so bad that it is essentially useless because "strafing" Fighters can easily shoot Bombers down without the Bombers being able to even use their rear gunners. With the proposed changes to the skill the "Expert Rear Gunner" Commander skill becomes a more attractive skill during both attack and return of the Bombers but it still significantly handicaps the Carrier Commander due to the lower speed of the Bombers.

 

 

PLAYER BASE EDUCATION SOLUTION

Spoiler

 

Each WOWS player will get access to a new set of five Tier 6 level Carrier-only missions that can be completed only once by a player but which have no time limited completion period: (Mission #1) Shoot down 250 enemy Aircraft via Fighter "Strafing" with a completion award of 250 Golden Doubloons, (Mission #2) Hit 250 enemy Ships via manual attacks with Dive Bombs with a completion award of 250 Golden Doubloons, (Mission #3) Hit 250 enemy Ships via manual attacks with Torpedoes with a completion award of 250 Golden Doubloons, (Mission #4) Sink 250 enemy ships via manual attacks with Dive and/or Torpedo Bombers with a completion award of 250 Golden Doubloons, (Mission #5) Gather 25,000 Experience Points (XP) with any Tier 6 Carrier which will reward a special "Carrier Expert" badge and achievement to the player in addition to the final completion award of the new French Tier 6 Premium Carrier LA FAYETTE with a 10-skill point French Commander and a free Port Slot. The new French Carrier LA FAYETTE is an exact copy of the already existing WOWS Tier 6 Tech Tree USA Carrier INDEPENDENCE but she is equipped with an unique "Type 11" Permanent Premium Ship Camouflage ("-3% to surface detectability range", "+4% to maximum dispersion of shells fired by the enemy at your ship", "-10% to the cost of ship's post-battle service", "+50% to experience earned in the battle", "+100% Free experience earned in the battle"), has a total of 45x Aircraft on board (1x4-Aircraft Fighter-Squadron with a total of 15x "Grumman F6F-5 Hellcat" Tier 7 Fighters, 1x4-Aircraft Dive-Bomber-Squadron with a total of 15x "Curtiss SB2C Helldiver" Tier 8 Dive-Bombers that can be equipped with either 1x HE 1000 lb ANM65 Bomb or 1x AP 1000 lb Mk33 Bomb, 1x5-Aircraft Torpedo-Bomber-Squadron with a total of 15x "Curtiss SB2C Helldiver" Tier 8 Torpedo-Bombers each equipped with 1x Mk13 Mod. 0A Torpedo).

 

This solution will likely both appeal to all players of WOWS and draw more players to play Tier 6 Carriers because it allows them to win 1,000 golden Doubloons and in addition rewards an unique French Premium Aircraft Carrier which offers a slightly similar – but not as overpowered – setup and play as the Tier 7 Premium Carrier SAIPAN. As a result of the setup of the five missions the players will have to both learn and gain an understanding of the pros and cons of Carrier play and especially of manual Aircraft attacks, meaning manual Fighter "strafing" attacks and manual Bombing attacks with Dive and Torpedo Bombers. Currently there is no reward incentive whatsoever for dedicated Battleship, Cruiser and Destroyer players to learn and gain an understanding of the pros and cons of Carrier play in WOWS via direct Carrier play experience, and there is also no special reward incentive whatsoever for new and novice Carrier Commanders to learn and perfect manual Aircraft Attacks. The best way to entice WOWS players to at least gain a minimum level of actual Carrier game play experience ("educating" the player base in other words) is to offer a reward that is simply too good for them to pass up. The proposed LA FAYETTE French Carrier uses a ship model, ship camouflage assets and stats, aircraft assets and aircraft armament that currently already exists in WOWS, meaning that no new content needs to be created to add this authentic French Aircraft Carrier into WOWS as a unique and interesting reward ship.

 

Basic general information on the authentic French Carrier LA FAYETTE can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_aircraft_carrier_La_Fayette_(R96)

 

A colour image of the French Carrier LA FAYETTE in Mers-el-Kébir.

https://imgur.com/a/9r29LQa

oDNohK2.jpg

 

A colour image of a French Flottille 1F-Aeronavale  - Grumman F6F-5 'Hellcat' like the ones that were used aboard LA FAYETTE

https://imgur.com/a/YqqbhTX

eHDcAMK.jpg

 

A colour image of a French Flottille 3F-Aeronavale  - Curtiss SB2C 'Helldiver' like the ones that were used aboard LA FAYETTE

https://imgur.com/a/2i7Fgle

U9urdNA.jpg

 

 

TIER 5 CARRIER SOLUTION

Spoiler

 

Tier 5 Carriers will never be matched with Tier 6 Carriers in matches. This will prevent new and novice Carrier Commanders in Tier 5 Carriers from facing highly skilled Carrier Commanders in Tier 6 Carriers. This solution is necessary because Tier 6 Carriers can make manual attacks in WOWS (Fighter "strafing" and manual Bombing attacks) which is something that Tier 5 Carriers cannot do. A new and novice Tier 5 Carrier Commander simply cannot fight highly skilled Carrier Commander in a Tier 6 Carrier on even remotely fair terms which more often than not leads to humiliating and morale shattering defeats for the Tier 5 Carrier Commander which is bad for "recruiting" and "retaining" of Carrier Commanders in WOWS. The current matching of Tier 5 Carriers with Tier 6 Carriers simply favours highly skilled Carrier Commanders in Tier 6 Carriers too much to the extreme. This solution increases the "comfort level" of Tier 5 Carrier play (especially for new and novice players) and it does not negatively impact on Tier 6 Carrier play.

 

 

CARRIER-AA DIVISION SOLUTION

Spoiler

 

Tier 6 to 10 Carriers are not allowed to be part of a Division. This solution prevent the extremely effective use of Carrier-AA Divisions which consist of higher skilled Carrier Commanders and higher skilled Commanders in battleships, cruisers or destroyers with a high Anti-Aircraft rating (including mounted Defensive Fire AA and with their ship Commanders specialized in the Anti-Aircraft role) to more or less instantly decide the outcome of match when they are faced by an enemy Carrier that is not in such a Division. The Carrier-AA Divisions with higher skilled Commanders generally have a win rate and effectiveness that is far above that of the individual players in those Divisions when these players do not operate in a Carrier-AA Division. As a result these Carrier-AA Divisions with higher skilled Commanders basically upset game balance for both fleets in a match. I do not propose this solution lightly, since one of the most fun elements of WOWS is playing with friends in a Division, especially when in a Carrier-AA Division. On the other hand I have to acknowledge that the Carrier-AA Divisions when they consist of highly skilled Commanders are generally bad for game play balance for all players on both fleets that take part in a match in which such a Carrier-AA Division with highly skilled Commanders is opposed by a new and novice or even fairly skilled Carrier Commander.

 

 

NON-USA BATTLESHIP AP BOMB VULNERABILITY SOLUTION

Spoiler

 

Fix the (hidden mechanism) deck armour values of USA Battleships so that they too have the same vulnerability to AP Bombs that the Battleships of other nations have been given in WOWS when these USA Battleships have more or less the same horizontal deck armour protection levels of non-USA Battleships. This mainly concerns the Tech Tree USA Battleships IOWA and MONTANA and the Premium USA Battleships ALABAMA, MASSACHUSETTS and MISSOURI.

 

Since the (hidden mechanism) deck armour values of these five USA Battleships makes them considerably more powerful in terms of horizontal deck armour protection level against AP Bombs in WOWS the logical thing to do is to bring their horizontal deck armour protection level down to the level of comparable non-USA Battleships in WOWS. It is not a viable solution to increase the deck armour protection level of non-USA Battleships to the AP Bomb resistance that these five USA Battleships enjoy because that would essentially make AP Bombers useless against Tier 8, 9 and 10. Currently some non-USA Battleships in WOWS have been intentionally made particularly vulnerable to AP Bombs (TIRPITZ for example) even when their horizontal deck armour levels are more or less that same as those of certain USA Battleships and even when these ships demonstrated a real world resistance to AP Bombs (TIRPITZ). Some of these vulnerable non-USA Battleships are among the most popular Battleships in WOWS (for example the British, Italian and German ones), which does not make sense from a game play balancing point of view and also reinforces a negative image of Carriers for many Battleship players. Premium USA Battleships should not get a preferential treatment over non-USA Battleships simply to drive up sales. And punishing Battleships players for not choosing a Tier 8-10 USA (Premium) Battleship when facing AP Bombers creates a "no real choice" situation which indirectly negatively impacts on the image of Carrier players as well. This is because Battleship players that prefer non-USA Battleships for whatever reason will continue to have an increasingly negative opinion of Carriers when their favourite non-USA Battleship is the main target of AP Bombs because USA Battleships are generally avoided by skilled Carrier players.

 

 

 

Edited by Widar_Thule
  • Cool 8
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,244
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,727 posts
9,120 battles

You put a lot of work into this and it would take a lot of wasted work to implement this when the revamp is scheduled for this year although sliding to the first quarter of next year is not unlikely. Have patience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
472
[QNA]
[QNA]
Members
1,838 posts
5,881 battles

I'd rather have a long term solution, what that means? Wish I knew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,364 battles

I very much like many of these solutions, besides concentrated AA for all ships, and DFAA for all DDs. As you've mentioned, players have a highly effective arsenal of skills, it's their fault for not choosing them. Also, many dDs at high tiers have a 30-60 AA rating, which translates to about 120-240 when DD DFAA is active, which is extreme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,325
[CUTE]
Members
5,202 posts
3,461 battles
21 minutes ago, megadeux said:

I very much like many of these solutions, besides concentrated AA for all ships, and DFAA for all DDs. As you've mentioned, players have a highly effective arsenal of skills, it's their fault for not choosing them. Also, many dDs at high tiers have a 30-60 AA rating, which translates to about 120-240 when DD DFAA is active, which is extreme.

DD AA is a laugh man. Or would you like it to require even less of an investment on the part of the CV player to deal with them? It's already a pretty decent free lunch in most cases provided the CV knows how to drop. Impossible torp spreads are a thing, and there is only so much turning to be done when a lack of DFAA doesn't panic drops. Besides, what threat is a DD to a CV? Often the only time a DD kills a CV is near the end when it's all but lost anyway.

Just spent a few matches in T7 with some Saipans and Hiryus. That Hiryu captain had no issues deleting whomever he pleased, had a Kaga doing the same earlier. Kami R? Gone. Gremmy? gone? If you have zero AA you are truly at the mercy of the CV players skill level in all instances. 

If you're having issues with CV as a whole, it's not CV. They are wicked strong provided you can play the class, not much different than DD. Are there stinkers? Everyone gets stinkers.

 

Edited by Canadatron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
745
[HYDRO]
Members
1,600 posts
3,753 battles
26 minutes ago, megadeux said:

I very much like many of these solutions, besides concentrated AA for all ships, and DFAA for all DDs. As you've mentioned, players have a highly effective arsenal of skills, it's their fault for not choosing them. Also, many dDs at high tiers have a 30-60 AA rating, which translates to about 120-240 when DD DFAA is active, which is extreme.

I would prefer to have minimal DD AA dps and the panic effect of the DFAA, than some extreme figures. The real problem with DDs is how easy it is to crosstorp them. Chances are depending on how agile the DD  that you will score a torpedo hit, effectively removing 30%+ of it's hp without much chance of countering.

Edited by warheart1992
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,364 battles
2 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

I would prefer to have minimal DD AA dps and the panic effect of the DFAA, than some extreke figures. The real problem with DDs is how easy it is to crosstorp them. Chances are depending on how agile the DD  that you will score a torpedo hit, effectively removing 30%+ of it's hp without much chance of countering.

That's what I would prefer. The issue with DD DFAA Is that you give an impossibly maneuverable target massive AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,389
[RLGN]
Members
8,309 posts
17,365 battles
1 hour ago, Widar_Thule said:

"Strafing" down enemy Aircraft is the part that I enjoy the most in the current WOWS Carrier play so this is a solution that I do not propose lightly.

So bullying and abusing lesser skilled carrier drivers is a good thing?

Strafing is the worst 'click to win' aspect in this game; probably more responsible for driving players out of carriers than anything else.

Easiest solution? REMOVE IT. (Along with manual attacks.)

Most of this entire debate is because WG stupidly gave carriers manual attacks in the first place. Which meant murderdrops; which brought on strafing and insane AA; and started the entire downhill slide.

5 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

I would prefer to have minimal DD AA dps and the panic effect of the DFAA, than some extreke figures. The real problem with DDs is how easy it is to crosstorp them. Chances are depending on how agile the DD  that you will score a torpedo hit, effectively removing 30%+ of it's hp without much chance of countering.

...and if a cruiser or battleship blaps you from far enough away the result is the same.

Edited by Estimated_Prophet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,364 battles
1 minute ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

So bullying and abusing lesser skilled carrier drivers is a good thing?

Strafing is the worst 'click to win' aspect in this game; probably more responsible fior driving player out of carriers than anything else.

Easiest solution? REMOVE IT. (Along with manual attacks.)

Most of this entire debate is because WG stupidly gave carriers manual attacks in the first place. Which meant murderdrops; which brought on strafing and insane AA; and started the entire downhill slide.

...and if a cruiser or battleship blaps you from far enough away the result is the same.

 

When I play my akizuki and delete a low skill DD with AP, is that abusing or bullying? 

Strafe is a skill based mechanic, it's not easy, but it's just as much skill based as a BB on BB duel, or a DD on DD duel. Strafing is an interactive way for CVs to interact with each other. Removing manual is like forcing ships to use only secondaries, albeit fairly long range secondaries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
745
[HYDRO]
Members
1,600 posts
3,753 battles
7 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

...and if a cruiser or battleship blaps you from far enough away the result is the same.

In the time it takes for the shells to travel a long distance you can turn, slow down, smoke up, open engine boost, show broaside  to force overpens if fired by BBs. In addition, dispersion plays an important role in how many shells will hit, whereas a well coordinated manual drop can reduce RNG quite a bit. 

The worst thing when I get rekt by CVs is that I know they do what it takes to win and I applaud it, and on the other hand get immensely annoyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
30 posts
960 battles

The current CV in the game is fine, nothing is wrong.  I find it funny how all the people trying to create an issue don't even play CV.   

Just leave it alone and find some other topic.  If it aint broke don't fix it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,364 battles

TL:DR;

Ships that screw up are punished and lazy players are beaten by skilled players. I really don't see a lot of issues. CVs are the ultimate counter to bad positioning. This game is built around positioning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
610
[OPRAH]
[OPRAH]
Beta Testers
3,903 posts
12,634 battles

@Widar_Thule Well that was quite a read. The only real problem with CVs is the multi tasking in the higher tiers when it seems one has more groups in the air than fingers to keep up with. I have US cvs from tier 4 to 8 and find them rather enjoyable in co op but I am dismal with them in random. However this Aegis Scenario is quite a gem for using my tier 6.

I understand that a rework is in the near future and that means we will all have to re learn cv play both offense and Defense.

Also you may be better served by sending this to one of the WG personnel if you seriously want it considered!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
139
[-AH-]
[-AH-]
Members
664 posts
3,398 battles

As a CV player, I agree with the OP, little balance fixes are what CVs need, not dumbing them down and taking all the fun out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,244
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,727 posts
9,120 battles
1 hour ago, TheCricketMan said:

The current CV in the game is fine, nothing is wrong.  I find it funny how all the people trying to create an issue don't even play CV.   

Just leave it alone and find some other topic.  If it aint broke don't fix it.

You have exactly zero matches in CV's how would you know they are fine?

8 minutes ago, Sir_Orrin said:

As a CV player, I agree with the OP, little balance fixes are what CVs need, not dumbing them down and taking all the fun out of it.

They have been doing little balance fixes since the beginning, they are still broken, and the population is dropping. What is said about doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,389
[RLGN]
Members
8,309 posts
17,365 battles
1 hour ago, megadeux said:

Strafing is an interactive way for CVs to interact with each other.

Strafing is a mechanic forced on players because WG needed some way to counter the manual attack murderdrops by torpedo squads they stupidly gave carriers in the first place.

Wiuthout manual attacks it is an unneccesary mechanic.

Interact with each other? It's either a slaughter, or a dance where two players waste time trying to click each other to death and thus decide an entire match, instead of doing what carriers should be doing, spotting and attacking ships.

1 hour ago, megadeux said:

When I play my akizuki and delete a low skill DD with AP, is that abusing or bullying? 

That destroyer stands more of a chance than a CV player's air squads do.

Edited by Estimated_Prophet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
139
[-AH-]
[-AH-]
Members
664 posts
3,398 battles
3 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

 

They have been doing little balance fixes since the beginning, they are still broken, and the population is dropping. What is said about doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results?

I mean personally, I'm a good CV player so I personally have no real problems with CVs besides the clearly broken fighter combat. What people don't realize is AA is really powerful, and as long as you are not all alone, we CVs have to be really careful with our approach or our planes are toast. All you guys see is ships getting hit by bombers, you don't see the 2-3 minutes of prep it takes to set up that run without losing all your planes. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,389
[RLGN]
Members
8,309 posts
17,365 battles
6 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

They have been doing little balance fixes since the beginning, they are still broken, and the population is dropping.

Balance fixes...

translation; making carriers HARDER to use. (Strafe, more AA, more DF, even more AA, faster rudder shifts...) It isn't a surprise the population is dropping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
772
[ARS]
Beta Testers
2,266 posts
1,876 battles

The Concentrate Fire consumable would be garbage.  As it can't shoot down anything all the CV has to do is wait it out, then strike the BB/CL/CA once it is on cooldown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
201
[ONAVY]
Members
789 posts
6,333 battles

DUMB --->   "OP" "Strafing" down enemy Aircraft is the part that I enjoy the most in the current WOWS Carrier play so this is a solution that I do not propose lightly. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
263
[RKN]
Members
1,634 posts
3,364 battles
31 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

Strafing is a mechanic forced on players because WG needed some way to counter the manual attack murderdrops by torpedo squads they stupidly gave carriers in the first place.

Wiuthout manual attacks it is an unneccesary mechanic.

Interact with each other? It's either a slaughter, or a dance where two players waste time trying to click each other to death and thus decide an entire match, instead of doing what carriers should be doing, spotting and attacking ships.

That destroyer stands more of a chance than a CV player's air squads do.

What? I mean, I find it a fun challenge, so maybe I'm biased, but don't we want a more engaging way to do fighter combat then click and wait for RNG to decide? 

Strafing is absolutely high skill, and a lot of work goes into perfecting it, much like a DD on DD duel. Sure it's hard to keep up with, but that's kind of the point. 

Manual drops are like a CV's main battery, they are the primary way of doing damage and are reasonably balanced. 

And no, that DD stands the same chance the enemy CV does. This is a game of skill, not a game meant to console those who refuse to learn and are crushed as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,244
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,727 posts
9,120 battles
58 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

Balance fixes...

translation; making carriers HARDER to use. (Strafe, more AA, more DF, even more AA, faster rudder shifts...) It isn't a surprise the population is dropping.

It has been past time for a big CV rethink for a long time as it gets more and more obvious that additional fixes have an almost 100% chance of not fixing anything and another almost 100% chance of causing additional problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×