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

cv vs cv mechanic are missing. lets discuss...

75 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

478
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
1,067 posts
9,668 battles

CVs need to see each others planes as threats instead of flying past each other as they target fish in a barrel.  I feel the temporary consumable is laughable (too short a duration and too static on the map). 

plane vs plane mechanics. Lets discuss some ideas here... 

  • Cool 7
  • Boring 3
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
388
[INR]
Members
1,225 posts
4,060 battles

If CVs could tell Fighters to escort a ship like a Catapult Aircraft, that would alleviate a lot of the current issues. It's not the ideal fix, but it's one that can be implemented quickly.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
167
[RED]
[RED]
Members
279 posts
12,449 battles

How about fighter escort, follows the attack/ bomber sqdn around and will attack if reds are nearby (within 2km or so). This will also work as distraction for ship AA and ship fighters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
543
[S0L0]
Beta Testers
1,704 posts
4,097 battles

I think that the consumable is a good idea, but the duration could be nudged up a bit.

Or maybe something like a cloud of fighters loitering high above, and when you click the consumable, the portion of the fighter cloud roars down to do a strafing pass on whatever area you've clicked on.

It could exhaust and regenerate similar to how the carrier's bombers exhaust and regenerate.

It lets WG use mechanics they already have in place, and a carrier player can have a less random fighter attack, practically no duration but it attacks the bomber squad that the CV player wants to attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,767
[SALVO]
Members
24,197 posts
24,546 battles
35 minutes ago, skillztowin said:

CVs need to see each others planes as threats instead of flying past each other as they target fish in a barrel.  I feel the temporary consumable is laughable (too short a duration and too static on the map). 

plane vs plane mechanics. Lets discuss some ideas here... 

No.  Just no.  Allowing plane vs plane combat is what made the RTS CV model such a cluster (bleep), particularly due to strafing.  It's VASTLY better the way it is now, rather than in RTS!!!

  • Cool 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,767
[SALVO]
Members
24,197 posts
24,546 battles
30 minutes ago, Gasboy said:

I think that the consumable is a good idea, but the duration could be nudged up a bit.

Or maybe something like a cloud of fighters loitering high above, and when you click the consumable, the portion of the fighter cloud roars down to do a strafing pass on whatever area you've clicked on.

It could exhaust and regenerate similar to how the carrier's bombers exhaust and regenerate.

It lets WG use mechanics they already have in place, and a carrier player can have a less random fighter attack, practically no duration but it attacks the bomber squad that the CV player wants to attack.

Actually, to some degree, I think that that's pretty much what the fighter consumable represents.  Calling down planes from their combat air patrol (i.e. CAP) to defend a certain area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
722
[WOLFC]
Members
1,752 posts
9,279 battles

The fighter drop consumable is pretty darn effective  -   I've seen 2 CV's keep a running screen going over a couple of vulnerable but pushing/capping DD's for minutes on end.

 

It's not there to kill, its there to keep your opponent from killing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,743
[WOLF7]
Members
5,113 posts
11 minutes ago, Crucis said:

No.  Just no.  Allowing plane vs plane combat is what made the RTS CV model such a cluster (bleep), particularly due to strafing.  It's VASTLY better the way it is now, rather than in RTS!!!

Exactly.  CV vs CV fighter battles *was* the problem with RTS CVs, that and the fact that the planes were in so many places at once.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
103
Beta Testers
423 posts
2 minutes ago, Anonymous50 said:

The fighter drop consumable is pretty darn effective  -   I've seen 2 CV's keep a running screen going over a couple of vulnerable but pushing/capping DD's for minutes on end.

 

It's not there to kill, its there to keep your opponent from killing.

I agree....
When i've been playing CV I will drop a fighter and it keeps the other CV away from the area. And if the other cv drops one...it keeps me out of the area. I've also noticed fighters in general from any ship is painfully effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,092 posts
12 minutes ago, Crucis said:

No.  Just no.  Allowing plane vs plane combat is what made the RTS CV model such a cluster (bleep), particularly due to strafing.  It's VASTLY better the way it is now, rather than in RTS!!!

Agree. Plane vs. Plane did the first iteration in. Let's not repeat

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,767
[SALVO]
Members
24,197 posts
24,546 battles
4 minutes ago, mavfin87 said:

Exactly.  CV vs CV fighter battles *was* the problem with RTS CVs, that and the fact that the planes were in so many places at once.

 

4 minutes ago, Wombatmetal said:

Agree. Plane vs. Plane did the first iteration in. Let's not repeat

 

I wouldn't necessarily mind if the total number of charges on the fighter consumable was a fair bit higher, I suppose.  (Haven't thought this through.)  It might also be nice if one didn't have to fly your bombers over the spot where you wanted to "place" a fighter squad, though I suppose that that could be overpowered.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,303
Members
2,628 posts
4,235 battles

No.  You're looking at it wrong,  CV versus CV ads another layer other ships don't have to worry about.  One of the intended goals of the rework was to reduce things of that nature.  At the moment CV's focus primarily on surface ships,  just like everyone else.  Leave it be.

I will say that I wish the fighter consumable were a BIT more effective though.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
330
[WOLFC]
Members
685 posts
24,954 battles
48 minutes ago, skillztowin said:

CVs need to see each others planes as threats instead of flying past each other as they target fish in a barrel.  I feel the temporary consumable is laughable (too short a duration and too static on the map). 

plane vs plane mechanics. Lets discuss some ideas here... 

It seems to me one of the objectives of the CV rework was to remove CV vs. CV mechanics from the game. That was the source of much gnashing of teeth in the pre-rework days. A 'good' CV player could deplane a 'not so good' CV player and then have free reign to wreak havoc on the enemy team. Wasn't this where complaints of a CV skill gap came from? Wasn't this why strafing was removed from tier 4 and 5 CVs?

With the new game mechanics, I think the effects of a skill gap between two CV players wouldn't be as pronounced as it was pre-rework, at least for the majority of the opposing team because of the reduction in alpha damage. CVs can no longer one shot full health battleships unless they get a detonation. Still, I think the lack of CV vs. CV mechanics is entirely intentional and it will be a hard sell to convince WG to re-introduce them into WoWS even to a small degree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
947
[SI-YC]
Beta Testers
2,343 posts
5,943 battles
1 minute ago, Rumple010 said:

It seems to me one of the objectives of the CV rework was to remove CV vs. CV mechanics from the game. That was the source of much gnashing of teeth in the pre-rework days. A 'good' CV player could deplane a 'not so good' CV player and then have free reign to wreak havoc on the enemy team. Wasn't this where complaints of a CV skill gap came from? Wasn't this why strafing was removed from tier 4 and 5 CVs?

With the new game mechanics, I think the effects of a skill gap between two CV players wouldn't be as pronounced as it was pre-rework, at least for the majority of the opposing team because of the reduction in alpha damage. CVs can no longer one shot full health battleships unless they get a detonation. Still, I think the lack of CV vs. CV mechanics is entirely intentional and it will be a hard sell to convince WG to re-introduce them into WoWS even to a small degree.

The problem is that CV vs CV is the only thing that can keep a CV in check.  CV vs CV is problematic but, without CV vs CV, CVs are game breaking.  This is not rocket science and I have to think the devs understand this.  My guess is that someone told them to ship it anyway.  No matter what they did with CVs they would be in trouble and, at least this way, they can sell new premiums.

Caveat Emptor.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
783 posts

You can still have good back and forth fighterish gameplay.  I had a game last night where us 4 CV were all balled up dropping fighters to protect each other as the last 5 ships in the match went at it.  2 Lexingtons vs my saipan and shoukaku.  My team lost just before i could finish off one of the two cv.   But yes we lack any real means of defending our allies, even as good as that one battle was it still was not truly impactful.

When we deploy a fighter it should last longer and be able to be ordered to guard a ship or spot on the map.   Right now fighters are kinda like a dumb bomb just drop it and forget it.  CV are unbalanced due to AA being so wonky in power between ships.  Either the CV has fangs and seems unstoppable or its a toothless vegan tiger all depending on tier and AA.  I got a match the other night that was nothing but woosters/minos/USN bb in my saipan.  I just went "well (@!*" not much i can do here.

WG needs to rescale AA dmg so that its a straight line progression as you tier up not a massive up curve at T8-10.   T3-7 AA needs to at least be moderately effective, and T8-10 needs reworked so that each ship feels like it can at least contribute to the AA fight.  Problem is WG used AA as a balancing point for ships, so Musashi could dominate non cv matchs but get slapped in CV ones.  AA should not be a hard balancing point, it should be something all ships have a decent amount of at tier for a modicum of self defense so they arent helplessly slaughtered.

People need to stop hating on the CV players and look at WGs idea of how they balance ships and AA.

Edited by JToney3449

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,872
[SIM]
Members
4,649 posts
7,770 battles

There's nothing wrong with the current CV plane versus plane mechanics. CVs can deploy interceptors to intercept enemy rocket/bomb planes, that's all the more that is needed. There might be room for the fighters to be tweaked, but there's no need to overhaul that interaction on a fundamental level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,299
[VCRUZ]
Members
4,046 posts
9,180 battles

I dont think this is going to happen. One of the intentions of the rework was to reduce the skill gap, WG wants to make CVs easier/simpler to play. Let me remind you that one of the issues with the old RTS system, is that good players would wipe bad players by killing all thier planes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,848
[WOLFG]
Members
27,102 posts
7,217 battles
1 hour ago, CommodoreKang said:

The problem is that CV vs CV is the only thing that can keep a CV in check.  CV vs CV is problematic but, without CV vs CV, CVs are game breaking.  This is not rocket science and I have to think the devs understand this. 

Of course they understand it. That's why CVs don't have anywhere near the alpha they used to, because the CVs can't keep each other in check.

And they don't keep each other in check, because we've been down that road already, it was the cause of the skill disparity predetermining games.

As much as you hate CVs, how would you like it if they were only a problem for your team, and not the enemy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
947
[SI-YC]
Beta Testers
2,343 posts
5,943 battles
3 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

Of course they understand it. That's why CVs don't have anywhere near the alpha they used to, because the CVs can't keep each other in check.

And they don't keep each other in check, because we've been down that road already, it was the cause of the skill disparity predetermining games.

As much as you hate CVs, how would you like it if they were only a problem for your team, and not the enemy?

It's as much a problem for the enemy as it is for my team.  It's problematic for literally everyone.  Except the CV.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
97
[HIT]
Members
172 posts
9,431 battles
2 hours ago, Crucis said:

No.  Just no.  Allowing plane vs plane combat is what made the RTS CV model such a cluster (bleep), particularly due to strafing.  It's VASTLY better the way it is now, rather than in RTS!!!

Strafing was the ONLY reason why fighter combat in RTS was a major issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,848
[WOLFG]
Members
27,102 posts
7,217 battles
1 minute ago, CommodoreKang said:

It's as much a problem for the enemy as it is for my team.  It's problematic for literally everyone.  Except the CV.  

If CVs can use fighters to shut each other down, it's a problem for the other team, because the team with the good CV player won't have to deal with planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,848
[WOLFG]
Members
27,102 posts
7,217 battles
4 minutes ago, HQ_21 said:

Strafing was the ONLY reason why fighter combat in RTS was a major issue.

This is true. But any fighter system that benefits more from skill and thought than the current one will cause the same issue.

It wasn't really strafing per se that was the issue, it was that a skilled player could render his team immune from air attack, as well as making it easier for him to strike the enemy.

Edited by Skpstr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
947
[SI-YC]
Beta Testers
2,343 posts
5,943 battles
Just now, Skpstr said:

If CVs can use fighters to shut each other down, it's a problem for the other team, because the team with the good CV player won't have to deal with planes.

That is a problem.  Another problem is both teams having to deal with planes the entire match with almost nothing available for them to stop the planes from being a problem for them.

So, the counter was indeed problematic.  Taking out the counter removes that problem and creates a much larger and broader problem.  Because as we've discussed, CV damage is just one part of the CV equation.  Spotting and disrupting concealment is another.  The game is already so passive because the damage is so extreme and unforgiving.  Concealment is how the game allows you to mitigate that extreme damage environment and get things done.  Having CVs on both sides flying all over the map revealing people trying to get things done can only do one thing.  Make the game more passive. 

The only way to break that cycle is to limit the disruption caused by the CVs.  IE some form of counter beyond the ridiculousness that is AA.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,743
[WOLF7]
Members
5,113 posts
14 minutes ago, CommodoreKang said:

The only way to break that cycle is to limit the disruption caused by the CVs.  IE some form of counter beyond the ridiculousness that is AA.

You should just come out and admit it.  You want them gone.  

I can respect that, but, otoh, you shouldn't be holding your breath waiting for it to happen.  It's not coming anytime soon, if ever.

You're talking to a wall, and the wall doesn't care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
947
[SI-YC]
Beta Testers
2,343 posts
5,943 battles
3 minutes ago, mavfin87 said:

You should just come out and admit it.  You want them gone.  

I can respect that, but, otoh, you shouldn't be holding your breath waiting for it to happen.  It's not coming anytime soon, if ever.

You're talking to a wall, and the wall doesn't care.

I just want a no-cv option.  Then you can do what you want with cvs.  The wall doesn't care but the awesome thing is that there are quite a few people who do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×