The Problems With CVs, and How to Fix Them

[XpliCT_]

Let me preface this discussion by saying that I have limited experience playing CVs post rework.  I have not played them, am not very good in them, and have next to no intention to get better at them.  They are bland, and boring for me to play when compared to a surface ship, and there are a few reasons for that, that I will try to address.  I will be talking exclusively about T10 ships, as that is what I play, and I'd imagine most people grind for those.  Discussions are welcome, and if you think I'm completely wrong, let me know.  

1.  Assured First Strike

The first, and potentially main, issue with CVs is their ability to strike ANY target in the game, at least once.  Regardless of what ship you are in, what commander spec you are, and how you are positioned, a CV is practically guaranteed at least a single strike on your ship.  There is, at most, a single exception to this, and that would be a full AA spec Minotaur that is kiting away.  Plane kills are extremely non-linear currently, and while the AA damage change on PTS will address this to a certain extent, it will not fix the core issue.  Attack squads are simply too large to shoot down in a short period of time.  Compound this with things like AA now being blocked by islands, which isn't an inherently bad thing, slingshotting, and the unreliability of flack, and you simply cannot deal enough damage quick enough to kill an entire squad.  On more than one occasion, a Hakaryu has been able to rush my AA spec DM, in ranked, through fighters, DFAA and proper sector management, and get a drop off for multiple citadels.  Once the planes pass, most, if not all, will die, but by that point the damage is done, and the CV will regenerate planes.  I will not be able to regenerate the HP that I lost.  

A potential fix for this issue would be smaller plane squads that will limit the amount of health in a single CV squadron.  Due to having smaller squads, a CV would be able to risk his planes without taking as much punishment for losing the squad, while surface ships that have formidable AA suites will be able to fend off attacks.  I believe this would be the best route to take, as it would be the easiest to balance.  Due to less strikes per wave, planes may have to have a higher speed, but that's easily tweekable.  

 

2.  CV Interaction

Pre-Rework CVs had interaction every second of the game, with fighter control being a key to determining a good CV player.  This led to a skill gap, where a Unicum CV could virtually shut down and eliminate an average player.  Part of the rework sought to reduce this skill gap.  In theory, removing the interaction between CV players would narrow the skill gap, but in practice, it has led to less of a limit on what a CV can do.  It has allowed a CV to focus specifically on farming damage, and while fighters do have slight area denial currently, they don't do nearly enough.  The outline on the map is extremely easy to avoid, which makes the fighters nothing more than a nussiance.  This has taken away one of the major "counters" to attack aircraft; another CV's air control.  No longer can a CV zone out another, nor can a friendly CV truly stop another from attacking something.  Yes, the current iteration of fighters will kill off the entire squad of whatever it is attacking, but the first attack will still be there.  

My solution to this would be to give CVs the ability to control a fighter squad manually, much like current squads.  This would let them have air control over a certain area of the map, without focusing on damage output.  Air supremacy was a key facet of CV play pre-rework, and should return in this iteration of CVs.

 

3.  Spotting 

This is a hotly debated subject, but CV spotting is currently an issue to DDs.  DDs have basically no recourse against CVs, and while that was also true before the rework, friendly CVs could actually do something about it.  Part of this problem would be solved with fighter control that I talked about in my previous point.  I'm not entirely sure what could be done about CVs and spotting, as they had this ability pre-rework as well, the largest difference pre and post rework is the ability for a CV to screen for his team.  I'm not entirely sure what you could do about unabated spotting that would make it balanced for both the CV and surface ships.  

 

4.  Plane Regeneration

While plane regeneration does have a limit, and it does incentiveze people to use different squads, it is an inherently flawed mechanic; there is no downside to losing an entire squadron of a specific plane.  With most carrier reserves, if you recall a single attack wave after taking off, there are no repercussions to losing the remainder of the squad.  T10 CVs will be able to field nearly full squads for the entire duration of the game, and with proper plane management, can send out the same squad ad-infinitum.  If they lose that entire squad, there is nothing stopping them from sending out the same one again, instantly.  Assuring a nearly full squad at all times is as simple as wasting a drop when you take off, thus sending the planes back to the carrier.  

A squad cool-down timer would greatly help with this.  The timer wouldn't have to be long, maybe 20 seconds from the last attack, but something would be better than what we currently have.  

 

These points are just some of the issues that are currently in game.  There are balance issues both ways, but this post is mostly focusing on the surface ship side of it.  Please, keep the arguments constructive, I don't want this to get locked right off the bat.

[Learux]

I think every DD player should get a fighter squadron that he/she controls from the CV. 

The constant harassment and lack of counter play is just unfun.

[CAPTMUDDXX]

@XpliCT_ The problem with CVs is the garbage rework. The fix is to revert to the previous system and adjust it to meet the stated reasons/goals that prompted this garbage rework.

[XpliCT_]

19 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

@XpliCT_ The problem with CVs is the garbage rework. The fix is to revert to the previous system and adjust it to meet the stated reasons/goals that prompted this garbage rework.

We both know WG won't do that.  

[HeadSplit120]

After all the nerfs CV's have received you still have a problem with them.  I don't know but maybe it isn't the class that's the problem but maybe the lack of ability or the refusal to adjust your playstyle while facing up against a CV.

Downvote me all you like but at this point any "How to fix CV's" should just be titled "I want CV's deleted/removed from the game."

[XpliCT_]

3 minutes ago, HeadSplit120 said:

After all the nerfs CV's have received you still have a problem with them.  I don't know but maybe it isn't the class that's the problem but maybe the lack of ability or the refusal to adjust your playstyle while facing up against a CV.

Downvote me all you like but at this point any "How to fix CV's" should just be titled "I want CV's deleted/removed from the game."

Not once did I say anything about wanting CVs deleted or removed.  I addressed concerns with them that I have experienced in game, and concerns that I have heard from other players.  Most of what I listed as the solutions are minor changes, and most of which could be implemented extremely easily.  I even proposed buffs to compensate for certain things.  The fact is that they are not fun to play against in a competitive environment, and ranked has proven that to me.  

[eagle_lance]

12 minutes ago, HeadSplit120 said:

After all the nerfs CV's have received you still have a problem with them.  I don't know but maybe it isn't the class that's the problem but maybe the lack of ability or the refusal to adjust your playstyle while facing up against a CV.

Downvote me all you like but at this point any "How to fix CV's" should just be titled "I want CV's deleted/removed from the 

When the only counterplay is blobbing up there's an issue. Pre-rework there was multiple counterplays to a cv strike- Def aa, catapult fighters, cv fighters, strong aa skills the coincided with consistent aa performance. Anyone of these could effectively negate or simply slow a strike down and the cv player would suffer negative consequences for striking into high aa. Now, there's no cool down on plane launching and aa is so inconsistent that a single strike will get through. If properly managed a cv will never run out of planes. Any other ship class has counters and negative consequences for bad play. A Cv's only worry is what ship to strike next. 

[Edgecase]

First strike is a tricky thing. If you have the ability to deny a CV a first strike, it means you theoretically have the ability to deny the CV any strikes at all. There's not really a middle ground on that particular point. The current system tries to strike a compromise in which CVs can always get a first strike, even into heavy AA, but plane losses will IN PRINCIPLE mean that they can only do this a small number of times per game before being deplaned.

Second -- and I think this is where your not having personal experience with CVs is showing -- is that many of the balance issues that we're currently seeing are the direct consequence of WG not addressing a number of extremely grey area issues with plane behavior, including the techniques known as fast evac, F-spam, and slingshotting. Players who play the game the "regular way" by flying in and flying out take probably 3x the losses of players who know and use these techniques. The ability of CV players to dramatically decrease their plane losses is the reason people think planes are invincible and unlimited. BUT, on the other hand, completely taking away the ability of CV players to mitigate losses through skilled play also seems like an anti-pattern, so there can't be nothing either.

Spotting is a problem, but much less than it used to be.  However, without skill-based AA or making DDs virtually undetectable by air, there's not a lot of design space to work with here. I see the AA rework as the best chance to make some progress here.

[Anonymous50]

OP puts out a constructive

1 hour ago, XpliCT_ said:

3.  Spotting 

This is a hotly debated subject, but CV spotting is currently an issue to DDs.  DDs have basically no recourse against CVs,...

 

 

Hotly debated?

More like one group screaming that their world is falling apart & the rest of us shaking our heads about that overreaction.

 

The only real spotting change 8.0 brought to me as a DD main is that I have to spend the first 45 seconds staying near a decent aa ship.   After that,  I'm pretty much free the rest of the game.    I would have preferred the change that would have made CV's wait 30 seconds but can understand why WG dropped that in order to look at the whole "where everybody starts" aspect.

 

During a game, if a CV wants to perma spot me, they are wasting resources on me - this hasn't changed from pre 8.0.   Right now that is happening 1 out of 20 games.

 

If you are in Tier VI & above running a DD,  you  have to have a 10 point captain & run concealment - again this hasn't changed from pre 8.0.

 

As for no recourse -  DD's recourse for CV"s is the same as for any ship that spots them - make it not worth the spotting ships while to keep doing that.

[ThisIsClassic]

23 minutes ago, Edgecase said:

First strike is a tricky thing. If you have the ability to deny a CV a first strike, it means you theoretically have the ability to deny the CV any strikes at all. There's not really a middle ground on that particular point. The current system tries to strike a compromise in which CVs can always get a first strike, even into heavy AA, but plane losses will IN PRINCIPLE mean that they can only do this a small number of times per game before being deplaned.

I'm hoping the change to how planes and squads are damaged will change this in that the CV will still be able to strike but it will be a reduced squad if the ship's AA is strong enough to knock down one or more planes before they drop.  

[HeadSplit120]

16 minutes ago, eagle_lance said:

Pre-rework there was multiple counterplays to a cv strike- Def aa, catapult fighters, cv fighters, strong aa skills the coincided with consistent aa performance.

They are still viable.  If I send a squadron against a ship with catapult fighters up in time the other aircraft will be shot down.  DFAA will cause enough damage to the aircraft that after the first initial strike the planes are low on health and need to be sent back, preventing any additional attack runs against you and even a ship with low AA.  Most players get the impression that DFAA isn't working because they aren't getting all those planes kills.

 

19 minutes ago, eagle_lance said:

Anyone of these could effectively negate or simply slow a strike down and the cv player would suffer negative consequences for striking into high aa. Now, there's no cool down on plane launching and aa is so inconsistent that a single strike will get through.

When we send a squadron into a group of ships with high AA we do suffer consequences.  Why do you think we dump the first couple attacks into the ocean?  After we launch a successful attack those planes are going to be shot down before they get immunity.  What you want to see is all those planes shot down before they do any damage.  In the old RTS version I would agree with you.  In the current rework we should be allowed to get at least a single strike in.  It sounds like you're upset that CV's are capable of scratching your paint.

 

19 minutes ago, eagle_lance said:

If properly managed a cv will never run out of planes. Any other ship class has counters and negative consequences for bad play. A Cv's only worry is what ship to strike next.

"If PROPERLY managed" 

Yes as it should be.  If a CV player is going to play more conservatively/safe he will and should still have full or close to full squadrons.  Some CV players will play aggressively some matches and will not be launching full squadrons or deplaned.

Only worry of what ship to strike next?  Sorry, no.  The player also needs to worry about the positioning of his CV.  We have to decide if we want to play it safe or risk our CV by positioning closer to the front for faster attacks, managing auto-pilot, constantly checking mini-map, deciding where the best spot to drop fighters to support our team while on a path to launch an attack or deciding to stall an attack to keep a target spotted.  Most importantly is where we need to launch an attack (spotting), not which ship, and focus our efforts to best support the team and win.

 

[Edgecase]

7 minutes ago, Anonymous50 said:

During a game, if a CV wants to perma spot me, they are wasting resources on me - this hasn't changed from pre 8.0.   Right now that is happening 1 out of 20 games.

If you think nothing changed in CV-DD spotting interactions between the 20% vision nerf, the rocket maneuverability and arming nerf, and the plane speed nerf, I think you're not paying attention.

[Edgecase]

2 minutes ago, ClassicLib said:

I'm hoping the change to how planes and squads are damaged will change this in that the CV will still be able to strike but it will be a reduced squad if the ship's AA is strong enough to knock down one or more planes before they drop.  

That's not the version currently on PTS, and it probably never will be. The PTS version has the planes get killed from the reserve first, and the active portion of the flight last. This prevents "sight jitter" from having planes constantly dying and being replaced, among other things.

More importantly, having the active portion of the flight get killed first would mean you'd be looking at a situation where being able to kill 3 planes during the duration of a run makes you totally invincible to air attacks, because you'd always deplete the active set of 3 (even if the squadron as a whole had four times that many planes just hovering nearby). Either that, or you'd have to make the active attack group larger than 3, so that ships with low AA get struck by 6 bombers at a time -- also no good.

[Panic512]

43 minutes ago, HeadSplit120 said:

After all the nerfs CV's have received you still have a problem with them.  I don't know but maybe it isn't the class that's the problem but maybe the lack of ability or the refusal to adjust your playstyle while facing up against a CV.

Downvote me all you like but at this point any "How to fix CV's" should just be titled "I want CV's deleted/removed from the game."

Please enlighten me, what nerfs?  All they did was change how they are played and gave them a change in overall alpha strike. I would much rather be deleted in a single strike from the old style RTS CV than constantly harassed by the never ending waves of aircraft with the new style reworked CVs.

[Anonymous50]

10 minutes ago, Edgecase said:

If you think nothing changed in CV-DD spotting interactions between the 20% vision nerf, the rocket maneuverability and arming nerf, and the plane speed nerf, I think you're not paying attention.

Oh, I know if anything it got worse for CV's since 8.1.

The OP implies that DD's being spotted by CV's is awful because of 8.0.  To me, this is nonsense not backed up by my experience or what I'm seeing in game.

 

[XpliCT_]

36 minutes ago, Edgecase said:

First strike is a tricky thing. If you have the ability to deny a CV a first strike, it means you theoretically have the ability to deny the CV any strikes at all. There's not really a middle ground on that particular point. The current system tries to strike a compromise in which CVs can always get a first strike, even into heavy AA, but plane losses will IN PRINCIPLE mean that they can only do this a small number of times per game before being deplaned.

Second -- and I think this is where your not having personal experience with CVs is showing -- is that many of the balance issues that we're currently seeing are the direct consequence of WG not addressing a number of extremely grey area issues with plane behavior, including the techniques known as fast evac, F-spam, and slingshotting. Players who play the game the "regular way" by flying in and flying out take probably 3x the losses of players who know and use these techniques. The ability of CV players to dramatically decrease their plane losses is the reason people think planes are invincible and unlimited. BUT, on the other hand, completely taking away the ability of CV players to mitigate losses through skilled play also seems like an anti-pattern, so there can't be nothing either.

Spotting is a problem, but much less than it used to be.  However, without skill-based AA or making DDs virtually undetectable by air, there's not a lot of design space to work with here. I see the AA rework as the best chance to make some progress here.

Regarding your first point, I disagree.  I believe that AA mounts have health, and can get damaged, to allow a CV the ability to strike any target late in the game.  I have had a full AA spec DM, with DFAA running and CV fighters directly over me, only to get triple citadeled by Hak bombers.  I don't believe that should happen.  

To your second point, I've found that this hasn't narrowed the skill gap at all, and I probably should have touched on that in my original post.  I was talking about the truly good CV players, not the average randoms player.  

I'm hoping that the AA rework will have a positive influence on the game as a whole, but I'm not holding my breath.  

[Skuggsja]

2 hours ago, eagle_lance said:

When the only counterplay is blobbing up there's an issue.

That's wrong. A single good AA cruiser with a couple of battleships can wreak havoc on planes. It's just like focusing fire on a ship. There is a reason armies to fight in rank and file anymore and dont just pile their troops in one location. Small unit tactics reign supreme.

 

2 hours ago, eagle_lance said:

Pre-rework there was multiple counterplays to a cv strike- Def aa, catapult fighters, cv fighters, strong aa skills the coincided with consistent aa performance.

Consistent performance, yeah I can agree its lacking now. As for DFAA, CV fighters, catapult fighters and AA skills they all still work just fine. Not every boat gets to be an AA boat just like not every boat gets to have radar or hydro. As for captian skills, I question many players ability to use the correct ones. I'm site people are throwing BFT onto ships with 200 continuous damage in an aura thinking it makes a difference where as a ship with over 900 should take BFT. How many heavy flak ships dont take AFT or the AA module? I would guess plenty. 

 

2 hours ago, eagle_lance said:

Anyone of these could effectively negate or simply slow a strike down and the cv player would suffer negative consequences for striking into high aa.

Strong AA ships or a small group of decent AA ships still do this. With the way AA works now, the smaller the sqaudron the more likely an aircraft will be lost.

 

2 hours ago, eagle_lance said:

Now, there's no cool down on plane launching and aa is so inconsistent that a single strike will get through.

Continuous damage from AA randomly targets a plane from the sqaudron and deals damage it about every 1 to 2 seconds. In a sqaudron of 12, the chances are 1 in 12 the damage is dealt to the same plane twice. A sqaudron of 3 has a 1 in 3 chance of having damage dealt to the same plane twice, meaning it's more likely to take more damage and be shot down. Thus, even if an aircraft carrier can launch planes, decent AA can completely negate it potentially while weak AA may do nothing.

 

2 hours ago, eagle_lance said:

A Cv's only worry is what ship to strike next. 

A CV has a huge concealment bubble and 12 potential threats. You have to move your ship around and try to keep it concealed just like anyone else.

 

2 hours ago, Edgecase said:

First strike is a tricky thing. If you have the ability to deny a CV a first strike, it means you theoretically have the ability to deny the CV any strikes at all. There's not really a middle ground on that particular point. The current system tries to strike a compromise in which CVs can always get a first strike, even into heavy AA, but plane losses will IN PRINCIPLE mean that they can only do this a small number of times per game before being deplaned.

Exactly this. I dont expect a ship to have a torp bulge with 100% damage reduction but somehow players expect to down planes like it's a free all you can eat buffet. It's the only reason I say much of anything in these threads. People arent looking for compromise, they want really radical and unbalanced solutions.

 

2 hours ago, Anonymous50 said:

Hotly debated?

More like one group screaming that their world is falling apart & the rest of us shaking our heads about that overreaction

Yep, like I was just sort of saying. Its absolute extremes and the fact that people have no experience on the other side of the fence is insanely evident.

[DeletedUser]

1 hour ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

@XpliCT_ The problem with CVs is the garbage rework. The fix is to revert to the previous system and adjust it to meet the stated reasons/goals that prompted this garbage rework.

Yes please revert. I cant wait to dev strike ships 2 min into the round with 10x crossdropped torps that are unavoidable.

[WhiteTulip]

The new tier 16 premium USN Cruiser. The simplest way to fix CVs:

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

1 hour ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

@XpliCT_ The problem with CVs is the garbage rework. The fix is to revert to the previous system and adjust it to meet the stated reasons/goals that prompted this garbage rework.

 

1 hour ago, XpliCT_ said:

We both know WG won't do that.  

Of course; because WG is too wedded to reinventing the wheel into a square block to ever do so.

16 minutes ago, Dr_Citadel said:

Yes please revert. I cant wait to dev strike ships 2 min into the round with 10x crossdropped torps that are unavoidable.

Try doing so with autodrops.

Murderdrops only worked unavoidably in RTS because of manual attacks.

WG shouldn’t have removed manual attacks from just Tier 4 and 5, they should have removed them from EVERY TIER.

[Desertfox51]

The fix is either delete them, or give people the option to to face them.

[SkaerKrow]

Your lack of experience and actual understanding about how CVs work shows in your suggestions, most of which are terrible. Until you know/understand something, don’t presume to suggest changes to it.

[BrushWolf]

This is a pleasant change, this isn't a completely idiotic post even though I mostly disagree.

1.  Assured First Strike) In the RTS days you attacked with multiple squadrons and while you could smack down one or maybe two the remainder made their strike which is no different than the first pass having a good chance to strike.

2.  CV Interaction) Yet even with the ability to focus on doing damage almost all of the CV's are doing less damage than in the RTS days, some of them by large margins.

3.  Spotting) DD's with their AA off are almost invisible to a CV and even after finding them have to go well out to make their attack run which if the DD has turned their AA off again will be a blind start to the attack run guessing on the DD's course.

4.  Plane Regeneration) You admit there is a limit to plane regeneration but then say there is no down side to losing an entire squadron. Yes, with most CV's losing the first squadron of a type isn't a huge deal losing that second one hamstrings your ability to do damage. If you still have your CV's take one of them into co-op and see for yourself and if you don't hop on the PT when it comes back up and see what happens when you lose too many planes quickly.

[BarneyStyle]

1 hour ago, Grflrgl said:

The new tier 16 premium USN Cruiser. The simplest way to fix CVs:

 

🤣

While I won the game, I shot down 89 planes, between two CV’s and they were still hurling planes at me till the timer ran out.  This seems a bit excessive, since there is not heroic achievement for this either.  At least give a player credit for swatting that many flies out of the sky.

[Umikami]

2 hours ago, HeadSplit120 said:

After all the nerfs CV's have received you still have a problem with them.

Since, after all the nerfs they've received, they're still OP, the answer is YES!

2 hours ago, HeadSplit120 said:

I don't know but maybe it isn't the class that's the problem but maybe the lack of ability or the refusal to adjust your playstyle while facing up against a CV.

Or possibly it's that, whether we're talking RTS or post rework CVs, they have never been properly balanced ships and have always been OP.

3 hours ago, HeadSplit120 said:

Downvote me all you like but at this point any "How to fix CV's" should just be titled "I want CV's deleted/removed from the game."

This is one of the major issues preventing any responsible or adult discussion concerning CVs and their abilities; the pro-CV guys who refuse to consider any moves to balance the ships they play and instead look upon any moves to balance the type as an anti-CV rant. Not helpful.

2 hours ago, Anonymous50 said:

More like one group screaming that their world is falling apart & the rest of us shaking our heads about that overreaction.

And we're getting tired of all that CV screaming, FYI.