Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Papa_Hausser

Designer Hatred of Carriers and Air Wings?

38 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

12
[MN73]
Beta Testers
1 post
1,005 battles

I am curious if there is just a very distinct hatred for the carrier by designers. I have spent countless frustrating hours playing the CVs in game and find them to be beyond disappointing anymore. I find the ships AA batteries utterly Bull. If WWII AA was a accurate as in the game the carrier would be long gone from the world. It is absolutely ridiculous that an 8 plane air wing can manage only 1 attack run. Add into that the absolute deadliness of the fighters and the Carrier is virtually worthless in battle. It gets very old and tiresome to lose you entire air wing in a battle and inflict about 15k - 20k in battle damage. Yet every squadron you send out is wiped off the face of the earth within 10 seconds of coming close to an enemy. I can't help but feel that the designers added CVs and then completely [edited] us on play-ability. 

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
703
[KNCOL]
Members
788 posts
1,749 battles
5 minutes ago, Papa_Hausser said:

I am curious if there is just a very distinct hatred for the carrier by designers. I have spent countless frustrating hours playing the CVs in game and find them to be beyond disappointing anymore. I find the ships AA batteries utterly Bull. If WWII AA was a accurate as in the game the carrier would be long gone from the world. It is absolutely ridiculous that an 8 plane air wing can manage only 1 attack run. Add into that the absolute deadliness of the fighters and the Carrier is virtually worthless in battle. It gets very old and tiresome to lose you entire air wing in a battle and inflict about 15k - 20k in battle damage. Yet every squadron you send out is wiped off the face of the earth within 10 seconds of coming close to an enemy. I can't help but feel that the designers added CVs and then completely [edited] us on play-ability. 

What tier are you playing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
824
[PISD]
Members
1,282 posts
5,278 battles

First: balance. Sure the CV are weaker than what they were in real life, but that is in order to make them playable in game. And if their damage is on the low side of classes it's mainly because their utility is on the higher side: providing spotting and hunting DD have far more impact on the game than farming damage on BB, especially for CV's.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,497
[RKLES]
Members
12,551 posts
14,267 battles

It’s the fact you can only send limited numbers of planes up to attack at a time in the game that makes AA all the more effective when in real life they usually sent up as many planes as possible to go out and sink a warship. But in World of Warships you must have game balance since it’s World of Warships not world of Aircraft Carrier superiority.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,310
[MUDDX]
Beta Testers
8,144 posts
22,442 battles
10 minutes ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

It’s the fact you can only send limited numbers of planes up to attack at a time in the game that makes AA all the more effective when in real life they usually sent up as many planes as possible to go out and sink a warship. But in World of Warships you must have game balance since it’s World of Warships not world of Aircraft Carrier superiority.

And that is complete bunk. The CV rework that put this restriction in is a steaming heap of putrid maggot crawling garbage.

 

19 minutes ago, Papa_Hausser said:

I am curious if there is just a very distinct hatred for the carrier by designers.

No they just caved to the whiners!

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,497
[RKLES]
Members
12,551 posts
14,267 battles
2 minutes ago, Koogus said:

What tier are you playing?

Going to go out on a limb and say they have managed to get themselves into mid tier or high tier where if a surface ship player has been smart and upgraded their AA heavily and the CV player has not then the CV planes can run into some problems...

That is a major problem with new players attempting to use CVs is that Reworked CVs require a lot more captain skills and upgrades than they used to require. Back in RTS CVs all you needed was 10-13 point captain you were all set and in very good shape for battles. These days you need pretty much all the Aircraft skills to help your planes plus extras like Concealment Expert to help hide your CV. This is the reason Veteran players can manage to do something with CVs, but newer players tend to struggle more unless they can open their wallet to get the CV captain high enough or else get captain trained using other ships. And this problem is difficult to resolve thanks to the flip side of the equation being not all surface ships are Veteran players and new players in surface ships need to be able to fend off air atttacks at least a little.

This was a major factor in my decision to scrap 2 of my CV lines tiers 4-9 couple days after CV rework was the fact all the CV captains would need to be overhauled and I was not willing to do that on a ship class I merely considered as fun weekend weapons that were not as useful during the week compared to my surface ships. Have enough ships with high captain skill requirements without having to deal with CVs as well. (Most surface ships only require 10-12 point captain which makes keeping large fleet on hand and operational easier)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,497
[RKLES]
Members
12,551 posts
14,267 battles
31 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

And that is complete bunk. The CV rework that put this restriction in is a steaming heap of putrid maggot crawling garbage.

 

No they just caved to the whiners!

Yeah RTS CVs were good, but to be honest a few OP elements had creeped into the game such as GZ’s AP bombs that quickly cost me some games even with heavy AA on my BB and having 2-3 escorting ships, all it took was 1-2 AP bomb hits and you were in major trouble or sunk. Then you had the players that could cross drop you with torpedo bombers point blank range in tier X and sink one ship after the next. So I think Wargaming need needed to use a scalpel instead of a sledgehammer to fix the problem.

However WG will never admit to this of course, but I really suspect the  real reasons behind the rework was the fact that once RN CVs were released and aside from small number of additional premium CVs maybe, WG would be all out of new CVs to add. So their next big project to sustain them will be Submarines in addition to other surface ships they can keep adding. But there is a major problem I realized when looking at the old RTS CVs and the upcoming subs. If a sub submerges all an RTS CV would need to do is form a circle around dive point expand that circle out and odds are they could spot that sub when it was forced to surface, then they could attack the sub with little to no fear from AA.

So you can see how the Reworked CVs seem to actually solve a few problems from Wargaming’s point of view;

1. They can make at least some of the surface ships a little happier now.

2. They can allow subs to have better chances on the game.

3. They allow clueless CV players endless planes so they never totally run out of planes.

4 They make CVs less appealing to Unicom players that wish to all out carry battles so that now surface ships are not getting totally destroyed by aircraft.

5. They get to quietly get rid some of their errors in judgment such as the GZ with the OP AP bombs among other such things.

6. They avoid the fallout that would happen if CVs had simply been removed as they can instead make CVs as playable or unplayable as WG desires to fit the needs of the game at any given time.

The cost of the above problems being solved is having to listen to just a small percentage of the small percentage of the more dedicated CV players in WOWs. They were able to pay off some of us former part time CV players such as myself with generous full compensation in exchange for trading in our CVs if we did not like the changes and could use the port slots, captains, credits, and free XP on other ships and ship lines. So as crazy as the CV rework may have seemed, in some ways it might have been a stroke of genius from a  long-term business perspective for WG.

Edited by Admiral_Thrawn_1
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,095
[KNMSU]
Members
7,086 posts
7,668 battles
51 minutes ago, Papa_Hausser said:

I am curious if there is just a very distinct hatred for the carrier by designers.

Most coddled ship type in the game, but it must be hated.

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,090
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,035 posts
11,612 battles

No they simply haven't figured out how to actually balance them yet because.... honestly I'm out of explanations for after 5 years that won't get me warnings, banned, etc. Other than they have listened to the whiners that have no actual idea what they are talking about. If there's a wrong decision, they seem to make it. Most recent being Hosho's TB nerf - the planes aren't the issue, it's the lack of actual useful AA at tier 3-5. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
636
[THREE]
Members
2,142 posts
10,912 battles
Just now, Battlecruiser_PrncsRoyal said:

Most coddled ship type in the game, but it must be hated.

As a BB main, I disagree... its BBs...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,592
[-BUI-]
Members
2,030 posts
5,697 battles

Yeah, I took 2 months break and came back to see nothing has changed.   AA still insanely overpowered if not just straight up worse than before.   Just travel in a group of 3 ships and you are 100% IMMUNE to all air attacks.    If only the Japanese figured that out the US would have never won the war in the Pacific, just have small groups of 3 ships and the carrier is obsolete!   

Love how EVERY GAME my team spreads out as far as possible while the enemy team is two groups of 5 ships and I literally can't do anything.   If its not that then I'm the only T8 CV in a totally T10 game with nothing but AA ships on the other side.   BALANCE!    

Completely unenjoyable to even THINK about playing this game.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,497
[RKLES]
Members
12,551 posts
14,267 battles
7 minutes ago, Zenn3k said:

Yeah, I took 2 months break and came back to see nothing has changed.   AA still insanely overpowered if not just straight up worse than before.   Just travel in a group of 3 ships and you are 100% IMMUNE to all air attacks.    If only the Japanese figured that out the US would have never won the war in the Pacific, just have small groups of 3 ships and the carrier is obsolete!   

Love how EVERY GAME my team spreads out as far as possible while the enemy team is two groups of 5 ships and I literally can't do anything.   If its not that then I'm the only T8 CV in a totally T10 game with nothing but AA ships on the other side.   BALANCE!    

Completely unenjoyable to even THINK about playing this game.

Actually you may have missed the intervals were AA was weakened and planes were wreaking havoc, particularly against DDs to the point DD players were either not wanting to play, were getting quickly slaughtered, or else would have to camp out and hope somebody sank the CVs. Now DDs can have enough AA to at least thin out attacking planes enough to improve their survival or at least extend their life span a bit.

Edited by Admiral_Thrawn_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,732
[INTEL]
Members
13,068 posts
36,066 battles
1 hour ago, Papa_Hausser said:

I am curious if there is just a very distinct hatred for the carrier by designers.

Haha. The most coddled class in the game, for whose sake the designers wrecked the game, drove off 00s of good players, stopped 00s of whales from spending, and screwed the lower tiers. 

Quite the opposite. The devs are absolutely obsessed with CVs, to the point that they are blind to anything else.

  • Cool 4
  • Boring 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
78 posts
2,227 battles

Seems like CVs should be a fun and important part of any 20th century naval combat game, but for whatever reason the current iteration misses the mark.  I'm new so I never played the RTS version, but it actually sounds like a generally much better concept:  manage your deck, planes and weapons well to have a greater impact on the battle.  Should have been a slam-dunk.

Edit:  The ship and plane models are damn beautiful, though.

Edited by column5
  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,763 posts
93 battles
55 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_PrncsRoyal said:

Most coddled ship type in the game, but it must be hated.

Wrong. That is BBs.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,119 posts
6,340 battles

By the end of the war,. The Japanese calculated that to score 12 hits using conventional attack methods, you needed to send 300 planes out, and you would lose 220 of them. With kamikaze, 60 planes would be needed for the same 12 hits.

Every attack on a naval vessel, US or Japanese, by aircraft ran a risk of being knocked down by anti-aircraft. Even at the very end, US planes were being shot down by AAA fire. It was just more likely to happen to a Japanese plane attacking an American ship than the other way around.

Sources: Pacific War Online

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,095
[KNMSU]
Members
7,086 posts
7,668 battles
7 minutes ago, RyuuohD_NA said:

Wrong. That is BBs.

Well, I'll be sure to let you know when my battleships become invisible, nearly impossible to citadel, and more fire resistant than an asbestos hydrant.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
636
[THREE]
Members
2,142 posts
10,912 battles
3 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_PrncsRoyal said:

Well, I'll be sure to let you know when my battleships become invisible, nearly impossible to citadel, and more fire resistant than an asbestos hydrant.

Fire resistant? Once that DCP is off, their taking 15k fire damage in 5 secs intervals.

BTW, the auto DCP is a hindrance, regardless of having a 60 sec active period

Edited by Cpt_Cupcake
Additional info
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
681
[ZR]
Beta Testers
282 posts
9,713 battles

Lol if the designer didn’t like CVs then there wouldn’t be rockets planes, there would be no stupid damage control, fires would last longer, deff AA would actually do something, and planes wouldn’t be able to heal so much damage.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,011
[RLGN]
Members
14,312 posts
25,245 battles
30 minutes ago, column5 said:

Seems like CVs should be a fun and important part of any 20th century naval combat game, but for whatever reason the current iteration misses the mark.  I'm new so I never played the RTS version, but it actually sounds like a generally much better concept:  manage your deck, planes and weapons well to have a greater impact on the battle.  Should have been a slam-dunk.

Edit:  The ship and plane models are damn beautiful, though.

1st bit; almost everything that has been done to reduce the skill gap between players, and the influence of carriers on games, could have been done within RTS TWO YEARS AGO (2017 was supposed to be ‘The Year of the Carrier,’) but someone at WG instead thought it would be better to completely reinvent the wheel; and so here we are.

2nd bit; just about the only ‘good’ part of the rework.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,732
[INTEL]
Members
13,068 posts
36,066 battles
31 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_PrncsRoyal said:

Well, I'll be sure to let you know when my battleships become invisible, nearly impossible to citadel, and more fire resistant than an asbestos hydrant.

...and have the best AA in the game.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2
[RVNHQ]
[RVNHQ]
Members
8 posts
4,193 battles

Just started playing CV before the latest update so I dont have a lot of history - i enjoyed playing them but -

Ship AA now is brutal - ok

Why would you send 6-8 planes at a target and only attack with 2 while the others get wrecked flying around the target? I find one pass at a target is about all you get, when that's done you only have 1-2 planes left.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,281
[SALVO]
Members
24,828 posts
25,916 battles
34 minutes ago, Desertfox51 said:

Lol if the designer didn’t like CVs then there wouldn’t be rockets planes, there would be no stupid damage control, fires would last longer, deff AA would actually do something, and planes wouldn’t be able to heal so much damage.

A couple of thoughts.

1.  DefAA doesn't seem useless to me.  I will say that its power doesn't seem as great as before, but it does seem to me to be far from useless.

2.  Planes healing?  Please.  With this "damage the last plane in the airgroup" thing, unless you fly through a flak burst and damage multiple planes, regular AA only hurts one plane at a time, making the aircraft heal mostly useless.  About the best you might hope for is to trigger the heal as you make an attack just to try to offset the damage you will take, rather than to heal damage already taken.  But even then, the utility of plane heals seems pretty weak.

3. Rocket planes were very, very real.  They just shouldn't exist until around tier 6, since they were a WW2 era invention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,497
[RKLES]
Members
12,551 posts
14,267 battles
4 minutes ago, Crucis said:

A couple of thoughts.

1.  DefAA doesn't seem useless to me.  I will say that its power doesn't seem as great as before, but it does seem to me to be far from useless.

2.  Planes healing?  Please.  With this "damage the last plane in the airgroup" thing, unless you fly through a flak burst and damage multiple planes, regular AA only hurts one plane at a time, making the aircraft heal mostly useless.  About the best you might hope for is to trigger the heal as you make an attack just to try to offset the damage you will take, rather than to heal damage already taken.  But even then, the utility of plane heals seems pretty weak.

3. Rocket planes were very, very real.  They just shouldn't exist until around tier 6, since they were a WW2 era invention.

Yeah and I believe those rocket attack aircraft were late WWII as well. So your looking at tier 10 for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,209
[PEED2]
Beta Testers
4,968 posts
14,934 battles

If they buff cvs they going make the life of everyone miserable.

If they nerf cvs they going make the life of cvs miserable.

Guess from who wg money come from more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×