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

An Idea for CV balance (please read)

59 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

955
[SMLSK]
Beta Testers
1,335 posts
1,977 battles

So I’m a little weary to post this but I think it could be a decent idea. So I’m gonna throw this out there and let the chips fall where they may.

 

I am in the group that maybe CV’s are a little strong. I don’t think they are OP, but I do feel they feel a little unlimited in ways. One of the more crazy things is their ability to be anywhere on the map if needed while the CV can feel somewhat out of range. Many of the ideas towards fixing this is having the CV’s have a fixed range the planes can fly. This, while well intentioned, is not a good solution as it forces to put CV’s on the front line.

 

However I do feel there is something in that thought process which might work, but in a different way. So let me give my idea.

 

The Concept

 

The planes on a CV are the key to this concept. Planes on CV’s will not so much have a limited range, but instead a limited flight time. The way it would work is when the planes are launched there would be a large circle around the planes on the map and mini map as well as a timer in the HUD. As long as the planes are in flight the timer ticks down and the circle becomes smaller. When the timer reaches zero and the circle disappears, the planes would automatically return to the ship.

 

0WpEeYg.jpg

 

The reasoning behind this is that planes had limited fuel supply which required the trips they make be very direct and purposeful. They could go off course to search for things, but they had to be wary of fuel and return to the carrier when they were low.

 

This is the same idea. Planes possess the ability to reach most of the map, if the cv was at the back of the map. However when flying that circle diminishes essentially reducing the area to which you can fly because of fuel consumption. If you accelerate the throttle, the fuel burns twice as fast. This forces management of fuel along with determining areas of attack. Planes can no longer fly around as long as they want, instead they have to be mindful of the targets they choose and how far they are from them.\

 

If targets are further away, while you could reach them at normal speed, it may be too slow which requires you to accelerate and burn fuel quicker which requires o get closer to the ship your planning to attack.


 

How does this affect aircraft carriers

 

This affects carriers in a few ways.

 

Scouting at the beginning is not as simple. You can’t just fly around spotting things easily. You can spot but as fuel burns you have to pick and choose exactly where you are headed. However there are quite a few things that become more important to be aware of. I tested with the audacious in a training room. On a 48 x 48 map the planes at normal speed took about 1 minute and 40 seconds to fully cross the map from one side to the other. That means the planes should have about 2 minutes of fuel to burn. However if you use the throttle you would instead have only 1 minute of flight time. (These number are not set, nor do they represent the reality of what they would be)

 

How does this affect CV’s overall?

 

CV’s no longer have easy control of the map

CV’s control of the map is now more limited. They can fly almost anywhere but it isn’t easy. You cannot go from one end to the other and back again. Your decisions have to be more thoughtfull.

 

If you conserve fuel then planes go slower and spend more time in AA fire

If you decide to conserve your fuel then when attacked by AA you are faced with the choice to throttle to avoid and waste fuel or take the increased damage.

 

Attack runs become more singular

It may become more difficult to pull single ship attack runs or multiple quick attack runs on one ship. Most CV players do save throttle to get through Flak and perform attack runs. That means when focusing a single ship they have to save throttle to for the run, then try and use it to turn around and perform another which can take a little time to reset. However what becomes more profitable are multi-ship attacks where you bounce from one target to another.

 

Fuel burns quicker than you realize

Say you are performing an attack run and you throttle for 10 seconds. In reality you lost 20 seconds of flight time which is a tenth of your entire flight time. That’s just in the attack, that doesn’t include the time to get to target etc. So you now are down half of your flight time or more and have to decide how you want to proceed to attack.



 

How does this Help ships targeted by CV’s

Difficult ships to hit are no longer worth the time spent

Because this is now partly a resource war ships that are difficult to find an good attack angle on waste precious fuel time on plane flights.

 

Low tier AA (may) become more effective

Low tier AA is crap, however with this change you may find players making sure planes are moving slower to conserve fuel which means planes are in sustained fire longer. Yes there will always be weakness but with more inexperienced CV drivers this could be more detrimental, especially at low tiers where AA is worse.

 

What does this mean for the limited acceleration

 

Well it means it’s not limited. No longer is it just 6-10 second burn, rather it’s however long you have on your flight time. 

 

Also this opens an opportunity for new skills that may involve things like increasing fuel capacity or reducing fuel consumption for certain nations. Potentially new consumables that affect other aspects of planes. 


 

Conclusion

This is not meant to be a perfect system, nor are my numbers exact. This is merely an idea I had that may work to curb one of the more strong aspects of CV’s. It would need true figuring out with heavy testing to make even remotely balanced, but I do feel it could be a solid solution that gives a bit more depth to CV play while offering more balanced gameplay for all ships in the game.

  • Cool 6
  • Funny 2
  • Boring 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
224
[WAG]
Beta Testers
784 posts
7,225 battles

that actually would be rather interesting. its not the instant death others have proposed, but keeps things interesting and provides a reason not to stick to  single hard to find DD. it doesn't effect their capability of attacking other ships much (which is fie right now just DD's really need help right now) and would provide and incentive to more aggressive CV placements as closer engagements would mean not only faster turn around time, but also more time on target as you have more fuel.

all in all i like this proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,846
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,433 posts
14,165 battles

I only scanned this but as soon as I saw limited range for planes but our battles are more like The Action of Samar where the CV's were right on top of the enemy ships than true carrier actions where the planes could fly for hours before getting to their target. Also most of these planes had ferry ranges of 750 miles or more and even when considering a combat range that is going to be a couple hundred easily. There was a range ie fuel limit in alpha but they found that it either restricted CV's too much or had no effect. Now the ideas you put forth are not stupid but they were looked at long ago.

What I feel is needed is some way to limit the number of CV's in a match particularly in the lower tiers without punishing people for choosing a particular ship type.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
955
[SMLSK]
Beta Testers
1,335 posts
1,977 battles
12 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

I only scanned this but as soon as I saw limited range for planes but our battles are more like The Action of Samar where the CV's were right on top of the enemy ships than true carrier actions where the planes could fly for hours before getting to their target. Also most of these planes had ferry ranges of 750 miles or more and even when considering a combat range that is going to be a couple hundred easily. There was a range ie fuel limit in alpha but they found that it either restricted CV's too much or had no effect. Now the ideas you put forth are not stupid but they were looked at long ago.

What I feel is needed is some way to limit the number of CV's in a match particularly in the lower tiers without punishing people for choosing a particular ship type.

I played during the open alpha weekend's and I don't remember CV planes having limited range.  While they may have found with RTS it wasn't as feasible, that doesnt mean it cant work now. The game had changed quite a bit. They even said subs would never be in the game a while back either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,846
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,433 posts
14,165 battles
Just now, otakuben said:

I played during the open alpha weekend's and I don't remember CV planes having limited range.  While they may have found with RTS it wasn't as feasible, that doesnt mean it cant work now. The game had changed quite a bit. They even said subs would never be in the game a while back either. 

That was removed in alpha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,297
[SALVO]
Members
24,843 posts
25,932 battles

@otakuben There's nothing wrong with CVs right now.  If anything, I think that they're somewhat on the weak side.

  • Cool 5
  • Confused 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
955
[SMLSK]
Beta Testers
1,335 posts
1,977 battles
1 minute ago, Crucis said:

@otakuben There's nothing wrong with CVs right now.  If anything, I think that they're somewhat on the weak side.

I disagree with this, but that is my point of view. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
955
[SMLSK]
Beta Testers
1,335 posts
1,977 battles
2 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

That was removed in alpha.

I know, I was saying I played in alpha and dont remember that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
305
[PROJX]
Beta Testers
729 posts
4,671 battles

The million dollar questions is how much fuel the plane carriers.

Too much and it's negligible.

Too little and the CV will have difficulty getting things done.

It is an interesting idea, but difficult to implement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,846
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,433 posts
14,165 battles
5 minutes ago, otakuben said:

I know, I was saying I played in alpha and dont remember that. 

You said.

10 minutes ago, otakuben said:

I played during the open alpha weekend's and I don't remember CV planes having limited range.  While they may have found with RTS it wasn't as feasible, that doesnt mean it cant work now. The game had changed quite a bit. They even said subs would never be in the game a while back either. 

Easy mistake to make. I was in the second wave of alpha and it had already been removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
955
[SMLSK]
Beta Testers
1,335 posts
1,977 battles
6 minutes ago, PotatoMD said:

The million dollar questions is how much fuel the plane carriers.

Too much and it's negligible.

Too little and the CV will have difficulty getting things done.

It is an interesting idea, but difficult to implement.

It wouldn't be easy to balance, but if done right it could solve a lot of issues. 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
976
[KAPPA]
Members
3,110 posts
8,239 battles

Honestly, isn't the rate of attack enough of a limit? A target 10km away is able to be reached twice as fast as a 20km off target. It feels like it'd either be far too limiting or basically do nothing. And this is WG, so I doubt it'd find a sweet spot.

Edit: If anything, why not halve the speed and double the damage?

Edited by Shoggoth_pinup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
955
[SMLSK]
Beta Testers
1,335 posts
1,977 battles
1 minute ago, BrushWolf said:

You said.

Easy mistake to make. I was in the second wave of alpha and it had already been removed.

I am curious as to what their implementation was and how it worked. Also I still hold my point it could work now because the game had changed so much since alpha. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,846
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,433 posts
14,165 battles
Just now, otakuben said:

I am curious as to what their implementation was and how it worked. Also I still hold my point it could work now because the game had changed so much since alpha. 

It was out before I was into alpha but what I was told was if it was enough to impact the CV it was too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
955
[SMLSK]
Beta Testers
1,335 posts
1,977 battles
1 minute ago, Shoggoth_pinup said:

Honestly, isn't the rate of attack enough of a limit? A target 10km away is able to be reached twice as fast as a 20km off target. It feels like it'd either be far too limiting or basically do nothing. And this is WG, so I doubt it'd find a sweet spot.

Well the results fuel consumption is not a set metric. That was a loose example. The idea is top reduce free reign over the map overall while still having access to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,846
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,433 posts
14,165 battles
1 minute ago, otakuben said:

Well the results fuel consumption is not a set metric. That was a loose example. The idea is top reduce free reign over the map overall while still having access to it.

Personally as I have said before I think that some way to reduce the number of CV in matches particularly in the low tiers where multiple CV matches are the most common without punishing people for the choice of ship they play is what we need. Maybe a queue dump like mechanism that will form balanced matches. There might be a lot of small matches with tier 4 CV's but the multiple dumps would stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
976
[KAPPA]
Members
3,110 posts
8,239 battles
2 minutes ago, otakuben said:

Well the results fuel consumption is not a set metric. That was a loose example. The idea is top reduce free reign over the map overall while still having access to it.

Edited my post for my take on a way to adjust that. It'd give one less ability to be anywhere at any time, and instead make you have to commit, as there's no more ease of changing location.

Although, one down side would be that DDs would be able to be killed in one go, but not only would finding (smart) DDs be much harder, but smoking up would make things much less easy to return in a timely manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32
[SWARB]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
44 posts

ok my two cents as a CV, and DD player

honestly Cv's are pretty balanced right now and if anything they have been nerfed to much already. but i do agree in lower tiers the number of carriers per team should be limited. to many times lately i've seen 3 tier 4 cv's per team that is to much!

NOW baclk to the OP's post.

the problem is most of the players are younger people that don't have a clue about strategy. and don't want to work with the other members of their team.

  1. time and again i see DD's take off leaving their teammates behind. 
  2. time and again they take the same routes to the caps.
  3. time and again they hide behind the same islands.
  4. time and again i see DD's that don't turn off their AA and secondaries.
  5. time and again i see dd's smoke up in front of the planes after they have already been spotted.

all of the above makes DD's very easy targets early in the match. and everyone will take advantage of an easy target doesn't matter what class ship you play! but then what happens the DD player feels he is being unfairly targeted and maybe he is, but its a situation of his own creation.

  1. DD's you need to stick closer to the cruisers for AA cover
  2. DD's you need to turn your AA and secondaries off. and only turn them on as a last resort!
  3. DD's if a plane detects you don't burn your smoke, honestly when you use your smoke your telling us hey i'm right here bomb my [edited]back to the stone age!
  4. DD's take different routes to the caps or wait to cap until your teammates are closer to the caps to cover you.
  5. DD's don't hide behind an island unless you are setting up an ambush on another ship or as a last resort to keep from getting spotted by a plane or ship.

 

also some friendly advice to the DD players. i know you get frustrated but when you vent your frustration in comms and start calling cv's sky cancer, threatening us or our families with physical injury or death, all you are doing is guaranteeing that for the rest of the night I will do nothing but play CV's and target DD's and make their lives a living hell and tell them in comms to take it up with you! (and yes i will make a note of your ingame name just for that purpose.) honestly i would rather be targeting BB's And cruisers that go off on their own instead of hunting dd's hiding in the caps.
 

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,535
[SYN]
Members
8,236 posts
13,957 battles

Adding some fuel mechanic would help alleviate some of the CV issues. 

But I think that would make CVs 'too complicated' in WeeGee's eyes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32
[SWARB]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
44 posts
1 minute ago, Kapitan_Wuff said:

Adding some fuel mechanic would help alleviate some of the CV issues. 

But I think that would make CVs 'too complicated' in WeeGee's eyes. 

adding fuel  won't solve the problem with cv dd interactions.

cv's already have a limited number of planes. tier 8 and 10 the regen time on squadrons is huge. that's why late in the match you don't see full squads of planes.

Instead of punishing the CV why not focus on the real cause of the problem which is most DD players have no clue how to actually play a DD and make the same mistakes over and over/ i listed a few of them in my post above.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,064
[BONKS]
Members
1,507 posts
50 battles

Flight time limitation isn't exactly something completely new to CV discussions.

The general issue is that anything that CV players label sufficient automatically becomes unbearable for surface ship players, while anything that surface ship players would deem balanced would draw the ire of CV players. A middle ground will only serve to irritate both sides.

This is because the rework is completely binary in design. A CV in the rework has no other purpose than to farm damage on surface ship players. Deny that purpose even remotely and player numbers plummet into the abyss as its history has already proven.

 

Besides, it's likely to complicated for the average player. WG doesn't even trust us to be able to switch between hull and planes and given the hilariously abysmal playing standard they're right in doing so.

Edited by El2aZeR
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,330
[SIM]
Members
4,940 posts
8,024 battles

An unnecessary and undesired change, particularly because WG would have to buff CVs in some way (probably alpha damage) in order to compensate for the significant loss of utility.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
955
[SMLSK]
Beta Testers
1,335 posts
1,977 battles
5 hours ago, the_snake_doctor said:

adding fuel  won't solve the problem with cv dd interactions.

cv's already have a limited number of planes. tier 8 and 10 the regen time on squadrons is huge. that's why late in the match you don't see full squads of planes.

Instead of punishing the CV why not focus on the real cause of the problem which is most DD players have no clue how to actually play a DD and make the same mistakes over and over/ i listed a few of them in my post above.

 

 

DD players aren't really  the problem though. There are issues there but the nature of CV's are inherently easier to use and stronger in general.

 

4 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

Flight time limitation isn't exactly something completely new to CV discussions.

The general issue is that anything that CV players label sufficient automatically becomes unbearable for surface ship players, while anything that surface ship players would deem balanced would draw the ire of CV players. A middle ground will only serve to irritate both sides.

This is because the rework is completely binary in design. A CV in the rework has no other purpose than to farm damage on surface ship players. Deny that purpose even remotely and player numbers plummet into the abyss as its history has already proven.

 

Besides, it's likely to complicated for the average player. WG doesn't even trust us to be able to switch between hull and planes and given the hilariously abysmal playing standard they're right in doing so.

I think at some point WG will just have to accept carriers will have to have a higher entry point skill wise and realize some players just won't be able to work them properly if they want them to be as well balanced as other ships.

Yeah flight limitations aren't anything new but are always geared towards the idea of having the limitation hard set in the sense of being similar other ships firing range. This at least gives the option to actually reach the entire map, just not in the way CV's are used to.

 

3 hours ago, SkaerKrow said:

An unnecessary and undesired change, particularly because WG would have to buff CVs in some way (probably alpha damage) in order to compensate for the significant loss of utility.

I don't think they would need to buff anything. The most this change affects is DD and CV interaction and planes can no longer just sit and wait for the DD to be become visible or even fly around casually looking to spot one. This would barely affect CV vs CA/CL and BB interaction since those are spotted easily and focused easily when needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
26 posts
11 battles

Limiting plane fuel would just make everyone to stay further at the back of the map so that enemy planes won't reach them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32
[SWARB]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
44 posts
14 hours ago, otakuben said:

DD players aren't really  the problem though. There are issues there but the nature of CV's are inherently easier to use and stronger in general.

I'm sorry but yes DD's are a huge part of the problem. but instead of addressing the DD's you choose the punish the CV players even more than they are already are option . and the change in DD's doesn't have to be done by war gaming but by the DD players themselves!

so lets look at cv's.

  1. cv's start with a limited number of planes.
  2. cv's have a limited number of fighter consumables
  3. cv's have a limited number of engine boost consumables
  4. cv's at tier 8 and 10 regen planes at a rate of 1 plane every 2 minutes roughly. (different carriers regen at different times and captain skill points) (regen rate greatly affects cv play specially in the later stages of a match)
  5. each cv squadron has a limited number of planes in it. and a limited number of weapons.
  6. cv planes spot most dd's at around 2.5km. some dd's the planes literally have to fly right on top of the dd to spot them.

now lets look at dd's.

  1. start each match with unlimited Shells, Torps and AA ammo
  2. start with a limited number of smoke consumables
  3. start with a limited number of speed boost consumables.
  4. starts with unlimited fuel.
  5. can use the AA cover from other surface ships
  6. can use the AA cover of the fighters from friendly cv's
  7. can spot planes at greater ranges (6-8km)
  8. can see planes while hidden in smoke
  9. dd's are usually more maneuverable and can dodge most rockets and bombs if the DD player has an ounce of skill.

but somehow cv's and their planes are to strong?

honestly with the limits already imposed on cv's it forces the CV player to use strategy to his advantage. at tier 8 and up mosts  CA's and BB's and some DD's can completely wreck a cv squadron in seconds. specially if they are in a group. forcing the cv player into a game play at the start of the match of spotting the enemy for his team until he finds that 1 player that decides he's a lone wolf and goes off from the pack. which is usually A DD at the start of the match.

so again the problem isn't with CV's its with DD's and the other ships on the team how the players chooses to use them. ANY ship that goes away from the pack is an easier target than a group of ships sharing AA coverage.

at the start of a random match what happens? you have a group of individuals that want to play their own way. yes you get a few that will join up and work together and a couple that just go off on their own. again they make an easy target for anyone not just cv's

 

but you want to add even more limits to cv's? how about this Get DD players to change up how they play stop going lone wolf and yolo'ing into the caps taking the same routes every time. get them to stick closer to the pack and work with the other members of their team because that is what they are suppose to be a team. no navy sails a single ship into battle by itself. they are always in groups for defense.

So if you want to add another limit to CV's then you should be ok with war gaming limiting the number of Shells, Torps, and AA Ammo each ship carries? you will also be ok with wargaming limiting the amout of fuel each ship carries as well right? i mean after all fair is fair. If you want to impose a fuel or range limit on 1 class of ships then it should be the same across the board for all ships right? i mean no ship has an unlimited supply of weapons or fuel...

 

when you finally figure out a real solution to the cv dd interface that focuses on the real problem with not only DD's but every ship in the game we CV players will listen and work with you to convince war gaming to add it... until then stop trying to punish a ship class that honestly has been punished enough because other players refuse to play a ship class how its suppose to be used.

 

  • Cool 1
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×