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

Incentive to balance CVs

40 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,015
[USA-N]
Members
785 posts
9,212 battles

I played a match today where a tier 8 CV was raging in chat because his team had potato-ed and he could not do much against the tier 10 ships in our fleet. He was last surviving member of his team (duh, he was a CV), and we had about 5 ships alive at the end. So, it was a clear win, but not an absolute ROTFL paddling.

So this guy was really raging. He was salty as anything, because his tier 8 CV was not doing massive damage to tier 10 ships. The thing was, I watched him do 8k rocket damage to a Smolensk, as he was raging. So it wasn't really the case that he was underpowered. He was just mad.

The point I took away, however, was how incredibly self entitled CV players can be. The guy was low tier. The guy was still alive at the end of the match. The guy was damaging ships two tiers higher, without being hit back.

Yet, he was raging. He was demanding that his ship be buffed.

There seems to be something desperately wrong with CVs getting to play whole games, while everybody else risks being dumped out early.

I wonder, what if killing a CV automatically granted a million credits to those who did damage to it?

If killing CVs had the right incentive, players might change their tactics in order to balance the risks and outcomes in the game.

I am in favour of bringing CVs into the game, rather than shutting them out. To do this, they need to face real risk. We will know this has occurred when they start going down early, instead of being the last left alive in every match.

Put a million credit bounty on killing CVs, and lower their AA defence, so that CV pilots can profit just as easily (perhaps more so) as everyone else. Make CV vs CV combat lucrative, and the main focus of fleet actions.

If CVs face real risk, there is no reason they can't become valued members of the community.

Show me the incentive, I will show you the outcome.

Edited by SidTheBlade
  • Cool 4
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
305
[PROJX]
Beta Testers
724 posts
4,640 battles

That's just going to lead to DDs going around the map border to hunt them, and inevitably dying. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
548 posts
40 minutes ago, SidTheBlade said:

I am in favour of bringing CVs into the game, rather than shutting them out. To do this, they need to face real risk. We will know this has occurred when they start going down early, instead of being the last left alive in every match

Firstly, within the context of this game they are airports not ships.

Secondly, airports > ground targets.  There is no balancing the two.  How do you balance a hawk versus a squirrel?  The only chance the squirrel has is not being the one chosen that day.

Thirdly, the AA is automated.  It doesnt matter if the red bote is a bot or human.  

Fourthly, players have to make a choice of a heavy AA ship or not - before knowing what type of game thier getting into. It severely impacts quality of game.  

 

Three solutions to the problem: CVs in CO-OP & Scenarios only;  separate CV mode, or a player option for Random matches with or without CVs.

 

 

  • Cool 2
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
822
[PISD]
Members
1,277 posts
5,261 battles

Okay, so a CV player raged, which is prove of...?

 

funny enough, the more CV we have the easier it will be to balance. Right now since we have some 50% game with CV an AA build is not that rewarding, but in a game where 80% of the match would have CV such build could be more competitive, for instance.

And at some point maybe DD will understand to play with their AA instead of either keeping it on or off....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,665
[O7]
Members
1,030 posts
4,390 battles
1 hour ago, SidTheBlade said:

I played a match today where a tier 8 CV was raging in chat because his team had potato-ed and he could not do much against the tier 10 ships in our fleet. He was last surviving member of his team (duh, he was a CV), and we had about 5 ships alive at the end. So, it was a clear win, but not an absolute ROTFL paddling.

So this guy was really raging. He was salty as anything, because his tier 8 CV was not doing massive damage to tier 10 ships. The thing was, I watched him do 8k rocket damage to a Smolensk, as he was raging. So it wasn't really the case that he was underpowered. He was just mad.

The point I took away, however, was how incredibly self entitled CV players can be. The guy was low tier. The guy was still alive at the end of the match. The guy was damaging ships two tiers higher, without being hit back.

Yet, he was raging. He was demanding that his ship be buffed.

There seems to be something desperately wrong with CVs getting to play whole games, while everybody else risks being dumped out early.

I wonder, what if killing a CV automatically granted a million credits to those who did damage to it?

If killing CVs had the right incentive, players might change their tactics in order to balance the risks and outcomes in the game.

I am in favour of bringing CVs into the game, rather than shutting them out. To do this, they need to face real risk. We will know this has occurred when they start going down early, instead of being the last left alive in every match.

Put a million credit bounty on killing CVs, and lower their AA defence, so that CV pilots can profit just as easily (perhaps more so) as everyone else. Make CV vs CV combat lucrative, and the main focus of fleet actions.

If CVs face real risk, there is no reason they can't become valued members of the community.

Show me the incentive, I will show you the outcome.

image.thumb.png.fa3d67766513ca15fb121a46f21f5234.png

Since December, you have played 242+21+27+18+17 = 325 games

And you have won 242(.4959)+21(.5714)+27(.5185)+18(.4444)+17(.5882) = 164 games

So that is 50.46% Win Rate, not even close to your so called 10% Win Rate

Confirmation Bias is a wonderful thing isn't it?

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,015
[USA-N]
Members
785 posts
9,212 battles

The problem is that CVs do not wish to sink other CVs.

Not only is this toxic, because it means CVs are only present to farm damage from ships that are unequal to them, it is desperately unrealistic.

When CVs became a thing, in the Battle of the Coral Sea, the battle was between CVs, with all other ships lending support. The main priority for both sets of CVs were the enemy CVs.

Of course.

WOWS gets this badly wrong, and all the fail in the world follows from the mistake in game design. CVs in WOWS have zero incentive to hunt other CVs. Instead, they spend the entire battle farming other classes of ships.

CVs, if they are to be brought into the community of decent persons, need to have incentives that induce them to prioritise other CVs as their targets.

Otherwise, they are The Fail, and will remain outcasts.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
501 posts
3,962 battles
14 minutes ago, SidTheBlade said:

The problem is that CVs do not wish to sink other CVs.

Not only is this toxic, because it means CVs are only present to farm damage from ships that are unequal to them, it is desperately unrealistic.

When CVs became a thing, in the Battle of the Coral Sea, the battle was between CVs, with all other ships lending support. The main priority for both sets of CVs were the enemy CVs.

Of course.

WOWS gets this badly wrong, and all the fail in the world follows from the mistake in game design. CVs in WOWS have zero incentive to hunt other CVs. Instead, they spend the entire battle farming other classes of ships.

CVs, if they are to be brought into the community of decent persons, need to have incentives that induce them to prioritise other CVs as their targets.

Otherwise, they are The Fail, and will remain outcasts.

 try playing a carrier and attacking other carriers it will not take you long to find out why carriers do not attack each other. it becomes extremely tedious and annoying and takes forever to fly your plane to the other side of the map carriers attacking each other because annoying to both parties involved and a quick way to lose your airplane. And all the while you're not helping your team

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,763 posts
93 battles
1 hour ago, SidTheBlade said:

The problem is that CVs do not wish to sink other CVs.

Not only is this toxic, because it means CVs are only present to farm damage from ships that are unequal to them, it is desperately unrealistic.

When CVs became a thing, in the Battle of the Coral Sea, the battle was between CVs, with all other ships lending support. The main priority for both sets of CVs were the enemy CVs.

Of course.

WOWS gets this badly wrong, and all the fail in the world follows from the mistake in game design. CVs in WOWS have zero incentive to hunt other CVs. Instead, they spend the entire battle farming other classes of ships.

CVs, if they are to be brought into the community of decent persons, need to have incentives that induce them to prioritise other CVs as their targets.

Otherwise, they are The Fail, and will remain outcasts.

Have you tried playing carriers yourself?

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
482
[RM-I]
[RM-I]
Members
960 posts
9,462 battles
1 hour ago, cronics said:

 try playing a carrier and attacking other carriers it will not take you long to find out why carriers do not attack each other. it becomes extremely tedious and annoying and takes forever to fly your plane to the other side of the map carriers attacking each other because annoying to both parties involved and a quick way to lose your airplane. And all the while you're not helping your team

It’s annoying to everyone else who gets attacked by a cv as well..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,519
[HINON]
Members
13,243 posts
2 hours ago, DolphinPrincess said:

Confirmation Bias is a wonderful thing isn't it?

It's one hell of a drug. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
809
[BONKS]
Members
693 posts
3,376 battles
4 hours ago, SidTheBlade said:

The point I took away, however, was how incredibly self entitled CV players can be

Coz nobody in any other ship class has raged in chat and been self entitled... ever... in the WHOLE history of World of Warships...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
809
[BONKS]
Members
693 posts
3,376 battles
4 hours ago, PotatoMD said:

That's just going to lead to DDs going around the map border to hunt them, and inevitably dying. 

They do that anyway. It's both cute and hilarious when they try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
828
[PIG]
[PIG]
Members
1,207 posts
5,634 battles
6 hours ago, SidTheBlade said:

I played a match today where a tier 8 CV was raging in chat because his team had potato-ed and he could not do much against the tier 10 ships in our fleet. He was last surviving member of his team (duh, he was a CV), and we had about 5 ships alive at the end. So, it was a clear win, but not an absolute ROTFL paddling.

So this guy was really raging. He was salty as anything, because his tier 8 CV was not doing massive damage to tier 10 ships. The thing was, I watched him do 8k rocket damage to a Smolensk, as he was raging. So it wasn't really the case that he was underpowered. He was just mad.

The point I took away, however, was how incredibly self entitled CV players can be. The guy was low tier. The guy was still alive at the end of the match. The guy was damaging ships two tiers higher, without being hit back.

Yet, he was raging. He was demanding that his ship be buffed.

There seems to be something desperately wrong with CVs getting to play whole games, while everybody else risks being dumped out early.

I wonder, what if killing a CV automatically granted a million credits to those who did damage to it?

If killing CVs had the right incentive, players might change their tactics in order to balance the risks and outcomes in the game.

I am in favour of bringing CVs into the game, rather than shutting them out. To do this, they need to face real risk. We will know this has occurred when they start going down early, instead of being the last left alive in every match.

Put a million credit bounty on killing CVs, and lower their AA defence, so that CV pilots can profit just as easily (perhaps more so) as everyone else. Make CV vs CV combat lucrative, and the main focus of fleet actions.

If CVs face real risk, there is no reason they can't become valued members of the community.

Show me the incentive, I will show you the outcome.

CV take a huge risk.
When a squadron attacks, it can be obliterated by AA in a couple of seconds if player knows how to use sector reinforcement!
No squadron can sink a ship in one run.
Almost all ships can destroy a squadron!!!

That is completely unfair.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,840
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
12,608 posts
6 hours ago, Farm_Fresh_Eggs said:

How do you balance a hawk versus a squirrel?  The only chance the squirrel has is not being the one chosen that day.

player option for Random matches with or without CVs.

hawk versus a squirrel? 

In biology, we call that an r-selection strategy. That is, instead of investing a lot of time in raising and teaching a few offspring, you just have a bunch of them in hopes that when the hawks get full enough a few will survive. I think this can be applied to WOWS too without too much of a stretch. The CV now can only attack one ship at a time rather several under the old RTS system. It also cam spot in only one area (or two for a time with fighters), rather than leaving fighter squadrons over all of the enemy DDs in order to keep them perma-spotted.

player option for Random matches with or without CVs.

There's never going to be a no-CV mode because this would result in longer queue times. CV already are less played than other ships. At high tiers, at least, the odds are that you will see a CV in less than half the games you play.

Edited by Snargfargle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
809
[BONKS]
Members
693 posts
3,376 battles
46 minutes ago, franz_von_goltz said:

No squadron can sink a ship in one run.

Ding Ding! 

Wrong!

1787524067_poorDD.png2.thumb.png.9d7c9800cb05c79f465ec86a4d556446.png

393313437_rocketsonDDs.thumb.png.31951f6e89c59794e29f58c82271dfd1.png

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
548 posts
2 hours ago, Snargfargle said:

There's never going to be a no-CV mode because this would result in longer queue times

It was a proffered solution; not a prediction.  Also, CB's are working more-than fine without airports.  

I know you're desperate to protect your seal-clubber special, but they arent good for the health of the game.  

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,029
[BONKS]
Members
1,478 posts
48 battles
3 hours ago, franz_von_goltz said:

When a squadron attacks, it can be obliterated by AA in a couple of seconds if player knows how to use sector reinforcement!

Sector reinforcement is a placebo mechanic against the grand majority of planes.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,840
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
12,608 posts
19 minutes ago, Farm_Fresh_Eggs said:

It was a proffered solution; not a prediction.  Also, CB's are working more-than fine without airports.  

I know you're desperate to protect your seal-clubber special, but they arent good for the health of the game.  

The "health" of a game is determined, in part, by player numbers and accrued revenue. It is also indicated by how often and extensively the game is updated, the availability of new game events, and the amount of new content. How well the managers deal with chat abuse, cheating, and how well the forums are moderated are other indicators of a healthy game. No matter how often people complain about minutiae in the forums all of these point to the fact that WOWS is a healthy game.

Edited by Snargfargle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
548 posts
21 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

The "health" of a game is determined, in part, by player numbers and accrued revenue. It is also indicated by how often and extensively the game is updated, the availability of new game events, and the amount of new content. How well the managers deal with chat abuse, cheating, and how well the forums are moderated are other indicators of a healthy game. No matter how often people complain about minutiae in the forums all of these point to the fact that WOWS is a healthy game.

Time will tell.  It's been a year since 0.8 and WG is still 'tweaking' airports and the complaints only get louder.

 

Keep in mind that WG left them out of CB.  Changes are slow with WG..  we'll see how things progress.  

 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,425
[WOLFG]
Members
28,933 posts
8,200 battles
10 hours ago, PotatoMD said:

That's just going to lead to DDs going around the map border to hunt them, and inevitably dying. 

Yup, people think DDs are easy to kill within range of multiple AA ships, (and to be fair, they can be) how much easier is it to kill one racing ahead by himself, when you know what his destination is?

It really just takes the effect of people prioritising mission requirements over winning, and dials it up to 9000 lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,425
[WOLFG]
Members
28,933 posts
8,200 battles
42 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Sector reinforcement is a placebo mechanic against the grand majority of planes.

I agree, but that's just a matter of numbers. Take it to an extreme, make sector reinforcement add 1000% damage, planes will drop like flies. So there is a happy medium somewhere.

Same goes for DFAA. No reason it can't deliver an attack debuff similar to the RTS days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
809
[BONKS]
Members
693 posts
3,376 battles
10 hours ago, PotatoMD said:

That's just going to lead to DDs going around the map border to hunt them, and inevitably dying. 

One tried tonight. It did not go well for them. They died 1 rocket squad later. What an assets to his team, truly. 

1170981871_StupidCVsnipingDD.thumb.png.faf9f094ec8752c45cff3ab43e8d4260.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,425
[WOLFG]
Members
28,933 posts
8,200 battles
3 hours ago, franz_von_goltz said:

CV take a huge risk.
When a squadron attacks, it can be obliterated by AA in a couple of seconds if player knows how to use sector reinforcement!

That's the problem, "can". A mediocre player can be obliterated, while a good player can largely ignore it. There's really no middle ground at present.

I like that WG is testing removal of "immunity zones". This won't make AA any harder for mediocre players, as they don't "exploit" them anyway. But it will (hopefully) rein in good players somewhat, and make AA more consistent.

3 hours ago, franz_von_goltz said:


No squadron can sink a ship in one run.

Not true.

I'm a mediocre CV player, and I've sunk lower-tier DDs with one squadron.

The reason it's not common for me, is that, because I can't really take advantage of immunity zones, 2 runs is all I usually get without having to bring up fresh planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,425
[WOLFG]
Members
28,933 posts
8,200 battles
14 minutes ago, Toss_a_plus_1_to_your_CV said:

One tried tonight. It did not go well for them. They died 1 rocket squad later. What an assets to his team, truly. 

1170981871_StupidCVsnipingDD.thumb.png.faf9f094ec8752c45cff3ab43e8d4260.png

 

Even I can kite a DD in a CV lol.

I admit, since I decided not to play "fair" and focus on DDs, I definitely sympathise with the DDs more. I've been taking out the rocket planes, and then if he smokes up, recall the rocket planes and come back with TBs, and torp the smoke.

One thing I never realised before is, if you're a DD in smoke, and TBs are near, you should turn off your AA. The constant stream of tracers coming from your boat makes a perfect (and constantly updating) aiming guide for a 2D weapon like torps. 

The only thing that really saves them in any given match is a combined lack of skill and determination on the part of the CV player.

I'll be honest. If DDs were made completely immune to damage from CVs, (unrealistic I know) I'd probably be ok with that. (although I do think bombs and torps vs. DDs are ok, and I would prefer rockets to be about chip damage and fires as opposed to being useless vs. a DD)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
215 posts
5,328 battles
11 hours ago, SidTheBlade said:

I played a match today where a tier 8 CV was raging in chat because his team had potato-ed and he could not do much against the tier 10 ships in our fleet. He was last surviving member of his team (duh, he was a CV), and we had about 5 ships alive at the end. So, it was a clear win, but not an absolute ROTFL paddling.

So this guy was really raging. He was salty as anything, because his tier 8 CV was not doing massive damage to tier 10 ships. The thing was, I watched him do 8k rocket damage to a Smolensk, as he was raging. So it wasn't really the case that he was underpowered. He was just mad.

The point I took away, however, was how incredibly self entitled CV players can be. The guy was low tier. The guy was still alive at the end of the match. The guy was damaging ships two tiers higher, without being hit back.

Yet, he was raging. He was demanding that his ship be buffed.

There seems to be something desperately wrong with CVs getting to play whole games, while everybody else risks being dumped out early.

I wonder, what if killing a CV automatically granted a million credits to those who did damage to it?

If killing CVs had the right incentive, players might change their tactics in order to balance the risks and outcomes in the game.

I am in favour of bringing CVs into the game, rather than shutting them out. To do this, they need to face real risk. We will know this has occurred when they start going down early, instead of being the last left alive in every match.

Put a million credit bounty on killing CVs, and lower their AA defence, so that CV pilots can profit just as easily (perhaps more so) as everyone else. Make CV vs CV combat lucrative, and the main focus of fleet actions.

If CVs face real risk, there is no reason they can't become valued members of the community.

Show me the incentive, I will show you the outcome.

Putting 8 k into a smolensk is nothing if you spent all your planes getting that number. at this point you might as well become a huge torpedo and ram the first ship you see.
You obviously have never played a carrier as some player stated. Most of all our weapons are useless and damaged reduced because of nerf table rigging.
That so called raging player probably didn't switch to spot mode vs offensive mode when uptiered. Notice the damage output drastically go down by checking your Cv player in the credit rolls.
By all means put a bounty on a Cv and i swear to you that a good team and Carrier will rope a dope your hunters and the game will be end faster than you can type gg.

I love t-6 players you always have the moron DD that goes out of his way to try to sink us big bad cv's. We see them, We throw more against the opposing fleet while keeping an eye on mr hero till he's all alone far far away from any help and then well ... Hotel california baby.
WE FEAST on the little bastard SO... Yes PUT a BOUNTY on us and watch the real players with real experience tear your soul out and eat it.

Get this in your head and i mean it with all good intentions...Cv's do not engage other surface ships unless it's really a last resort.
 

Edited by Skidmark_01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×