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

What if CVs had zero aircraft regen but had a hard limit of their full aircraft compliment?

323 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,131
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,628 posts
4,994 battles

One of the major bones I see a lot of players posting over and over and over and over is that CVs have "infinite planes" and that there are no consequences to them for having planes shot down.  I don't agree with those positions, but if the existing system is causing players to hyperventilate then I wonder if having a completely fixed number of planes for each CV might not calm things down a bit.

I see two ways of going about this. 

1) The CV starts with 100% of its aircraft complement available for use by the player and the player can use them as he sees fit, but once they are gone then they are gone.  For a good player this might make them overly effective as they get to use their particular CV's best planes aggressively at the start, making a difference early when it counts more while a poor CV player could, in contrast, quickly find themselves without any planes at all.

2) The CV starts with some number of planes ready to go just as they do now and then they regenerate planes as losses occur, but the number of regenerations for each plane type are limited and once the regeneration has been fully used there are no more planes.  This would limit CVs much as they are now and keep the good players from dominating too much while also preventing the poorer players from being deplaned too early.

In both cases the total number of planes, assuming high enough losses to allow maximum regeneration in the second option, would be the same and absolutely finite. 

Some plane health numbers might need to be adjusted to make this work, but that shouldn't be too hard.

Would either of these systems ameliorate the feeling that some players seem to have that shooting down planes is useless because they feel that CVs have infinite numbers of planes?

  • Cool 6
  • Boring 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,900
Alpha Tester
6,440 posts
3,249 battles

Sounds like CVs before the rework, when you could do hammer-and-anvil drops on Yamatos with a Midway and Dev Strike them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,568
[PVE]
Members
19,848 posts
12,024 battles
7 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

One of the major bones I see a lot of players posting over and over and over and over is that CVs have "infinite planes" and that there are no consequences to them for having planes shot down.  I don't agree with those positions, but if the existing system is causing players to hyperventilate then I wonder if having a completely fixed number of planes for each CV might not calm things down a bit.

I see two ways of going about this. 

1) The CV starts with 100% of its aircraft complement available for use by the player and the player can use them as he sees fit, but once they are gone then they are gone.  For a good player this might make them overly effective as they get to use their particular CV's best planes aggressively at the start, making a difference early when it counts more while a poor CV player could, in contrast, quickly find themselves without any planes at all.

2) The CV starts with some number of planes ready to go just as they do now and then they regenerate planes as losses occur, but the number of regenerations for each plane type are limited and once the regeneration has been fully used there are no more planes.  This would limit CVs much as they are now and keep the good players from dominating too much while also preventing the poorer players from being deplaned too early.

In both cases the total number of planes, assuming high enough losses to allow maximum regeneration in the second option, would be the same and absolutely finite. 

Some plane health numbers might need to be adjusted to make this work, but that shouldn't be too hard.

Would either of these systems ameliorate the feeling that some players seem to have that shooting down planes is useless because they feel that CVs have infinite numbers of planes?

Planes ARE limited this way now by the match time limit.

  • Cool 7
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,856
[WPORT]
Members
5,407 posts
10,457 battles
10 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

What if CVs had zero aircraft regen but had a hard limit of their full aircraft compliment?

We had this before the CV re-work, back in the good ole RTS CV days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,131
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,628 posts
4,994 battles
13 minutes ago, 1Sherman said:

Sounds like CVs before the rework, when you could do hammer-and-anvil drops on Yamatos with a Midway and Dev Strike them.

No, the mechanics would still be as they are now, post rework.

11 minutes ago, Kizarvexis said:

Planes ARE limited this way now by the match time limit.

Yes, I know that.  Many people who complain about CVs do not seem to know that.  I don't think the second suggestion here would produce gameplay noticeably different than we have now, except the "infinite planes" complaint would be defanged.

10 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

We had this before the CV re-work, back in the good ole RTS CV days.

The first suggestion, yes, but the second is a hybrid that would produce no real change in gameplay, but would undermine one of the anti-CV talking points.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
255
[FG]
Members
566 posts
4,799 battles

There are many issues with CVs currently, but I actually like the way aircraft reserves are handled these days.

If a CV player is careless with their squadrons and doesn't manage their reserves, they will find themselves struggling to bring out full strength squads as the game goes on.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,299
[VCRUZ]
Members
4,049 posts
9,180 battles

I would like to see something like this, but i dont think WG is going to do anything like this. We would have similar issues with the RTS cv's where bad CV players would lose all planes and become useless. This would increasse the already huge skill gap even more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,832
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,411 posts
14,163 battles
18 minutes ago, Kizarvexis said:

Planes ARE limited this way now by the match time limit.

 

4 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

Yes, I know that.  Many people who complain about CVs do not seem to know willfully deny that.  I don't think the second suggestion here would produce gameplay noticeably different than we have now, except the "infinite planes" complaint would be defanged.

FTFY

 

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,568
[PVE]
Members
19,848 posts
12,024 battles
1 minute ago, BrushWolf said:

Yes, I know that.  Many people who complain about CVs do not seem to know willfully deny that 

FTFY

 

Truth!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
304
[PROJX]
Beta Testers
724 posts
4,640 battles

It sounds interesting, in theory a CV would become weaker over time like all other classes, instead of being fairly consistent. 

That would make spamming planes in the early game a real issue though.

I think having a hard cap similar or lower to what they could theoretically regen in a match would make more sense,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
330
[R-F2]
Members
727 posts
9,869 battles

The unlimited plane issue isn't really that rework CVs regenerate planes, it's that they have so many more planes than the old CVs did. If you gave them all their planes at the beginning it would be a CV buff, but if Wargaming had shown the plane numbers from the outset instead of obfuscating it with the regeneration mechanic it'd be obvious how many more planes they have.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
71
[RSF]
Members
159 posts
11,610 battles

The Siapan already has this with it extremely long plane reload compaired to all of the other cvs and its small compliant of planes in each squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,307 posts
4,577 battles

What if your plane performance begins to deteriorate after losing your better pilots. Then it could be an option to start the battle with better pilots or put them more in the back/reserves. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
975
[KAPPA]
Members
3,110 posts
8,225 battles

It'd get people to stop whining about infinite planes, so the idea has always appealed to me. Just give me 100% of the planes I could get in a 20 minute match upfront and I'll go show the red team exactly why regen is a good idea. :cap_haloween:

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
501 posts
3,962 battles

By reducing the amount of planes that carry have you will have to buff the planes as well to compensate.  and not only that it will increase the skill Gap greatly where is a team that has a bad carrier will be much harder hit than a team with a good carrier. One of the whole key points at the rework was to reduce the skill Gap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
578
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
868 posts
2,737 battles
12 minutes ago, Shoggoth_pinup said:

Just give me 100% of the planes I could get in a 20 minute match upfront and I'll go show the red team exactly why regen is a good idea

Yeap.  I remember seeing this coming when the big CC's started banging on about "unlimited planes", the foreshadowing was real.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,008
[BONKS]
Members
1,478 posts
48 battles

The issue with the current CV reserves isn't that planes regenerate over time. It is actually a quite decent system that in theory limits skilled players, as they cannot keep an optimal strike force at all times, while throwing average players a bone and thus reducing the skill gap.

The issue is that in relation to current AA strength planes regenerate far too fast and therefore even bad CV play is rarely punished. So while currently maximum plane reserves are theoretically limited by time, they may as well be unlimited for all intents and purposes.

The solution is quite simple. Either buff AA or reduce the rate at which planes regenerate. There is no need to throw the overall system completely on its head like WG has done with AA and as a result completely messed it up.

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,131
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,628 posts
4,994 battles
1 hour ago, WernerHerzdog said:

The unlimited plane issue isn't really that rework CVs regenerate planes, it's that they have so many more planes than the old CVs did. If you gave them all their planes at the beginning it would be a CV buff, but if Wargaming had shown the plane numbers from the outset instead of obfuscating it with the regeneration mechanic it'd be obvious how many more planes they have.

In some cases, yes, but not nearly to the degree that people seem to think.  The whole disposable fighters being counted as planes makes people think CVs have a lot more than they really do.  In addition the way regen works no CV will ever actually get the theoretical number of planes it looks like they could.  Regen happens when there are available spaces on the deck, but if planes exceeding the deck limit return to the ship then any excess is just tossed into the ocean.

8 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

The issue with the current CV reserves isn't that planes regenerate over time. It is actually a quite decent system that in theory limits skilled players, as they cannot keep an optimal strike force at all times, while throwing average players a bone and thus reducing the skill gap.

The issue is that in relation to current AA strength planes regenerate far too fast and therefore even bad CV play is rarely punished. So while currently maximum plane reserves are theoretically limited by time, they may as well be unlimited for all intents and purposes.

The solution is quite simple. Either buff AA or reduce the rate at which planes regenerate. There is no need to throw the overall system completely on its head like WG has done with AA and as a result completely messed it up.

What regen rate would you find acceptable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,008
[BONKS]
Members
1,478 posts
48 battles
12 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

What regen rate would you find acceptable?

Currently Saipan is about the only CV which actually has to seriously worry about managing reserves. I'd take that as a baseline and move from there.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
441
[K0]
Members
1,755 posts
8,121 battles

Unless the hardcap on planes is strict for all carriers, the second system would be virtually identical to what we have now. But if it gets people to stop whining about infinite planes I'm all for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,131
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,628 posts
4,994 battles
1 minute ago, El2aZeR said:

Currently Saipan is about the only CV which actually has to seriously worry about managing reserves. I'd take that as a baseline and move from there.

Indomitable and Kaga as well.

All of those have compensating reasons for their low regen.  Just applying that to other CVs would pretty much break them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,131
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,628 posts
4,994 battles
Just now, Flashtirade said:

Unless the hardcap on planes is strict for all carriers, the second system would be virtually identical to what we have now. But if it gets people to stop whining about infinite planes I'm all for it.

Of course it would be.  The current system, for most CVs, produces a maximum number of planes close to their hangar capacity.  That is the whole point.  The "infinite planes" complaint is just nonsense.  The second idea is mostly a placebo to defang that complaint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
441
[K0]
Members
1,755 posts
8,121 battles
2 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

Of course it would be.  The current system, for most CVs, produces a maximum number of planes close to their hangar capacity.  That is the whole point.  The "infinite planes" complaint is just nonsense.  The second idea is mostly a placebo to defang that complaint.

Then I'm all for it. There's tons of valid gripes about CVs, but this is the most incessant ones that's not actually one of the core design issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
884
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,031 posts
12,710 battles
2 hours ago, Helstrem said:

One of the major bones I see a lot of players posting over and over and over and over is that CVs have "infinite planes" and that there are no consequences to them for having planes shot down.  I don't agree with those positions, but if the existing system is causing players to hyperventilate then I wonder if having a completely fixed number of planes for each CV might not calm things down a bit.

I see two ways of going about this. 

1) The CV starts with 100% of its aircraft complement available for use by the player and the player can use them as he sees fit, but once they are gone then they are gone.  For a good player this might make them overly effective as they get to use their particular CV's best planes aggressively at the start, making a difference early when it counts more while a poor CV player could, in contrast, quickly find themselves without any planes at all.

2) The CV starts with some number of planes ready to go just as they do now and then they regenerate planes as losses occur, but the number of regenerations for each plane type are limited and once the regeneration has been fully used there are no more planes.  This would limit CVs much as they are now and keep the good players from dominating too much while also preventing the poorer players from being deplaned too early.

In both cases the total number of planes, assuming high enough losses to allow maximum regeneration in the second option, would be the same and absolutely finite. 

Some plane health numbers might need to be adjusted to make this work, but that shouldn't be too hard.

Would either of these systems ameliorate the feeling that some players seem to have that shooting down planes is useless because they feel that CVs have infinite numbers of planes?

Both concepts would do nothing more than make life harder on the players learning CV's and the just plain bad CV players. It would mean nothing to good or better CV players. Unless of course the total limits on aircraft were to the point of making the ships unplayable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5
[FDS]
Members
36 posts
1,899 battles
19 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Currently Saipan is about the only CV which actually has to seriously worry about managing reserves. I'd take that as a baseline and move from there.

so you want to take the cv with the worst reserves and the carrier where losing any planes hurts and make that the baseline, that sounds like a terrible idea. if this did happen how would you compensate the cvs which have had there regen cut, also how do you account for cvs like enterprise and ark royal who rely enterprise to a lesser so on there regen to make up for there weaker planes. enterprise has fine planes in the long run not really weak but regen is one of the stronger points of the carrier.

Edited by bugman757

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×