Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
kishan99

Just a Suggestion about CVs

26 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

366
[DUD]
Members
706 posts
2,470 battles

So I know all about the ongoing CV hate.   Especially after Jingles gave his input about it and listing the problems.   Obviously, WG isn't going to remove it.  

 

So what about a debuff mechanic?   My idea is that every single time you launch a new squadron, your Aircraft restoration time increases by "x" percentage.   Basically, you can't keep chucking out aircraft all the time at the same rate throughout the battle. 

 

After 1st Squadron Launch: "5% increase in Aircraft Restoration Time"

After 2nd: "10% increase"

After 3rd: "15%"

After 4th: "20%"

After 5th: "25%"

 

Now, ongoing from here, we keep the 25% penalty but now

After 6th launch: "25% more Aircraft Restoration and lose 100 HP per second"

After 7th: "25% more Aircraft Restoration and lose 150 HP per second"

 

Of course the number would be modified but this basically makes CVs more tricky to play because you need to really make your targets count instead of throwing aircraft away.   This basically combines the old CV mechanics that instead of having 0 planes, you have significantly less.   Just give it a thought.   This should help dds much more.   This is coming from a Japanese CV player, which I honestly think it is broken.   I went on the test server and tried out the Hakar with a full airplane build and dealt 50k damage to a Yamato in like 2 minutes (the dive bombers).   Maybe RNG was on my side or something helping me with those triple citadels but I have to say, it was incredibly broken and something needs to be done.      I am trying to help out both sides here.

 

Edit: Might want to increase the health of planes so things like Worchester and Defensive AA don't completely delete Cvs and make them useless with these proposed changes

Edited by kishan99
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5
[FDS]
Members
36 posts
1,972 battles
14 minutes ago, kishan99 said:

So I know all about the ongoing CV hate.   Especially after Jingles gave his input about it and listing the problems.   Obviously, WG isn't going to remove it.  

 

So what about a debuff mechanic?   My idea is that every single time you launch a new squadron, your Aircraft restoration time increases by "x" percentage.   Basically, you can't keep chucking out aircraft all the time at the same rate throughout the battle. 

 

After 1st Squadron Launch: "5% increase in Aircraft Restoration Time"

After 2nd: "10% increase"

After 3rd: "15%"

After 4th: "20%"

After 5th: "25%"

 

Now, ongoing from here, we keep the 25% penalty but now

After 6th launch: "25% more Aircraft Restoration and lose 100 HP per second"

After 7th: "25% more Aircraft Restoration and lose 150 HP per second"

 

Of course the number would be modified but this basically makes CVs more tricky to play because you need to really make your targets count instead of throwing aircraft away.   This basically combines the old CV mechanics that instead of having 0 planes, you have significantly less.   Just give it a thought.   This should help dds much more.   This is coming from a Japanese CV player, which I honestly think it is broken.   I went on the test server and tried out the Hakar with a full airplane build and dealt 50k damage to a Yamato in like 2 minutes (the dive bombers).   Maybe RNG was on my side or something helping me with those triple citadels but I have to say, it was incredibly broken and something needs to be done.      I am trying to help out both sides here.

just why. no your not helping both sides don't lie please.

also i just thought of this, if this was to happen what happens if i click on the wrong squad and have to send them back guess im eating a debuff no reason god forbid im on the 6th launch

Edited by bugman757

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[DUD]
Members
706 posts
2,470 battles
2 minutes ago, bugman757 said:

just why.

because they are broken

 

2 minutes ago, bugman757 said:

no your not helping both sides don't lie please

I am... People get to keep their precious CVs, and keep annoying dds with a penalty.   Hence... both sides...

Edited by kishan99
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,846
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,430 posts
14,165 battles

While a different idea it is just another let's punish the player playing the CV idea.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5
[FDS]
Members
36 posts
1,972 battles
6 minutes ago, kishan99 said:

because they are broken

 

I am... People get to keep their precious CVs, and keep annoying dds with a penalty.   Hence... both sides...

Cringe thats your entire post sorry man.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,877
[WPORT]
Members
5,490 posts
10,518 battles

The CV/DD rivalry is natural and supposed to be friendly.

We play a game wherein we sink each other's ships.

The victory conditions are well-published.

CV's have already been nerfed via the "re-work".

Entire ships were *taken* from CV players because of the whining from the people who couldn't learn how to play well together as a team, but they could learn how to whine on the forums and the internet until WOWs "did something".

The next time you, or any other anti-cv player, wants "something to be done" about CV's, I suggest you remember that what could be done may yet become another Puerto Rico disaster!

 

Edited by Wolfswetpaws
edit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,275
[TMS]
Beta Testers
3,731 posts
14,321 battles
22 minutes ago, kishan99 said:

After 1st Torpedos Launch: "5% increase in  Torpedo Reload Time"

After 2nd: "10% increase"

After 3rd: "15%"

After 4th: "20%"

After 5th: "25%"

 

Now, ongoing from here, we keep the 25% penalty but now

After 6th launch: "25% more Torpedos Reload and lose 5 knots of speed"

After 7th: "25% more  torpedo Reload and lose 15 knots of speed"

I fixed this for you, and made it so someone who hates DD's can have these same ideas of yours done to them, and You can change it again to suit a BB as well.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,052
[BONKS]
Members
1,496 posts
50 battles
2 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

CV's have already been nerfed via the "re-work".

giphy.gif

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,877
[WPORT]
Members
5,490 posts
10,518 battles
2 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

giphy.gif

Puerto Rico, or worse, could happen again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,052
[BONKS]
Members
1,496 posts
50 battles
4 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

Puerto Rico, or worse, could happen again.

I mean, what was so bad about PR anyway?

Sure, the marketing and following PR disaster was terrible (or really funny depending on perspective), but beyond that? Got a few free rewards from some grind I didn't actively bother with anyway, so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edited by El2aZeR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,877
[WPORT]
Members
5,490 posts
10,518 battles
1 minute ago, El2aZeR said:

I mean, what was so bad about PR anyway?

Sure, the marketing and following PR disaster was terrible (or really funny depending on perspective), but beyond that? Got a few free rewards from some grind I didn't actively bother with anyway, so... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Fair enough.

Was a "click-bait & switch" situation.  Was an "uproar" because of what seemed like clumsy or misleading marketing?
Was the most "pitchforks & torches" situation I'd seen in the WOWs playerbase, so far.

Did people cope with it?  Yes.  Some better than others, but yes.

Heck, in full disclosure I got an Exeter from it as a reward for progress made on the P.R. grind/build.

Still didn't bring my Zuiho back.

How many ships have you had taken from your port by WOWs because they made a game change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,799
[WORX]
Members
10,650 posts
18,555 battles

I still say its quicker to return the CV  to 0.7.11...

I still say to do a CV rework 3.0

All I know, if we're not at the point CV are a problem for them to act... Then we have to wait it out, the problems are there they're not going away... Sooner or later, WG have to make a drastic/decisive action on the CV class.

The moment can't come quick enough for some..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,052
[BONKS]
Members
1,496 posts
50 battles
1 minute ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

How many ships have you had taken from your port by WOWs because they made a game change?

I rebought all CVs for the compensation before 0.8.0, so technically speaking all CVs which got removed.

On the other hand I'm still playing RTS CVs on the Chinese server, so I could also answer none.

Then again I've been playing CVs almost exclusively since the rework, which means I could also say that all my surface ships got "taken".

Pick one I suppose. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,088
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,029 posts
11,611 battles

Clearly you don't play a CV above tier 4 if at all. 

The time to restore aircraft - even WITH what things there are to speed them up, are 40-90 seconds or more PER PLANE. So as is one of the groups on Midway losing 6 planes takes 6 minutes to get back the losses - that's 1/3 of the match, and you want to INCREASE IT?

The restoration rate isn't a damn problem in how fast it is, if anything at certain tier sand certain scenario's it's how damned long it is that's an issue.

Take it from a guy that plays CV's and the other classes too, these are the issues, and the most basic forms of solutions:

  • Rocket alpha damage for high volume rockets is too high and needs a nerf, something like 50% or maybe a bit less, when were firing 16-30 rockets in a go, maybe more, damage needs to be lower especially to not stomp DD's. Dealing damage with HVAR and RP-3's should be about quantity of hits, not quality of rocket alpha.
  • The biggest one is AA needs to be PROPERLY fixed - There should not be a 500-600 DPS gap between a Yamato - that has more AA guns, and a Montana. It should be 1-200 tops. The AA shouldn't double from tier 6-8 and jump almost similarly from 8-9/10. There should be a smooth increase in DPS through the damn lines. Most ships below tier 8 need AA buffs of some level, most 8's are okay, few exceptions both ways, and several 9 and 10 ships outright need nerfs. AA also needs to be more based on the DPS - not the damn flak as the bulk of it, Flak hits to CV planes should be what a citadel hit is to a cruiser. DD's should actually have AA that's not borderline meaningless.
  • Useability of rocket planes - they should aim in faster and have better agility like they used to - once their alpha damage on HVAR and RP-3's are reduced.
  • DD's need more module HP - seriously they shouldn't be this easy to disable.
  • Spotting - at this point, it just needs to be made that CV's can not spot for their team - it gets these clowns off our backs to spot for them and solves that issue outright, just adjust xp earnings in other areas o make up for the losses. 
  • get rid of fighters beyond CV cap - with AA balanced right, cat fighters should go the way of the dodo, period unless they are an IJN gimmick (because they actually had and used them more than UK or the rest), and if the fighter consumable stays it should be a larger area, longer ammo, but drastically less damage - not an auto kill of the number of planes it deploys.
  • Bomb accuracy and damage both need to be looked at. Some bombs are way too accurate, some have way too low ability, others need some damage nerfs most likely.
  • TB's need to be adjusted case by case - Hak should go back to 3x4 but lower damage on the torps - the fact it has 12x planes still that deal MORE damage than RTS's is just stupid from day 1. Kaga I think is fine, maybe a tad high on damage, etc. 
  • Going in to a lot of the damage/balance changes - CV lines need a purpose. IJN BB's are basically BB hunters while USN excels more at Cruisers in many tiers, UK cruisers are great at DD hunting while IJN's again have some better ability vs BB's - RTS CV's had this, namely IJN better at anti BB and USN better at anti CA/L - go back to that, with IJN more anti BB, USN more anti CA while UK is more anti-CL and the easily made German line anti DD.
  • Bring back odd tiers - trying to get people to go from tier 4 -6 and have to grind the same XP any other class has to on just the tier 4 has people trapped in that tier, on top of those running from broken AA vs CV's at tiers 8-10 or just out right clubbers, exacerbating the various other issues, namely lack of AA at tier 3 and 4, in those tiers. Odd tiers will at least break some of the matches up, and pull some of the players out of tier 4. 

And that is the most basic list without me retyping any of the damn walls I've been writing since the rework was announced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
462 posts
23,224 battles
57 minutes ago, kishan99 said:

Obviously, WG isn't going to remove it.

I'm still wondering how long it will take for WG to figure out they have three different games here:

  1. Surface Ship Warfare
  2. Carrier Warfare
  3. Submarine Warfare

One could have different modes for Surface Ship Warfare:  BB-centric and General.

People claim the number of players won't support it.  But I'm thinking if done properly, it may actually attract more players and perhaps bring back some folks that have moved on due to CVs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[DUD]
Members
706 posts
2,470 battles
52 minutes ago, CriMiNaL__ said:

fixed this for you, and made it so someone who hates DD's can have these same ideas of yours done to them, and You can change it again to suit a BB as well.

I actually like this a lot not going to lie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
6 posts
879 battles
1 hour ago, kishan99 said:

So I know all about the ongoing CV hate.   Especially after Jingles gave his input about it and listing the problems.   Obviously, WG isn't going to remove it.  

 

So what about a debuff mechanic?   My idea is that every single time you launch a new squadron, your Aircraft restoration time increases by "x" percentage.   Basically, you can't keep chucking out aircraft all the time at the same rate throughout the battle. 

 

After 1st Squadron Launch: "5% increase in Aircraft Restoration Time"

After 2nd: "10% increase"

After 3rd: "15%"

After 4th: "20%"

After 5th: "25%"

 

Now, ongoing from here, we keep the 25% penalty but now

After 6th launch: "25% more Aircraft Restoration and lose 100 HP per second"

After 7th: "25% more Aircraft Restoration and lose 150 HP per second"

 

Of course the number would be modified but this basically makes CVs more tricky to play because you need to really make your targets count instead of throwing aircraft away.   This basically combines the old CV mechanics that instead of having 0 planes, you have significantly less.   Just give it a thought.   This should help dds much more.   This is coming from a Japanese CV player, which I honestly think it is broken.   I went on the test server and tried out the Hakar with a full airplane build and dealt 50k damage to a Yamato in like 2 minutes (the dive bombers).   Maybe RNG was on my side or something helping me with those triple citadels but I have to say, it was incredibly broken and something needs to be done.      I am trying to help out both sides here.

 

Edit: Might want to increase the health of planes so things like Worchester and Defensive AA don't completely delete Cvs and make them useless with these proposed changes

What you're asking for is disastrous, it would be impossible for a CV to even help his/her team after the 5th run other then maybe spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[DUD]
Members
706 posts
2,470 battles
45 minutes ago, The_Fire_Department said:

We get you dont like CVs

I actually don't mind it comparing to torp spamming dds, especially when I play it lol.  Just suggesting something to people who really hate it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[DUD]
Members
706 posts
2,470 battles
31 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

Clearly you don't play a CV above tier 4 if at all.

Tier VI and Viii.

 

32 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

Rocket alpha damage for high volume rockets is too high and needs a nerf, something like 50% or maybe a bit less, when were firing 16-30 rockets in a go, maybe more, damage needs to be lower especially to not stomp DD's. Dealing damage with HVAR and RP-3's should be about quantity of hits, not quality of rocket alpha.

I agree with this.   Doing 5k to dd is too much and that includes destroying modules. 

32 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

Useability of rocket planes - they should aim in faster and have better agility like they used to - once their alpha damage on HVAR and RP-3's are reduced.

just predict earlier and start your run earlier.   I have no problem aiming

 

33 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

DD's need more module HP - seriously they shouldn't be this easy to disable.

yes

 

33 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

Bomb accuracy and damage both need to be looked at. Some bombs are way too accurate, some have way too low ability, others need some damage nerfs most likely.

The carpet bombing is insane because even slightly off target still hits.   Doesn't British bombers avoid Flaks?

34 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

Bring back odd tiers

I wouldn't mind

 

5 minutes ago, Comander_Bowlingball said:

What you're asking for is disastrous, it would be impossible for a CV to even help his/her team after the 5th run other then maybe spot.

Adjust the numbers like I said so it isn't that bad.   i just came up with random numbers to get an idea out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,088
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,029 posts
11,611 battles
4 hours ago, kishan99 said:

just predict earlier and start your run earlier.   I have no problem aiming

Neither do I - however one of the reasons Wargaming went to the rework was to make CV's easier and more accessible to newer players and those of a lower skill level, and make them easier to use. The way CV's could aim in and all was fine earlier, if anything against DD's - which is the class they stated the aim changes were meant to help - there is no real change, the bigger impact is against cruisers and BB's that actually have decent AA. I can't tell you how many newer CV players I've seen complain about the rockets - or get chewed out in all chat because I'm bullseyeing DD's with 9 rockets and they have issues with a cruiser because even though it's not one of the better AA ones it actually has flak. They need to undo that nerf when they nerf the damage the way they should have a year ago. 

 

5 hours ago, kishan99 said:

The carpet bombing is insane because even slightly off target still hits.   Doesn't British bombers avoid Flaks?

Bombs in general are insane. I couldn't get the clip sadly but I actually had a 1-2000 lb bomb miss a DD, but it was still close enough that it rolled shock damage vs the magazine and detonated it. Meanwhile I've had a DD dead to rights in a carpet bomb with 0 hits or incapacitations. Dropped with the reticule aimed in on an AFK ship, RNG throws the bombs just off the sides and onto a turret that results in no pen with the crosshairs right on the superstructure. There needs to be a little more consistency - even if the damage has to be lowered. I'd rather be getting constant hits at a lower damage than 1 big hit every so often unless they actually give us options like taking say 4x 500 lb bombs instead of a 2000 lb bomb or the like so we can choose accuracy or alpha. 

And no, they don't avoid flak when they go higher, if that were the case my Ark Royal's tier 4 Swordfish wouldn't get slaughtered as often attacking tier 8 ships. They have to dodge left/right same as any other the problem being they are insanely slow and tier 8 ships can throw enough flak fast enough that by the time you turn to miss 1 burst the next hits you. Which is why it has one of the fastest regens - to compensate the insane losses it can take and smaller hanger. They really botched the design on Ark Royal, though not quite as bad as Indomitable.

5 hours ago, kishan99 said:

Adjust the numbers like I said so it isn't that bad.   i just came up with random numbers to get an idea out

The problem is the idea solves none of the actual issues, just like when they nerfed rocket aiming, or Hosho's torps, or any other number of things over the years regarding CV's. The only one that can even be constituted a 'problem' hat I have hands on expiereance with is Kaga - and that's not her regen rate it's that it has it's full historical compliment of around 90 planes at it's disposal and so while it makes it just able to cope vs 9 and 10 makes it godly against 6 and 7 - partially due to their inadequate AA. CV's still get effectively deplaned quite often, particularly in longer matches, unless they aren't attacking and are just spotting. And most of the whining on CV's having 'unlimited planes' is more often from players dealing with CV's in tiers where AA is inadequate at best. And much like RTS, he majority of issues with CV's would be solved if they just balance the damned AA right and not have massive DPS gaps or plane HP gaps.

You add a longer regen, were I to say screw it and go seal club in tier 4 (I avoid it because I hate just how easy it is) it wouldn't effect me at all because I'm almost never taking losses in tier 4, and what ones I do are negligible. Whereas it'd be an issue at higher tiers or stuck -2 against high AA ships or Ark Royal that is designed around the idea of high regen because it's going to take stupid high losses in most battles. 

They need to fix AA and plane HP first and foremost - then most other things and after all that - that's when we look at plane regen because some ships may need to ave longer regen's added, and others have them shortened. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,877
[WPORT]
Members
5,490 posts
10,518 battles
22 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

I rebought all CVs for the compensation before 0.8.0, so technically speaking all CVs which got removed.

On the other hand I'm still playing RTS CVs on the Chinese server, so I could also answer none.

Then again I've been playing CVs almost exclusively since the rework, which means I could also say that all my surface ships got "taken".

Pick one I suppose. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Interesting.

I was under the, mistaken, impression that WOWs updates were global and not regional.  Chinese server still on RTS is news to me.
Thanks for that.

I'll pick "the one you no longer have (on your NA account) since the CV re-work was implemented and the ship was removed from the game".
(Feels like a quote from a game show when I say it that way.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,052
[BONKS]
Members
1,496 posts
50 battles
22 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

I was under the, mistaken, impression that WOWs updates were global and not regional.  Chinese server still on RTS is news to me.

Well, Chinese law requires that you seek a local publisher for your game, otherwise you're not allowed to publish your game in China. Apparently WG and the Chinese publisher they chose had some kind of disagreement which resulted in their contract being terminated or sth along those lines, leaving the Chinese server stuck on version 0.7.3 which was just prior to the release of USN CLs.

My NA account hasn't been used since the end of 2016. My main account on EU can be found here:
https://wows-numbers.com/player/526953200,El2aZeR/

I should probably just put this in my sig, really.

Edited by El2aZeR
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,877
[WPORT]
Members
5,490 posts
10,518 battles
3 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Well, Chinese law requires that you seek a local publisher for your game, otherwise you're not allowed to publish your game in China. Apparently WG and the Chinese publisher they chose had some kind of disagreement which resulted in their contract being terminated or sth along those lines, leaving the Chinese server stuck on version 0.7.3 which was just prior to the release of USN CLs.

My NA account hasn't been used since the end of 2016. My main account on EU can be found here:
https://wows-numbers.com/player/526953200,El2aZeR/

I learn something new every day.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,015
[USA-N]
Members
785 posts
9,232 battles

Give the customer choice. Don't remove CVs from the game. Make them an option.

Choice in the market is great.

For example, if another publisher provides a similar game without CVs being forced on me, I will take it.

For example, if WG give me choice, I might spend money with them again.

Choice for the customer is fantastic. Makes glorious benefit capitalist society and free people, comrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×