Aircraft carrier power level

[dragonkingofthestar]

what will keep carrier's from bombing every one else's battle ships out of the water like they did in real life? or is this a acceptiable break from reality were acepting for the sake of this game.

[triptyx]

Balance.  :)

 

I'll assume AA fire will be pumped up a bit, and carriers will have to manage their aircraft carefully to ensure they don't lose their available squadrons due to total squad loss.  Further, fuel limits could ensure that aircraft only have a limited loiter time to continue to inflict damage.

[sgtpepper500]

Well first of all I believe that if one team has a carrier that the other one will have as well. So that right there is a counter as there will be other planes engaging them.

 

Also planes will not be insta killing everything, as they will be having to deal with all the AA. AA is also AI controlled so they will be always doing their job.

 

Planes also do not have a 100% hit rate.

 

Carriers are not invincible so they will not be able to solo everything around them.

 

All of this plus other factors which are mostly quite realistic allow for naval engagements where a carrier will not be the sole factor in winning.

 

TL;DR- balance.

[lapon2046]

Speed of aircraft launching and AA are probably the major limiting factors, you dont want your bombers flying over the DD or CL/CA or they will get shot to hell, and the limited range of aircraft which might prevent them from taking very circuitous routes.

[Capcon]

You'll find with some reading that big strikes from big carriers were normally require to take out big ship (there were of course exceptions). The spotting aircraft sound like they will be a key to accurate long range shooting too.

[Wunderwaffen1945]

dragonkingofthestar, on 04 February 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

what will keep carrier's from bombing every one else's battle ships out of the water like they did in real life? or is this a acceptiable break from reality were acepting for the sake of this game.

other carriers maybe  :Smile_glasses:

[Wake_Island]

ITS OVER 9000!!!!

[Carrier_Enterprise]

Wake_Island, on 04 February 2013 - 04:59 PM, said:

ITS OVER 9000!!!!

It had to be said, It just had to.

[Carrier_Enterprise]

[Quaffer]

Just a surmise:  Carriers could and did defeat other vessels because they could project power (fly planes) at a greater distance than non-carrier vessels (fire shells).  From the center of a WoWS map most battleships will be capable of hitting most targets that are on the map.  This makes it less of a sniper rifle vs revolver fight and more of a knife fight.  While is not a historical representation of war at sea it will lend itself to a more balanced game.

[ShamelessAdvocate]

I suspect that, like arty in WoT, there will be more than a few people setting their sights on taking out the carriers as quick as possible and so protecting them becomes essential.. and yes, I realize that carriers are not like arty as they are not THAT squishy, but any good team worth their salt will use BBs, DDs and Cruisers to screen off attackers against their team's CVs.

 

I guarantee, if I am in a match where my team has carrier(s) I will probably take the role of being their defense screen more often than not unless our team already has some folks dedicating themselves to the defense of the carriers.

[Capcon]

masonicaviator, on 04 February 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

I suspect that, like arty in WoT, there will be more than a few people setting their sights on taking out the carriers as quick as possible and so protecting them becomes essential.. and yes, I realize that carriers are not like arty as they are not THAT squishy, but any good team worth their salt will use BBs, DDs and Cruisers to screen off attackers against their team's CVs.

I guarantee, if I am in a match where my team has carrier(s) I will probably take the role of being their defense screen more often than not unless our team already has some folks dedicating themselves to the defense of the carriers.

Agreed, defending our carriers means our carrier might have planes to help in their own defense while the attackers might lack air cover. Advantage us!

I am quite interested to see what the balance of attack and defense is aircraft versus AA guns since both will be out of the player's direct control largely.

[Wunderwaffen1945]

9000!

[Commanderjoebob]

well on the FaQ they said each carrier wont hold more than like 15 planes, there will also be only 1 carrier per team. So with 5-6 BB's AA fire raining down (or up) on the planes I think it will be pretty well balanced.

[Crag_r]

I think the biggest thing that will stop a carrier from bombing all the ships is... well another Carrier or at least is Air wing, hence why we are going to see tactics involved in game

[Appollosnos]

Clan Wars is going to be pretty crazy with the slot system(hypothetical) I could see maybe 4-5 carriers 2-3 battleships and the rest split between Destroyers and cruisers

[Krieg]

Nobody will play if a single carrier strike can wipe out a fleet.

[trojankv]

Krieg, on 04 February 2013 - 09:33 PM, said:

Nobody will play if a single carrier strike can wipe out a fleet.

Agreed, that would be pretty unbalanced.  Plus practically everyone in the queue would be on carriers.  But it could very likely be that the team that best protects it's carrier will be the team that wins.

[triptyx]

It may end up being like a coordinated team with skilled arty - ensuring they remain unmolested to whoop some tail may greatly increase the chances of a win.

[Capcon]

I have to think that bombing accuracy of the AI carrier strikes will not be awe inspiring.

 

And 18" aerial torpedoes are not Long Lances.

 

If we start with ships from before World War I the planes will be pretty underwhelming for quite some time.

 

By 1927 the top speed of twin engine (yes twin engined) Douglas T2D torpedo bombs from the CV-1 Langley was 125mph. The Fairey Flycatcher fighters from the Argus being only a little faster. Gloster designed Nakijima's being much the same.

 

Carriers don't get really dangerous until the late 30's. IMHO

[Enkryptid]

Capcon, on 04 February 2013 - 07:20 PM, said:

Agreed, defending our carriers means our carrier might have planes to help in their own defense while the attackers might lack air cover. Advantage us!

I am quite interested to see what the balance of attack and defense is aircraft versus AA guns since both will be out of the player's direct control largely.

i am also looking to go the Cruiser route and provide some defense to a huge target on our team, there will always be someone trying to kill the carrier = moar killz for me!  :Smile_playing:

[NynjaSquirrel]

I'm very interested in going for carriers, but am hoping they won't go the way of the slow heavies in WoT and become redundant.

[Enkryptid]

NynjaSquirrel, on 07 February 2013 - 11:16 AM, said:

I'm very interested in going for carriers, but am hoping they won't go the way of the slow heavies in WoT and become redundant.

i hope to try carriers as my 2nd ship, i am sure they will be a lot of fun. i am hoping the RTS style gameplay for them will add a different dimension to battle, more so than arty currently do in WOT

[Capcon]

Another possibility is that carrier power level will be controlled at least in part via the in game economy.

 

If my carrier has 65 planes on it and I lose 17 in one battle do they come back for free?

 

Are better planes more expensive? better aerial torps? better/bigger bombs? AP bombs versus General Purpose?

 

One big bomb per plane versus 2 or 3 smaller ones?

 

If ships with guns and torps have to "pay" for ammo I would expect carriers to pay for bombs, torps, and planes.

 

I don't recall seeing much from KGB on this other than a "not yet" back in August.

[triptyx]

Agreed Capcon.  Having to replenish carrier "ammo" in the form of planes and bombs is a critical component of the economy.