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

What if Light & Escort Carriers?

8 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

26
[UMY]
Members
59 posts
13,907 battles

 

The WG experiment with aircraft carriers and anti-aircraft defenses has started more than a year ago, and although adjustments and balances are still being made in this regard, the truth is that the vast majority of the community is dissatisfied with the results.


Some of the problems that can be observed right now are the following:

  • Tier 3 and 4 ships defending against air attacks without even possessing anti-aircraft defenses.
  • Aircraft carriers facing ships of 2 tiers lower or higher due to the matchmaking system, causing extremely unbalanced situations for some of the parties. Let's take any tier 8 CV as an example; in the first game he could face a division of Hallands and in the second game a poor Icarus.

For these problems, mainly, I propose the following changes to the current aircraft carrier system:

  • Tier 5 as the first tier in which aircraft carriers develop in the Tech Tree. As a consequence Hosho, Langley, Hermes and Rhein will level up and there will be no more Tier 4 aircraft carriers in the game.
  • The return of the old odd-tiered aircraft carriers to provide a continuous carrier line from tier 5 to tier 10.
  • The differentiation between fleet aircraft carriers, light aircraft carriers and escort aircraft carriers. Not necessarily creating new classes in-game, but only including more aircraft carrier lines with varied characteristics, such as light and heavy cruisers.
    • Fleet aircraft carriers are large ships with a huge hangar capacity (examples; Essex, Taiho, Audacious, Graf Zeppelin, etc.). Within the game its gameplay would continue in the current way, with 3 types of attack squadrons; rockets, TB and DB.
    • Light aircraft carriers are small to medium-sized ships, with little armor and reduced hangar capacity (examples; Independence, Ryujo, Hermes, etc.). In-game they would be aircraft carriers with concealment capabilities comparable to those of a light cruiser in most cases. Due to their poor hangar capacity, their squad options would be reduced to 2; rockets and TB or DB, depending on the gimmicks. 
    • Escort aircraft carriers are slow and variable size ships, resulting from the conversion of other ships into aircraft carriers, which have a small hangar capacity (examples; Bogue, Shimane Maru, Nairania, etc.). These ships like the previous ones would only possess two types of squadrons, rockets and TB/DB, but unlike the previous ones they could NOT be used in random battles due to their, possibly, poor performance, instead they would be ideal ships for Operations in which they could participate submarines and destroyers.
  • In the new aircraft carrier system the MM would be limited to ± 1 tier difference just for CVs, avoiding situations in which one side has too much advantage or disadvantage.

This is how the new tech trees would look like:

Due to their year of design/laid down and the fact that in most games the aircraft carrier itself doesn't engage in direct combat (laughs on Graf), some ships take place at higher or lower levels than might be expected.

USA:

Spoiler
Tier Fleet Aircraft Carrier Light Aircraft Carrier Escort Aircraft Carrier Premiums
5

Langley

- -  
6

Ranger

- Casablanca  
7

Wasp

- Bogue Independence (light) & Long Island (escort)
8

Yorktown

- Charger Enterprise (fleet) & Saipan (light) 
9 Essex - Commencement Bay Saratoga (fleet) & Sangamon (escort)
10

Midway

- -  

Ideally Yorktown should be at tier 8 in the fleet carrier line but it is better to leave the ships as they are not making too many changes.

Grind will start with Langley and then you can chose going for Ranger or Casablanca. 

As USA only had 2 light carrier classes, they could easily become premium ships.

Japan:

Spoiler
Tier Fleet Aircraft Carrier Light Aircraft Carrier Escort Aircraft Carrier Premiums
5 -

Hosho

-  
6 - Ryujo Yamashiro Maru  
7 Hiryu

Zuiho

Shimane Maru  Soryu & Unryu (fleet)
8 Shokaku

Ryuho

Kaiyo Kaga (fleet)
9 Taiho

Hiyo

Taiyo Akagi (fleet) & Shinyo (escort)
10 G15 from 1942 (Improved Taiho) aka "Hakuryu"

-

- Shinano (fleet)

Shinano might be a diffcult to balance ship.

Grind will star with Hosho and then you will have 3 options to go.

UK:

Spoiler
Tier Fleet Aircraft Carrier Light Arcraft Carrier Escort Aircraft Carrier

Premiums

5 Eagle Argus -

 

6 Furious Hermes

Archer

Glorious/Courageous (fleet)
7 Illustrious :fish_nerv:

Avenger

Ark Royal (fleet) & Attacker (escort)
8 Implacable Unicorn

Vindex

Campania (escort) & Indomitable (fleet)
9 Audacious Majestic

:fish_nerv:

Colossus (light)
10 Malta design from 1943 Centaur

Pretoria Castle

 

Here we have a little problem since Ark Royal is already a premium ship, maybe a ficticious design could solve this.

And we will have 2 differente options when startin the grind, Eagle and Argus, that will have to be chosen from Acasta. If you chose Argus then you will be able to grind the Archer line.

Germany:

Spoiler
Tier Fleet Aircraft Carrier Light Aircraft Carrier Premiums
5 Flugzeugdampfer I from 1914 aka "Ausonia" Kleinen Flugzeugträger from 1942 aka "Rhein"  
6 Elbe from 1942 Hilfsflugzeugträger II from 1943 (De Grasse conversion design)  
7

Project A III from 1942

Weser from 1942 (Seydlitz conversion design) Project A IV aka Flugdeckkreuzer E V from 1942 (light)
8

Project A II from 1942

- Graf Zeppelin (fleet)
9

Project A I from 1942

- Europa from 1942 (fleet)
10 Grossflugzeugkreuzer C from 1942 (Flight deck cruiser design) -  

Not surprisingly most of this tree is based on paper designs. If someone is iterested in knowing these designs, let me know and I'll share them.

Same situation as british CVs when starting the grinding, but without escort carriers.

France:

Spoiler
Tier Fleet Aircraft Carrier Premiums
5 Béarn 

 

6 PA-4 from 1930

Duquesne conversion design from 1935 (light)

7 Joffre from 1938

 

8

Jean Bart conversion design from 1944 

PA-25 from 1943 (light)
9

-

PA-28 from 1947 aka "Clemenceau" (light)
10

-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not enough to make a full line.

Italy:

Spoiler
Tier

Premiums

5

Sparviero (fleet)

6

 

7

Bonfiglietti's project from 1929 (fleet)

8

Aquila (fleet)

9

 

10

 

Same as above.

Soviet Union:

Spoiler
Tier Fleet Aircraft Carrier Light Aircraft Carrier
5

Project Komsomolets from 1927

-
6 :fish_nerv: Project 71 from 1936
7

:fish_nerv:

Project 68AV (Chapayev conversion design from 1939)
8

Project 72 from 1944

-
9

Project 69AV from 1945 (Kronshtadt conversion design)

-
10

Project Kostromitinova from 1946

-

An almost complete line made up entirely of paper designs.

Line could start with Komsomolets and then change to a light cruiser at tier 6 and again change at tier 8 to continue with fleet carriers.

Spain:

Spoiler
Tier

Premiums

5

 

6

Project 66 from 1950 (Canarias cruiser conversion design) (fleet)

7

 

8

 

9

 

10

 

An special mention.


Some lines have holes and some others do not reach tier 10, but it is not necessary that they all go to the maximum level, thus avoiding the non-historical designs and anyway undeniably increasing the variety of playable ships.

Edited by roofvalk
  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,918
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,451 posts
1,963 battles

Couple of questions.   

Why not Illustrious for the regular British carrier line?

Which version of Project 71 are you proposing for the Russian tree? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26
[UMY]
Members
59 posts
13,907 battles
11 hours ago, mr3awsome said:

Why not Illustrious for the regular British carrier line?

Because Implacable is already in game.

11 hours ago, mr3awsome said:

Which version of Project 71 are you proposing for the Russian tree? 

Design form 1936
Displacement: 10000 t standard; 13150 full load
Dimensions: 215m x 24m x 5.88m 
Machinery: 126 500 shp=33 kts
Armament: 8x1 100mm, 4x4 37mm, 20x1 12.7mm
                     30 airplanes
 

7ca5a592ab822c3281c72e6809440b84.png

Edited by roofvalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,155
[FURIA]
WoWS Community Contributors
2,088 posts
6,344 battles

I think the idea of Wargaming with the carriers  only in the pair numbers is to have more models for more lines in the future. If we adapt your proposal of 1 nw cv in everty tier they will run out of CV lines in the close future.

Yet I agree with the problems you detected. 

And, as I always do, I want to bring some panamerican Cvs

Artillero", "Lancero", "Coracero", "Salta" y "Corrientes weres liberty ships that used to be escort carriers and were retrofitted to cargo ship and sell to Argentina. Here th navy planned to conver them ones again to carrier and used for training.
The other idea was to convert the Brown cruiser's to carriers.
These thing never come to ben but they bought two modified colossus class the 9 de Julio and after that, the even more modified 25demayo
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,942
[SYN]
Members
9,038 posts
16,350 battles

Although it's a nice thought in parts, I don't think it'll fly because a lot of it is contrary to WG's stance on the game. The main problems are:

  1. Carriers are still, and despite the rework, fairly unpopular and WG's policy of removing every other tier to concentrate players for matchmaking remains pretty sensible. It's easier to have a shorter queue if all the T9 carrier players are instead in T8 or T10 queues along with those players. It also has the advantage of removing carriers from certain game modes (T7-T9 ranked/sprint etc.). I can't imagine WG changing that.
  2. If you introduce carriers with 1 tier spread matchmaking (which I do generally like as an idea) and stick to WG's goal of a carrier in every game you make the whole game 1-tier spread matchmaking, which WG have steadfastly refused to do, though they have updated matchmaker. Another requirement like that would probably complicate and slow matchmaker, increasing queue times, especially if you've diluted the small carrier playerbase in point 1.
  3. People won't grind 'Escort' carriers just to play them in Operations, and WG is not very invested in PvE modes, hence the general neglect of PvE and long term removal of some operations. Grinding an escort carrier when you could bring your better fleet carrier seems a waste of time, you could modify airgroups for ASW operations, but escort carriers seem fundamentally unappealing, low power and very low speed.

I don't think the Light Carrier idea will really work, despite trying to leverage concealment and new planes. Spending lots of effort with fighters to occasionally stop some red bombers (which can drop their own fighters) is not likely to be productive. Moving up is very dangerous with radar and air spotting. Light carriers are quite simply fleet carriers only worse. While there's nothing to stop a light cruiser being balanced with a heavy cruiser, or even superior, or a destroyer with a destroyer leader, the light carriers are simply smaller, less well armored, typically slower, equipped with less AA/secondary weapons, smaller on the hangar and well... you get the idea. Worse. I don't think you could balance them around concealment and fighters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,918
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,451 posts
1,963 battles
12 hours ago, roofvalk said:

Because Implacable is already in game.

Design form 1936
Displacement: 10000 t standard; 13150 full load
Dimensions: 215m x 24m x 5.88m 
Machinery: 126 500 shp=33 kts
Armament: 8x1 100mm, 4x4 37mm, 20x1 12.7mm
                     30 airplanes
 

7ca5a592ab822c3281c72e6809440b84.png

I meant more in relation to Ark Royalas its already a premium, and has a closer relationship to Implacable and those that come after it. 

I believe that is Project 71A; Project 71B was a larger design which better met the capabilities that were hoped for. I also believe its from later than 1936. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26
[UMY]
Members
59 posts
13,907 battles
16 hours ago, Talleyrand said:

I think the idea of Wargaming with the carriers  only in the pair numbers is to have more models for more lines in the future. If we adapt your proposal of 1 nw cv in everty tier they will run out of CV lines in the close future.

WG announced the reintroduction of odd-tier aircraft carriers in the future but if the gameplay will be exactly the same, what is the point of having more branches?

16 hours ago, Talleyrand said:

And, as I always do, I want to bring some panamerican Cvs

Let me investigate and I'll add them to the proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26
[UMY]
Members
59 posts
13,907 battles
13 hours ago, mofton said:

Carriers are still, and despite the rework, fairly unpopular and WG's policy of removing every other tier to concentrate players for matchmaking remains pretty sensible. It's easier to have a shorter queue if all the T9 carrier players are instead in T8 or T10 queues along with those players. It also has the advantage of removing carriers from certain game modes (T7-T9 ranked/sprint etc.). I can't imagine WG changing that.

low popularity is kind of understandable, but WG deciding to remove them from the game didn't make them more attractive.

13 hours ago, mofton said:

If you introduce carriers with 1 tier spread matchmaking (which I do generally like as an idea) and stick to WG's goal of a carrier in every game you make the whole game 1-tier spread matchmaking, which WG have steadfastly refused to do, though they have updated matchmaker. Another requirement like that would probably complicate and slow matchmaker, increasing queue times, especially if you've diluted the small carrier playerbase in point 1.

increasing single tier battles would be an option, but the problem of long wait times remain.

13 hours ago, mofton said:

People won't grind 'Escort' carriers just to play them in Operations, and WG is not very invested in PvE modes, hence the general neglect of PvE and long term removal of some operations. Grinding an escort carrier when you could bring your better fleet carrier seems a waste of time, you could modify airgroups for ASW operations, but escort carriers seem fundamentally unappealing, low power and very low speed.

subs are in a similar state right now, if they prove not to performe well in random battles, a unique battle type will be created for them and we will have to grind them anyway. Escorts could be similar, participating in that unique battle type, bringing them some special features.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×