CV ideas

[dolan49f]

These are just a few ideas for thought. Please this are friendly suggestions.

Spotting.

Upon being spotted by an enemy carrier friendly ships of the carrier will only show the last known location on the mini map of the enemy ship. However, friendly ships that are within 10 km of the spotted ship spotted by the cv is visible to friendly ships and will be detected. For example, an enemy ship is behind a mountain and is 5 km from a friendly ship.  The friendly ship can not spot the ship, but the cv's aircraft can spot the ship and the enemy ship will be detected to the friendly ship and other teammates. 

Secondaries.

If ships have dual purpose cannons, they should be allowed to switch from ship targeting to planes. Time to switch from ships to planes should be a 10 sec delay. 

Pilots as a resource.

Pilots suffer battle fatigue or become hardened 

a. when flights suffer great loss the pilots become battle fatigued and lose 15% of abilities

b. when more pilots return from flights, battle fatigue is removed

C. When more pilots return, instead of being shot down pilots receive the hardened status + 10% of abilities

What those abilities are ill let the forum decide 

 

If you dont like that model how about this

Pilots are given a status.

a. Green, are new pilots that are used when planes are shot down. - 15% abilities

b. Ready. are pilots are what you begin with a the start of the battle. green pilots can become ready after returning back from successful attacks.

c. Veteran, battle hardened pilots + 10% abilities

Formation Replenishment

On the attack run it should take 2 seconds for planes to re-enter the attack fun formation.

This is makes shooting down aircraft meaningful. 

[Farm_Fresh_Eggs]

Much easier to simply limit CVs to PVE modes only.  

[Laser_Beam]

Even easier to remove CV from the game.

[BrushWolf]

47 minutes ago, dolan49f said:

These are just a few ideas for thought. Please this are friendly suggestions.

Spotting.

Upon being spotted by an enemy carrier friendly ships of the carrier will only show the last known location on the mini map of the enemy ship. However, friendly ships that are within 10 km of the spotted ship spotted by the cv is visible to friendly ships and will be detected. For example, an enemy ship is behind a mountain and is 5 km from a friendly ship.  The friendly ship can not spot the ship, but the cv's aircraft can spot the ship and the enemy ship will be detected to the friendly ship and other teammates. 

Secondaries.

If ships have dual purpose cannons, they should be allowed to switch from ship targeting to planes. Time to switch from ships to planes should be a 10 sec delay. 

Pilots as a resource.

Pilots suffer battle fatigue or become hardened 

a. when flights suffer great loss the pilots become battle fatigued and lose 15% of abilities

b. when more pilots return from flights, battle fatigue is removed

C. When more pilots return, instead of being shot down pilots receive the hardened status + 10% of abilities

What those abilities are ill let the forum decide 

 

If you dont like that model how about this

Pilots are given a status.

a. Green, are new pilots that are used when planes are shot down. - 15% abilities

b. Ready. are pilots are what you begin with a the start of the battle. green pilots can become ready after returning back from successful attacks.

c. Veteran, battle hardened pilots + 10% abilities

Formation Replenishment

On the attack run it should take 2 seconds for planes to re-enter the attack fun formation.

This is makes shooting down aircraft meaningful. 

Dual purpose guns are already factored into your AA with no switching needed. The rest is overly complicated.

 

 

[SkaerKrow]

I don't personally like these particular ideas, but I do appreciate that you have some constructive suggestions and decided to share them.

[Lord_Slayer]

I still like the idea of the CV being unable to launch aircraft unless it is moving forward at a certain speed.

Yes there are catapults to launch aircraft, but the most typical way in WW2 was the rolling takeoff.

Most games I see a CV park itself in the corner or behind an island and sit there. But forcing them to move to launch aircraft, you don't let them hide behind an island, you keep them moving and increasing the chances they are spotted and shot at. It the CV goes below a certain speed, the CV is unable to launch any aircraft until the condition is corrected.

 

It doesn't quite fix everything, but its a simple place to start.

[yashma]

1 hour ago, Lord_Slayer said:

I still like the idea of the CV being unable to launch aircraft unless it is moving forward at a certain speed.

If you combine that with a limited operating range or flight time for aircraft, you will force CVs to get close to the front lines while denying them the ability to camp stationary behind islands.  It would introduce a serious risk of the CV loosing its hull and alleviate some of the complaints about lack of counter play.  The other added bonus of a limited flight time is that it would make aircraft far less oppressive.  It would reduce the overall map presence of the CV, limit their ability to perma spot and limit their ability to effectively create crossfires at will as a CV would not be afforded the time to circle around and attack from the perfect angle.  

Obviously a lot of balance tuning would be needed, with maybe some buffs in other areas.....but the end goal would be to transform CV gameplay so that instead of (launch planes, find a target, position for the attack), it would be (find a target, position for the attack, launch planes).  This would go a long ways to bringing CV gameplay in line with surface combat.  

[Telastyn]

That sort of minimap only spotting has been suggested a few times, and I think is still an easy fix that would provide a lot of balance.

Not a fan of the other changes. The dual purpose gun change would be a straight nerf to most DDs and ships like the Atlanta. I _do_ think that manually controlled AA (literally changing perspective and shooting at planes) would introduce a level of skill to it and give players more agency in the result. Though that’d be a lot more work, hard to balance, and potentially still be unfun/ineffective. 

[Snargfargle]

1 hour ago, yashma said:

If you combine that with a limited operating range or flight time for aircraft, you will force CVs to get close to the front lines while denying them the ability to camp stationary behind islands.  

There is already a risk-reward with CVs. CVs that park at the back of the map already lose damage per minute potential. However, if you are playing a naval game then why should you expect the CVs to fight on the front lines anyway? The CVEs of Taffy 3 were about the only ones that actually got into a gun battle and the Gambier Bay was the only US CV sunk to surface fire in WWII.

[bosco1111]

2 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

There is already a risk-reward with CVs. CVs that park at the back of the map already lose damage per minute potential. However, if you are playing a naval game then why should you expect the CVs to fight on the front lines anyway? The CVEs of Taffy 3 were about the only ones that actually got into a gun battle and the Gambier Bay was the only US CV sunk to surface fire in WWII.

By that logic then CVs hulls should not even be on the map or immune to fire from other ships?

[Lord_Slayer]

12 hours ago, yashma said:

If you combine that with a limited operating range or flight time for aircraft, you will force CVs to get close to the front lines while denying them the ability to camp stationary behind islands.  It would introduce a serious risk of the CV loosing its hull and alleviate some of the complaints about lack of counter play.  The other added bonus of a limited flight time is that it would make aircraft far less oppressive.  It would reduce the overall map presence of the CV, limit their ability to perma spot and limit their ability to effectively create crossfires at will as a CV would not be afforded the time to circle around and attack from the perfect angle.  

Obviously a lot of balance tuning would be needed, with maybe some buffs in other areas.....but the end goal would be to transform CV gameplay so that instead of (launch planes, find a target, position for the attack), it would be (find a target, position for the attack, launch planes).  This would go a long ways to bringing CV gameplay in line with surface combat.  

 

10 hours ago, Snargfargle said:

There is already a risk-reward with CVs. CVs that park at the back of the map already lose damage per minute potential. However, if you are playing a naval game then why should you expect the CVs to fight on the front lines anyway? The CVEs of Taffy 3 were about the only ones that actually got into a gun battle and the Gambier Bay was the only US CV sunk to surface fire in WWII.

 

 

10 hours ago, bosco1111 said:

By that logic then CVs hulls should not even be on the map or immune to fire from other ships?

Hence my suggestion.

 

@yashma While that is a good suggestion, I think limiting the range or flight time would be seen as a major nerf. At this point, the CVs only have 1 squadron in the air (with a max of three possible attacks). CVs do not have the ability to cover multiple points as they could previously in the RTS and they lack the alpha they used to have. I would agree that AAA does need to be improved across the board on all the ships. Ships like Atlanta, Worchester, Minotaur, Des Moines, etc used to force CVs to avoid them. To a point, they still do, but many experienced CV captains can now attack these without the fear that existed previously.

 

@Snargfargle @bosco1111 The issue my thought fixes is just that: the CVs that simply park. They remain far in the back or parked hidden by an island, not revealed until a lone ship or plane spots them, or the CV makes a run when their position is threatened. I get that this is an arcade game, not a sim, but by forcing the CV to maintain a minimum speed moving forward in order to launch aircraft would put the CV in play more, and yes, possibly targeted when spotted. I'm not saying they have to run right up in the front lines, but on most maps there is plenty of space for the CVs to sail about behind the front lines without being spotted. By keeping them moving, it forces the CV driver to not only 'fly' his planes, but to also monitor and maintain his ships current course. It kinda takes a step back to the RTS where the CV actively controlled his ships and ordered the planes where to go, only here the CV flies the planes and orders his ship where to go. The CV must maintain that minimum speed to launch aircraft. Falling below that speed by slowing down or running into an island (or ship) prevents the CV from launching aircraft until the slow speed is corrected. This also has the added affect of preventing the CV from launching aircraft on battle start until the ship comes up to speed.

[Snargfargle]

3 minutes ago, Lord_Slayer said:

CV from launching aircraft on battle start until the ship comes up to speed.

As you say, it's more an arcade game than a sim, though it has elements of both. Carriers having to turn into the wind is probably never going to be implemented because there is no "wind" in WOWS. In fact, there is a mod the CCs use to make the seas glassy smooth. However, if there was wind then the CVs might not even have to move, just face into it, as the trade winds can blow up to 30 miles an hour. 

Personally, I'd like to have the ability to take off from the carrier deck, and fly a 3-D mission to the attack point with a joystick and drop the torpedoes and bombs using actual WWII-era sighting. Code to do this has been around for decades. I played a fun carrier-based game that did just this in the early 90s. However, this is probably not going to happen either.

If you start introducing more sim aspects for one ship then you will need to do so across the board. For instance, when a battleship fires its main guns it should go blind for several seconds until the flash and smoke dissipates. DDs should have one torpedo loadout and that's it. When the torpedoes are gone it's guns only from then on. Planes should be able to spot torpedoes again and also bomb and strafe them to blow them up. Planes also should spot ships from as far or farther than the ships can spot them as you can see a ship for miles from a plane, I know as I have flown small planes. Planes also should crash into ships when they are downed over them or even if they so desire. If you want a ship that has a limited number of planes then let the IJN ships select "kamikaze" at the start of a match. Of course, this won't be done as it's not "PC" in today's culture, though games in the past had this.

[Acura_invader]

Don’t waste your time. They never care about your idea. Since the 9.0 patch, many players were leaving the game. I think only profit decreased can make them listen to players’ ideas. To be honest, in the past, I played tierX battle a lot, but Cv makes this game boring, I can’t find any fun now. I have skipped Black Friday and Xmas events. If WG still don’t change  CVS, I will delete this game and leave it forever.

[dieselhead77]

14 hours ago, Snargfargle said:

There is already a risk-reward with CVs. CVs that park at the back of the map already lose damage per minute potential

That isnt risk for reward? Whats the risk? Less dmg? What a load of horses..t.

The CV risks nothing regardless of where he parks his plane factory.

3 hours ago, Snargfargle said:

If you start introducing more sim aspects for one ship then you will need to do so across the board. For instance, when a battleship fires its main guns it should go blind for several seconds until the flash and smoke dissipates. DDs should have one torpedo loadout and that's it. When the torpedoes are gone it's guns only from then on. Planes should be able to spot torpedoes again and also bomb and strafe them to blow them up. Planes also should spot ships from as far or farther than the ships can spot them as you can see a ship for miles from a plane, I know as I have flown small planes. Planes also should crash into ships when they are downed over them or even if they so desire. If you want a ship that has a limited number of planes then let the IJN ships select "kamikaze" at the start of a match. Of course, this won't be done as it's not "PC" in today's culture, though games in the past had this

You want all this back then I want AA back that decimates entire squads. I want no fly zones, I want CV's detonating when shot and decks knocked out permanently with sufficient damage. I also want my torp flooding nerfs revoked and CV's to be able to directly fight other CV's. 

[Snargfargle]

22 minutes ago, dieselhead77 said:

The CV risks nothing regardless of where he parks his plane factory.

You don't play CVs, do you? Actually, that's a rhetorical question now because I just checked, you don't. Why don't you play CVs up to tier ten and then a hundred games at tier 10? You might have fun and you certainly will learn more about CV-surface ship interactions.

[dieselhead77]

5 hours ago, Snargfargle said:

You don't play CVs, do you? Actually, that's a rhetorical question now because I just checked, you don't. Why don't you play CVs up to tier ten and then a hundred games at tier 10? You might have fun and you certainly will learn more about CV-surface ship interactions.

How about no? Ive played a few games in coop and its trash. Im pretty sure I know more about it than you do going by your comments and your wr.

But hey, you keep avoiding the obvious and keep burying that head of yours in the sand..............

[Snargfargle]

1 hour ago, dieselhead77 said:

How about no? Ive played a few games in coop and its trash. Im pretty sure I know more about it than you do going by your comments and your wr.

But hey, you keep avoiding the obvious and keep burying that head of yours in the sand..............

Fats and logic seem to be lost on some people here. I think that I'm going to follow the example of another fourumite and just ignore those who won't even make an attempt to see things from both sides or provide verifiable facts to back up their claims.

I think the forums will be a much nicer place without as few as a half-dozen of the more rabidly ant-CV and anti-WG crowd. For the life of me, I can't understand why some people still play this game if they hate it as much as they profess to.

[dieselhead77]

13 hours ago, Snargfargle said:

Fats and logic seem to be lost on some people here. I think that I'm going to follow the example of another fourumite and just ignore those who won't even make an attempt to see things from both sides or provide verifiable facts to back up their claims.

I think the forums will be a much nicer place without as few as a half-dozen of the more rabidly ant-CV and anti-WG crowd. For the life of me, I can't understand why some people still play this game if they hate it as much as they profess to.

I dont hate the game, I hate CV's and what they bring to the game. I hate WG for ignoring the obvious. I hate guys like you who think you have to play CV to know anything about CV/surface ship interaction.

Talk about facts and logic? You ignore both yourself everytime you say CV's are fine for the game. You didnt even show any facts or logic ffs.

I did forget you are a bit of a hypocrite tho, you love to dig through others stats to make your points while hiding your own.

You completely ignored my retort your post and went off on a tangent as soon as I said I wanted my AA etc back.

And just an fyi, a friend of mine decided to play CV to do what you suggested and see if it helped counter them. He said what everyone else with a brain has said, it only helped a little bit against bad CV players, against a half decent CV player you're at his mercy. Im sure you will ignore these facts and logic just like you ignore all the other facts and logic with your head buried in the dirt.....

[Snargfargle]

1 minute ago, dieselhead77 said:

I did forget you are a bit of a hypocrite tho, you love to dig through others stats to make your points while hiding your own.

I am a biologist so I've spent a lifetime working with stats and love to explore them still. I'm also a very private person so my own stats are nobody's damn business but my own unless I want to reveal them.

[dieselhead77]

4 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

I am a biologist so I've spent a lifetime working with stats and love to explore them still. I'm also a very private person so my own stats are nobody's damn business but my own unless I want to reveal them.

Good for you, dont dig through someone elses stats if you arent prepared to have them check yours. Thats known as being a hypocrite.

[Snargfargle]

1 minute ago, dieselhead77 said:

Good for you, dont dig through someone elses stats if you arent prepared to have them check yours. Thats known as being a hypocrite.

Nope, that's using the options available to you.

[dieselhead77]

So you're a very private person who hides his stats coz "thats ma business" who happily pokes his sticky nose into everyone elses stats?

This isnt being a hypocrite?

Considering your own stats as "hands off" while poking through everyone else's is literally being a hypocrite.

 

[El2aZeR]

On 12/12/2020 at 4:47 PM, Snargfargle said:

There is already a risk-reward with CVs. CVs that park at the back of the map already lose damage per minute potential.

That's not a risk, that's a trade-off. Less damage for more safety.

 

On 12/13/2020 at 7:59 AM, Snargfargle said:

You don't play CVs, do you?

Not like that apparently matters to you now, doesn't it?

[Newtype]

On 12/12/2020 at 10:47 AM, Snargfargle said:

There is already a risk-reward with CVs. CVs that park at the back of the map already lose damage per minute potential. However, if you are playing a naval game then why should you expect the CVs to fight on the front lines anyway? The CVEs of Taffy 3 were about the only ones that actually got into a gun battle and the Gambier Bay was the only US CV sunk to surface fire in WWII.

I mean any other ship doing the same thing loses all their damage potential so in the case you mention CV is already ahead.

[Cirran]

Since we are talking about realism, how about we apply that to all things in the game? It seems that would be only fair. In the end I really don't think this is about being fair. Well is is about being "fair" in a certain group's opinion. When they are done being "fair" to CVs lets turn our attention to DDs. Edit: and every other ship type in the game.

 

Cirran