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

Comprehensive Fix to CVS

87 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

857
Members
525 posts
24,463 battles

The rocket patch (I am not calling it a nerf and I will explain why in a bit) should not have surprised anyone at all. It was long overdue to fix a problem that shouldn’t have existed in the first place and that is rockets should have never been introduced into the game in the first place. The mechanic was wrong, the power of the rockets was too high and it led to some changes that have really unbalanced the game. DD air detection ranges were reduced to the point of being just silly. Some DDS cannot be detected by planes which are just 2km away, some DD AA was buffed but not FOR EVERYONE which led to some DDS taking out whole attack waves in 2 seconds while other DDs in the SAME TIER could barely shoot down a plane.

IT’S A DELAY-NOT A NERF

First you have to know what the problem is in order to understand why this patch in 6 months wont have helped DDS at all. So why were rockets so deadly to DDs?

  • Too many aircraft were launching too many rockets in 1 strike so it essentially overwhelmed the DDs.
  • WG refused to double or triple the dispersion pattern of rockets
  • Damage per rocket was too high and still is too high. With a solid strike on a TIER 10 cruiser that’s an easy 5000-7000HP gone right there.

These 3 elements are the main reason why rockets caused havoc on DD players and guess what? These 3 elements HAVE NEVER BEEN NERFED by WG and are still not nerfed in this patch. This is why this patch isn’t a nerf, it’s simply a delay of what is to come.

  • The Present
  • For now in this moment unless a target is moving very slow or better yet standing still the rockets will probably miss. CV players were always leading the target with rockets (which is why rockets were such a problem for DDs) so that element hasn’t changed at all, it’s just part of it is out of the players control however that is ONLY TEMPORARY because here is the real problem with this patch.
  • 6 months from now, probably less:
  • I am starting to hit DDs more regularly with rockets and were just week in and thanks to the auto pilot feature those rockets don’t miss when u time it just right.

CV players will figure it out and I GUARNTEE U THEY WILL and 6 months from now were back to where we were before this patch. The only thing that got nerfed in this patch are US and Japanese CVS so much so that these CVS are now essentially operating with only 2/3rds of the flight group even though this may be just a temporary affair..

What WG NEEDS TO DO IS REMOVE ROCKETS FROM THE GAME FOR GOOD!

Fixing the Problem with a  2 point philosophy

It is absolutely essential to limit the amount of aircraft launching the actual attack to no more than 2 or 3 per wave AND it is also essential to limit how much ordinance an air craft can carry so that no ship of any kind is overwhelmed.

 Step 1- CV LOAD OUTS-Diversity is good for the game

Maintain the 3 air groups for CVs and make the following changes. CV players should have a choice of loadout because this would add variety to the game and the differences between nationalities should be more distinct.

HE DIVE BOMBER Squadron-Effective against lightly armored targets-Destroyers/Light Cruisers

  • 4x 250lb bomb per aircraft- 2 aircraft per strike
  • 2x 500lb layout per aircraft-3 aircraft per strike

AP DIVE BOMBER Squadron-Effective against armored targets- Battleships/ Heavy Cruisers

  • 2x 1000lb bomb per aircraft- 3 aircraft per strike
  • 2x 2000lb layout per aircraft- 2 aircraft per strike

TORPEDO Squadron-Effective against all targets.

  • For all torpedoes, buff speed across the board but torpedo release cannot be less than 500m from target.
  • Any torpedo dropped under 500m automatically does not arm
  • Limit 1 torpedo per aircraft
  • Light Torpedoes fast but low alpha
  • Heavy Torpedoes slower but higher alpha

Step 2- Aircraft performance-In WW2 typical release was at 1500ft or higher for dive bombers

Create 4 height levels for Dive bombers

  • VERY HIGH ALTITUDE DROPS-LEVEL BOMBING-Extreme penetration but very low accuracy
  • HIGH ALTITUDE DROPS-Better penetration but less accuracy
  • MEDIUM ALTITUDE DROPS-Less penetration but more accuracy
  • LOW ALTITUDE DROPS-Low penetration but high accuracy

Step 3- Anti-Aircraft

  • Ideally all AA should be brought back to Patch 8.0 levels but this may need to be modified
  • No DD should be able to have more AA than a BB in its TIER
  • Increase AA ranges to all ships across the board
  • US and UK should have the strongest AA
  • Everyone else in the middle
  • Japanese at the bottom

Step 4- Detection Ranges

This feature of the game has become a joke and needs to be fixed to make it more fair and realistic to some degree.

  • All DD detection ranges are locked in at 6km from the air
  • All CA detection ranges are locked in at 10km from the air
  • All BB and CV detection ranges are locked in at 12km from the air

Why this will work

  • The number of aircraft launching each attack wave is limited to 2 or 3
  • The amount of ordinance carried by each aircraft is limited
  • CV players will get to choose when to release their bombs but suffer penalty or rewards at each stage

 

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,447
Members
690 posts
20 battles
11 minutes ago, Anij said:

IT’S A DELAY-NOT A NERF

Well you've twisted logic to come up with this statement. CV's have less influence on the win and do less damage overall, particularly to the most important targets. That is quite clearly a reduction in overall power, and therefore obviously a nerf. 

I also disagree with your suggestion that in 6 months CV players will have adapted, and will be back at pre-nerf levels of rocket effectiveness. Obviously most CV players will adapt to various degrees, however they will never get back to the same level of effectiveness, this just isn't possible. 

Having said all that, I do get the main crux of your post, that the introduction of rocket fighters originally was a mistake. I'm not sure if I agree with that, but it's certainly a valid argument. Given where we are now, with rockets originally being designed as a direct anti-DD weapon system, yet now of limited value against DD's, they are a weapon that almost all CV's have that no longer has a real function. That is definitely an issue, and I think WG need to work out what rockets should be used for, and give them a clear role. If they can't do that, then I agree with you that they may need to consider removing them, at least from some ships. 

Having said that, I think there are roles that can be found for rockets. The KM AP rockets already have a role that still works fine with only a short delay. Tiny Tims have a role as well, to do reliable damage to larger targets with a quicker response time than other squadrons, although I think they still need some balancing to get right in this role, and I'd actually like to see them have a much longer launch point to give them a role of picking off low health ships. Standard type rocket fighters could possibly be made quite fast with low damage potential, but with buffed spotting abilities as a rapid response spotting tool.

I don't mind the move away from CV's being such significant counters to DD's, I think the benefits of this are already apparent in game, but that does leave CV's with a bit of further balancing required just to clarify their overall roles, as well as the roles of post nerf rocket fighters. 

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,520
[D-DAY]
Members
7,126 posts

@Anij it is a nerf. It is a change designed to alter the effectiveness of an attack leading to less hits.

A negative change to how something works is a nerf.

I believe the rocket/DD interaction needed a nerf - but I also feel that WG need to ensure the knock on effect for XP/credit earnings is not negatively affected.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
105
[-KA-]
Members
161 posts
5,391 battles
2 hours ago, Anij said:

The rocket patch (I am not calling it a nerf and I will explain why in a bit) should not have surprised anyone at all. It was long overdue to fix a problem that shouldn’t have existed in the first place and that is rockets should have never been introduced into the game in the first place. The mechanic was wrong, the power of the rockets was too high and it led to some changes that have really unbalanced the game. DD air detection ranges were reduced to the point of being just silly. Some DDS cannot be detected by planes which are just 2km away, some DD AA was buffed but not FOR EVERYONE which led to some DDS taking out whole attack waves in 2 seconds while other DDs in the SAME TIER could barely shoot down a plane.

IT’S A DELAY-NOT A NERF

First you have to know what the problem is in order to understand why this patch in 6 months wont have helped DDS at all. So why were rockets so deadly to DDs?

  • Too many aircraft were launching too many rockets in 1 strike so it essentially overwhelmed the DDs.
  • WG refused to double or triple the dispersion pattern of rockets
  • Damage per rocket was too high and still is too high. With a solid strike on a TIER 10 cruiser that’s an easy 5000-7000HP gone right there.

These 3 elements are the main reason why rockets caused havoc on DD players and guess what? These 3 elements HAVE NEVER BEEN NERFED by WG and are still not nerfed in this patch. This is why this patch isn’t a nerf, it’s simply a delay of what is to come.

  • The Present
  • For now in this moment unless a target is moving very slow or better yet standing still the rockets will probably miss. CV players were always leading the target with rockets (which is why rockets were such a problem for DDs) so that element hasn’t changed at all, it’s just part of it is out of the players control however that is ONLY TEMPORARY because here is the real problem with this patch.
  • 6 months from now, probably less:
  • I am starting to hit DDs more regularly with rockets and were just week in and thanks to the auto pilot feature those rockets don’t miss when u time it just right.

CV players will figure it out and I GUARNTEE U THEY WILL and 6 months from now were back to where we were before this patch. The only thing that got nerfed in this patch are US and Japanese CVS so much so that these CVS are now essentially operating with only 2/3rds of the flight group even though this may be just a temporary affair..

What WG NEEDS TO DO IS REMOVE ROCKETS FROM THE GAME FOR GOOD!

Fixing the Problem with a  2 point philosophy

It is absolutely essential to limit the amount of aircraft launching the actual attack to no more than 2 or 3 per wave AND it is also essential to limit how much ordinance an air craft can carry so that no ship of any kind is overwhelmed.

 Step 1- CV LOAD OUTS-Diversity is good for the game

Maintain the 3 air groups for CVs and make the following changes. CV players should have a choice of loadout because this would add variety to the game and the differences between nationalities should be more distinct.

HE DIVE BOMBER Squadron-Effective against lightly armored targets-Destroyers/Light Cruisers

  • 4x 250lb bomb per aircraft- 2 aircraft per strike
  • 2x 500lb layout per aircraft-3 aircraft per strike

AP DIVE BOMBER Squadron-Effective against armored targets- Battleships/ Heavy Cruisers

  • 2x 1000lb bomb per aircraft- 3 aircraft per strike
  • 2x 2000lb layout per aircraft- 2 aircraft per strike

TORPEDO Squadron-Effective against all targets.

  • For all torpedoes, buff speed across the board but torpedo release cannot be less than 500m from target.
  • Any torpedo dropped under 500m automatically does not arm
  • Limit 1 torpedo per aircraft
  • Light Torpedoes fast but low alpha
  • Heavy Torpedoes slower but higher alpha

Step 2- Aircraft performance-In WW2 typical release was at 1500ft or higher for dive bombers

Create 4 height levels for Dive bombers

  • VERY HIGH ALTITUDE DROPS-LEVEL BOMBING-Extreme penetration but very low accuracy
  • HIGH ALTITUDE DROPS-Better penetration but less accuracy
  • MEDIUM ALTITUDE DROPS-Less penetration but more accuracy
  • LOW ALTITUDE DROPS-Low penetration but high accuracy

Step 3- Anti-Aircraft

  • Ideally all AA should be brought back to Patch 8.0 levels but this may need to be modified
  • No DD should be able to have more AA than a BB in its TIER
  • Increase AA ranges to all ships across the board
  • US and UK should have the strongest AA
  • Everyone else in the middle
  • Japanese at the bottom

Step 4- Detection Ranges

This feature of the game has become a joke and needs to be fixed to make it more fair and realistic to some degree.

  • All DD detection ranges are locked in at 6km from the air
  • All CA detection ranges are locked in at 10km from the air
  • All BB and CV detection ranges are locked in at 12km from the air

Why this will work

  • The number of aircraft launching each attack wave is limited to 2 or 3
  • The amount of ordinance carried by each aircraft is limited
  • CV players will get to choose when to release their bombs but suffer penalty or rewards at each stage

 

*counter air missions.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,517
[DEV_X]
[DEV_X]
Alpha Tester
3,058 posts
27,797 battles

6 months you say? 

I'm not sure about the generalized playerbase but I doubt it. After 2.5 years there are still players unable to operate their DDs effectively in a CV game. 

Skilled CVs will master new rockets in no time and less skilled wont use them or wont play the class.

I see what you're getting at but I just dont know that the impact will be negated ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
949 posts
220 battles

The only fix will be will CVs start engaging other CVs.  Why were fighter planes removed/exchanged for rocket planes, to begin with?

 

Until CVs start countering the other planes, then they (CVs) will continue to farm toxicity.  What genius thought it OK to have a player sit at the back and remain undetected while sending out planes with no consequences if the planes get shot down (or not).

This is so biased and the coddling of CVs needs to stop.  Once WG adds consumables and the same effects of fire, CVs will always be accused of coddling and favoritism. 

 

As for the height levels on bombers.  this is already in-game, time the release for high, low, or whatever.

 

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,520
[D-DAY]
Members
7,126 posts
2 hours ago, Princess_Daystar said:

Aside from the nitpicking above, it seems like a decent idea.

Is it? We have only had the rocket change in the general populace for a week now; so we have no idea what is the final (average performance) across the board for it.

Yet here we have a solution to already make other changes before this one has even had a chance to provide a result on what the change has done. Shouldn't we see what one change has done before introducing more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
222
[F4E]
Members
449 posts
7,053 battles
19 minutes ago, Laser_Beam said:

The only fix will be will CVs start engaging other CVs.  Why were fighter planes removed/exchanged for rocket planes, to begin with?

 

Until CVs start countering the other planes, then they (CVs) will continue to farm toxicity.  What genius thought it OK to have a player sit at the back and remain undetected while sending out planes with no consequences if the planes get shot down (or not).

This is so biased and the coddling of CVs needs to stop.  Once WG adds consumables and the same effects of fire, CVs will always be accused of coddling and favoritism. 

 

As for the height levels on bombers.  this is already in-game, time the release for high, low, or whatever.

 

I agree, having a CV spend 100% of his focus on just killing enemy ships is terrible.  It makes everyone else his punching bag, and nobody wants to be a punching bag.

 

But let's get real, coddling of CV's?? LOL.  DD's break every law of reality and physics so they can burn down a 60,000 Ton BB with their 100mm pop pop guns.  Concealment works the opposite as reality just to protect DD's and let them go invisible.. in the middle of an ocean.. They don't have a citadel, or even suffer penetrating hits from BB shells.  In fact, why did this rocket nerf happen?  Coddling, because in WG reality, a 2000 ton DD should be as or more powerful than capital ships right? 

  • Thanks 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,129
[FOXY]
Members
2,564 posts
7,685 battles
1 minute ago, _WaveRider_ said:

Is it? We have only had the rocket change in the general populace for a week now; so we have no idea what is the final (average performance) across the board for it.

Yet here we have a solution to already make other changes before this one has even had a chance to provide a result on what the change has done. Shouldn't we see what one change has done before introducing more?

Maybe, but ive always disliked ammo choice being left up to the line of ships, so i like the idea. If we gradually make cvs more and more like the other ships in game letting them choose between He and AP(or even SAP on some carriers) on launch of the strike craft would be a nice choice to have.

It already takes two presses of the button to lauch aircraft and they could have the ammo choice appear after the first button press.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,129
[FOXY]
Members
2,564 posts
7,685 battles
Just now, Glamorboy said:

I agree, having a CV spend 100% of his focus on just killing enemy ships is terrible.  It makes everyone else his punching bag, and nobody wants to be a punching bag.

 

But let's get real, coddling of CV's?? LOL.  DD's break every law of reality and physics so they can burn down a 60,000 Ton BB with their 100mm pop pop guns.  Concealment works the opposite as reality just to protect DD's and let them go invisible.. in the middle of an ocean.. They don't have a citadel, or even suffer penetrating hits from BB shells.  In fact, why did this rocket nerf happen?  Coddling, because in WG reality, a 2000 ton DD should be as or more powerful than capital ships right? 

Throw any arguments towards realism out the door, this an arcade fps game with a naval skin. As such DDs do need to be on the same level as bbs, in their own way.

Bbs can get penetrations against dds. I took 8k off of a Fletcher yesterday with AP rounds from a BB.

I agree in that i do think fire damage needs to be looked at. Ive been farming Cruisers, and BBs the last few days with he spam from my own cruisers and dds, i always feel bad for whoever is on the recieving end as theres really nothing they can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
222
[F4E]
Members
449 posts
7,053 battles
2 minutes ago, Princess_Daystar said:

Maybe, but ive always disliked ammo choice being left up to the line of ships, so i like the idea. If we gradually make cvs more and more like the other ships in game letting them choose between He and AP(or even SAP on some carriers) on launch of the strike craft would be a nice choice to have.

It already takes two presses of the button to lauch aircraft and they could have the ammo choice appear after the first button press.

I agree, some of the stuff is good imo.

Get rid of rockets (except as a niche thing on a couple CV's maybe) = good.

Ammo choices for bombs = good.

I also like increasing the torp speed and being able to drop it further back.  It gives ships an easier time trying to dodge, but if they press in further to drop, AA should start shredding planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,520
[D-DAY]
Members
7,126 posts
2 minutes ago, Princess_Daystar said:

Maybe, but ive always disliked ammo choice being left up to the line of ships, so i like the idea. If we gradually make cvs more and more like the other ships in game letting them choose between He and AP(or even SAP on some carriers) on launch of the strike craft would be a nice choice to have.

It already takes two presses of the button to lauch aircraft and they could have the ammo choice appear after the first button press.

So this will make the ship type more effective in the damage they can do - is that a change that is needed (genuine question)?

In addition, is the current state of play intended where the CV has to understand the enemy and what his weapons can actually hurt (understanding by knowing what is out there so spotting for himself and team)? 

If this change is implemented then it will make the CV more efficient - would certainly help my scores lol - but is that customisation needed on a ship that can already strike around the map at their selected choice of ship. Just a thought than a question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
222
[F4E]
Members
449 posts
7,053 battles
1 minute ago, Princess_Daystar said:

Throw any arguments towards realism out the door, this an arcade fps game with a naval skin. As such DDs do need to be on the same level as bbs, in their own way.

Bbs can get penetrations against dds. I took 8k off of a Fletcher yesterday with AP rounds from a BB.

I agree in that i do think fire damage needs to be looked at. Ive been farming Cruisers, and BBs the last few days with he spam from my own cruisers and dds, i always feel bad for whoever is on the recieving end as theres really nothing they can do.

You missed my point.  I don't care about DD's being absurdly more powerful than in real life.

I just find it rich when they call other classes "coddled"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
949 posts
220 battles
9 minutes ago, Glamorboy said:

I agree, having a CV spend 100% of his focus on just killing enemy ships is terrible.  It makes everyone else his punching bag, and nobody wants to be a punching bag.

 

But let's get real, coddling of CV's?? LOL.  DD's break every law of reality and physics so they can burn down a 60,000 Ton BB with their 100mm pop pop guns.  Concealment works the opposite as reality just to protect DD's and let them go invisible.. in the middle of an ocean.. They don't have a citadel, or even suffer penetrating hits from BB shells.  In fact, why did this rocket nerf happen?  Coddling, because in WG reality, a 2000 ton DD should be as or more powerful than capital ships right? 

fire extinguisher.  Argument over.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,129
[FOXY]
Members
2,564 posts
7,685 battles
1 minute ago, _WaveRider_ said:

So this will make the ship type more effective in the damage they can do - is that a change that is needed (genuine question)?

In addition, is the current state of play intended where the CV has to understand the enemy and what his weapons can actually hurt (understanding by knowing what is out there so spotting for himself and team)? 

If this change is implemented then it will make the CV more efficient - would certainly help my scores lol - but is that customisation needed on a ship that can already strike around the map at their selected choice of ship. Just a thought than a question.

Indeed it would make it more effective, in the current state of the game i dont think its the right time to do more changes.

However, if wg continues to change carriers/make them more like other ships i would hope they added in some positive changes like this.

At the same time, CVs like Graf Zepplin  exist, and those dont have any real redeeming qualities anymore, in my opinion of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,520
[D-DAY]
Members
7,126 posts
7 minutes ago, Glamorboy said:

But let's get real, coddling of CV's?? LOL.  DD's break every law of reality and physics so they can burn down a 60,000 Ton BB with their 100mm pop pop guns.  Concealment works the opposite as reality just to protect DD's and let them go invisible.. in the middle of an ocean.. They don't have a citadel, or even suffer penetrating hits from BB shells.  In fact, why did this rocket nerf happen?  Coddling, because in WG reality, a 2000 ton DD should be as or more powerful than capital ships right? 

What ship doesn't break reality and the laws of physics in this game lol.

The BB disappears just as annoyingly as the DD when I have a target on him, everyone is subject to the concealment mechanics (available on Wiki if you are not sure about them).

And the Haragumo does a average of 55,000 damage - I doubt if that is all on one BB - in fact with BB heals I doubt the normal damage the burning of one DD does is the cause of the BB dying. More likely the BB has played poorly and over extended, or the enemy team is better.

But if you want to complain that it is the worst surviving and worst damage on average ship type that keep whooping your backside - go ahead lol.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,520
[D-DAY]
Members
7,126 posts
11 minutes ago, Princess_Daystar said:

Indeed it would make it more effective, in the current state of the game i dont think its the right time to do more changes.

However, if wg continues to change carriers/make them more like other ships i would hope they added in some positive changes like this.

At the same time, CVs like Graf Zepplin  exist, and those dont have any real redeeming qualities anymore, in my opinion of course.

I must admit, I just play most the time, so when I use my GZ I don't really look to see if I got so much XP etc. I just kind of assess if I feel I had a good game.

If an individual ship needs attention I agree. For a long time I have wished for CV planes to be linked with the health of the CV - it would have to be the average plane loss for each CV on an average game, then add 20% health so that it literally will be poor play by the CV that means their return to port. I think that for a long time part of the animosity towards CVs is because moany feel that shooting down planes doesn't do anything.

Now I don't see the point in entertaining that thought - maybe later? But look at what a 4-5 sec change to rockets have done to the emotions. Who knows what the future will bring lol. :Smile_honoring:

Edited by _WaveRider_
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
578
[CDOH]
Members
956 posts
8,620 battles

I appreciate this post.  But Detection is the biggest problem with CVs not the damage.  Constant Spotting damage is by far the most powerful attribute of CVs.  This mechanic needs to be addressed before anything else in my book.  CVs cannot constantly light up ships without expending a resource.  I would add a radio consumable which has a cool down.   This would go a long way to adding tactical and fun game mechanics back into the game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,129
[FOXY]
Members
2,564 posts
7,685 battles
Just now, Rothgar_57 said:

I appreciate this post.  But Detection is the biggest problem with CVs not the damage.  Constant Spotting damage is by far the most powerful attribute of CVs.  This mechanic needs to be addressed before anything else in my book.  CVs cannot constantly light up ships without expending a resource.  I would add a radio consumable which has a cool down.   This would go a long way to adding tactical and fun game mechanics back into the game.

How long do you think is a fair amount of time for it to be active?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
578
[CDOH]
Members
956 posts
8,620 battles
1 minute ago, Princess_Daystar said:

How long do you think is a fair amount of time for it to be active?

No idea it would need to be play tested  but i would start with same cool down and duration as radar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,084
[WPORT]
Members
10,953 posts
15,451 battles
2 hours ago, Laser_Beam said:

The only fix will be will CVs start engaging other CVs.  Why were fighter planes removed/exchanged for rocket planes, to begin with?

 

Until CVs start countering the other planes, then they (CVs) will continue to farm toxicity.  What genius thought it OK to have a player sit at the back and remain undetected while sending out planes with no consequences if the planes get shot down (or not).

This is so biased and the coddling of CVs needs to stop.  Once WG adds consumables and the same effects of fire, CVs will always be accused of coddling and favoritism. 

 

As for the height levels on bombers.  this is already in-game, time the release for high, low, or whatever.

 

My Erich Loewenhardt earned a "Close Quarters Expert" award, the other day.

I fondly remember the RTS CV era, wherein CV's would engage each other in a struggle for air-superiority in a real-time-Chess-match, while cooperating with their team-mates to shoot down opposing planes and sink opposing ships.

Then the "re-work" happened.  :cap_old:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,084
[WPORT]
Members
10,953 posts
15,451 battles
1 hour ago, Rothgar_57 said:

I appreciate this post.  But Detection is the biggest problem with CVs not the damage.  Constant Spotting damage is by far the most powerful attribute of CVs.  This mechanic needs to be addressed before anything else in my book.  CVs cannot constantly light up ships without expending a resource.  I would add a radio consumable which has a cool down.   This would go a long way to adding tactical and fun game mechanics back into the game.

Every ship can detect every other ship.
It is merely a question of how they do it.

The trade-off for CV's to spot something is the exposure to AA fire and the time required to fly to the intended target that needs to be spotted.
While a plane is spotting, it isn't attacking.  
If a plane attacks, thereby expending its' ordnance (hit or miss), then the plane that performed an attack is automatically sent back to the CV and ceases spotting (assuming it wasn't shot down in the process of attacking).

Every surface ship can attack and spot simultaneously.
Aerial detection parameters favor the ships being detected, not the planes.  This is especially true for DD's with their AA guns turned-off.

Edited to add:  Time is a "resource".

Edited by Wolfswetpaws

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,084
[WPORT]
Members
10,953 posts
15,451 battles
7 hours ago, Anij said:

 

IT’S A DELAY-NOT A NERF

 

It is a nerf.
I don't agree with you.
Have a nice day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
222
[F4E]
Members
449 posts
7,053 battles
1 hour ago, _WaveRider_ said:

For a long time I have wished for CV planes to be linked with the health of the CV - it would have to be the average plane loss for each CV on an average game, then add 20% health so that it literally will be poor play by the CV that means their return to port. I think that for a long time part of the animosity towards CVs is because moany feel that shooting down planes doesn't do anything.

It was at this point, you lost credibility.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×