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

Theorycrafting: Breaking the 2 CV meta. (First Draft)

25 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

11,300
[SALVO]
Members
16,451 posts
10,192 battles

INTRODUCTION

I know a lot of us are "troubled" (yes, euphemism) about the announced Double CV for the next CB season at T6. I'm not smilling happy about it, but I'm genuinelly interested and curious about how it will develop, not only because it is the first time we are having 2 CVs in a team based competitive instance, but because this may herald (or strongarm) another shift in how we play the game.

So far the strategy (meta) has always focused on map control, spreading forces and creating crossfires to get access to enemy's broadsides. Enter double CVs and the meta starts to change radically, spreading forces becomes an extremely risky proposition, without spreading forces map control becomes unattainable... this leads to a change of strategy focus towards concentration of forces (presented with the extreme aerial threat, massing resources for effective AA coverage becomes a necessity). We might be witnessing the beginning of true Fleet Tactics for WoWS, this has me thrilled.

But ArI, what do you mean? what are you smoking?... let me first explain what is changed:

  • A team selecting double CVs forfeits its BBs. This deeply changes the match dynamic, at this point the threat of massive AP damage dissapears, the concept of "keeping your broadside safe" stops being relevant, suddenly you are faced with an unprecedented freedom of movements, not really posible at T10 given the ever present risk of accurate AP damage from a multitude of sources. At T6, remove battleships (and "supercruiser" Graf Spee) and the long range AP threat basically disappears.
  • Faced with an overwhelming aerial threat, there are only two viable options: hide (smoke) or mass (fleet). Smoking gives up mobility, hidden forces become fixed. Massing a fleet gives up map control. Both options have benefits and drawbacks, but for the first time massing units instead of spreading them out becomes a viable proposition.
  • The orthodox strategy considers using the undeniable power of double CVs along a complement of chain smoke able units to guarantee survivability from air attacks while delivering damage from smoke cover using CV spotting. The archetype of this comp would be double CVs plus Huanghe/Perth complement. I could (and probably will at some point) explain why I find this meta unbeliavably boring and uninteresting, but for now I will just assume this would be the most common meta and the one to break.
  • The unorthodox (at least in terms of competitive WoWS meta) strategy consist in massing your forces into a Task Force operating in close proximity for overlapping AA support. This has the obvious benefit of neutering the main enemy asset (airpower), with the only requirement of keeping close proximity from your team mates. This translates as: the team needs to operate as a massed coordinated squadron, formations suddenly becomes a thing... if you happen to love history and the theory of naval combat as I do, you will understand why this has me giggling like a kid on Christmas Eve. 
  • Maybe for the first time (as far as I know, and be warned my experience is not very ample) we are faced with opposing meta concepts being both theoretically viable in CB. We may experience the WoWS equivalent os a Retiarius vs Secutor match up.

TL;DR: 2 CV/no BB option means the traditional map control and spread of forces becomes no longer relevant or attainable. Massed fleets, formations and close work coordination becomes a viable option under this situation.

 

THEORY - ACTING AS A FLEET

This is where theorizing starts becoming interesting and the possibility of acting as an organized Task Force starts looking viable. I will be really brief for the moment as it is already late and I have not much more time atm to expand the ideas just present the considerations:

  • The enemy is considered to have Double CVs and assortment of smoke cruisers comp
  • Our comp will consist of double BBs, with cruiser and destroyer escorts
  • BBs will act as the core of the Task Force, they will act together (within effective air cover distance) at all times and won't split until the air threat is suppressed
  • The Task Force must operate with extreme aggression, always looking for a quick resolution of the match, on the understanding it will be submitted to constant attrition and DoT from air attacks and HE spam. Any delay will always favor the enemy.
  • The Task Force will operate with an initial "intelligence disadvantage", it is a fact the enemy will know our deployment before we know his, for this reason it is suggested to be no early deployment but a full frontal advance (center) until there's information on the enemy. At that moment, the intention should be to push forward and destroy the enemy over retaining specific map control, it could be retaken once the enemy is defeated. 
  • The Task Force will be presented with 2 tactical challenges. Air Attrition and HE smoke spam.
  • Air Attrition will be addressed by maximizing the exchange of HP for plane loses, by keeping a mass of 4-5 AA able ships within overlapping range, it will be possible to limit enemy airstrikes to just one attack per cycle. 
  • HE smoke spam will be addressed by a swift frontal mass assault, I will explain the details further on but the core idea lies on taking advantage of the relative lack of mobility of the smoke cloud. The task force will proceed at flank speed towards the smoke cloud, initialy tanking the long range fire. Reaching medium range from the enemy, the leading destroyers will deploy a smoke trail and the fleet will close the distance under smoke cover. Then the enemy will be forced to abandon its smoke and become exposed or become exposed either way when entering hydro range. Once exposed, the enemy will suffer concentrated focus fire from the Task Force.
  • Having a solution for both tactical problems, the Task Force focus would be to maneuvre in order to either force a contact with the enemy or force them away from at least 2 caps while preserving the Task Force integrity and HP advantage until victory is secured

Task Force composition and Roles:

  1. Battleships (2 units): Their role is obviously to provide heavy AP damage (lethal to the expected enemy CL forces), to act as HP tank pool and provide strong AA resources to the Task Force.  I propose 2 initial candidates for the BB role. Ise, it brings awesome long range AA (with an added value of 12 flak puffs) and utility in the form of on demand spotting by their TBs. The second option is Izmail, it brings 30 knots of speed and fast cycling DCPs. Ise excels at dealing with the air threat, Izmail excels at dealing with the smoke threat. 
  2. Cruiser - Escort (2 units): Their role is to supplement the BBs with AA power, DPM and utility (hydro/smoke). They will always remain within close proximity of the BBs and along them will constitute the core of the task force. The Escorts can be of 2 types, smoke or tanks. For smoke Cruiser I propose Huanghe, it provides powerful AA and the ability to protect its BB partner with its crawling smoke in case it needs to go dark/dissengage for DCP cooldown. For tank Cruiser I propose Devonshire, it can soak up a lot of damage, has a strong heal, and it has a very respectable close range AA suite, with DFAA possibilities (tho it foregoes hydro). For those wanting a more methodical approach I would suggest Ise/Huanghe, for those wanting pure shock and awe I would suggest Izmail/Devonshire. Izmail/Devonshire comp would require close DD support for smoke, while Ise/Huanghe could operate more independently from the DD support, relaying on their own smoke in case it is needed
  3. Cruiser - Hound (1 units): The role of the Hound is to dash ahead of the main body of the Task Force when charging smokes to spot the enemy units, the Hound will ride close behind a smoke laying DD (lets call her the Hare) and will make and keep contact with the enemy until it is destroyed by the Task Force. The Hound can be of 3 types: hydro, smoke or manly. For hydro Hound the pick is Nurnberg (or anything with long range hydro at T6), it just needs to creep within hydro range from the smoke cloud and light it up. For smoke Hound I suggest Leander, being the Hound will place the cruiser as priority target, having heal and smoke increases the surviving chances of the Hound during and after the action, consider it could end well beyond the AA bubble of the Task Force and would need to survive on its own until recovered. For manly Hound I suggest Duca de Aosta, it is fast and nimble, it has all the right consumables to survive on its own for a while (hydro, DFAA, fighter), no one is outrunning the manly Hound.
  4. Destroyer - Escort (2 units): Their role is to support the Task Force with utility in the form of smoke, spotting, screening/hydro, smoke purging torpedo spreads and supplement DPM and AA values. Imo, the core value of a support DD would be its smoke for this reason I would suggest fast cycling smoke layers like Fushun (good for the Hare role) or Icarus (long lasting hydro for screening and disengage smoke on demand). I'm curious about using Monaghan in her AA configuration, long lasting smoke, long range area torps and more importantly (and this I need to test) if fully rigged for AA duty the numbers look pretty awesome, adding this value to the Task Force I wouldn't be surprised if it is even possible to create a functional no fly zone around the task force, in any case the plane tax would be brutal and unsustainable for the CV.
  5. Destroyer - Rambo (1 unit): This is one special role, it consist on detaching one lone DD to contest a different cap. It's role is to draw attention and pull enemy units from engaging the Task Force during what is expected to be "the main action". It is a Decoy and its main requirement is being able to survive and operate on its own as long as possible. I suggest T-61, Icarus or whatever you guys prefer for the role.

Task Force Organization

  • Squadron 1: BB, Cruiser Escort, DD Escort
  • Squadron 2: BB, Cruiser Escort, DD Escort
  • Wild Card: Cruiser Hound/ DD Rambo

The Task Force could be organized in 2 similar squadrons, this to facilitate coordination under combat, each escort will be assigned to a particular BB and will be tasked with providing "her BB" with the required support (smokes/screen/hydro). Under Double CV situation both Squadrons should operate in close coordination, but when under lesser "air threat" situations, the Squadron can act independently to generate more map control. The Wild Card element is there to supplement the squadrons or detach as needed to give more flexibility to the comp.

And this will be all for the moment... 

 

Edited by ArIskandir
  • Cool 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
583
[HOLE]
Members
310 posts
2,456 battles

Player's will complain no matter what. Double CV will not bring any huge advantage by any means. With the latest nerf to rocket's has only taken what self defense it had to keep a dd from torpedoed to death. As a team this will effect in a negative way if the team dd has to leave the group to defend its CV. The only real advantage is its spotting power which is no different then a dd role in game but you know where the planes are when spotting. A dd can remain in stealth mode if played correctly. What appeals to me is that having CV's in game keep player's on the move/feet to win that battle compared to cross firing and island hiding along with kitting which is well know in most competitive matches. I personally find that type of play stagnant and boring. I prefer matches where things have to change up throughout the battle to achieve a victory.   

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,846
Members
878 posts
20 battles

I'm also excited at the prospect of two CV's being an option, and the potentially interesting meta changes that this may bring.  I do have some concerns though.

The first concern is that the meta (especially with no Spee being available) will devolve into a smoke cruiser based one.  No radars at tier 6 makes this very strong.  That meta is the worst possible outcome, because it is incredibly passive and unpleasant to play against.  I'd have more fun playing against five Petros per team than having to deal with teams full of smoke cruisers.  I am very concerned this is where the season will end up, because this is what happened last tier 6 CB season, and in the end it was only double BB comps running multiple Spee's playing push comps that broke them.  That won't be an option this time with the Spee's being removed as an option.

The second concern is that double CV will just straight up be unviable.  You give up all pretence of map control to play double CV, and basically that means you are trying to kill ships fast enough to make up for both the caps and any ship losses your own team suffers.  That is a challenge.  Not only that, but with no BB to keep the enemy cruisers and BB's in a relatively static position, the CV damage output becomes much less reliable because there is nothing to punish cruisers and BB's that sit in open water actively dodging.

The potential for new comps is interesting though.  I'd love to see a double CV and DD heavy comp be viable.  We're certainly going to try that sort of thing, and have a few ideas of how to execute it effectively against different line-ups.  I'd love to see double CV seasons at tiers 8 and 10, so hopefully this is a successful trial.

On a related note, I suspect this clan battle season is a trial following the rocket nerf, into the potential for reducing CV restrictions in randoms.  It wouldn't surprise me if they do this season and then a tier 10 season with double CV as an option, that if there are no major issues WG would allow random battles to have two CV's per team at tier 10.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,327
[KWF]
Members
6,769 posts
7,727 battles

What I see is an awful lot of premium ships having a prime spot in the upcoming season. It isn't pay to win, but it can be an advantage, especially in cases of Ise where the hybrid role complements your needs almost perfectly.

That said, not a CB veteran here :Smile_hiding:.

Edited by warheart1992

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,850
[BONKS]
Members
4,814 posts
52 battles
4 hours ago, motleytanker said:

With the latest nerf to rocket's has only taken what self defense it had to keep a dd from torpedoed to death.

T6 CVs never had particularly punishing rockets to begin with.

If you don't know how to defend yourself from a DD rushing you that's an issue with you and not with CVs.

 

3 hours ago, Moggytwo said:

Not only that, but with no BB to keep the enemy cruisers and BB's in a relatively static position, the CV damage output becomes much less reliable because there is nothing to punish cruisers and BB's that sit in open water actively dodging.

I don't see how this is going to happen given that 2 CVs working in coordination can nullify any attempt to dodge.

Edited by El2aZeR
  • Cool 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,846
Members
878 posts
20 battles
53 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

I don't see how this is going to happen given that 2 CVs working in coordination can nullify any attempt to dodge.

That is definitely true, they can.  However, a BB and CV can also do that, because a cruiser or BB trying to dodge a CV attack is limited in its manoeuvres by the potential BB alpha strike - except that doesn't require coordination, just the BB's mere presence limits the positioning and manoeuvering options.

Don't get me wrong, I want to see double CV as a viable load out, I just have my doubts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,850
[BONKS]
Members
4,814 posts
52 battles
33 minutes ago, Moggytwo said:

That is definitely true, they can.  However, a BB and CV can also do that, because a cruiser or BB trying to dodge a CV attack is limited in its manoeuvres by the potential BB alpha strike - except that doesn't require coordination, just the BB's mere presence limits the positioning and manoeuvering options.

While true to a certain extent, the primary difference is that BB shells can be negated through cover and is fairly unreliable especially at that tier while a CV strike is not, thus I believe having a crossfire via 2 CVs is preferable to having a BB. CVs also assert global map presence while a BB only does so in a limited area.

To be entirely honest 2 skilled CVs working in coordination can already wipe out entire teams in high tier randoms, I doubt it is going to be particularly different in mid tier competitive. Hence why the meta will most likely be extremely smoke heavy in an attempt to negate that.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
732 posts
999 battles

I mean people worried about two CVs? Literally DDs basically have full immunity against them at the moment. (Smart ones anyway) Unless One CV went offensive and the other one just used fighters to keep track of the DDS for the team.

 

The ONLY way I would see a great boost is yes like stated before, unless both those CV Captains are talking perfectly in coordination against one ship, I don't see too much of a threat. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,352 posts
3,059 battles
3 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

T6 CVs never had particularly punishing rockets to begin with.

Ryujo's Reisen can do five-digit figures with their rocket strikes. However this only works against forts :fish_boom:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,300
[SALVO]
Members
16,451 posts
10,192 battles
9 hours ago, motleytanker said:

What appeals to me is that having CV's in game keep player's on the move/feet to win that battle compared to cross firing and island hiding along with kitting which is well know in most competitive matches. I personally find that type of play stagnant and boring. I prefer matches where things have to change up throughout the battle to achieve a victory.   

For me that's the appeal of having a match against double CVs (ergo without BBs) it changes everything. This could be novel and fun.

 

53 minutes ago, Shomaruki said:

I mean people worried about two CVs? Literally DDs basically have full immunity against them at the moment. (Smart ones anyway) Unless One CV went offensive and the other one just used fighters to keep track of the DDS for the team.

The ONLY way I would see a great boost is yes like stated before, unless both those CV Captains are talking perfectly in coordination against one ship, I don't see too much of a threat. 

I'm fairly sure a DD would be dead meat against 2 CVs working in coordination, it would be cross dropped out of existence. Double CVs working together is something we have not really experienced before, not really a precedent on what they can or can't do

4 hours ago, db4100 said:

this idea of yours will be "expired" once submarines hit the waves

Since Subs won't be playing the next CB season, this is hardly relevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
732 posts
999 battles
11 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

For me that's the appeal of having a match against double CVs (ergo without BBs) it changes everything. This could be novel and fun.

 

I'm fairly sure a DD would be dead meat against 2 CVs working in coordination, it would be cross dropped out of existence. Double CVs working together is something we have not really experienced before, not really a precedent on what they can or can't do

Since Subs won't be playing the next CB season, this is hardly relevant.

Oh i Agree with you 100% but the same can be said with any crew that coordinative attacks o.o.  I mean I've played games with Two CVS before, and usually at the start of the match I try and talk with the other captain and we work on a team battle plan.

 

A team attack is better than a random one o-o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,300
[SALVO]
Members
16,451 posts
10,192 battles
8 hours ago, Moggytwo said:

The first concern is that the meta (especially with no Spee being available) will devolve into a smoke cruiser based one.  

This is one of the 2 core problems to break this next season. Usually "assaulting" a smoke cloud is a losing proposition but this season we have the opportunity to operate with an overwhelming concentration of forces that makes assaulting a smoke cloud viable. I'm very excited to design and test tactics for assaulting a smoke cloud.

8 hours ago, Moggytwo said:

The second concern is that double CV will just straight up be unviable.  You give up all pretence of map control to play double CV, and basically that means you are trying to kill ships fast enough to make up for both the caps and any ship losses your own team suffers.  That is a challenge.  Not only that, but with no BB to keep the enemy cruisers and BB's in a relatively static position, the CV damage output becomes much less reliable because there is nothing to punish cruisers and BB's that sit in open water actively dodging.

 TBH, this is my major concern. If double CV proves to be unviable, we will revert by default to a less extreme more conservative 1CV/1BB meta (thus boring). I have faith the CV specialists will develop a functional double CV comp to contend with.

9 hours ago, Moggytwo said:

The potential for new comps is interesting though.  I'd love to see a double CV and DD heavy comp be viable.  We're certainly going to try that sort of thing, and have a few ideas of how to execute it effectively against different line-ups.  I'd love to see double CV seasons at tiers 8 and 10, so hopefully this is a successful trial.

Sounds interesting but I can't see DD heavy comps working against hybrid/heavy comps, you'll be relaying heavily on Airstrikes and Torps for damage and both can be mitigated with proper "fleet tactics". At T6 I can't think about a really effective gunboat DD, able to sustain open water engagements against a massed enemy. And in that scenario who is going to prevent the enemy from just marching through and engaging your CVs?. I wish you good luck and success in your endeavor tho, we need variety of viable comps to keep things fresh.

9 hours ago, Moggytwo said:

On a related note, I suspect this clan battle season is a trial following the rocket nerf, into the potential for reducing CV restrictions in randoms.  It wouldn't surprise me if they do this season and then a tier 10 season with double CV as an option, that if there are no major issues WG would allow random battles to have two CV's per team at tier 10.

I hope the restrictions are not relaxed for Randoms. It has already been proved to exhaustion the average Random player is braindead and unable to coordinate by itself with random team mates, I would accept it tho within a Division exclusive format. Meaning a mode filled strictly with "large" Divisions of 3 or 6 players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,300
[SALVO]
Members
16,451 posts
10,192 battles
8 hours ago, warheart1992 said:

What I see is an awful lot of premium ships having a prime spot in the upcoming season. It isn't pay to win, but it can be an advantage, especially in cases of Ise where the hybrid role complements your needs almost perfectly.

That said, not a CB veteran here :Smile_hiding:.

Indeed some very useful gimmick like crawling smoke or hybrid role are Premium ship monopoly, I think it is unavoidable up to some degree given the business model. Tho it really doesn't bother me as much as long as there are viable F2P options, and there are some. That's why I'm theorizing about a full F2P comp with Izmail/Devonshire/Fushun/Icarus. Maybe it would be less flexible than a Premium comp and require some more skill and coordination to pull up, but imo it could be effective too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
445
[--K--]
Supertester
1,753 posts
21,604 battles

A smoke ball can kite away from a blob at more than 1/4 speed especially if you don't have something forward of them to spot the lead smoke ship. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,300
[SALVO]
Members
16,451 posts
10,192 battles
13 minutes ago, GandalfTehGray said:

A smoke ball can kite away from a blob at more than 1/4 speed especially if you don't have something forward of them to spot the lead smoke ship. 

That's where the Ise planes come in handy. Worst case scenario you already pushed them from cap and then you can sit in your own smoke ball  blocking their access to cap. 

An alternate could be to deploy a DD running wide to gain some vision angle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,846
[SGSS]
Members
6,915 posts
18 hours ago, ArIskandir said:

INTRODUCTION

I know a lot of us are "troubled" (yes, euphemism) about the announced Double CV for the next CB season at T6. I'm not smilling happy about it, but I'm genuinelly interested and curious about how it will develop, not only because it is the first time we are having 2 CVs in a team based competitive instance, but because this may herald (or strongarm) another shift in how we play the game.

So far the strategy (meta) has always focused on map control, spreading forces and creating crossfires to get access to enemy's broadsides. Enter double CVs and the meta starts to change radically, spreading forces becomes an extremely risky proposition, without spreading forces map control becomes unattainable... this leads to a change of strategy focus towards concentration of forces (presented with the extreme aerial threat, massing resources for effective AA coverage becomes a necessity). We might be witnessing the beginning of true Fleet Tactics for WoWS, this has me thrilled.

But ArI, what do you mean? what are you smoking?... let me first explain what is changed:

  • A team selecting double CVs forfeits its BBs. This deeply changes the match dynamic, at this point the threat of massive AP damage dissapears, the concept of "keeping your broadside safe" stops being relevant, suddenly you are faced with an unprecedented freedom of movements, not really posible at T10 given the ever present risk of accurate AP damage from a multitude of sources. At T6, remove battleships (and "supercruiser" Graf Spee) and the long range AP threat basically disappears.
  • Faced with an overwhelming aerial threat, there are only two viable options: hide (smoke) or mass (fleet). Smoking gives up mobility, hidden forces become fixed. Massing a fleet gives up map control. Both options have benefits and drawbacks, but for the first time massing units instead of spreading them out becomes a viable proposition.
  • The orthodox strategy considers using the undeniable power of double CVs along a complement of chain smoke able units to guarantee survivability from air attacks while delivering damage from smoke cover using CV spotting. The archetype of this comp would be double CVs plus Huanghe/Perth complement. I could (and probably will at some point) explain why I find this meta unbeliavably boring and uninteresting, but for now I will just assume this would be the most common meta and the one to break.
  • The unorthodox (at least in terms of competitive WoWS meta) strategy consist in massing your forces into a Task Force operating in close proximity for overlapping AA support. This has the obvious benefit of neutering the main enemy asset (airpower), with the only requirement of keeping close proximity from your team mates. This translates as: the team needs to operate as a massed coordinated squadron, formations suddenly becomes a thing... if you happen to love history and the theory of naval combat as I do, you will understand why this has me giggling like a kid on Christmas Eve. 
  • Maybe for the first time (as far as I know, and be warned my experience is not very ample) we are faced with opposing meta concepts being both theoretically viable in CB. We may experience the WoWS equivalent os a Retiarius vs Secutor match up.

TL;DR: 2 CV/no BB option means the traditional map control and spread of forces becomes no longer relevant or attainable. Massed fleets, formations and close work coordination becomes a viable option under this situation.

 

THEORY - ACTING AS A FLEET

This is where theorizing starts becoming interesting and the possibility of acting as an organized Task Force starts looking viable. I will be really brief for the moment as it is already late and I have not much more time atm to expand the ideas just present the considerations:

  • The enemy is considered to have Double CVs and assortment of smoke cruisers comp
  • Our comp will consist of double BBs, with cruiser and destroyer escorts
  • BBs will act as the core of the Task Force, they will act together (within effective air cover distance) at all times and won't split until the air threat is suppressed
  • The Task Force must operate with extreme aggression, always looking for a quick resolution of the match, on the understanding it will be submitted to constant attrition and DoT from air attacks and HE spam. Any delay will always favor the enemy.
  • The Task Force will operate with an initial "intelligence disadvantage", it is a fact the enemy will know our deployment before we know his, for this reason it is suggested to be no early deployment but a full frontal advance (center) until there's information on the enemy. At that moment, the intention should be to push forward and destroy the enemy over retaining specific map control, it could be retaken once the enemy is defeated. 
  • The Task Force will be presented with 2 tactical challenges. Air Attrition and HE smoke spam.
  • Air Attrition will be addressed by maximizing the exchange of HP for plane loses, by keeping a mass of 4-5 AA able ships within overlapping range, it will be possible to limit enemy airstrikes to just one attack per cycle. 
  • HE smoke spam will be addressed by a swift frontal mass assault, I will explain the details further on but the core idea lies on taking advantage of the relative lack of mobility of the smoke cloud. The task force will proceed at flank speed towards the smoke cloud, initialy tanking the long range fire. Reaching medium range from the enemy, the leading destroyers will deploy a smoke trail and the fleet will close the distance under smoke cover. Then the enemy will be forced to abandon its smoke and become exposed or become exposed either way when entering hydro range. Once exposed, the enemy will suffer concentrated focus fire from the Task Force.
  • Having a solution for both tactical problems, the Task Force focus would be to maneuvre in order to either force a contact with the enemy or force them away from at least 2 caps while preserving the Task Force integrity and HP advantage until victory is secured

Task Force composition and Roles:

  1. Battleships (2 units): Their role is obviously to provide heavy AP damage (lethal to the expected enemy CL forces), to act as HP tank pool and provide strong AA resources to the Task Force.  I propose 2 initial candidates for the BB role. Ise, it brings awesome long range AA (with an added value of 12 flak puffs) and utility in the form of on demand spotting by their TBs. The second option is Izmail, it brings 30 knots of speed and fast cycling DCPs. Ise excels at dealing with the air threat, Izmail excels at dealing with the smoke threat. 
  2. Cruiser - Escort (2 units): Their role is to supplement the BBs with AA power, DPM and utility (hydro/smoke). They will always remain within close proximity of the BBs and along them will constitute the core of the task force. The Escorts can be of 2 types, smoke or tanks. For smoke Cruiser I propose Huanghe, it provides powerful AA and the ability to protect its BB partner with its crawling smoke in case it needs to go dark/dissengage for DCP cooldown. For tank Cruiser I propose Devonshire, it can soak up a lot of damage, has a strong heal, and it has a very respectable close range AA suite, with DFAA possibilities (tho it foregoes hydro). For those wanting a more methodical approach I would suggest Ise/Huanghe, for those wanting pure shock and awe I would suggest Izmail/Devonshire. Izmail/Devonshire comp would require close DD support for smoke, while Ise/Huanghe could operate more independently from the DD support, relaying on their own smoke in case it is needed
  3. Cruiser - Hound (1 units): The role of the Hound is to dash ahead of the main body of the Task Force when charging smokes to spot the enemy units, the Hound will ride close behind a smoke laying DD (lets call her the Hare) and will make and keep contact with the enemy until it is destroyed by the Task Force. The Hound can be of 3 types: hydro, smoke or manly. For hydro Hound the pick is Nurnberg (or anything with long range hydro at T6), it just needs to creep within hydro range from the smoke cloud and light it up. For smoke Hound I suggest Leander, being the Hound will place the cruiser as priority target, having heal and smoke increases the surviving chances of the Hound during and after the action, consider it could end well beyond the AA bubble of the Task Force and would need to survive on its own until recovered. For manly Hound I suggest Duca de Aosta, it is fast and nimble, it has all the right consumables to survive on its own for a while (hydro, DFAA, fighter), no one is outrunning the manly Hound.
  4. Destroyer - Escort (2 units): Their role is to support the Task Force with utility in the form of smoke, spotting, screening/hydro, smoke purging torpedo spreads and supplement DPM and AA values. Imo, the core value of a support DD would be its smoke for this reason I would suggest fast cycling smoke layers like Fushun (good for the Hare role) or Icarus (long lasting hydro for screening and disengage smoke on demand). I'm curious about using Monaghan in her AA configuration, long lasting smoke, long range area torps and more importantly (and this I need to test) if fully rigged for AA duty the numbers look pretty awesome, adding this value to the Task Force I wouldn't be surprised if it is even possible to create a functional no fly zone around the task force, in any case the plane tax would be brutal and unsustainable for the CV.
  5. Destroyer - Rambo (1 unit): This is one special role, it consist on detaching one lone DD to contest a different cap. It's role is to draw attention and pull enemy units from engaging the Task Force during what is expected to be "the main action". It is a Decoy and its main requirement is being able to survive and operate on its own as long as possible. I suggest T-61, Icarus or whatever you guys prefer for the role.

Task Force Organization

  • Squadron 1: BB, Cruiser Escort, DD Escort
  • Squadron 2: BB, Cruiser Escort, DD Escort
  • Wild Card: Cruiser Hound/ DD Rambo

The Task Force could be organized in 2 similar squadrons, this to facilitate coordination under combat, each escort will be assigned to a particular BB and will be tasked with providing "her BB" with the required support (smokes/screen/hydro). Under Double CV situation both Squadrons should operate in close coordination, but when under lesser "air threat" situations, the Squadron can act independently to generate more map control. The Wild Card element is there to supplement the squadrons or detach as needed to give more flexibility to the comp.

And this will be all for the moment... 

 

First thanks for doing some theory crafting.

Planes don't do much damage and they die fast.

No matter how many planes are put up i don't see planes getting in if they stay together.

No need to show broadside is interesting idea. T6 cruiser AP is not very powerful.

Nice work up.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,092
[TOG]
Members
4,758 posts
34,564 battles

The prior T6 matches had been either long range slug fests or smoke fests. Here's the ships that I see as useful.

 

1. Ise - having a ship that can do CV/BB rile would be useful. The question is how useful.

2. Arizona - Strong AA suite and tanky. The issue to me is her slow spped.

3. Dallas - This is a  ship that has all the consumables to take on a repeated double CV attack. You might kill it,  but you'll be low in planes by the time you're finished.

4. Smoke CA's - Huanghe, Perth, Devonshire, London and Leander. I prefer perth but the Rn cruisers go superheal.

5. DD's - Either T-61 or Monahan would work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,300
[SALVO]
Members
16,451 posts
10,192 battles
7 minutes ago, Bill_Halsey said:

1. Ise - having a ship that can do CV/BB rile would be useful. The question is how useful.

I also think Ise is a strong favorite to "rule" the season, it is a very solid pick with its AA and spotting utility

9 minutes ago, Bill_Halsey said:

2. Arizona - Strong AA suite and tanky. The issue to me is her slow speed.

I haven't thought about AZ, depends on how potent her AA and how Tanky she is... being slow, your strategy would be limited to sit in Cap and just endure. 

12 minutes ago, Bill_Halsey said:

3. Dallas - This is a  ship that has all the consumables to take on a repeated double CV attack. You might kill it,  but you'll be low in planes by the time you're finished.

The problem is, it isn't only air attacks. You'll be subjected to smoke spam, she'll require smoke support to survive, in such scenario something with her own smoke would fare better. Huanghe for example also has decent AA and has smoke.

14 minutes ago, Bill_Halsey said:

4. Smoke CA's - Huanghe, Perth, Devonshire, London and Leander. I prefer perth but the Rn cruisers go superheal.

Huanghe has stronger AA compared to Perth, London's heal is really poor and her smoke is barely functional, Devon has no smoke but has a regular heal like Leander. As a purely smoke spammer under double CV conditions, Huanghe is clearly the better pick.

19 minutes ago, Bill_Halsey said:

5. DD's - Either T-61 or Monahan would work.

DDs are an interesting topic, it depends on what role do you want them to perform. T-61 is all around good, but her smoke is weak, Monaghan is an interesting ship and you can build her as an AA mini monster but you forego your guns, you'll be deadmeat if caught unsupported by any other DD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,092
[TOG]
Members
4,758 posts
34,564 battles
12 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

I also think Ise is a strong favorite to "rule" the season, it is a very solid pick with its AA and spotting utility

Well, I suppose I better start training in ops then. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
165
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
324 posts
4,905 battles

The TF concept is a great idea, but I don't know if T6 AA is up to the task...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,300
[SALVO]
Members
16,451 posts
10,192 battles
7 minutes ago, Dunnik said:

The TF concept is a great idea, but I don't know if T6 AA is up to the task...

4-5 ships worth of AA are guaranteed to limit CVs to only one strike (and they will pay a hefty price for that strike), that's the best you can realistically expect. Then it becomes a race between your HP tank/regen and plane DPM/regen. If you keep your HP integrity longer than the CVs keep viable attack flights, you win. I expect attrition to favor the CVs once you factor in the HE spam, that's why I consider swift decisive action to be essential if you are applying a TF strategy, consider you'll also be losing map control and that neither is sustainable on the long run.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×