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

Why Do the Developers Micromanage Our CV Loaduout Options?

15 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
1,021 posts
3,578 battles

Does anyone know if many of the developers actually play the game?  Because, if they do, how can that not understand how frustrating it is for them to micromanage which planes we can carry on our flattops?  It is bad enough that the matching system matches carriers against each other so the tech difference between the planes is sometimes so different that the planes on one side are essentially useless because the other side's fighters shoot everything down with impunity.  Then there is the fact that we are stuck with choosing between the best of bad or not good options for which squadrons we can have.  If a player chooses to limit the number of fighter squadrons they have then so be it, that is on the player.  But NOT having a choice is often frustrating and zero fun because of how the matching system matches the CVs against each other.  If a player CHOOSES to not take no fighters for the ride and then have enemy fighters shoot down everything then that consequence is on the player's choice.  But having everything get shot down because we cannot choose enough fighter squadrons to provide support or because they are so inferior they are useless is completely different.  Feeling completely helpless because of a choice made for me is very frustrating and not much fun.

 

 

 

For example, our only choices for the loadout on the Zuiho are between one choice that has only one fighter squadron and a second choice with zero fighter squadrons.  Now, even if the Japanese were actually stupid enough to have so few fighters on their carriers why should the game force us to do the same thing on a carrier that has the capacity to handle four squadrons?  Two fighter squadrons makes more sense then only one, and is infinitely more sensible than zero.  Then on the Bogue, which has an ultimate capacity to carry thee squadrons, if we want to have two fighter squadrons, which is a better option compared to the others of none or one, we can only have dive bombers but no torpedo planes.  The only way to have TBs is if we stick with the lower tech option and sacrifice a fighter squadron AND the bombers to have them.  How does that make any sense on a fully upgraded CV that can carry three squadrons?  Why not allow the players to choose if they want to carry DBs or TPs depending upon THEIR skill and preferences?  So, the bottom line again is, what is the point of the developers micromanaging our plane loadouts on our carriers?

 

Depending upon the responses I am willing to make this a formal suggestion if nobody else has made it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[AVW]
[AVW]
Beta Testers
491 posts
16,399 battles

The better question is do the programmers play there own game.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,661
Alpha Tester, Members, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
12,413 posts

The better question is do the programmers play there own game.   

 

I'm pretty sure they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[AVW]
[AVW]
Beta Testers
491 posts
16,399 battles

 

I'm pretty sure they do.

 

I have all ways doubted  this. When I get home for work after being on the computer all day, I don't all ways feel like sitting at it wile at home. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
698 posts
36 battles

Because certain loadouts would be absurdly OP.

 

For instance Hakuryu with 9 TB squads

 

As opposed to just being massively OP with 6 TBs? If the Essex could put up 6 Fighters it could at least play defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts

The better question is do the programmers play there own game.   

 

Some do, I'm very much sure that a degree of the developers play or test their own games either for bugs, community events, or fun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,012 posts
1,480 battles

 

As opposed to just being massively OP with 6 TBs? If the Essex could put up 6 Fighters it could at least play defense.

 

Fighters never kill any of my bombers when i go to kill the enemy CV. So considering that 3 cant intercept my planes at all. 6 would be even funnier as they watch me sink him and do nothing to save him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,021 posts
3,578 battles

 

As opposed to just being massively OP with 6 TBs? If the Essex could put up 6 Fighters it could at least play defense.

 

EXACTLY! ! !  If two CV captains on the same side at that level go for balance and put up 3 or 4 fighter squadrons each and the other side puts up only attack aircraft the fighter support should be able to neutralize the other carriers without ever even finding them.  I love it when I am skippering a Bogue with two fighter squadrons and the other side chooses the no fighter option.  I like teamwork and helping my team so I use my fighters to defend my team by going after the other side's attack planes.  I don't even bother searching for the other CV/s until after I have shot down all their planes.  The other carrier/s can't hurt my teammates once it has no planes left.  Then I can use my fighters as scouts to find any reaming DDs before I look for the other flattop/s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
440
[BLKHS]
Beta Testers
1,612 posts
8,174 battles

I'm totally good with having load out options for the CV's, but it should be load out options for the entire air component of the carrier, and then in battle, CV's should be able to surge most of the aircraft, at least two-thirds of them....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
300
Beta Testers
783 posts
4,031 battles

Because the game is designed to appeal to toddler-level casuals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,021 posts
3,578 battles

I'm totally good with having load out options for the CV's, but it should be load out options for the entire air component of the carrier, and then in battle, CV's should be able to surge most of the aircraft, at least two-thirds of them....

 

Okay, that is great for you.  But what about other players who prefer different options, and/or who simply prefer having more choices and/or a better choice?

 

With the straight flight deck WWII era and earlier carriers could not surge launch their aircraft.  They had no alternative but to launch one squadron at a time in pairs, and they had to wait until one pair was clear before launching the next.  They had to wait in case of a problem during takeoff since they could not risk having one or two planes trying takeoff with a crash or failure in front of them.  Only a carrier with an angled flight deck could add anything like a surge launch capacity that you suggest.  I think the developers actually got this part right.

 

What about launching planes while the carrier is not moving?  Biplanes, sure, but fully loaded monoplanes?  I am pretty sure that once the planes got advanced/fast/heavy enough carriers could not launch their planes while the carrier was sitting still so they needed a minimum amount of wind across the deck for flight operations, and that means the ship moving at flank speed (i.e. maximum).

 

Ironically, full speed is actually not a ship's full speed.  On the ships I served and stood the Throttleman watch ship's speed increments were actually 1/3, 2/3, standard, full, and flank in 5 knot increments.  Any speed in between those standard bell orders required a bell order plus a specific revolutions order.  So for example when we did Naval Gunfire Support (NGFS) we would sometimes move at 3 knots back and forth on a line on the chart until we got to the end of the line and did a Standard or Full bell order to turn around to get back on the line.  And when we did an UNREP along side we would do a lot of bell changes of one or two RPM to try and match speeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
698 posts
36 battles

 

Fighters never kill any of my bombers when i go to kill the enemy CV. So considering that 3 cant intercept my planes at all. 6 would be even funnier as they watch me sink him and do nothing to save him

 

Because you're overwhelming them with numbers or because you baited them away (or your tier X planes outrun the tier 9 fighters?) You should still be able to bait them away even if they had 6 squads, though you'd probably find it a tad harder. It's just, if you know the enemy is full bomber, why wouldn't you trade in your strike craft for extra fighters? Nothing stopping you from attempting to establish Air Superiority before you call them all back and send out your own bombers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,072 posts
1,908 battles

I think the reason is national flavor and "Balance" They want US CV to use mostly FT and DB so they force you to do so if you want to have max squads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,021 posts
3,578 battles

I think the reason is national flavor and "Balance" They want US CV to use mostly FT and DB so they force you to do so if you want to have max squads.

 

Thanks.  National flavor makes some sense and that was the only possibility I could think of if the game actually does reflect the SOP for how the Americans and Japanese loaded their CVs.  But, I don't buy the fighter free option for the Japanese CVs, or the single fighter squadron option.  I know for a fact that both sides always deployed enough fighter squadrons so they could send some to protect the strike package and keep some back to provide CAP for the flattop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,072 posts
1,908 battles

 

Thanks.  National flavor makes some sense and that was the only possibility I could think of if the game actually does reflect the SOP for how the Americans and Japanese loaded their CVs.  But, I don't buy the fighter free option for the Japanese CVs, or the single fighter squadron option.  I know for a fact that both sides always deployed enough fighter squadrons so they could send some to protect the strike package and keep some back to provide CAP for the flattop.

 

3.0 CV had a balanced loadout, A air superiority loadout, and a heavy damage loadout. Seems like they want to keep those options.

Share this post


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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×