Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'CV'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - Asia Language Based Communities
    • English Speaking Community
    • 繁體中文討論區
    • 日本語コミュニティ
    • 한국어 커뮤니티
  • Mod Section
    • Player Modifications
  • Public Test Forums
    • English Speaking Community
    • 繁體中文討論區
    • 日本語コミュニティ
  • Locked Threads
    • Locked Threads


There are no results to display.

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL






Drag Interests

Found 163 results

  1. Fr00dyDud

    CV manual dropping

    Hey there fellow captains, so I was facing this problem on my keyboard in which both of my alt keys are not working. Since I just unlocked my first Japanese CV, I was very exited to try manual torps dropping, and all the manual stuff. but since the alt keys are not working I decided to change the key bindings to something different but it still doesn't work. It just doesn't show the manual dotted circular thingy from which you can do a manual drop, please help me guys. Thanks.
  2. 不該為求平衡更改航母原先操作技巧 原因: 1.航母艦長職務本就是操控飛行中隊發動攻擊而非擔任飛行中隊長。 2.仍舊無法解決航母與水面艦發生戰鬥時的平衡(航母仍能對單一艦艇集火)。 3.航母與水面艦的差距當初不該用增加水面艦AA基礎傷害來彌補。 應將AA技能拖到每艘船身上,然後根據船艦設計決定AA技能的持續時間以及影響投彈的擴散度, EX:防空艦艇AA持續時間短,冷卻快,影響投彈精準度+50%;普通艦艇AA持續時間中,冷卻慢,影響投彈精準度+30%。 Nerf目前基礎AA傷害過高等船艦。 防空技能開啟時增加的傷害倍率不變。 總結: 雖然我覺得目前講什麼或許都太遲了(? 看到航母艦艇刪除有點不捨, 希望WG能再慎重考慮。 認同請在下面回應發表意見! 讓WG重新考慮這個問題!
  3. My current CV Rework Rework (WiP) Preface Numbers are obviously subject to balancing requirements, what I have detailed is an IDEA and as such should be very much subject to change. Premise The current iteration of the CV rework is boring and 1-dimensional. We need something that has a little more gusto and dynamism. So I'm proposing changes based on: The action-based system will not change significantly AA needs to be relevant CVs need strike potential Easy enough to learn, hard enough to master Conditions Reduce ‘dot’ damage done by CVs, significantly reduce chance of fire/flood to roughly once every 2 drops. Reduce damage of each attack run a bit, so that ‘maximum’ theoretical damage output of 2 wings doing their 2 attack runs is 75% of a ships HP. Which I would guess should be 2 AP DB wings v BB. Limit number of attack runs for planes to 2 or 3. For each aircraft in a wing shot down, reduce damage output but a %, eg 2% or 4% per plane or something (obviously change as needed). Add ability to have 2 flights in the air at the same time. Two Flights I am proposing a 2-flight or 2-squadron system. Basically the you have 2 flights of your choosing, any combination. The key to that combination is the balance against different targets of rockets/DB/TBs. Why have two flights? Basically I find one flight boring and the gameplay is exceptionally repetitive and stale. So the trick is to have two flights, giving the player far more choice and allowing combination attacks and CVs to actually have some mastery involved. The trick is balancing the damage. How would Two Flights work? Basically you would be able to switch between which flight is active, the active one you would control and possibly be able to set course. Either way you would definitely be able to have the second flight follow your main one around, my initial estimate would be 5 km (as always subject to change). Essentially my proposal functions around being able to do 2 attack runs per flight with a maximum potential (perfect) damage of %75 of BB HP at tier. Obviously 0 DOTs for that 'max' damage combination. DOT Damage DOT or Damage Over Time damage is the damage cause by fires and floods. The more DOT damage you add, the more painful the game becomes. IMO warships has pushed DOT damage a bit too far lately (RN BBs anyone?). DOT damage should be a risk-reward thing, not an ‘expected’. Chance of Fire/Flood should be reduced to the point that it happens ‘sometimes’ and that if you are choosing aircraft for that feature, it feels like it’s worth it but not mandatory. Potential DOT damage should scale with real damage, the better chance you have of DOT damage, the less the real damage the wing can inflict. Aircraft Damage So the biggest issue people have with CVs (currently) is the strike potential, being able to essentially ‘1-shot’ you. So I’ll use AP DB v BB as a damage metric. Perfect hit, perfect RNG (ignore detonations here), 2 wings should never be able to 1-shot a BB. So let’s just put a random limit and say no more than 75% damage and talk about this in terms of a T10 BB. 100k HP 2 wings (AP DB), a total of 4 runs, 5 bombs per drop. 75% - 75k HP max damage 4 runs, 18750 per run 3750 max damage per bomb at T10. You’d be looking at a ‘good’ 4 runs by 2 sqns being 30-40k damage on a T10 BB. (That would be max possible damage by any combo.) This is just me brain-storming, but I think you can see where this is going. Basically the amount of damage will need to be effectively scaled to AA. For using HE DBs, Rockets or TBs, you are shifting the damage metric from raw damage to a bit of DOT or what it’s effective against. TBs – I would expect 2 wings with a total of 4 runs to inflict 1 flooding. Rockets – good v DDs, do little damage to other ships but decent fire chance, I would expect 2 wings with 4 runs to inflict 2 fires on non-DDs reliably but do almost 0 damage on CA/BBs. HE DBs – less fire chance than Rockets but more penetrating power, perhaps has enough pen to cita CLs? Effective v DDs, harder to land, effective against CAs but less so than v CLs. AP DBs – Can cita BBs and some CAs, good against ‘heavily’ armoured targets. 0 DOT Damage reduction Now you would need to balance this properly with AA but the idea is that as you lose aircraft within your wing, your maximum damage output is reduced. Doing damage to the different aircraft wings therefore actually means something. I’ll touch on this a bit more in the AA section. You could even apply a ‘max’ damage reduction (say 30%). Number of attack runs You have to limit this, there has to be a reason outside of AA to go back to your CV. There again needs to be that risk-reward to committing to an attack run. Why the detail? Now your two Flight choices matter… You balance things like TBs and HE DBs fire/flood and actual damage to make it a worthwhile choice to go AP DBs OR the TB/HE option when targeting CAs. Due to BB torp reduction, AP DBs are you best bet against BBs, unless you are lucky enough to get a flooding (‘lucky’ enough), you now have a risk-reward system. Maybe you go 1 AP DB and 1 TB so that you are pretty good against CAs and ok v BBs? Or maybe one of the BBs has insane short range AA so you want the TBs so you don’t lose as much damage? AA – How to make it work? Easy, you don’t want to completely destroy each flight after their 2 runs (maybe 3) but you want AA to do something. As mentioned earlier, apply a damage reduction to each plane in the flight that’s destroyed. In balancing it, they need to have some basic conditions to balance it to. For example: No one ship should ever be able to wipe out an aircraft wing in… 3 drops or 5 passes. No two ships should ever be able to wipe out an aircraft wing in 2 drops, 4 passes. Etc. You basically want to make it so that 90%+, CV players will get 2 drops off with both flights and then need to return to base against a concerted AA effort, say 3 ships, 1-2 of which have good AA. AA beasts? Well obviously they’re going to need to actually balance AA for starters. But if there are issues with how quick planes are getting shredded against AA Monsters, instead of adding aircraft HP (making them imba for other ships) simply add a cool-down between plane destruction. For example, 5-10s. So at minimum it takes 50-100s to take down a 10-plane wing of aircraft but while this cooldown is in effect, the next tier of damage reduction is applied. (So while the cool-down for the first aircraft being downed is active, 4% reduction in damage as opposed to 2%). DFAA? Easy, simply make it apply a damage reduction, either max (30%?) or possibly even greater if that’s needed, 50%. Spotting Basically I see spotting as eliminated from CV play outside of the 'active' squadron. Basically either have it so that the AA attack range is the spotted range or do something interesting... ... Make is so that aircraft only spot in a similar fashion to Cyclones, quasi-visible on the minimap. Conclusion So the whole idea is to have a bit of variety and combination (2 Flights active) and at the same time keep the core action-based reworked system. In furtherance of this is a shift away from DOTs and from either aircraft or AA being OP. You also want the risk v reward system to be worth it. A concentrated AA effort? Well maybe you only get the 2 attack runs per flight, not 3? Or maybe the damage reduction is making it not worth dropping on those targets due to DFAA? Maybe the AA escort around BBs is too much, need to switch to HE DBs to take out the CLs? Maybe the concentration of camping ships is so high that 2xTBs will land just about every torp? Basically my changes would allow anyone to jump in and have fun with CVs, while a good player could use the choices available and skill in managing multiple flights to maximise their contribution. By using the damage reduction system and clearly defining which planes are effective against which ships, a balance can easily be found. Thoughts from the floor?
  4. Corlione1

    Public TST - CV Test

    I need a Help Page for the Aircraft controls in Public TST for the CV enhancements please. There are three types of planes - Fighters Torpedo bombers Dive Bombers 1) How is each aircraft type controlled - targeting; bomb runs; views etc. 2) How do you toggle views between a Squadrons and the CV? 3) Can you have more than one squadron airborne at a time? How do you do this? 4) What other key controls are available - F, T … And what do they do when in Aircraft flight mode. I'll look to get this in the proper CV Rework Test feedback forum.
  5. Kitsune_Ivy

    Manual torp drop

    someone tell me how to drop torp manually. i tired with alt key didn't work
  6. Skarhabek

    from susanoo into Norris

    WG staff 1 : hey, people complaining about skill gap in CV, perma spotting, multitask crap and not appealing gameplay. we need to increase CV play to monetize it. market just too crowd with surface pheasant. WG staff 2 : lets do the skarhabek advice, buff CV but make it more action packed.... _____________________________________ WG is overbuffing CV..... infinite plane? NEW ROCKET? ability to dodge AA? and LESS strategic SKILL?? AND MOST non-CV player love it.......??? ___________________________________________________ bet me 10 credit, after CV rework..... everyone will play CV instead. CV player 1 : HEY LOOK THERE IS SMALL DD THERE! DD player 3000018386418 : oh its CV, now it cannt crosstorp me hahaha and i got KIDD AA! CV player 2 : HEY CV PLAYER 3,4,5 ! LETS BOMB THOSE DD! CV player 5 : whoach nice find ! DD player 3000018386418 : ahahaa i am pro at TORPEDOBEAT! DEEEEJAAVUUU!!!! .....proceed with rocket bombing >>>> 3K HP remaining but still have repair party DD player 3000018386418 : HOWLING SHEET! OI CV I NEED HELP! THERE IS 5 CV ATTACKING ME!!!! CV player 2 : bro..... look! there is no CV in your team, the new MM is based on normal ship now.... ......Lolanta come >>>> Lolanta player : HAHAHAAHA A TRUE HERO HAS COME TO HELP!!! I GOT AA SPECED!! ITS RAMBO TIME!!!!! ...... 400 shotdown plane later....... still get nuked with rocket and now have 10K HP remaining....... lolanta player : HEY! how many plane enemy CV still have? CV player 1 : well, the AA is actually dodgeable, its easy to insta kill.....but we want to see fire work..... did you know what? unlike Rambo, Norris NEVER RUN OUT OF AMMO AND NEVER RELOAD!!!! ________________________________________________________________________________
  7. FenrirApalis

    Suggestions for CV buffs

    Maybe I am posting this in the wrong section, but oh well I will put it here anyways so as many of you, if not all of you, have seen, you barely see aircraft carriers in World of Warships right now. Especially in high tiers, it's barely existent. Now the battleships and some cruisers (mostly USN BB) received AA buffs, it would be even harder for the CV players to find a reason to play. I used to play matches where I would be surprised to see no carriers on the team list and that was a time I'm that I will miss. Carriers are able to do so much for the team and turn the tide of the battle but they are just so rare now. I have a few ideas for consumables and other changes that can be incorporated into aircraft carriers and maybe some battleships, so here is my list: 1. Air radar consumable. We have all seen battles where the enemy CV or allied CV sneak their planes across along the border of the map and destroy the enemy CV before the game even reaches the 15 minute mark. Of course with the high tier CV's defensive AA consumable that problem has been reduced, but nobody's AA will ever be as effective as your squadron(s) of fighter planes. (unless it's a Des Moines or Hindernberg of course XD) so what does the air radar do? Pretty obvious. It spots all aircrafts that are in the air right now. Maybe the float planes should count too, maybe not. So that way the aircraft carrier would be able to dispatch their fighters to the correct sector of the map and using them to their maximum efficiency. This consumable will have 2 charges, +1 for superintendent or premium and +2 if SI and premium. Standard should have 300 seconds reload time and premium will have 240 seconds reload time. This will save the carrier players lots of time when deciding where their aircraft should go and giving them a better chance to influence the battle in their favour. 2. Defensive secondaries consumable. This is one that I think could be incorporated into battleships too, especially the later tiers. It would provide say a 15% boost to the rate of fire of secondaries and give them a 50% boost in accuracy. Make them last 45 seconds on Tier 7 BB, 50 for Tier 8, 55 for Tier 9 and 60 for Tier 10. The duration of the consumable is doubled on aircraft carriers as they have less secondaries and generally need the secondaries for a bit longer until the planes can get into the AO or an allied ship arrives. The reload time for the consumable will be the same as the defensive AA consumable on cruisers, amount of charges equal to the air radar consumable as listed above. 3. Aircraft speed boost consumable. Pretty self explanatory, all your aircrafts get a speed boost just like how destroyers get speed boosts. Make it basically the same thing as the destroyer speed boost except on aircraft, maybe change the boost from 5% to 10% as 5% doesn't help as much as it should. It could be useful to try and get your bombers back while sending in your fighters to cover their retreat, or make your fighters fly like bats outta hell to try save an allied battleship from enemy aircraft (or in some cases, yourself) amount of charges and reload time should be equal to the destroyer speed boost. Now, captain skill addition for CV! Well this is an addition to the situational awareness skill which I think could help some CV players, especially if the Air Radar consumable gets incorporated into the game. And that is for individual squadrons to have a tiny 'detected' warning over them if they are spotted by enemies. Of course, just like ships, they gotta have different signs for different types of detection. A standard detected sign for being detected by ships and the radar/sonar detection sign for detected by air radar. Could help some CV players right? let me know what you think of my ideas, if they could maybe inprove the current poor state that the CV's are in.
  8. Shifty_Panzer

    Hurray, CV Rework!

    Yes, WG are actually reworking on CV. Idk if this is a bad or good news, its up to you. Oh yes, this is a quote from Notser video "They will not release any premium Aircraft Carriers until the rework is in the game." So hey, good news, no OP premium CV until the rework. But there could be a possibility that they will make CV involved in clan battles btw. WG better work on those CVs before BB get obsolete. For more details, here is the video : Edit : I dont know any sh*t about this mate, im not a professional, why am i even making this thread.
  9. Shifty_Panzer

    New Royal Navy CV

    Recently got news from Panzerknacker that there are going to be 5 new British CV, this will include : HMS Furious (fast and furious) HMS Victorious HMS Unicorn (more like unicum) HMS Hermes (herpes) And lastly, HMS Implacable Feel free to share your opinions! and yes, more CV... sigh Edit : Luckily theres no HMS Ark Royal, or Bismarck is going to get hunt again
  10. HMNZS_Riwaka

    Split Aircraft Carrier "Plane Groups"

    Hi, I am using USS Bogue and I would like to know if I can split the torpedo plane's and bomber planes into two group's Because when I play game I can not seem to split the airplane groups up into two. Thank you
  11. WG, there is no balance when a tier 6 CV with manual attack is in battle with a tier 5 auto attack only CV. Does your staff actually have any brains not to see this as not being balanced at all? Auto attack only CV should only face the same. Never a manual attack CV.
  12. LordTyphoon

    I have a CV idea

    Guys, I have an idea that might revitalise CV play in WoWS, since CV gameplay is at an all-time low at the moment. Although I wouldn't say CVs are my favourite ship class (I'm much stronger with cruisers and BBs, CVs horrifically sink my stats), the impact of CVs to the history of modern warships, as well as the outcomes of major global conflicts (including WWII, Korean War, Vietnam War) is so significant that I think they are under-represented in current gameplay. Please don't be too harsh with your comments, as I am sure there are problems with my idea, but I came up with it in 15 mins so I haven't had the opportunity to figure out the kinks yet. I think that we should have carrier vs carrier battles as one of the game scenarios in WoWS. In addition to Co-op and Random Battles, CV battles will be its own battle type. Players can use carriers only, and both sides will field several carriers of matching tiers (e.g. 3 Taihos and 3 Essexs per side), with 4-6 CVs were team (or less, depending on practicality of the map, airwing size, etc.), and no players will not have full (see below) control of any escorting BBs, CL/CAs or DDs of the carrier groups. These will probably be played on the largest WoWS maps to make these battles practical. Historically, I can think of two battles in WWII in the Pacific-theatre where CV vs CV engagements were fought with neither fleet coming within visual/firing distance of each other (Coral Sea and Midway), and where the forces on either side were relatively even (at Midway, the island itself could be though of as an unsinkable carrier, but with B-17s of course). Therefore, I dont think my idea is without relevance or is unrealistic. Because carriers operated in battle groups with escorts, I don't have a solution on how to bring these other ships into the game. Making them purely AI would be boring. Historically, CV captains have some degree of authority to organise escort formations, so perhaps each CV player is allowed to control 1 escort within the fleet and position the ship accordingly (e.g. each carrier gets a cruiser of its nation for use as an AA screen, and uses the 0-key to select it and move it using autopilot, similar to how the 1-key is used to control the carrier currently). Grouping AA of cruisers together within a team could be quite devastating for the CV strike aircraft , so there will be defensive strategies in where to position them, and planes will need to exploit gaps in these escort screens. I'm not sure if there should be limitations to the distance between escorts and their carriers, or their ability to earn 'close quarter combat' for carriers should enemy carriers get close enough to the primary weapons of the escorts. Ás with current WoWS gameplay, I think CVs vs CVs will require a similar mix of individual brilliance and cooperation to ensure team victory. The exact mechanics to promote this, I have not yet come up with. The game will be a 20-minute time-limited game, but no capture-the-base or domination. The game will end either when all enemy carriers are sunk, or if the timer runs out. if the timer runs out, the team with most points wins. Sinking a carrier gives 100 pts, escort BBs sunk give 80 pts, CLs 75 pts, DDs 40 pts (or something like that). There could be some interesting tactics here (e.g. which CVs will fly combat air patrol (CAP) where, where to position fighters in an attack run, which enemy CV to focus on first, which CVs will dive bomb or torpedo bomb from which direction, diversionary attack runs, attacking fleets with planes/different types of planes from multiple angles/times to find gaps in enemy CAP). I think this can get really messy and potentially there can be a massive torpedo soup or furball fighter dogfights, but I think it will be the challenge to try to cause this, or stop this from happening, by either team depending on the situation. There is potential for this to be very fun. I think I'd enjoy this, depending on how they go with the CV rework. Imagine if both sides ran out of planes, the game becomes a serial map-wide ramming contest =D Guys please critique/build on this idea. Would love to one day play a Midway 1942 rematch as either Fletcher or Yamamoto =]
  13. ahh... finally i am understand that feeling. now i am confused, playing Bismarck is so much fun but those CV ruined everything. using secondary and then sunk is more fun than torping and sinking the Yamato....... when in Bismarck: "CV HELP MEEE, BOMBER IS COOOMING" "CV spot enemy DD" "CV repel those scouter from spotting our DD" "CV spot E5" "CV move" < almost get close to enemy "howling sheet" well.... i thought i am good at CV, but the truth is there is actually there is more potato CV. the Potato is exist, even in T8 or T9 -_- we cannt 100% blame them for playing bad. the class CV itself is so rare to find a good guide. i am looking for youtube, scratching the forum and ask directly. but tell me how many CV player dedicated to get better? people always complain the disparity of cv player skill is too far. if that is the problem, why dont we closing the gap between the Potato and the unicum? currently the guide about CV is scattered in all place. not everybody bother to search the whole place just for playing "right click class" 1. Together we can create a guide what CV should do [for Asian meta]. 2. the guide is not only contain how to bombing or strafing, but the whole tactic&strategy like predicting enemy bomber, loadout or the map. 3. the unicum check it throughly to confirm is that good or need to change. 4. Translate the guide in many languange, i am from Indonesia so i am going to translate it and post it on our community. 5. i can relax yolo in Bismarck :V and also we should make EACH CV SHIP a guide, like this one. different ship have different loadout, strength, weakness and map that it will encounter. so the tactic and strategy should be differ according to the ship. also playing with division or not will affect the gameplay. there is so much factor that we must include in that guide :V also lets revive our : https://forum.worldofwarships.asia/forum/224-game-guides-and-tutorials/ its seem dead..... WHY dont swap the https://forum.worldofwarships.asia/forum/223-newcomers-zone/ into the subforum and game guide as the main forum. ALL HAIL POTATO!!!
  14. 現在無法平衡航空母艦與水面艦的差距 是否能將航空母艦分艦隊與SOLO航空母艦分開佇列? 我是個SOLO CV玩家 但是經常遇上CV分艦隊基本上都是穩輸的(CV必定帶上AA特化流的兩艘,各卡地圖左右邊+航母FT,基本上制空權就完全在對方手上) 也造成水面艦玩家即使再努力也難扳回一城 因此我建議分艦隊的CV只能遇上組分艦隊的CV、SOLO CV遇上SOLO CV 以上是我的建議,懇請WG過目一下
  15. Currently the single CV player in the team of each side takes too much responsibility. He has very little space to make errors, or the whole battle loses. I think it's unfair for both CV players and for non-CV players. As a CV player, if you make an error, you will probably get reported. As a non-CV player, you may lose just because there's a new CV play in your team. The one-CV limit must account for this situation. As the AA fire of Tier X ships are so strong, just 2 Des Monieses can block the whole front line against Tier VIII CV. Why not allow 2 Tier VIII CVs for each team in a Tier X battle? We can still keep the one-CV limit for Tier VIII CV in a Tier VIII battle, as the AA defense is not that strong.
  16. I don't understand, most people suck at it, so why keep playing? Sometimes people tell me to play for fun, and then i call them masochists, which greatly offends them. That's because more than half the time you meet a unicum CV fishing div, and with your slow reaction time and micromanagement skills you are nearly guaranteed to be completely devastated, along with your team. How is that even fun? I quit CVs once i reached T6, because i understood that with my own skill level all im gonna do is generate more salt at high tiers. So id like to ask those CV players with less than 900 WTR (im not statbashing, but stats provide some insight on how well one plays compared to others even though its pretty flawed) in CVs T6 and above, why keep playing all the way until T8-10?
  17. BlindToss


  18. Hi guys: I was told a Q&A in 0.7.3 said that the Graf Zeppelin will back to store in "about 3 months later"(June)? and also told that new CV will not be online in store until CV rework done? I'm not sure whether they are true but really interested about the premium CVs :3 Do anyone have some news about it? Thx~
  19. KillStealz

    CV Queue Times

    Got an instant queue with this today, our CV suicide himself when he was overrun by fishing div... point is one CV was obviously in queue for a very long time. Not a very enjoyable game WG, please fix CV queue time and MM rules. Or most happy for you to just remove CV from the game entirely.. 2018 year of the NO CV!
  20. DFaultPlayR69

    When you do a good job as a CV

    Just had the best CV play I had for a long time, and i both got reported and complimented Shame though I didn't get a Kraken since the last remaining enemy ship, which was the Graf Zeppelin killed himself with his last DB squadron. I suspect the reports i got were from the salty Graf, and the poor Belfast that I deleted with 1 AP bombing run.
  21. Hi,I'm a experienced player in wows,thank you for giving me a joying time.After finished a lot of games,there are some suggestions maybe good at CV system. 1.Restore the flight level as before,it is unfair to limit players not to use high performance force to against opponent while others may have.Some players have to put up with low damage,low hp and low speed during the conflict.Maybe we should let them choose what they want,limit it by cost,not by forbidding. 2.Remove the limit number about using flights in a flight group.For example,for USN CV player,they can choose 1 to 6 flights as there own group size,for IJN CV player,they can make 1 to 4.The skill 4-5 can make the limitation add 1 . 3.After buffing several points,we should make some cost to limit CV force. (1) Board Bearing Capacity,limit the count number of mission flights. (2)Group Limit,limit count number of flight groups,make it rise with CV level,form 3 to 8. (3)Group Hostling Time,make it rise with flights number,drop with CV level. (4)Take off Time,make it rise with with group number,drop with CV level. 4.Allow to the group size while sitting in port,forbid to change it during the battle. 5.Make 3 new button to add flight group,add 1 kind 1 group by clicking 1 button,make it suffering by cost long time to delete a group. Sorry for my poor English, that's all of my suggestions.Thank you for reading it.
  22. Like it says in the title, please get a lot of advice and feedback from people who know RTS games and mechanics when you do this rework. CV game-play is essentially RTS, so please do everything you can to make it a good RTS experience that is fun for the players and can compliment the rest of the team in a balanced way, even if that means putting aside a bit of developer pride.
  23. anonym_2EFpjvgfY2gu

    Improve CV play - Rotate and lock Map for CV

    I find it much easier to play CV when the CV is at the bottom of the map when game starts. An option to turn the main map in 90 degree increments would be great to try out. And have the minimap follow.
  24. InterconKW

    An Argument for CV Removal

    Edit 3/16/18: If you are seeing this thread, this was posted a long time ago. I've updated my carrier experience in the most recent reply here. Ha, clickbaity title. Sort of. It's come to my attention through a recent thread that opinions on certain aspects of carriers are... conflicting. So I'm going to give my two cents- MY OPINIONS- in a dedicated rant thread with reasoning about why carriers are the most horrible thing that has ever happened to this game. You have been warned, feel free to attack me. First of all, I'm going to clear up the misconceptions people might have about me. First of all, I'm not having problems fighting carriers. I sometimes wipe their squads with DFAA, sometimes they kill me... that's not the real issue. Second of all, I don't hate many people who play carriers at all. I in fact highly respect good carrier players and keep many of the ones I've met on my ingame contact list, including ones that mowed down my team... because let's be honest, carriers are not easy to play and expert micromanagement is an admirable skill. It is due to my active interaction with these players that I can lay down my points, despite not being one who would be considered a "carrier player." OPEN RANT- A BACKSTORY ON WHY I HATE CARRIERS WITH A PASSION. A while ago I posted a thread detailing the... nasty experiences I had suffered under carriers during the marathon for the Gangut battleship. The grand total games I played with CVs in the matchmaking was 65 during the last portion of October 2017. In these 65 games, 3 times I had a carrier sail into the enemy team, and I saw 24 allied carriers sniped by the enemy. A further 8 were AFK, or actually didn't do anything (see- sub 200 base exp) and often, the enemy CV dominated. I kept count on the WoWs Reddit Discord because it was just too horrible to be true. Any user who happens to be there may feel inclined to confirm my progress keeping. For a while, I thought I could let the matter slide and that my stroke of bad CV luck would come to an end. I left it in my resolutions for 2018 to not rant about carriers. One party wasn't happy about this... and it was the carriers themselves. The New Year event has hit, and complaints about "events bringing out bad or tryhard players" go flying. And so it begins. Here are two photographs from the last 2 days alone. \ The first photo shows... a Taiho. I can throw an incredibly long and vulgar insult about the level of intelligence this player is exhibiting, but the moderators would not like that. The second photo still physically pains me. The allied Independence not only got deplaned, but in the last 20 seconds turned into an enemy destroyer, got killed, and flipped the points after a backbreaking carry by my division (note the base exp)- DEFEAT. What is this. WHY AM I PUTTING UP WITH THIS DAY AFTER DAY. TODAY ALONE IN 4 GAMES WITH CARRIERS 2 GOT DEPLANED AND 2 SAILED INTO THE ENEMY, INCLUDING THAT TAIHO. WHAT ARE THE REASONS. To me, the cause of this is how absolutely horribly the CV class has been designed. There's a difference between a badly balanced ship, and a badly designed one. The CV class is TERRIBLY designed IMO has brought about a plethora of issues, including and not limited to... 1- Intra-class Imbalance The interaction between carriers and other carriers is flawed. Note tier 7, with Sai-pain's infinite unpenalized strafing works, Kaga's one-shot kill drops, keeping in mind the state of the silver CVs. How about tier 8? The fiasco that was Graf Cr... I mean Zeppelin, a carrier so out of wack it had to go through the process of removal and community testing? 2- Inter-class Imbalance Carriers are not "clear cut" more powerful than all surface ships, but they are in most cases and tiers the highest influence class. They can do unavoidable drops on many surface ships (see USN CVs, high tier especially) and can spot destroyers and heavily influence the capture points and the game. This on its own is not outright bad... but consider... 3- Carrier Skill Gaps Since CVs are a high skill class, the population of players who plays them well is... relatively small, which is why I respect such players. However, WoWs is free-to-play and that inevitably brings about the people who are less than skilled. Measures have been taken to penalize poor play in carriers, but this hasn't stopped many individuals from failing their way up the trees. I won't pull any names. Bad carriers, especially ones with poor attitudes along with poor skill, can be... notoriously well known. This means that a portion of the CV population will continuously roll over the other without much effort. This skill gap is, IMO, further aggravated by recent changes to low tier CVs (bring out your “it stops sealclubbing” argument now, then remember the 4 point AS skill exists) that gives any new CV player a rough ride into the tiers that alt-drop, with visible effect on especially tier 6 carriers. Okay, so you say "skill gaps exist in all classes?" I say "it's worst in carriers". Remember how CVs have a small but highly skilled group on top? This causes a metaphorical "top heaviness" in CV vs CV interaction. Furthermore, CVs are high influence and one CV being steamrolled or doing something unspeakably stupid spells doom for their own team moreso than any other class doing the same. Thus, this skill gap is more influential in carriers than in any other class, and also has more negative effects for the teams when carriers are involved. It's also pretty rough on a new player picking up carriers. The gap only widens. 4- Badly-designed Mechanics Involving Carriers The following complaints have reached me from even good carrier players. AA mechanics are iffy, RNG filled and a select number of ships turn the skies into the Bermuda Triangle. Then we have AA powercreep? (look at that Kidd). The carrier UI and how it handles lag/latency is another talking point. Such issues make playing carriers unpleasant. On the other hand, CVs are bad-mechanic riddled. A good example would be the APDBs. Anti-battleship you say? Watch a full HP Des Moines get left clicked to oblivion. Today a LEXINGTON APDB took 22k off my Zao. WORKING AS INTENDED. I won't even talk about the juggling of carrier loadouts, including recent USN changes. 222 Midway totally hasn't pushed Hakuryu into the sub 50% WR zone. This list is once again not exhaustive, but put the factors here alone together. Here's a possible vicious cycle. Carriers in their current state > Skill gap widens > Steamrolls with CVs occur > More hate for carriers "throwing games" > More AA builds and ships > CV changes > Updates > Flawed Mechanics > etc. etc. I have more CV issues to bring up, but it's getting tiring on me. GET TO THE POINT. I HATE CARRIERS. CVs are ruining my games. Causing me defeats. Causing negative experiences. I'm not alone. I'm sure issues like this are giving the CV players pain, especially those who are well-educated on their own class. Community opinion of carriers is poor. You see phenomena like "CV blame" or "CV hate" and this community opinion is totally justified. In fact I'm willing to say the majority of players usually consider the presence of a carrier an element that makes a round worse than a round without a carrier. I've seen CVs tell me about how "everything runs AA builds" and honestly, this is because people want to mitigate this flawed high influence element of carriers. In turn, this gives CV players a bad time. Let's throw more stuff into my CV hate soup. How about the aforementioned APDBs with autodrops wiping full HP Tier 10s? Seems enjoyable. Carriers committing suicide and other forms of manipulating the CV's high influence for "griefing"? Groups of players using carriers to sync drop or mess with MM? Oh, let me rant about that last one too. In my first solo T10 game of 2018 a clan had a solo Essex on my team and a Taiho divved with a Des Moines group on the enemy team. Same clan. Seems fishy? Well, the Essex strikes like normal, but proceeds to fly his planes into the enemy side where his clanmates shred them. I call this out to my team. Fortunately, a group of players agrees to help try to stop this possible "clan feeding", and we take out one of the Des Moines and start taking the objective and point lead. This is when the Essex possibly starts trying to "sabotage himself" so the larger div of his clan mates wins the game. First, he lets a flanking, border riding Shimakaze close the distance to him. When I successfully intercept this DD, he refuses to spot it. When the DD dies, things go back to normal again for a while, but then suddenly he charges straight into the enemy flank. I believe he was trying to flip the points by essentially killing himself. He succeeds, but an objective lead and two last minute kills make my side win by 20 points. Mission accomplished? No, I just felt outright sour at the usage of CVs like this. How else can CV divs manipulate MM apart from such syncdropping, assisted by low carrier populations especially at high tier? How about 2 T6 ships divved with a T5 carrier, or two T8 ships divved with a T7 carrier, thus essentially forcing MM to give them a more advantageous tier spread? Are CVs the kingpins of such manipulation? To me, yes. And we return to the vicious cycle- such actions make the community hate CVs more, and CVs suffer more, and so on. Oh, I almost forgot. Premium carriers. An Enterprise on my team 1 day after the release sailing into the center of Tears of the Desert and dying without launching planes? People with no carrier experience given the opportunity to ruin games by buying high tier CVs? The imbalance of premium CVs? All contributing to CV hate, no? And if it isn't obvious, people hate seeing their own CV getting steamrolled too. Yay, my CV is useless and the enemy CV, the highest influence class in the game, is now facerolling my team. Bit of a roundabout point, but I'm summing this all up. CV hate grows due to these factors, among others. And so on. And so on... AND SO ON. And with countless games ruined by the class with the derogatory nicknames of "Sky Cancer" or "Cancer Vessel", this is why I make my stand that I should not have to tolerate the existence of CVs, which is a huge mistake in the face of WoWs even the developers have arguably acknowledged (Clan battle CV exclusion? The post about carriers being unsatisfactory and the developers being unsure about what to do?). As someone so utterly salty about repeat horrible experiences with carriers, my opinion on "what to do" is more radical than most's. Once again, WHY AM I PUTTING UP WITH THIS. CVS ARE A MISTAKE IN A VICIOUS, SELF DEGRADING CYCLE, AND NOONE TRULY CAN AGREE ON WHAT IS TO BE DONE WITH THEM. Honestly, a deep down, less logical part of me wants a carrier removal. I'm being self reaffirmed that carriers are sinking further and further into their mess, and that they are "too far gone" to have their reputations fixed or the class resolved. The alternative to a hardline removal I've talked about would be a bypass. Say... an option to never see a CV in your game until the rework (we know one is needed- CVs are too flawed). Regardless of what ship you play. You get the choice, say "No, I do not like CVs" and never see them again until they are fixed. The latter suggestion brings about the questions "Wouldn't this make playing carriers horrible because the only people who want to see them are AA build, or worse, if the majority of the community hates carriers and says no (something I believe is totally possible), would getting a game as a CV be impossible?" Personally, I don't care anymore. Carriers have done enough to ruin my experience in a game that, while far from perfect, I otherwise enjoy, and I don't want to see their ugly flat-decked faces ruining my games and turning my hard fought victories into defeats through abuse of their high influence anymore. This rant is sponsored by the countless "allied" carriers who may as well have teamkilled me outright (and... the one or two CVs who accidentally did drop me)- Who have ruined my games, who have used their ships to put their teams at disadvantages whether willingly or not, who have made WoWs unpleasant enough for me to warrant posting this. My apologies go out to the few good carrier players out there that give me the only fading reasons to try to talk about carriers in a reasonable manner. I still respect you for being skilled and often nice or understanding to me in chat, but your class is bad for the game. I also know the developers of WoWs probably put more dedication into their game than most of the community probably believes, and that expecting them to get a class as complex as CVs right might not be fair. Everyone makes mistakes. You guys made carriers. I pity you. Rant over.
  25. A. 1 CV per 1 match >>> obvious :v - my friendly CV is afk/dc - i got targeted by 2 CV and ded quickly..... - 2 noob cv vs 2 unicum cv is unfair - T5 rant : i cannt strafe T6 CV - blah-blah.... facking CV B. remove commander AS skill to DB buff >>> AS will be replaced with : "Ace Divebomber", add +1 DB to squadron and buff DB HP by 35% >>> finally, a love for DB.... they can rekt memetaur now..... - Saipan fighter OP - IJN 2x5 fighter vs 1x7 USN..... - rant : someone seal clubbing at T4 with 19 commander skill.... - why enemy CV have 1 extra plane but i am not? - low tier CV is unplayable because unicum seal club C. DD dispersion when spotted >>> 50% dispersion added when DD spotted by plane. a sign will be added to mark a DD is spotted by plane >>> ALL DD only spotted by plane at 2.8km..... fixed aerial concealment - i got spotted by CV 24/7 - CV OP please nerf - DD rant : CV is killing MEEEEEEEEEEE - when i see CV, i dequeu D. less torpedo damage on low tier, torp T4 and T5 dont cause flood >>> T4 Torp is equivalent of 40% of its original damage >>> T5 is 60%, no flood........T6 is 80%, can cause flood but the chance is halved >>> T7 CV got normal torpedo - low tier Babbies Rant : CV OP - Skarhabek Advice is causing less BB population on low tier - Skarhabek Advice is make low tier unplayable - there is too much T4 and T5 seal clubber...... E. auto drop is farther, manual torpedo re-arm time is increase..... but, CV torp range increase to 5 km >>> 4 sec torp re arm time >>> auto drop start from 3km - DD rant : CV killing me in an instant, Hakuryu or MEMEWAY cross drop impossible to dodge - who the hell is Skarhabek??? - RNCL rant, i cannt dodge CV torpedo.....??? NEED BUFF F. T8 CV got 7km Torp Range >>> best CV chance to fight AADF or supa AA in T10 memetaur >>> OBVIOUSLY REKT CAMPER, a moving 25 knot ship can dodge spotted torp easily from 7km - there is too much camper on T10, WG do something! - noob CV rant : there is to many AA screen, i cannt do anything.... - i am forget to delete my browser history OMG!!!! G. AADF damage multiplier is halved, strafe damage multiplier is 1/3 from before >>> AADF 4x multiplier is just simply plain silly...... >>> strafe from skilled player will make a noob CV cry..... deleted sky less than 2 sec - Noob CV rant : i got strafed and ded - noob player rant : my team CV is NOOB - skill based MM for CV..... H. fighter damage is decreased by half for T4 and T5 >>> longer dogfight animation >>> bomber at lower tier can still breath..... >>> T4 and T5 fighter is able to get out from dogfight by exit strafe..... but cannt normal strafe - my team CV is noob, all his fighter plane deleted I. an empty bomber chased by fighter wont get speed debuff >>> T4 and T5 bomber is able to abandon their bomb by pressing "H" >>> empty bomber can run from being shotdown by fighter..... only bomber that contain bomb will get speed debuff - i am running out of plane, CV sux J. Exit strafe WONT DECREASE PLANE, but COST MORE AMMO >>> instead of nerfing saipan..... buff others >>> eat 30% ammo reserve - OMG Saipan OP, ping pong strafe delete all my plane! - saipan WTF is that?? - lag, i cannt strafe exit and deleted my own squadron K. delete IJN CV AS loadout...... - its weird..... just feel weird..... 2/2/2 memeway cannt do a sheet againts 4/2/2 Hahakukuk - USN CV rant : how 1/1/1 Independence beat 3/1/1 Ryujo?? - IJN AS loadout is crab or cencar WG please bufffff USN CV Conclusion :........7km CV base secondary!!! >>> 10km for Kaga and Graf Zeppelin >>> Graf Zeppelin got repair party consumable Best Seller ship of the year 2018 : Graf Zeppelin when will we get helicopter???