Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'aircraft carriers'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • 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

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Drag Interests

Found 6 results

  1. First post, simply because i have finally reached that point where I am so fed up with carriers that I am actually making a post. This post will be primarily referring to the capabilities of T6-10 warships and carriers. The primary point which i will be attempting to address is the durability of Aircraft Power Creep (specifically referring to the AA power of cruisers and how carriers have far surpassed them) Cruisers, before the CV balance, were renowned for their AA capabilities, specifically with the AA defence consumable being able to decimate entire squadrons of like-tier aircraft and disperse incoming attacks from higher-tier aircraft. That is practically non-existent at this point. simply put, the AA defense of all ships has been surpassed by the power-creep of carriers and their aircraft: The new way in which aircraft take damage by spreading it out equally amongst each plane makes it to that, in order to shoot down a single plane, you must deal damage near-equal-to/surpassing the total HP of all aircraft in a squadron or detachment because of how it is spread which almost never happens because a detachment of aircraft or even the entire squadron usually dis-appear and become invincible before you can deal enough damage for the spreading of damage to knock out one of the planes. those planes may be damaged to the point of falling apart at the seams but that all means nothing if it survives and gets recycled into another squadron. Cruisers are only able to reliably knock out aircraft with the DAAF consumable and sector reinforcement combined, otherwise even the reinforcement isn't even near enough to make any meaningful impact on AA defence. This basically requires for DAAF in order to make any impact on a CV temporarily (because remember, they can regen aircraft now). Any ship without DAAF has practically no AA ability since IF (A BIT IF) you shoot down an aircraft, by the time a carrier cycles though their squadron that aircraft is regenerated and ready to roll again. AA gun placement durability, when considered with how powerful carriers have become even at the beginning of the game, just makes CVs all the more powerful. the points above were in the context of having full durability on your AA placements, the power of CVs is increased exponentially with AA placement degradation overtime, making any hope of shooting down any aircraft after taking a match-worth of incoming fire from other warships and aircraft attack misplaced. Just the fact that AA defence dies off over time is enough to make carriers overpowered with the balancing since a carrier can regenerate any shot down aircraft and can only get stronger as the match goes on and ships lose their AA placements which can't regenerate. The captain perk for reducing incoming damage from AA defences is THE ONLY perk/consumable/equipment/flag/anything-in-the-game which directly reduces incoming damage (with the exception of the ramming flag). That fact alone is scary and ridiculous for obvious reasons...if it isn't obvious then just think to yourself if and other warship were able to equip something or have a captain skill which directly reduces the damage from incoming fire by 10% and see how much of a necessity it would become. This also begs the question of why isn't there a way to directly decrease the damage done by aircraft or torpedoes or why not even shell damage whilst we're at it? one might argue "well it isn't reducing the damage which a CV directly takes" but those aircraft ARE the cv, the means by which it deals damage. Catapult fighters and aircraft-dropped fighters are a gamble. The AI of both is simply broken, it takes a while just for the damned things to start following an aircraft and attack it and the speed at which AA aircraft move is just ridiculous. I find that my catapult fighters work 33% of the time, usually I'll launch them, they'll fly for a few seconds then they're start to follow the aircraft which just striked and are about to dissapear, then follow the next one and be near-useless. AA aircraft, on the rare occasion that a carrier does drop them to defend you will follow the same pattern and be a gamble half the time. oh and not to mention that AA aircraft can be shot down by the strike aircraft's rear gunner, for some reason, AA aircraft have severely lower HP than the strike aircraft themselves and just die after a few seconds of persuit if you're unlucky which, for battleships, renders your only form of substantial AA defense useless. I didn't feel the need to mention Battleships or destroyers often in the above points because of how useless they are at AA defence, just think of the above points but worse because of lower overall AA damage. poor, poor destroyers I also feel the need to say that I know that some of the points above were present before the balancing (such as AA gun degradation) but i think you will agree that the gameplay effects of such things are "from a past age" so to speak, they were fine prior to the rework but now due to the nature of carriers (specifically referring to aircraft regen) and their aircraft, they have been grotesquely exaggerated in how they benefit carriers and make life a living hell for other ships. The fact that carriers can only be countered by particular cruisers since not all cruisers can carry DAAF is just idiocy, they should be counter-able by ALL CRUISERS and by certain battleships as a carrier can infinitely attack and be invulnerable to direct return fire (if they're not stupid) and don't deserve (by virtue of not taking direct damage in return) to be countered by more ships or EVERY ship for that matter due to that single virtue of being able to attack ANY SHIP ON THE MAP without taking return fire In conjunction with the above point, as it stands now a carrier can deal equal or superior damage than an equal-tiered battleship or cruiser which is just ridiculous since they cannot be damaged in return and can infinitely attack an enemy ship if that ship has weak AA and are unable to shoot down any aircraft. it's just really stupid and makes me feel frustrated and defeated when i think about it. Recommendations (note: these recommendations are not intended to be be suggested as if they should be implemented all at once, they are each possible implementations that i think would balance the power of carriers) AA Gun placement regeneration (idea stolen from another forum post) Having AA guns regenerate over time, like how carriers can regenerate their aircraft, would make it a necessity for carriers to attack ships which are already under fire and have their AA guns knocked out as well as increase the usefulness of sending rocket attack planes to pepper a target before using other attack aircraft. This would not be a significant change alone but is rather a supplementary change and just fits well with everything. Having it be a necessity to send in rocket attack planes initially would give a heads-up to any ship as to who is being currently targeted by a carrier, giving time for the ship to group up with a cruiser before more attack aircraft come it's way or give cruisers time to find a buddy and support them against the on-coming aircraft assault. Increased effectiveness of AA aircraft Whether it be a more proficient AI which targets the main squadron of aircraft, a larger effective range, increased fighter speed, increased HP or all of them combined, Fighter aircraft need to be improved. as they are, fighters are only effective on a rare few occasions Making carrier dropped aircraft able to be dropped or called to follow a specific allied ship EXCLUSIVELY and not called on an aircraft's location. making this VITAL CHANGE would make fighters less selfish, as it stands, carriers simply use fighters to spot enemy ships which is broken (if you place the fighters out of AA fire, then can spot ships for their entire duration uninhibited) and selfish, this NEEDS TO CHANGE because the entire reason for this mechanic existing (i.e. to suppress enemy aircraft attacks against your allied ships) is the last thing that a carrier thinks about when launching an attack. Decreased HP of attack aircraft This recommendation is another universal change which would balance aircraft since (in my opinion) they are currently just far too durable. by making aircraft more likely to be lost in an attack would mean that carriers would have to be more careful when attacking ships and avoiding AA cruisers (or, if tied with my first suggestion, mean that is would be even more necessary for CVs to attack recently-battered ships with TEMPORARILY reduced AA capabilities) and if not, actually have the risk of not being able to use any squadrons for a while due to being far too risky. As it stands, a carrier will rarely run out of aircraft in a single aircraft type let alone their entire lineup, this needs to change and make game play more risky for carriers Reverting the means by which aircraft take damage back to the way it was previously The current system is just idiocy, sure it means that an attack squadron gets weaker as it loses aircraft but the quick withdrawal of aircraft doesn't grant enough time for sufficient damage (to outweigh the total HP of all aircraft in a division) to be inflicted upon aircraft and be able to shoot even one of them down. Reverting this would mean 2 things: 1. That a well-defended ship will be able to knock out aircraft FAR more consistently 2. That carriers will not have situations where all of their aircraft are lost in the span of 2 seconds due to their HP total being met by their prey. implementing such a change would also warrant an increase in the HP of squadrons to balance things out Get rid of that stupid change which reduced the AA effectiveness of grouped ships Enough said, it's just stupid. why was it even added in the first place? Now feel free to discuss in comments so we can get the attention of WG and raise disease awareness of "Carriers", it affects the lives of thousands of WoWS players in every region every day. Also please being up any valuable points which i missed, i will try to add the good ones in an "edit" section ^-^
  2. 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.
  3. blauflamme22

    Fighter-bombers

    It's a topic the comes up every now and then, the ability for fighters to have some sort of attack against ships, like strafing with cannons or rockets. I'd like to tweak the idea a bit and instead propose a fourth category of aircraft; the fighter-bomber, in air to air it would be weaker than the pure fighters (slowed down by the weight of those bombs etc) and in the air to surface it would be weaker than the pure dive bombers (having to carry lighter bombs to maintain air to air performance etc.) Because of the nature of Fleet aviation there are a number of example of aircraft that have served such porposes, the Skua, Mosquito, Firefly and Corsair to name a few. Basically they could operate just like the current fighters and dive bombers do just as an inferior mix, though I'd love to see the graphics for a rocket and cannon strafing run. Anyway, I'd love to hear peoples' thoughts, especially those that actually play CVs or are interersted in playing them.
  4. Rourkey123

    The Air Superiority

    4 out of 4 games I have come across air superiority loadouts on all of the enemy cv's. I unfortunately was using a strike package and was virtually useless to my team, which a certain player let me know. Something needs to be done about the popularity of the AS loadout. I have come across Japanese cv's using an AS loadout, completely against most sense of the IJN carrier. In my opinion something needs to be done about cv play altogether, going into a battle with a set loadout I can accept, however coming into a battle with a loadout of my choosing, and having no effect on the game whatsoever (due to the astonishingly large numbers of air superiority carriers) is ridiculous. I believe that WOWS should adopt similar cv style preperation as Navy field. In which being able to directly choose the exact number of each type of aircraft to bring to battle. This would: 1. limit the number of AS carriers as it would further reduce the number of xp that will be received by using a strictly full fighter loadout (not just USN cv's choosing AS then IJN cv's choosing AS to counter that) 2. Increase the playability of cv's in general as it would allow more customization and experimentation of cv's 3. and finally it would also allow cv's to have a larger impact on the battle, for example an all TB carrier would be able to do lots(oh no that would be overpowered! Wait till the end!) This would come with balancing issues which in my opinion could be fixed by one simple thing, Dive bomber buff. We all know they kinda suck, unless you use fires. I believe fire should come into it but i do believe they need to be looked at again, more like a shell type rather than a bomber variant. For example, you should be able to hit citadels, and should be able to use the shell hit boxes(like when you hit the superstructure with ap you do little damage). However i do still believe there should be a limit on TB, DB and Fighter numbers in a loadout. One last thing I would like to add is that players should be able to create squadron of aircraft of a number of their choosing to fit this more customizable aircraft loadout. Eg instead of deploying 6 torpedo bombers under one control, be able to deploy 2 squadrons of 3 for example. This would still fit the 6 aircraft of one squadron but being able to split them would open so many opportunities for this game. I know all this sounds like I should just leave and just play Navyfield but i really think the addition of these things to this game would make it great. I just feel like the CV has been left out the most in terms of depth of gameplay and experimentality than other ship classes.
  5. Sz_Benny

    Aircraft Carriers Top of Team

    Anyone else noticing Cv's at the top of the team list nearly every single game? Don't know if i'm just incredibly unfortunate, but I've played around 100 battles and there seems to be a problem here... I'm guessing this is probably due to torpedo bombers and their ability to drop torps literally 40m from your ship making them literally impossible to avoid all of them, which isn't very nice when only one of the torps can take away half your hp. I also noticed that the planes can fly through obstacles, making islands (which would normally protect you from torpedo's) useless from planes. The torpedo bombers can fly right through the island and drop torpedo's from the islands side. Don't know if it is just torpedo bombers that are the problem but something seems wrong based on the results Cv's are getting every game. Edit: Sorry for not being clear, I meant cv's are top of team xp list , not the initial loading screen team list.
  6. ChickenNuggets

    more suggestions

    Maps: a. Pacific - no island, just water all around. b. Australia - no need to be in australia itself, but near continental landmass. c. Visayas Islands - you know, the stage for some of the greatest WWII battles in the pacific Ships: a. Bismarck - one of the best battleships ever created. i want it to see head on against the yamato class. b. Takao - because ALL HAIL TAKAO-CHAN (Aoki Hagane no Arpeggio) Submarines are out of the question. There's no way we can shoot these guys. Graphics Quality: Maybe you can lower the specs of the requirements, although the current quality is good enough, even at low. CVs (Aircraft Carriers): I hope we can launch more aircrafts, like more than three squadrons of torpedoes and fighter aircrafts. Also, I think it'll be better to see some Japanese CVs, that can do kamikaze. (huehuehue) will add some more when my imagination goes wild again.
×