Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
silenthunter19944

Carriers do not need defensive fire consumable

25 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
1,196 posts
2,883 battles

Hi all, I want to ask the community for their opinion for defensive fire consumable available from tier 8-10. War Gaming added the consumable for carriers due to the amount of carrier sniping that was going on from tier 8 and beyond. Well, carrier sniping is just extremely hard now due to the consumable. In my opinion, the consumable is unnecessary. In low tier games, carriers players are taught to stick to the main fleet in order to avoid getting carrier sniped and also to be protected from destroyers. I learnt the hard way, I've been carrier sniped a lot of the time when I was playing with the Bouge and the Independence and I finally learnt to stick to the main fleet for AA protection. I believe that in higher tier battle if a carrier get carrier sniped by not sticking with the fleet it is the carrier fault. If the enemy aircraft carrier has an AA loadout then he/she is my highest priority since I use a strike loadout. I do not want aircraft carriers with the AA loadout to have any more AA protection because they will be extremely hard to kill, they already have their extremely powerful fighters squadron to fend themselves, why should they have even more protection from defensive consumable ? Strike loadout squadron is screwed because the enemy fighters will tear up their planes and even if they get close to the carrier they have to deal with a two minutes spreading effect from the defensive fire consumable and that's plenty of time for the carrier being attacked to bring his/her fighter back from the front and tear up the attack group. So, what do you guys think of this defensive fire consumable? do you like it or no and do you think that War Gaming should remove it from carriers completely ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,163 posts
1,874 battles

Defensive Fire was a solution designed to benefit USN high tier carriers from being overwhelmed by IJN strike squadrons at the high tiers and sniped immediately. Given how much influence a single carrier has on a match, giving them defensive fire allows high tier carriers a little bit more survivability, allowing for more varied tactics instead of each carrier sending all its planes directly at its opposing to take it out right at the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
783 posts
4,821 battles

You are right about its impact on the AS vs Strike Loadouts being somewhat lopsided but it is partly a deterrent for those who go full strike loadouts always. With DF, AS CVs Fighters 'should' be more focused on team defense.

Tier 8-10, if both carriers on each team choose strike, more than likely you'll see them both trying to snipe each other and it is of course not encouraged.

 

Strike carriers are SUPPOSED to bomb tactical targets in order to secure objectives for the win while an Air Superiority carrier is SUPPOSED to protect the fleet from the enemy carrier and do reconnaissance but also be able to do some damage. As it stands, AS loadouts offer very little rewards and the Strike vs Strike CV matches are often seen to a point where CV sniping became such a meta. At least now, a lot are deterred from doing CV sniping much to the dismay of the other ship classes in the match.

 

I am aware of the many problems of CV gameplay and balance in general but I think adding DF, at least to the high tier ones is a good move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
359 posts
2,819 battles

First, I believe DF for CV is not a balancing toward CV class. Not the matter of -say-what Shokaku can do to Lexington or vise versa.
But is balancing for the whole matches-those BB CA DD.

 

Looking at history of what WG do to CV. No CV division. Then mirror mm. No side has more cv than the other. That's saying WG is very concern with what CV can do to the team. They practically say each side should not hold CV advantage toward the other.
Then there's a practice called CV sniping which quickly grant CV advantage to once side. WG doesn't like that. Hence CV DF.

 

patchnote on this matter
Focused encounters between aircraft carriers is a common thing in high-tier battles. We think

this situation negatively affects gameplay -- the players on the team that loses a carrier at

the beginning of the battle are at a great disadvantage, and sometimes intentionally wait for

defeat. To prevent this from happening as little as possible, we made the "Defensive AA Fire"

consumable available on high-tier aircraft carriers. Unlike its cruiser counterpart, this

consumable is intended for the aircraft carrier's own protection from enemy air attacks and is

very poorly suited to helping allied ships.

Spoiler

 

 


Now for what I call side effect of CV DF. The balancing toward the CV themselves.

So? what will it be.
Does it encourage more strike-because they don't need to protect themselves with FT anymore?
Or does it encourage balance and AS- Because strike will eventually lose all plane to AS because they can't nuke AS at the beginning anymore?
Your call

 

As for sticking with the fleet. There's some problem
Langley and Bogue cannot move with the fleet-they're too slow.
Almost nothing *caugh texus caugh* in tier 4-5 can help with AA. No one has DF either. They shoot down 1-2 planes, not enough to prevent a snipe. That's rule out Zuihou and Hosho too

To be fair you usually need two CV to succesfully snipe in those tier- cause strike capability still too low.

Higher tier US CV has absurd detection range. And everything got more range to shoot you.

 

Another thing is CV DF is more affecting on good CV players. The one that can snipe successfully and run USN strike often.

 

If I got a Lexington now and play in Co-op. What i want to do is run strike,snipe the bot and rule the sky
But if I go into random with Lexi, I will buy premium consumable because I fear snipe lol. That's skill issue.

It seem OP is the first group that prevention of snipe affect his play style. His frustration is reasonable.

 

At the end. Its about what WG want with the patch. Does it help CV survive more? yes. That's WG goal.

What about balancing issue it affect? Does it help one nation more than another? Do they care? Can they do something better? I have no idea.

Edited by Hero_of_Zero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,043 posts
4,300 battles

Defensive AA consumable killed high tier strike loadout CV gameplay, it killed it so bad i only had 5 games with CV(4 tier 8 CVs, and 1 tier 9 CV, no tier 10 seen yet) while playing my tier 10 cruiser and battleship in my last 50 games. I understand, as I don't want to play CV any longer too.

 

It's WG's answer to our majority noobie CV players crying for getting killed so easily. Little do they know it's what kept CV gameplay very good. It kept the need for cruiser escorts for the CV, kept CV players on full alert for any ambush attack from the sides of the map that can come at any time, and now that's gone--a good gameplay element gone. Of course, you can still attack CVs now, but at a very very heavy cost of your airplanes and totally not worth it anymore, specially if you are attacking USN CVs.(not to mention this heavily sides with USN carriers since their dive bombers only have small penalties while attacking under defensive AA)

 

Sorry, until WG removes this noob-aid consumable CV gameplay will remain boring and brain rotting engagement. If only players can go back in early days of CV when it was fun, albeit OP for the IJN but still fun.

Edited by Deicide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
216 posts
2,239 battles

Hi all, I want to ask the community for their opinion for defensive fire consumable available from tier 8-10. War Gaming added the consumable for carriers due to the amount of carrier sniping that was going on from tier 8 and beyond. Well, carrier sniping is just extremely hard now due to the consumable. In my opinion, the consumable is unnecessary. In low tier games, carriers players are taught to stick to the main fleet in order to avoid getting carrier sniped and also to be protected from destroyers. I learnt the hard way, I've been carrier sniped a lot of the time when I was playing with the Bouge and the Independence and I finally learnt to stick to the main fleet for AA protection. I believe that in higher tier battle if a carrier get carrier sniped by not sticking with the fleet it is the carrier fault. If the enemy aircraft carrier has an AA loadout then he/she is my highest priority since I use a strike loadout. I do not want aircraft carriers with the AA loadout to have any more AA protection because they will be extremely hard to kill, they already have their extremely powerful fighters squadron to fend themselves, why should they have even more protection from defensive consumable ? Strike loadout squadron is screwed because the enemy fighters will tear up their planes and even if they get close to the carrier they have to deal with a two minutes spreading effect from the defensive fire consumable and that's plenty of time for the carrier being attacked to bring his/her fighter back from the front and tear up the attack group. So, what do you guys think of this defensive fire consumable? do you like it or no and do you think that War Gaming should remove it from carriers completely ?

e53d7f8067067a51029cde8260094ff5867b10ab

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
216 posts
2,239 battles

His opinion counts same as anybody.

 

So my opinion that his opinion stinks also counts then? Just because someone has an opinion doesn't instantly make it valid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SGC]
Super Tester
1,459 posts
6,806 battles

His opinion counts same as anybody.

 

In my opinion,

Political Content, user sanctioned

~tc1259

 

The devs made it clear that they don't want carrier sniping. It's detrimental to gameplay and USN CVs will always die to an IJN CV strike unless they ran AS because IJN Fighter Squads can keep the USN Fighter squad busy while their bombers snipe.

Edited by tc1259

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
114 posts
2,025 battles

What about all the times your team's carrier gets sniped out by a strike load out 3 minutes into the game,leaving pretty much your entire team vulnerable to (deadly) aircraft strikes for the rest of the game?

I'm against carrier sniping as it can potentially ruin the game for the whole team just because the carrier player isn't good enough or doesn't get enough protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,043 posts
4,300 battles

What about all the times your team's carrier gets sniped out by a strike load out 3 minutes into the game,leaving pretty much your entire team vulnerable to (deadly) aircraft strikes for the rest of the game?

I'm against carrier sniping as it can potentially ruin the game for the whole team just because the carrier player isn't good enough or doesn't get enough protection.

 

and so that's why cruisers need to defend their CV. when we, CVs, see enemy CV defended heavily by cruisers we usually disengage. This is team synergy right here, the whole team working together, and now it's lost.

 

Anyhow, if both your team CV and enemy CV is strike loadout, he can't defend you anyway. The best way for a strike loadout to defend his team is to kill the enemy CV.

 

So my opinion that his opinion stinks also counts then? Just because someone has an opinion doesn't instantly make it valid.

 

It can, depending on who's opinion is it. A 50 IQ beggar on the street's opinion, or a well educated 150 IQ doctor? the OP has considerable CV experience, so his opinion is 10x the worth of yours.

 

 

The devs made it clear that they don't want carrier sniping. It's detrimental to gameplay and USN CVs will always die to an IJN CV strike unless they ran AS because IJN Fighter Squads can keep the USN Fighter squad busy while their bombers snipe.

 

True, we can't do anything about it. Some of us, players with a lot of CV experience, gave tons of credible suggestions to fix this issue far back in beta and fell to deaf ears. But at the end of the day, they will reap what they sow. HIgh tier CV is almost extinct as WG's design direction is incredibly boring, non-competitive, noobfest and unrewarding to play. I don't know about the other servers, but if they're going through the same things here in SEA, we can surely expect a CV rebuffing otherwise bye bye CVs in SEA

Edited by Deicide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,452 posts
2,950 battles

As a shameless CV-sniping player, I strive to eliminate the enemy CV when the opportunity presents itself-

 

Tactics range from simply spotting the CV outside AA range while it gets battered by long-range battleship shots to sacrificing my fighter group(s) to guarantee that my strike planes reach their intended target and buy enough time to force the enemy CV to use a damage-control party before I perform another bombing run to guarantee his destruction- At the cost of all the initial squadrons that took off from my runway in the beginning of the match.

 

Defensive fire? So long as I'm outside AA range, I can wait at the perimeter for half a minute or simply change targets if it's too protected or I risk losing squadrons. In any case, devoting some protection to the enemy CV at a corner of the map means that somewhere, the enemy lacks numbers to hold from a push from my team.

 

Air superiority is a great thing to have- Striking at the most vital enemy is also an excellent strategy. It's high-risk, high-reward, after all. However, if you ask me, thanks to defensive fire being mounted on higher-tier CVs, it would simply stall CV-sniping attacks rather than completely prevent it. So long as the CV on the offensive has control of the air around the CV he/she intends to snipe, it will be inevitable.

 

Now, I'm only using a Hiryu as my top-tier CV, but I have eliminated Shokaku and Lexington-class CVs early in the match with assistance from my fellow CV using wave tactics. First wave triggers defensive fire, if lucky, forces a flooding/fire that requires damage-control, second wave will consist solely of dive bombers on reserve after defensive fire is over. If no damage-control party was triggered in the first wave, this guarantees it whilst maintaining the CV cannot launch planes. Last wave will be torpedo bombers that deliver flooding. If damage-control was triggered on the 1st wave, I'll let the CV burn whilst I devote my torpedo bombers to other targets.

 

Of course, the entire time the attacks were happening, the CV was lit up and open for shelling.

 

It has the very unfortunate side effect of also exposing our CVs because the fighter groups are busy buying time for the strike groups. I did end up in several situations where we mutually blew ourselves up in an attempt to outdo the other. It was funny because it essentially turned into a CV-less match right off the bat.

 

Back to the thread's topic... I don't mind AA consumables for higher-tiers. The only thing that can stop a dedicated snipe-attack is are CA escorts. If the CV ventures close to the frontline for AA, it'll be a prime target for shelling, if it's too far in the back, it's one or several less players in the frontline. If the sniping target has an AA mod, it has to choose between scouting for our team's DDs and CAs and defending itself- Which is excellent for promoting aggressive pushes from DDs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,043 posts
4,300 battles

As a shameless CV-sniping player, I strive to eliminate the enemy CV when the opportunity presents itself-

 

Tactics range from simply spotting the CV outside AA range while it gets battered by long-range battleship shots to sacrificing my fighter group(s) to guarantee that my strike planes reach their intended target and buy enough time to force the enemy CV to use a damage-control party before I perform another bombing run to guarantee his destruction- At the cost of all the initial squadrons that took off from my runway in the beginning of the match.

 

Defensive fire? So long as I'm outside AA range, I can wait at the perimeter for half a minute or simply change targets if it's too protected or I risk losing squadrons. In any case, devoting some protection to the enemy CV at a corner of the map means that somewhere, the enemy lacks numbers to hold from a push from my team.

 

Air superiority is a great thing to have- Striking at the most vital enemy is also an excellent strategy. It's high-risk, high-reward, after all. However, if you ask me, thanks to defensive fire being mounted on higher-tier CVs, it would simply stall CV-sniping attacks rather than completely prevent it. So long as the CV on the offensive has control of the air around the CV he/she intends to snipe, it will be inevitable.

 

Now, I'm only using a Hiryu as my top-tier CV, but I have eliminated Shokaku and Lexington-class CVs early in the match with assistance from my fellow CV using wave tactics. First wave triggers defensive fire, if lucky, forces a flooding/fire that requires damage-control, second wave will consist solely of dive bombers on reserve after defensive fire is over. If no damage-control party was triggered in the first wave, this guarantees it whilst maintaining the CV cannot launch planes. Last wave will be torpedo bombers that deliver flooding. If damage-control was triggered on the 1st wave, I'll let the CV burn whilst I devote my torpedo bombers to other targets.

 

Of course, the entire time the attacks were happening, the CV was lit up and open for shelling.

 

It has the very unfortunate side effect of also exposing our CVs because the fighter groups are busy buying time for the strike groups. I did end up in several situations where we mutually blew ourselves up in an attempt to outdo the other. It was funny because it essentially turned into a CV-less match right off the bat.

 

Back to the thread's topic... I don't mind AA consumables for higher-tiers. The only thing that can stop a dedicated snipe-attack is are CA escorts. If the CV ventures close to the frontline for AA, it'll be a prime target for shelling, if it's too far in the back, it's one or several less players in the frontline. If the sniping target has an AA mod, it has to choose between scouting for our team's DDs and CAs and defending itself- Which is excellent for promoting aggressive pushes from DDs.

 

you have great point, and as i've also repeatedly said before, CV sniping is "high-risk, high-reward".

 

As i've said you can still snipe CV today, the problem is you're going to exchange a lot for it, it's gonna cost either your time or your planes. Even if you stay away from AA, chances are the enemy CV is going to run away and will be sending his fighters to your bombers. This eliminates one of the fundamental of CV sniping: sneak attack. Half-sleep, inattentive CV players pay heavy price, and it forces them to learn and level up their map awareness, hence breeding good players. With the AA consumable, this is lost.

 

Yes, you can still snipe, but the CV AA consumable works more of a deterrent, and it works brilliantly that nobody snipes anymore. Then they realize that without CV sniping, playing CV is boring, then they stop playing CV somewhere at tier8-9 or even lower, then we no longer have CV (good, competitive)players.

Edited by Deicide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
341 posts
2,790 battles

I don't believe high tier CVs should receive defensive fire because now they can't be punished for being out of position. If you are bad enough to get sniped, you should be punished for it.

 

e53d7f8067067a51029cde8260094ff5867b10ab

 

Nice contribution to this discussion. Maybe you should try 9gag or reddit where they also enjoy discussing memes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,083 posts
5,169 battles

ichase said it before that CV do need them, but the problem of CV defensive fire is that its lasted for 2 minutes long. i think he said that it should be adjusted to 30 second-ish at best.

 

i too don't wanted a game where a cv on side side sink the opposing cv and just hugging all the fun for the rest of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,452 posts
2,950 battles

Switch targets in preparation for wave 2.

 

Planes in the air not using their weapons is a sore sight.

 

We must have the patience of a crocodile lurking in the waters, but having no resources spent means nothing was done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
114 posts
2,025 battles

and so that's why cruisers need to defend their CV. when we, CVs, see enemy CV defended heavily by cruisers we usually disengage. This is team synergy right here, the whole team working together, and now it's lost.

 

So if you're playing alone,you're going to have to completely rely on the aid of the random cruisers you find in matchmaking?

 

Have you ever complained about less than satisfactory team mates who have difficulties with the most basic of game-play even at such a tier?

Or how about carriers who stay perfectly stationary throughout the game and then get sniped out,leaving your team to the mercy of the enemy carriers?

 

Do we all really need carrier sniping to happen more often? 

 

 

As a non-carrier player my input might not be the best but I'm pretty sure games where your carriers are lost within the first five minutes don't make very exciting or satisfying games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,452 posts
2,950 battles

Here's the thing:

 

Because the team competence is a random, uncontrollable factor, taking things into our hands guarantee more leeway for mistakes.

 

It won't certainly save you from a crushing defeat, but you can cut your losses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SGC]
Super Tester
1,459 posts
6,806 battles

The hypocrisy is that many people here will complain about bad MM and dumb teammates but yet still believes that CAs will always escort their CVs or that the CV actually uses his engines to move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,043 posts
4,300 battles

 

So if you're playing alone,you're going to have to completely rely on the aid of the random cruisers you find in matchmaking?

 

Have you ever complained about less than satisfactory team mates who have difficulties with the most basic of game-play even at such a tier?

Or how about carriers who stay perfectly stationary throughout the game and then get sniped out,leaving your team to the mercy of the enemy carriers?

 

Do we all really need carrier sniping to happen more often? 

 

 

As a non-carrier player my input might not be the best but I'm pretty sure games where your carriers are lost within the first five minutes don't make very exciting or satisfying games.

 

my carrier sniping is high, as most of the time i defeat the opposing CV, but my battleship winrate is higher. why is that? having a surviving CV doesn't guarantee victory as much as having destroyer advantage in multi-base capture(i forgot the name, is it domination?).

 

Here's the thing:

 

Because the team competence is a random, uncontrollable factor, taking things into our hands guarantee more leeway for mistakes.

 

It won't certainly save you from a crushing defeat, but you can cut your losses.

 

 

CV sniping is exactly is. MY sniping rate is high, and I can control the game better when I kill the enemy CV, so the enemy CV thinks too.

Team competence random, that's right, that's why I don't trust them to capture and hold bases, I take it to my hands as a CV and obliterate key ships and I can't do that if enemy CV is preventing me so. I can't do that if an enemy CV is threatening me with snipe. The root of the problem here is not the CV sniping, but the poorly designed CV loadouts in which we've given good suggestions to balance not only CV sniping, but the whole CV gameplay. But here we are, and we see the results of the slowly extincting CV population. Results speak for itself.

 

ichase said it before that CV do need them, but the problem of CV defensive fire is that its lasted for 2 minutes long. i think he said that it should be adjusted to 30 second-ish at best.

 

i too don't wanted a game where a cv on side side sink the opposing cv and just hugging all the fun for the rest of the game.

 

 

Yup it's too long. The element of surprise is lost with that duration and favors the USN CVs too much as their dive bombers can ignore the Defensive AA. It takes too long for planes to fly from the edge of the map to the other, then back. I understand non-cv player's sentiment too but we're seeing the results here. 50+ games and only 5 of those have CVs in them and no tier 10 CVs in queue anymore.

Switch targets in preparation for wave 2.

 

Planes in the air not using their weapons is a sore sight.

 

We must have the patience of a crocodile lurking in the waters, but having no resources spent means nothing was done.

 

Oh yes, you can have all the patience in the world, but the game time is only 20 minutes. only 20 minutes to deal as much damage as you can to do your job as a CV. How long for your planes to fly from the topmost of the map to the southernmost? Their return? Your ingress preparation? While preparing for another wave, enemies are now owning your team. That's why it's so crucial to kill the enemy CV as fast as possible since it's costing your team your support to them.

though, if you're into mediocrity that's not a problem.

Edited by Deicide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
783 posts
4,821 battles

 

my carrier sniping is high, as most of the time i defeat the opposing CV, but my battleship winrate is higher. why is that? having a surviving CV doesn't guarantee victory as much as having destroyer advantage in multi-base capture(i forgot the name, is it domination?).

 

CV sniping is exactly is. MY sniping rate is high, and I can control the game better when I kill the enemy CV, so the enemy CV thinks too.

Team competence random, that's right, that's why I don't trust them to capture and hold bases, I take it to my hands as a CV and obliterate key ships and I can't do that if enemy CV is preventing me so. I can't do that if an enemy CV is threatening me with snipe. The root of the problem here is not the CV sniping, but the poorly designed CV loadouts in which we've given good suggestions to balance not only CV sniping, but the whole CV gameplay. But here we are, and we see the results of the slowly extincting CV population. Results speak for itself.

 

I agree with this point but with a different conclusion. I only got the hang of CVs with my T7/T8 CV and I ALMOST NEVER snipe unless the enemy CV is the last vulnerable target. My experience leads me to the conclusion that NOT having to snipe and being a better asset to the team leads to higher winrates which DF forces most players to do. I also agree with the poorly designed loadouts or CV gameplay in general is the cause of low CV population.

 

Yup it's too long. The element of surprise is lost with that duration and favors the USN CVs too much as their dive bombers can ignore the Defensive AA. It takes too long for planes to fly from the edge of the map to the other, then back. I understand non-cv player's sentiment too but we're seeing the results here. 50+ games and only 5 of those have CVs in them and no tier 10 CVs in queue anymore.

Just gonna point out that USN DBs had a nerf of 25% in dispersion when panic'd at the same patch. I also don't get the other people whining that IJN CVs get better +AA during DF when having DF itself favors USN CVs a whole lot more. And again, low CV population has always been there and it is pretty unsubstantial to equate it due to DF intro for tier 8-10 CVs.

 

Oh yes, you can have all the patience in the world, but the game time is only 20 minutes. only 20 minutes to deal as much damage as you can to do your job as a CV. How long for your planes to fly from the topmost of the map to the southernmost? Their return? Your ingress preparation? While preparing for another wave, enemies are now owning your team. That's why it's so crucial to kill the enemy CV as fast as possible since it's costing your team your support to them.

though, if you're into mediocrity that's not a problem.

Definitely with you here. 2 min is just too long and add to the waiting time of actually bombing, I can surmise around 5-6 minutes just to eliminate the enemy CV and that's if your first wave is successful. Around that time, he could of already done a lot to your own fleet or went to a more secure place with actual AA support. You can drop the payload of your bombs to other enemy targets after baiting enemy CV DF but then it'd take another few minutes just to reload, and fly your planes back to enemy CV position wherein he could do a lot more.

I'll just highlight(in blue) my opinions on this. Mostly Agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
341 posts
2,790 battles

CV sniping is exactly is. MY sniping rate is high, and I can control the game better when I kill the enemy CV, so the enemy CV thinks too.

Team competence random, that's right, that's why I don't trust them to capture and hold bases, I take it to my hands as a CV and obliterate key ships and I can't do that if enemy CV is preventing me so. I can't do that if an enemy CV is threatening me with snipe. The root of the problem here is not the CV sniping, but the poorly designed CV loadouts in which we've given good suggestions to balance not only CV sniping, but the whole CV gameplay. But here we are, and we see the results of the slowly extincting CV population. Results speak for itself.

 

There's a good CV player when I see one. This is exactly the problem. Load outs of CVs are horrible which lead the to difference in results of IJN and USN CVs. What WG needs to do is not nerf or buff USN/IJN but to rework the class as a whole. CV sniping is a high risk high reward tactic, like destroying DDs first in a domination game. Adding defensive fire to a CV just promotes unskilled game play. From anecdotal as well as statistic experience, SEA CV players all run fighter loadouts which means you shouldn't be sniped at all. On top of this, if say both CVs are running strike loadouts, whoever is more skilled should pull off the snipe better. I've dodged 2 waves of houshou torps (16 torps) in a 15kt langley, which shows the other CV player getting punished heavily for failing (In high tiers, AA would punish the planes more as well as wasting about 5 minutes for travelling). Adding a consumable which acts as a 4 minute invulnerability does not help CV players perform better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,043 posts
4,300 battles

 

There's a good CV player when I see one. This is exactly the problem. Load outs of CVs are horrible which lead the to difference in results of IJN and USN CVs. What WG needs to do is not nerf or buff USN/IJN but to rework the class as a whole. CV sniping is a high risk high reward tactic, like destroying DDs first in a domination game. Adding defensive fire to a CV just promotes unskilled game play. From anecdotal as well as statistic experience, SEA CV players all run fighter loadouts which means you shouldn't be sniped at all. On top of this, if say both CVs are running strike loadouts, whoever is more skilled should pull off the snipe better. I've dodged 2 waves of houshou torps (16 torps) in a 15kt langley, which shows the other CV player getting punished heavily for failing (In high tiers, AA would punish the planes more as well as wasting about 5 minutes for travelling). Adding a consumable which acts as a 4 minute invulnerability does not help CV players perform better.

 

All true , and that's why I said this AA consumable made CV gameplay a pure noob-fest and not the real solution they're after.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,196 posts
2,883 battles

 

All true , and that's why I said this AA consumable made CV gameplay a pure noob-fest and not the real solution they're after.

 

I agree with you here and I have something else to discuss. It is NOT the cruiser responsibility to escort the aircraft carrier. It is the CV responsibility to follow the fleet especially in high tier battle, no one should be babysitting someone else ship. IF you are out of formation you DESERVE to be punished, IF you don't realise that the enemy carrier is trying to CV snipe you, you DESERVE to be sniped. If you lack carrier game sense all the way up until tier 8-10 you DESERVE to be killed. Even when I was a newbie captain I am still able to follow my escorts. The Langley and Bouge are slow but they are still able to follow US battleships as they only go at 18-20 knots. Aircraft Carrier used to be the hardest class to get into and master in the game, CV gameplay right now revolves around the skill less ability to ALT+M1 with your fighters and press the button to activate defensive fire. I do not agree with War Gaming decisions for aircraft carriers and I would strongly recommend them to change CV as a whole instead of adding silly consumables to carrier and ruin the CV gameplay as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,043 posts
4,300 battles

 

I agree with you here and I have something else to discuss. It is NOT the cruiser responsibility to escort the aircraft carrier. It is the CV responsibility to follow the fleet especially in high tier battle, no one should be babysitting someone else ship. IF you are out of formation you DESERVE to be punished, IF you don't realise that the enemy carrier is trying to CV snipe you, you DESERVE to be sniped. If you lack carrier game sense all the way up until tier 8-10 you DESERVE to be killed. Even when I was a newbie captain I am still able to follow my escorts. The Langley and Bouge are slow but they are still able to follow US battleships as they only go at 18-20 knots. Aircraft Carrier used to be the hardest class to get into and master in the game, CV gameplay right now revolves around the skill less ability to ALT+M1 with your fighters and press the button to activate defensive fire. I do not agree with War Gaming decisions for aircraft carriers and I would strongly recommend them to change CV as a whole instead of adding silly consumables to carrier and ruin the CV gameplay as a whole.

 

While most of this is correct I would like to point out some corrections. That is staying with formation. The question is, how close are you to team cruisers so to be within formation, and to be within their AA defense consumable? Even if you are within the formation if enemy bombers can still attack you unpanic'd what's the point. No.2 point, carriers at high tier have bad concealment and Midway and essex have concealment on par with battleships, one DD comes close and everybody will be shooting at you. If you go with your cruisers charging in front of the battleships you will regret going with the formation. I have played a lot of high tier CV game to know that you really needed CA escort(only for the first 5 minutes is the most I need) at high tier games prior to this CV AA consumable patch, I have seen a lot of CVs "going with formation" and then die from arty shots or flooded with torpedoes from neaby enemy DDs when I continuously spot them with my figthers and extra dive bombers from a safe distance, they are indeed well defended from air, but not from sea.

 

Defending CV is a choice. You could go ahead and go into the frontlines and leave your CV and as I always say, you'll reap what you sow. If two CVs are in sniping match and one of the CVs got a cruiser defending him, guess who'll suffer in the end?

Edited by Deicide

Share this post


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

×