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

I have a CV idea

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
980 posts
12,617 battles

 

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 =]

 

Edited by LordTyphoon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
5 posts
1,068 battles

Hi Typhoon,

 

Seems like you have a very interesting prospect brewing over there.

 

Historically, the IJN has 4 powerful carrier groups, i.e. the Akagi, Kaga, Hiryu and Soryu

While the USN possessed the Enterprise, Hornet and Yorktown.

 

The advantage of the USN is having Midway Islands with their AA installations and some Army aircrafts (which of course, we all know contributed nil to any damages to any IJN warships).

While IJN advantages is having a massive armada (including the infamous Yamoto and some powerful cruisers) that dwarfed those of the USN.

 

It remains to be decided whether you want this to be played out accurately historically or just any random ship configurations will do.

If it's the latter than it would be easy for WG to implement, otherwise WG have to change the battle machanics to come out with historically accurate carrier stats and battle groups.

 

Of course, if they are willing and managed to come out with a new battle mode to allow players to jump right in to a battle, allowing them to choose any carrier groups with pre-selected battle groups to escort them without considering whether the players possessed any carriers beforehand, then it would be feasible and not to mention lots of fun if players are given incentives to play this game mode (remeber what happened with historical mode in WOT?),

 

I would forsee that Midway Island will be the point of capture, as it is the main obejectives of the IJN while the USN will be alloted the task of defending the island with AA installations intact to discourage bombing from the IJN airforce. Once the IJN players captured the island, the USN players will have a limited time to recapture the island, barring which, any sides who hold the island for a certain amount of time will achive victory or when any sides lost all their carrier groups.

 

Anyway, randomised CV vs CV would be a great idea as it would meant the importance of aircarft carriers would be tried and tested realistically with AA, battle group formations, CAP, radar searching, scouting and intelligence all played out in tandem. The vital importance at hand is to have a map large enough to accomodate this gameplay and battle time would be increased accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
812 posts
2,681 battles

hmmm good idea, a good game for a contest or tournament for a custom match. the prob is people will treat is only as event match (like the haloween) and not as normal match. also playing with cv vs cv have a different gameplay and required skills such as picking ships depending on their aa and angle and since it was just an escort that can cant use wasd hax then its an easy target for plane even with aa, execpt for atlanta of course. so the the cv vs cv only promotes the cv vs cv skills such as navigating the planes for angle of attack and ambush positions, scouting, order of dogfights and manual planes skills like strafing and manual drop. the escort ships is not really a problem. since they act like planes where you can control them like squadrons, is easy to accidentally to ignore the the control of escort when you're busy controlling the planes cuz of number of enemy planes cuz its cv vs cv. imagine every cv have an average 2 fighter squadrons, 2 torpedoes and 2 dive bombers, now imagine the numbers of players and sure the skies will be files with planes. well just an opinion though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,248 battles

No, no, no, no, no, no!!!

Just don't let multiple CVs fight in a single battle!

The reason is simple, try a 10v10 Hakuryu war in training room, and you will find your computer burnt.

A massive amount of aircraft is soooooooooo~ computer demanding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MEGA]
Member
4,564 posts
17,569 battles

yep, i once experienced a 2V2 T10 CV battle back in OBT, i get 20-30 FPS usually, but that match my FPS dropped to 8-12, it must have been even worse for the CV players themselves

Share this post


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

MEH. Do you even know the reason why they put Defensive AA on CVs? WG don't want competitive players in this game: more RNG, less skill, more catering for the noobs with $$$$$$. All this CV ideas, throw them away into the trash can. WG's only path for CV is to <content removed> and noob gameplay.

 

Insults/Derogatory comments. Post edited. User Sanctioned.

~ADM_dude_SG

Edited by ADM_dude_SG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,248 battles

MEH. Do you even know the reason why they put Defensive AA on CVs? WG don't want competitive players in this game: more RNG, less skill, more catering for the noobs with $$$$$$. All this CV ideas, throw them away into the trash can. WG's only path for CV is to retardedness and noob gameplay.

I don't think so.

Giving carriers DAAF was meant to deal with the meta of CVs try to kill each other at the beginning of the game. By providing better anti-air survivability for carriers, I think the devs try to stop CV players from taking out his opponent and fish the entire surface fleet after that. It IS meant for competitiveness.

Edited by _Halcyon

Share this post


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

I don't think so.

Giving carriers DAAF was meant to deal with the meta of CVs try to kill each other at the beginning of the game. By providing better anti-air survivability for carriers, I think the devs try to stop CV players from taking out his opponent and fish the entire surface fleet after that. It IS meant for competitiveness.

 

Yep, you don't think so, someone who lacks much CV experience, let alone experience those CV sniping days. You don't even know that sniping CVs take a lot of time and quite toll heavy. If your team is stupid(which you typically get if you solo play without unicum divs), by the time you succesfully killed enemy CV, you already lost, because it takes at least 2-3 runs to kill a good opposing CVs and that takes a lot of time specially with all the debuffs that CVs has undergone/
Edited by Deicide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LNA]
Member
1,666 posts
10,492 battles

Nah it is not a good idea , for that kind of battle your surface ship is more like a floating AA battery that has to stick to your team carriers. Not to mention the large map required with a lot of deadspace between , with 4 carriers in a match no person would want to move away from base camp lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MEGA]
Member
4,564 posts
17,569 battles

 

Yep, you don't think so, someone who lacks much CV experience, let alone experience those CV sniping days. You don't even know that sniping CVs take a lot of time and quite toll heavy. If your team is stupid(which you typically get if you solo play without unicum divs), by the time you succesfully killed enemy CV, you already lost, because it takes at least 2-3 runs to kill a good opposing CVs and that takes a lot of time specially with all the debuffs that CVs has undergone/

why, it almost looks like they are trying to encourage teamplay. i for one DONT miss they days where one CV would snipe the other and leave the rest of the team defenceless, or to have our CV get sniped and lose the match by defult

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LNA]
Member
1,666 posts
10,492 battles

CV sniping has always been and still a threat , but it depends on the situation and how you implement it.

I usually dont go snipe their carrier 1st but strike someone else , if he seems like a noob or the map open up or his FT is wrecked he will be next in line.

Taking carrier in the 1st sortie is time consuming as ship formation is still tight and you have to hug border to move. Doing it on the 2nd sortie though , i can always move in the middle if there is nothing there :trollface:, this is especially important , as a mindless and busy red carrier will sometime slow to react or has already went too far to react against me yoloing towards him.

US strike carriers are the strongest at sniping the other carrier, IJN can but they will most likely have to use a wave to bait DFAA. US canjust go in and dump their payload 2 times and chances are he will be dead ( their torps are ez to aim under DFAA and their bomber dont know what that DFAA is)

Edited by legionary2099

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
980 posts
12,617 battles

Wow thanks for the reply guys. I thought this wouldn't be popular and I'd get slammed for suggesting such a thing. 

 

Perhaps in the future WG will come up with a gaming engine that will reduce the computer processing required to run such a CV vs CV game? Remember when its CV vs CV, the idea is that there won't be any non-CV player ships in the game. But its still a lot of planes, I know. 

 

\It remains to be decided whether you want this to be played out accurately historically or just any random ship configurations will do.

If it's the latter than it would be easy for WG to implement, otherwise WG have to change the battle machanics to come out with historically accurate carrier stats and battle groups.

 

I had random CV battles in mind, I think scenario battles will get dry real quick. That way you would have random carrier combos and random air group combos every game, and the challenge will be to exploit the enemy air groups after finding out their compositions. 

 

Nah it is not a good idea , for that kind of battle your surface ship is more like a floating AA battery that has to stick to your team carriers. Not to mention the large map required with a lot of deadspace between , with 4 carriers in a match no person would want to move away from base camp lol

 

But that's part of the challenge? Positioning surface ships in a way to maximise AA coverage. But since no defence will be 100% solid, the challenge would be to break through the CAP and AA defences to take out the carriers. 

 

That's why I propose a points system - sinking the surface ships will earn you points too, so there will a prize for sinking surface ships, and you don't necessary have to target the enemy carriers. There can be multiple strategies that come out of this. 

 

Good stuff though, guys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
7,578 posts
8,005 battles
45 minutes ago, world_of_war_battle said:

good idea

i hope wow will allow cvs to put all it airplanes in the air all at a time

An idea from January 2017. Forgot to check the dates mate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,126 posts

nah~~~ let them go extinct for all I care, this class is game breaker

no matter wining or losing side, presence of CV is rob every tiny bit of enjoyment even one in billion bits of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
347 posts

OK, I'm just speculating here (so pls don't kill me!) but I think the CVs reworked would be something akin to Red Alert (Kirov reporting) where each unit is individually controllable and there is a limit to how many units that you can control hence the problem with over scouting (obviously no upgrades during the battle, eliminates droping skills but still requires skill just different ones). If so then I guess, but only the early carrier engagements are plausible (the ones after Midway but before the US had large numbers of carriers at sea, i.e Marianas turkey shoot is not plausible but Santa cruz maybe. Also Coral sea might be plausible).

But as you've said, It depends on the CV rework

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
30 posts
1,085 battles

 if cvs put all it airplanes in the air all at a time 

you might have trouble with the internet or computer

because too many planes are flying in the air

imagine 600 planes in the air 

the server might get burned down

Edited by world_of_war_battle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
30 posts
1,085 battles

wargaming only needs to let the AA Defense on ships get weaker , if they do not activate the AA Defensive Fire

it is very clear that wargaming wants the balance between DDs CAs BBs and CVs in a 1 vs 1 battle

PLEASE ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT wargaming WANTS GAME BALANCE

PLEASE ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT wargaming WANTS GAME BALANCE

PLEASE ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT wargaming WANTS GAME BALANCE

Edited by world_of_war_battle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
30 posts
1,085 battles
於 2017/1/9 在 PM12點30分,HMS_Swiftsure_08 說:

No, no, no, no, no, no!!!

Just don't let multiple CVs fight in a single battle!

The reason is simple, try a 10v10 Hakuryu war in training room, and you will find your computer burnt.

A massive amount of aircraft is soooooooooo~ computer demanding

I think HMS_Swifture_08 has a good point

Edited by world_of_war_battle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×