Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
sunlo2013

iChase CV refinement suggestion

16 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

372
[ZA]
[ZA]
Member
466 posts
10,645 battles

As usually, I don't how viable all these suggestions would be. I will just leave his suggestion here so people can think about it and start discussion.

1. Refine fighter: remove ability to spot ships, make it unlimited charge with timer (typo earlier) and make it rocket plane only consumables.

2. Give DFAA to all ship, and make DFAA effects as ability to focus all flaks in a narrow cone area.

3. Put rearming timer on squadron so that CV will have more down time in between attacks. To compensate this down time, CV alpha damage will need to increase.

His suggestion obviously still has some problems and I would say 1 and 3 points is a little contradicting themselves, which I will elaborate my concerns in further discussion.

92e62b6.jpg.834d15d2f338614abe4697b76471f957.jpg

 

Edited by sunlo2013

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
88
[AMPOL]
Beta Tester
283 posts
7,827 battles

Step 1 to fix the CV issue, limit CV's to 1 per game on all tiers.

Yea I know it would never happen because of increased wait times for CV players

Step 2 ignore step 1 and hope those of us who don't play CV's keep playing so there is someone for CV players to match with

Step 3 Hope really hard we don't just say screw it and go elsewhere :) without us there is no game, without CV players, there is still a game :) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
736
[SMOKE]
Member
2,058 posts
16,289 battles

That may be useful as far as AA goes, I have my doubt though , and it still do not take into consideration what the DD and CL missing, their stealth and concealment , and range,if spotting need to be taken away then all CV planes will have to lost spotting capacity ( and still we have Radar ) ... and then the meta is can WG provide a mean for the Cl and DD to strike from that now much longer range ... if they are still forced at range then whether the stay alive or not does not matter, all it did is making the light force survival rate looking better, they still cannot function vanguard, they still cannot go out and do their duty, and the still cannot deal damage ( which mean they are still not rewarded , economy just do not add up ) .. yes part of that is about the reward mechanics, it simply do not reward for the light force to go do support duties ... and consequently the light force will not do it as it simply means going into harms way, placing one in danger and with no return ( when all the CA, BB are busy damage farming from way back ) ...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
731
[LBAS]
Member
3,103 posts
14,590 battles
20 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

Make AA auras overlap again!!!

#MAAAOA2019

Sounds like Fort AA :Smile_veryhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,177
[MRI]
Member
3,610 posts
15,541 battles

I honestly don't think his suggestions are very good. Like you said, his points seemingly contradict themselves at times.

3 hours ago, sunlo2013 said:

1. Refine fighter: remove ability to spot ships, make it unlimited with time and make it rocket plane only consumables. 

I could be wrong, but I think he meant that the fighters consumable will have unlimited charges, not that they will last forever. Or at least that was how I interpreted it. To be fair, he wasn't very clear in the video.

But anyway, he talks a lot about zoning and stuff. The thing is, current CV players already do this, or at least the good ones do. The problem with the current fighters is they don't last long enough for players to take advantage of this, plus their radius is too small unless you are the Enterprise. My suggestion would be to remove the ability for fighters to spot ships like he said, give them a longer duration, give them a bigger radius and make them lock onto enemy planes faster.

I don't like his idea of removing the fighter consumables from torpedo and dive bombers. If he wants CVs to have more interaction with each other, then removing the fighter consumable would be a very silly thing do do. Give the rocket planes more fighter consumables or whatever.

3 hours ago, sunlo2013 said:

2. Give DFAA to all ship, and make DFAA effects as ability to focus all flaks in a narrow cone area.

He needs to elaborate a lot more on this because he was pretty vague. How does one set the cone? Can the cone be moved? Depending on how it is implemented, this could even be a nerf to DFAA.

Imo it is better to just tweak the sector AA system instead. Have more sectors, enable faster switching, make the sectors have a bigger AA buff or nerf, etc.

3 hours ago, sunlo2013 said:

3. Put rearming timer on squadron so that CV will have more down time in between attacks. To compensate this down time, CV alpha damage will need to increase.

One of the points of the rework is to reduce CV alpha strikes. Why does he want to go back there

57 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

Make AA auras overlap again!!! 

I wouldn't mind, but I think WG wants AA to have their own flavours now.

Like they want some ships to be better at supporting others but weaker in defending themselves.

Previously AA escorts are good for both for escorting and also at AA self-defence. There was no ship which was good at escorting but bad at self-defence. The only ship I can think off was Akizuki, and that has more to do with its lack of maneuverability making it vulnerable to cross drops, rather than a lack of AA.

Edited by Thyaliad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
311
[LBAS]
Beta Tester
875 posts
5,777 battles
2 時間前、Soloun の発言:

Step 1 to fix the CV issue, limit CV's to 1 per game on all tiers.

Yea I know it would never happen because of increased wait times for CV players

Step 2 ignore step 1 and hope those of us who don't play CV's keep playing so there is someone for CV players to match with

Step 3 Hope really hard we don't just say screw it and go elsewhere 🙂 without us there is no game, without CV players, there is still a game 🙂

 

For now we can still play this game without kinds like you anyway 😄, unless your group could make 50% of global player base leave then that's another question though.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
372
[ZA]
[ZA]
Member
466 posts
10,645 battles
8 minutes ago, Thyaliad said:

I could be wrong, but I think he meant that the fighters consumable will have unlimited charges, not that they will last forever. Or at least that was how I interpreted it. To be fair, he wasn't very clear in the video.

 

Yes, it is typo cos I was using my phone to post and didnt prove read

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,597
Member
4,917 posts
8,860 battles
28 minutes ago, Thyaliad said:

Like they want some ships to be better at supporting others but weaker in defending themselves.

Only in WoWS does that make any sense. Like, ships with superb long-range AA aura, but no small-caliber AA guns? Actually I own 2 ships like that, no short-ranged aura at all, Salem and Lightning.

AA guns IRL can shoot into each other's range, more or less ineffective. And in-game, they should.

Edited by Paladinum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,855
[TLS]
Member
4,234 posts
20,377 battles
46 minutes ago, Thyaliad said:

Like they want some ships to be better at supporting others but weaker in defending themselves. 

They want to pigeonhole ships into "roles" but do not reward the support roles as well as they should.

Right now they should go back to basics and fix the core things rather than half-assed fixes. Patching now is just putting a bandaid over a large hole in the hull.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
372
[ZA]
[ZA]
Member
466 posts
10,645 battles

I think the fighter will not be effective if they are in form of consumables and AI control. If you want fighter to be able to contribute more on team play they have to be player control and separate from squadron.

I am thinking if you can control and direct fighter on tactical map and mini map, just like RTS mode (but without manual strafe) and like how we control hull now. And make it that fighter will not spotted surface ship at all but can only spot plane. Then there we have a more dynamic system for air to air defense. 

What these fighter can do in old day is,

1. you can set way points for them to patrol area

2. you can set fighter to follow and protect a particular ship.

3. you can direct fighter to chase an enemy squad. 

4. you can direct fighter escort you strike squadron

This will provide simple enough control for CV player but functional enough fighter capability to protect friendly. At the same time it will not shut down other CV completely like old days.

I think some basic fighter support is most people missed from the old RTS mode.

Edited by sunlo2013

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
372
[ZA]
[ZA]
Member
466 posts
10,645 battles

I think what he mean by (DFAA) focus AA cone is further enhanced the sector system. so may be on top of 180 degrees for sector you can set another layer of focus AA sector. You can set this sector using torpedo tube like interface. Now you can have 3 level of intensity of AA and you can point to enemies squadron with mouse or simply maneuver your ship.

That will be simple enough to operate. And give isolated ship's AA a bit more teeth. In fact when use correctly or combine few ships probably too powerful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
372
[ZA]
[ZA]
Member
466 posts
10,645 battles

I think when people complaint about die by thousands cut. That is because there no adequate CV to CV interactions. When CV can not at least interrupt other CV then of course you will continuously harass by CV. I think my fighter propose above should solve part of the problem.

If we increase alpha damage in exchange for less number of strike then the problem will be.

1 increase CV skill gap dramatically.

2 DD will still suffer the most because the potential one shot kill capability may return. 

I think one of the successes element of new CV is that constant action  and involve in front line combat and strikes. I prefer to keep it that way and simply work on a better fighter system and AA balance for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
736
[SMOKE]
Member
2,058 posts
16,289 battles

There are no effective, consistent and working AA ..... period ... and then what about concealment for DD and CL .. sorry CV vs CV do not give back what's been taken ... WG need to provide a way for all type of ships and all ships a fair and workable play and game play and its not just about these. its about ability to go  play and counter play, deal damage ( cause that's the only thing tha really reward ) ... as of this moment .. most DD /CL player will flatly refuse to go scout, go spot, so screening and go capping .. cause .. well we all know why ... and am not seeing anything done to rectify that, in fact the opposite is here ... all WG care is about how they can push more premium sale, they are not about game balance and they dearly shown unwilling to do so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
254
[ULAG]
Member
909 posts
10,099 battles

I completely agree with @Thyaliad about the fighter consumable. The best and simplest way to improve their effectiveness is to increase their radius and reduce reaction time while removing the ability to spot. It will also help with DDs with no AA because CVs usually put a fighter on top of them whenever they can or need.

However, the effect of AA on fighters will need to be reconsidered also. If enemies shoot down the fighters while remaining unspotted, it will not be balanced at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
581 posts
1,666 battles

All these refinement may be too tedious for WG to implement and maintain technically.

Apart from the CV rework, based on how they implemented AFK penalty and radar LOS,  I had such impression that WG would only like to implement things simple technically regardless use case completeness and refinement.

They will do it if it is just adding or enable a few global variables thatrequired very little or no coding. without any if else then cases whiles.

 

Edited by tsuenwan

Share this post


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

×