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

CVs are OP pls fix

46 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
48 posts
10,850 battles

CVs have too much of an influence in the match. The CV rework was to fix this and and make them more accessible to players. However there has been a serious backlash.

First of all when DDs are complaining about CVs, they seem to forget how before, CVs could keep you perma spotted easily. Now is not the case. The biggest difference between the rework and old rts system is that there are always CVs out there.

Here are some of my suggestions to help balance things out yet also require CVs to step up their game and not spam things and farm damage.

 

1) Limit 1 CV per side at T8. Since T8 has all the premium CVs, they are basically just too influential on the game. An Enterprise and Saipan side would easily demolish a double Shokaku side. This shouldn't be the case. They can also gang up on any T6 ship and make him redundant

 

2) Give DDs the fighter consumable where they "CALL" fighters "FROM" the carrier to their location. This would give them protection and make them an intergral part of the game again. The fighters could even have a travel time from the carrier to the DD to balance things out.This ties into number 3.

 

3) Make fighters automatically aim for enemy aircraft as soon as they enter their effective radius. Currently carriers can easily get a premature run or escape before the fighters engage . This shouldn't be the case, fighters should automatically attack any planes that enter their effective radius.

 

These are some of my suggestions and I would like to hear any responses. Destroyers have always hated games where there is a carrier, even before the rework. I find that people seem to be forgetting this. Superunicum carrier divisions were pretty common before the rework but I've noticed a drop in their number. Before you would always get some anchor T7 Saipan with two T8 AA ships division, this kind of div doesn't work as div anchoring doesn't work anymore.

I don't consider the reworked CVs to be OP. It's just that they need a proper counter by the players and I thing making DDs have that consumable would help them. I personally like the new carriers as now everyone can fly.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
159
[-FUN-]
Member
524 posts
8,425 battles

Partially agree here, I think no.1 is enough, no need for no.2 and 3, for DD to be interesting again. Considering  also possibility of multiple DD in a battle, if all 3 points are implemented, a 1 cv and 3 dd battle will simply be to frustating for the cv player

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
270
[NZAUS]
Beta Tester
370 posts
8,574 battles

hmm I wonder if with number 2 suggestion if there could only be 1 lot of fighters called at any time, so for example if a DD called fighters they remained on location for (insert viable time) and, until they were destroyed or the time ran out there were no more available, so you could not have fighters in all the caps at one time. Probably make it a limited number of call ups per DD ? (To avoid permanent fighter defence)

As for number 3, if there were a few seconds for the fighters to "assemble" for an attack on initial spawn so the opposing player could abort, but after that they instantly aggro anything in their effective radius ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,353
[TLS]
Member
4,858 posts
21,287 battles

TLDR, but the better system was the old one. I maintain my position, rework rushed, poorly tested and now people suffer.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,234
Member
5,695 posts
9,510 battles
14 hours ago, dejiko_nyo said:

TLDR, but the better system was the old one. I maintain my position, rework rushed, poorly tested and now people suffer.

RTS CVs are the only CVs. CVs that can only have one squadron in the air at a time are not CVs. 

Reworked AA is better than the old 'All hail RNGesus' system though. In concept, not in balance. The bulk of AA damage is still RNGesus.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,628
[CLAY]
Member
3,231 posts
14,200 battles

I agree totally with your analysis of the situation.

I would like to see #1 happen, so long as it did not affect T6 matchmaking... for surface ships.

#2 is interesting. Maybe not all DDs, especially not with more balance changes against DDs coming in(?), but could be an interesting gimmick for some. Though it does render obsolete the concept of aircraft handling equipment on any other ship.

#3 is a big yes for me. Fighters as is are not good enough. Even ship launched fighters. They are too easily avoided. I want a no fun zone for CV planes. At most they act as a deterrent for a CV player who is at least half awake.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
84
Beta Tester
859 posts
892 battles
49 minutes ago, dejiko_nyo said:

TLDR, but the better system was the old one. I maintain my position, rework rushed, poorly tested and now people suffer.

I disagree that the old rts system was better. But i do agree that the re-work feels rushed, but not poorly tested. (i've seen other games that's worse.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
56 posts
3,842 battles

You need to look at it from WeeGee's perspective, because that's who changes things, not us.

Limiting CV numbers to 1 per side is probably the easiest and best solution by far, exactly the same as limiting SPG numbers in WoT would be.

But, they're never going to do it in either game, because the last thing a company wants is to limit customer access to product.

I'm sure they pay scant regard to the opinions of players, while watching the game stats we can't access to judge the success or otherwise of a change.

And therein lies the problem; CV game-play heavily affects game outcome, I couldn't agree more. However, that effect will not be reflected in the stats they look at.

Average damage per game, average winrate, and stats like those, will be how they balance the game. It's a typical big company approach - cold, remote and disconnected from smaller realities.

The irony is, CVs now seem to attract the same criticisms DDs once got (for different reasons) and so the meta shifts.

They wanted more people to play CVs, they got it. I simply jumped from DDs to CVs, but not everyone is as pragmatic and easy to please as me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
836
[SMOKE]
Member
2,509 posts
18,035 battles

AA, spotting, and all the interaction between different game play / game mechanic and interplay pretty much what made the mess ... what WG say is right they have made the CV more accessible for all , but then they forget the side result is that they have ruin every other else and pretty much broke the game balance and game play .. they mean for the CV to do many thing but in the end CV only go do one thing, find the juiciest target and harasses and farm damage out of it and farm kill as much as possible ; and that we cannot blame the CV players, we see BB, CA, CL, and even DD players doing the same , cause this game only reward damage deal and lesser but still significant for kill(s) .. support work, those are dirty little task that are dangerous, time consuming, tough, hard to do and most of all penalize the player for doing so ( by them having to face all the incoming or return fire without any reward ) and yet again this goes the same to all ship type ; so in the end we got what we got ...

I do agree the suggested would be useful, but more need to be done, CAP should be made standard and unlimited from CV towards their teammate and on call automated , Fighter to Attacker need to be adjusted, you do not see 1:1 lost ratio in a fighter vs Bomber or Fighter vs Torp plane scenario, Fighter always will get more kill, its more like 2.5:1 to way up in real world and this should reflect the case ... unless the enemy got their own escort fighter then its fighter vs fighter

No.3 is an absolute must, what's the use of a CAP if they do not go actively do their duty

Still any of these do not take away the fact that the game need consistent, effective, and available AA for each and every ship type and ships and the interaction must  be made ha surface ships can target their aerial enemy , not by this side or that side ( sector )

And further to that, Limit the plane arsenal a CV can have, just as all surface ships had limited HP, CV's all is based on their planes and now they have unlimited one .. this is both ill implemented and place undue advantage to the said group of ships ... Just as surface ships are faced with choice of keeping alive ( limited HP ) and still able to fight or rush in but face possibility to die ; by placing limit on planes and reserve any CV players would also be fairly so place with such limit and choice ; right now CV enjoy luxury that they can spam attack knowing even if they lost whole squadron they can re spawn, yes it take time but it still there. Not the HP on surface ships , especially those not with heal ; or if WG insist on this unlimited plane supply the the counter measure must be that Damage deal by planes would auto heal ( 100% and only damage deal by planes be it fire, rocket, bomb or torpedo ) on ships ; you give one side unlimited supply to keep fighting on then you give the other side too ; tha's fair ( but of course then the game would be in total chaos )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
592 posts
1,666 battles
2 hours ago, Paladinum said:

RTS CVs are the only CVs. CVs that can only have one squadron in the air at a time are not CVs. 

Reworked AA is better than the old 'All hail RNGesus' system though. In concept, not in balance. The bulk of AA damage is still RNGesus.

 

Looking back at early WOWS design:

https://www.redbull.com/int-en/world-of-warships-launch-interview

How does it compare to World of Warplanes?
It’s a matter of scale and of the craft involved. Obviously, planes zip through the air pretty quickly and there are things like altitude to think about. The controls and dynamics of gameplay have been refined and streamlined, making for a more accessible, medium-paced strategy angle to gameplay........ One of the key factors in the game balance is the rock-paper-scissors gameplay we have. It’s like a triangle of battleships, cruisers, and destroyers. We have aircraft carriers in the centre, because they can be effective against vessels, with a more RTS feel to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
48 posts
10,850 battles

Another idea came into my head actually. Instead of limiting the number of planes. Increase the spawn time of planes later into the game. For example, at 10 minutes, spawn rate is lenghtened or increased by 25%, 15 minutes into the game this becomes 50%. That means CVs still get to spwn planes but must be more wary about their number of losses 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11
[_BST_]
Member
50 posts
16,929 battles

Agree with item 1. Item 2 and 3 not so much. Don't know much about Premium CV, don't have them.

Current CV is just fine, not OP and whatnot. I hope that WoW don't do anything with CV in the next upgrade. I played the Public Test 0.8.4.0 and if they actually do what they did to the Rocket Planes, let just say, might as well don't have them.

I don't understand what the CV "re spawn" of planes....I have the USN T6 and British T6 and T8 CV. If I lose the planes early in the game, towards the end I have 1 or 2 planes left which is not enough do much damage.

In any case, what is the difference of CV keeping DD spotted and a DD keeping a BB spotted? From what I understand is that DD players are now complaining what BB complained about them as they are now complaining about CV.

It is not easy to hit a skillful DD player with Planes.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,234
Member
5,695 posts
9,510 battles
14 hours ago, dejiko_nyo said:

BBs/DDs OP, plz fix.

I've been waiting for a BB fix since 2017 and WHAT WG DID WAS REWORKING CVS??? IS THERE JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS ANYMORE???

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

I'm leaving this game when I get all the T10 cruisers in the game!!! That will be, like, 2 years from now, which there will be more cruiser lines along the way!!! Which I will get the T10 of those lines too!!! Which will add more time!!! But I WILL leave the game!!!

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Edited by Paladinum
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
254
[NCOTS]
Member
909 posts
10,798 battles

1 and 3 are pretty solid points.:Smile_honoring:

In case of 2 that should be applied for all classes and instead of instantly summoning a fighter, it will notify the Carrier player in the team that one of his teammates has called for fighter backup... if the carrier feels that helping his teammate in that perticular situation is helpful for the team, then he'll accept the request, otherwise reject. This is to make sure that people dont just spam fighters on top of them unnecessarily. Also, there needs to be a limit to how many times this facility can be used.

Edited by _TAMAL_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[LBFM]
Member
1 post
4,745 battles
10 hours ago, _TAMAL_ said:

make sure that people dont just spam fighters on top of them unnecessarily

In the original post it was stated this would be a consumable. I do like your idea of requesting from carrier but that just gives the carrier more control over the game

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
254
[NCOTS]
Member
909 posts
10,798 battles
2 minutes ago, ScottyOfAus said:

In the original post it was stated this would be a consumable. I do like your idea of requesting from carrier but that just gives the carrier more control over the game

 

Well, ships have their own fighter. Adding another consumable that does the same doesnt make sense. While it is true that a lot of ships dont have the option to use fighter consumable, that is for balance perposes.

That is why I think that extra fighter support should come from carriers. After all, they are the ones who will be helping their team from the enemy carrier. Also, the "control" aspect is minimal as the CV player is only setting priorities, nothing else... As a CV player myself, I only help teammates with fighters that are (1)Strategically important, (2)Obvious targets for enemy CV and (3)Anybody who is contesting the cap. Literally every player keeps spamming "Provide AA support" the entire match. If I keep listening to those and spawn fighters accordingly, my team will not win:Smile-_tongue:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26
[151ST]
In-Training Moderator
104 posts
5,441 battles

Been playing this game on and off since early early Alpha. Came back about a week ago. CV's are absolute rubbish.......like, ABSOLUTE RUBBISH. The balance is so terribly terribly wrong. Almost every battle has two CVs in it, and regardless of how much teamwork I try and regardless of what ship (BB, CA, CL, DD) I take - CV wins. Literally just watched a Tier 9 experienced DD player chase a Tier 9 CV and he could hardly even close the range and at 7km the damage the DD could do was pointless against the waves of aircraft which wiped him out. Note - EXPERIENCED player. Have been in a 50k+ tier 9 BB against a Tier 8 CV and despite dodging about 5 torpedo plane strikes and 3 rocket strikes in the space of about a minute I still couldn't kill the CV quick enough and he took me out eventually.........we're talking 11km range here too btw. These are two of the examples of every single battle I've played in the last week. Want the replays? I've been a WG supporter for as long as tanks has been out, and I've worked voluntary for them multiple times, so I'm no rager. But this iteration of the game is really really bad. Here's another one...........Ibuki maxed out with AA, just had a tier 8 Kaga torpedo plane wave fly directly over my ship, shot 2 planes down. 2. Really? Fix it devs........we're done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,234
Member
5,695 posts
9,510 battles

WG are freaking drunk.

EVERY other BB gets like 5-7km less air detection than surface detection radius, and YET GK gets beyond 10km of air detection. Even the Yamato Tower has smaller air detection radius.

What is this? Disfavor? Discrimination? 

 

And HOW THE HECK can Conqueror has better concealment than Hindenburg and Henri?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1 post
992 battles

Pretty new player here and honestly pretty frustrated by how CV works. Played a bit in the era of RTS CV and honestly it's pretty fun ( except when there's unicum CV player ) but right now it's just [content removed] everywhere.

Had a match where i got uptiered playing as T6 Bayern with T8 CVs and some T8 BBs. Match started and i got paired up with Fuso and Nurnberg so we should be pretty safe against the CVs since the Nurnberg has the AA build. But good lord the Fuso just got blown up in first 2 minute of the match where no side has even fired a single shot yet. My AA is just shit and when the Nurnberg popped his DFAA the planes just go somewhere else lol. Wasting limited use consumable with cooldown while the enemy could just fly in again after 30 seconds. And i got killed by the same exact CV 4 minutes in the fight before i could fired a single shot as well.

Even if we got uptiered atleast in the world where CVs didn't exist I could still play carefully using the terrain as cover. But now when an uptiered CV just see you as a free damage farm it's just not fun to play , even if you guys said "git gud" and learn to maneuver it's still impossible to completely dodge all 2x4 torpedoes coming at you.

 

Right now i just want anything for the AA rework atleast to prevent CVs having free damage farm.

Like right now have seen some CV tutorial regarding how the hell planes could dodge all of my flak and I thought it just severely one sided where the CV could zoom in dodge all of your flak while my AI controlled flak are being retarded. Well it's pretty okay for current but can't they add some kind of increasing flak accuracy for every 5 second or so? Just to prevent CV going back again and dropping all of their torpedoes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
836
[SMOKE]
Member
2,509 posts
18,035 battles

well for a start, I cannot understand how any CV with their hugh side profile had such concealment

Edited by Mechfori

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,628
[CLAY]
Member
3,231 posts
14,200 battles
10 hours ago, Mechfori said:

well for a start, I cannot understand how any CV with their hugh side profile had such concealment

Do not start by applying real world logic to concealment. Otherwise we might start asking why concealment from air is smaller than concealment from surface. In reality, planes would be able to see surface ships from much greater distance than other surface ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
48 posts
10,850 battles
On 5/29/2019 at 12:10 AM, esra01 said:

Pretty new player here and honestly pretty frustrated by how CV works. Played a bit in the era of RTS CV and honestly it's pretty fun ( except when there's unicum CV player ) but right now it's just [content removed] everywhere.

Had a match where i got uptiered playing as T6 Bayern with T8 CVs and some T8 BBs. Match started and i got paired up with Fuso and Nurnberg so we should be pretty safe against the CVs since the Nurnberg has the AA build. But good lord the Fuso just got blown up in first 2 minute of the match where no side has even fired a single shot yet. My AA is just shit and when the Nurnberg popped his DFAA the planes just go somewhere else lol. Wasting limited use consumable with cooldown while the enemy could just fly in again after 30 seconds. And i got killed by the same exact CV 4 minutes in the fight before i could fired a single shot as well.

Even if we got uptiered atleast in the world where CVs didn't exist I could still play carefully using the terrain as cover. But now when an uptiered CV just see you as a free damage farm it's just not fun to play , even if you guys said "git gud" and learn to maneuver it's still impossible to completely dodge all 2x4 torpedoes coming at you.

 

Right now i just want anything for the AA rework atleast to prevent CVs having free damage farm.

Like right now have seen some CV tutorial regarding how the hell planes could dodge all of my flak and I thought it just severely one sided where the CV could zoom in dodge all of your flak while my AI controlled flak are being retarded. Well it's pretty okay for current but can't they add some kind of increasing flak accuracy for every 5 second or so? Just to prevent CV going back again and dropping all of their torpedoes

This is why I believe that T8 CVs should be limited to one per side. Any T6 ship just gets wrecked. Wargaming did fix up their concerns from the old rts CV system and open up the class to more players. However, they opened up a whole new can of worms and are now drunk on vodka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,353
[TLS]
Member
4,858 posts
21,287 battles
1 hour ago, HSF_Akeno_Misaki said:

This is why I believe that T8 CVs should be limited to one per side. Any T6 ship just gets wrecked. Wargaming did fix up their concerns from the old rts CV system and open up the class to more players. However, they opened up a whole new can of worms and are now drunk on vodka

It looks like T8 is going to follow T10 in the 1CV soft limit somewhere down the track according to the latest devblog post today. 

Also, for all CV players, bad news, the coffee break wg was going to give at the start of the game has been cancelled for now. You are not going to have to wait 45s + 15/30/45s for planes to fly. 

Edited by dejiko_nyo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
836
[SMOKE]
Member
2,509 posts
18,035 battles

still won't solve the under tier issue for surface ships, 1 CV limit per game is a start, an ever better one is MM that would place any game with CV that no surface ship would be 2 tier under tiered .. effectively meaning CV will always get MM of +2/-1 or may be the long suggested +/-1 for all ships

Edited by Mechfori

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×