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

Balance in game

43 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
3 posts
3,629 battles

In 0.3.1.1 BB buffed a lot and CV nerfed a lot. This is not fair for CV players and DD players. BBs can turn fast like DDs. This is impossible. They can easily avoid hitting with torpedoes.

Moreover, CVs are too weak. US CVs don't have enough torpedo bombers and dive bombers to attack other ships, while Japan CVs don't have strong planes to deal with US fighters and other AA guns.
At this time, CVs can only destroy both each other and other ships are not able to destroy. CVs should attack other types of warships but not each other. This is not fun.

This is my suggestions:
-reduce BBs turning speed to same or slower than CVs
-nerf BBs AA guns
-buff CVs AA guns
-buff Japan CVs' planes' survivability

-buff US CV's planes' damage power
-nerf US DDs AA guns
-CV's special skills : within a short time, planes ignore all AA guns, no AA guns can damage planes, if CLs/CAs use their AA skills, then CLs/CAs can use AA guns to attack planes like without using skills. (both skills offseted)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
532 posts
1,052 battles

A short version of what I'm going to say:

 

Lol, no, so get good. All they have to do is fix the difference in plane stats from tier to tier, as of right now, there is a huge difference from say tier 6 planes and tier 7 planes.

Edited by ExESGO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,063 posts
509 battles

A short version of what I'm going to say:

 

Lol, no, so get good. All they have to do is fix the difference in plane stats from tier to tier, as of right now, there is a huge difference from say tier 6 planes and tier 7 planes.

 

^

@ OP Get good in the game CVs are not broken.

Edited by Halken_Sky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,718 posts
1,988 battles

SSSSSSSSSSSSSSStuff

 

Translation: I don't like getting destroyed and adopt to different play style each patch, so please nerf the ship that kills me and buff the ships I like :trollface:

 

Fair enough I guess :bajan:

 

CBT is for testing, may be the devs want to try out something extreme just like how the "Snail" did to the economy in WT back in ~0.29 (I forgot, but it was changed drastically somewhere near that period). Relax.

Edited by Alvin1020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
679 posts
3,488 battles

 

^

@ OP Get good in the game CVs are not broken.

 

CVs are way broken.

 

USN relegated to fighter games, no fun for ANYONE

IJN bomber game, something they did very poorly in reality.

 

The pigeon holing of CV roles is bad for all gameplay.

 

See this for an education.

http://forum.worldofwarships.asia/index.php?/topic/5092-ichase-opinion-on-ijn-vs-usn-carrier/page__fromsearch__1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,063 posts
509 battles

 

CVs are way broken.

 

USN relegated to fighter games, no fun for ANYONE

IJN bomber game, something they did very poorly in reality.

 

The pigeon holing of CV roles is bad for all gameplay.

 

See this for an education.

http://forum.worldofwarships.asia/index.php?/topic/5092-ichase-opinion-on-ijn-vs-usn-carrier/page__fromsearch__1

 

I really don't get the USN Cv moaning after the 3.1 patch by people, when i do get a steady stream of 1.6k exp to 1.8k exp every game in my essex using Fighter modules.

 

P.S. already saw that video and commented how many people are playing the CVs completely wrong but well it's their game and their carriers

Edited by Halken_Sky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,718 posts
1,988 battles

 

I really don't get the USN Cv moaning after the 3.1 patch by people, when i do get a steady stream of 1.6k exp to 1.8k exp every game in My Essex using Fighter modules.

 

 

Because Matchmaker decide how well you gotta do. Good luck when you see another USN Carrier (Or even IJN Carrier) Higher Tier than you.

 

The reward is disgraceful. I can't prove this with screenshot, but I swear to god Once I shot down 30-ish aircraft and a win, all I got is ~1000 XP. Some body on my team died 3 minutes into the game and only sinked another DD got 1200 Base. Why should I even bother with USN CV? Why don't I go to play IJN CV and Maybe at least I got lucky facing another IJN CV or No CV, thus doing Massive Damage?

 

Thats my Main issue with USN CV. Reward and Incentive.

Edited by Alvin1020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,063 posts
509 battles

 

Because Matchmaker decide how well you gotta do. Good luck when you see another USN Carrier (Or even IJN Carrier) Higher Tier than you.

 

The reward is disgraceful. I can't prove this with screenshot, but I swear to god Once I shot down 30-ish aircraft and a win, all I got is ~1000 XP. Some body on my team died 3 minutes into the game and only sinked another DD got 1200 Base. Why should I even bother with USN CV? Why don't I go to play IJN CV and Maybe at least I got lucky facing another IJN CV or No CV, thus doing Massive Damage?

 

Thats my Main issue with USN CV. Reward and Incentive.

 

 

If you guys are new players and only tried the CV tree after the 3.1 patch then here is a preview on the CV stats before the 3.1 patch, These were before the US battleships with their superior AA and also when fighters are completely obsolete cause each team has the same amount of fighters and the only planes fighters will engage is another fighter.

 

 MKoyyDb.png

K6IpOFl.png

Sk5dlGN.png

zSjTTry.png

iQCVqd9.png

 

While most of the community think that the CV play-style is completely broken now due to them not having fighters engage other fighters, and have bombers survive to do their exp grind(which is the reason why people are saying CV are OP in the first place). I on the other hand invite this new change as it actually adds diversity to CV gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,718 posts
1,988 battles

SSSSSSSSSSSSSStuff

 

Yes I have NO problem with the diversity of gameplay which I considered a good try from the devs, the thing I am bothered about is the ridiculous MM (that is if the tier difference will not be changed) and the reward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,063 posts
509 battles

 

Yes I have NO problem with the diversity of gameplay which I considered a good try from the devs, the thing I am bothered about is the ridiculous MM (that is if the tier difference will not be changed) and the reward.

 

MM was ridiculous in the first place as we are in CBT one of the forum moderators have already said that the MM tier limit was removed to allow for more games to be tested.

Also if you think MM is ridiculous now you should have seen it back at 3.0, tried taking on 2 Essex in a lone ranger?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,718 posts
1,988 battles

 

MM was ridiculous in the first place as we are in CBT one of the forum moderators have already said that the MM tier limit was removed to allow for more games to be tested.

Also if you think MM is ridiculous now you should have seen it back at 3.0, tried taking on 2 Essex in a lone ranger?

 

Well and thats why USN CVs are not the favorite in the current meta :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,063 posts
509 battles

 

Well and thats why USN CVs are not the favorite in the current meta :(

 

Not the favourite and being broken are two completely separate things, i have seen good CV players while making my way up the IJN CV tree, but then again like most people that only happened within the first 1-2 days of the patch 3.1 release. Anything after that are mostly new players and the rare and occasional good player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,718 posts
1,988 battles

 

Not the favourite and being broken are two completely separate things, i have seen good CV players while making my way up the IJN CV tree, but then again like most people that only happened within the first 1-2 days of the patch 3.1 release. Anything after that are mostly new players and the rare and occasional good player.

 

True. It's especially frustrating in a USN CV that you shot down waves and waves of planes and then your team still crumbled :unsure:

I seriously give up on CV now - and I really don't understand why people still say it's Overpowered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
141 posts

In 0.3.1.1 BB buffed a lot and CV nerfed a lot. This is not fair for CV players and DD players. BBs can turn fast like DDs. This is impossible. They can easily avoid hitting with torpedoes.

 

- Ships aren't tanks or aircraft.  What determines their turning radius is more related to the length and width of the ship.  Yamato actually really could turn on a dime.  The enormous bulk of any battleship meant the rudder takes a lot longer to shift leading to the "drift" that everyone laughs about, but once turning even a huge ship can turn really tightly.  I'm fine with slower rudder shift times ... as long as torpedo planes have to make "realistic" torpedo runs (you know, straight line fight, low to the water, relatively slowly) instead of right now where they sort of circle over my ship like a bunch of trash and leaves in the wind then suddenly: Torpedoes 10m away from my ship!  How about it?

 

- The basic AA on battleships is fine, I think.  The problem is that the AA vs. attacking planes mechanic (really carrier gameplay in general) is a bit too simplistic and deterministic right now.  There's no trade-off for the CV driver; there should be some option to do a safer but less effective attack or eat a bunch of losses to hope for a better attack.

 

- IJN CV planes are in sort of a bad spot.  But Tier differences for fighters is stupid right now.

 

- A clicky to make AA ineffective?  What no.

 

- The bigger problem than buffing USN attack plane strength is to give carrier drivers back more flexibility in making their plane layouts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
6,604 posts
2,477 battles

Nothing is wrong with AA of BB, is obvious USN BB have better and powerful AA

IJN Planes INDIVIDUALY already as strong as USN planes in the same tier except the number of planes per squad

I know you are talking about IJN CV
IJN don't have any Good AA BUT their CV have good Concealment and speed, so we won't need IJN CV be a AA battery

USN DD's AA need nerf? Are you [content removed] kidding me? I don't remember lost more than 3 planes every game my squad attack USN DD

Planes ignore AA? what are they using? KLIEN FIELD? CLOAKING DEVICE?

 

Profanity. Warning issued

~Twisted0ne

Edited by Twisted0ne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,718 posts
1,988 battles

 

- Ships aren't tanks or aircraft.  What determines their turning radius is more related to the length and width of the ship.  Yamato actually really could turn on a dime.  The enormous bulk of any battleship meant the rudder takes a lot longer to shift leading to the "drift" that everyone laughs about, but once turning even a huge ship can turn really tightly.  I'm fine with slower rudder shift times ... as long as torpedo planes have to make "realistic" torpedo runs (you know, straight line fight, low to the water, relatively slowly) instead of right now where they sort of circle over my ship like a bunch of trash and leaves in the wind then suddenly: Torpedoes 10m away from my ship!  How about it?

 

- The basic AA on battleships is fine, I think.  The problem is that the AA vs. attacking planes mechanic (really carrier gameplay in general) is a bit too simplistic and deterministic right now.  There's no trade-off for the CV driver; there should be some option to do a safer but less effective attack or eat a bunch of losses to hope for a better attack.

 

- IJN CV planes are in sort of a bad spot.  But Tier differences for fighters is stupid right now.

 

- A clicky to make AA ineffective?  What no.

 

- The bigger problem than buffing USN attack plane strength is to give carrier drivers back more flexibility in making their plane layouts.

 

- 10m? More like 1~2km

 

- There is. Manual drop vs Auto drop.

 

- Tier difference is intentional, but it's a little BS to see 2 squadron being eaten up by 1.

What Underpowered IJN planes? With their 3-4 whole sqadrons of TB compare to the USN's 1 (Up to Tier 8)?

 

- Well there is one to make it MORE effective. One click Boom suddenly all the DB just missed. :sceptic:

 

- This is the one I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
679 posts
3,488 battles

In 0.3.1.1 BB buffed a lot and CV nerfed a lot. This is not fair for CV players and DD players. BBs can turn fast like DDs. This is impossible. They can easily avoid hitting with torpedoes.

Moreover, CVs are too weak. US CVs don't have enough torpedo bombers and dive bombers to attack other ships, while Japan CVs don't have strong planes to deal with US fighters and other AA guns.

At this time, CVs can only destroy both each other and other ships are not able to destroy. CVs should attack other types of warships but not each other. This is not fun.

 

This is my suggestions:

-reduce BBs turning speed to same or slower than CVs

-nerf BBs AA guns

-buff CVs AA guns

-buff Japan CVs' planes' survivability

-buff US CV's planes' damage power

-nerf US DDs AA guns

-CV's special skills : within a short time, planes ignore all AA guns, no AA guns can damage planes, if CLs/CAs use their AA skills, then CLs/CAs can use AA guns to attack planes like without using skills. (both skills offseted)

 

absolutely NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

 

Basically every point you make, NO, No no!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
141 posts

 

- 10m? More like 1~2km

 

No, like 10m.  I can't tell you the number of times that torpedo bombers literally drop their torpedoes so close to my destroyer ... they don't arm and just pass harmlessly under me.  So close I think my crew could throw pots and pans from the kitchen and shoot down these planes by hitting them in a propellers.

 

Of course, if the CV driver can do it a bit further away, they do arm and kill me.  Any carrier driver who claims torpedoes can always be dodged is ... a bit odd I think.  I see them drop torpedoes really close up.  It's definitely NOT 1k-2km.  Perhaps 10m is an exaggeration given the game, but definitely within 200m.

 

Edited by nyankochan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
6,604 posts
2,477 battles

Better buff DD turn radius than nerf BB turn radius, it hurts my eyes every time I look into the stats different

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,718 posts
1,988 battles

 

No, like 10m.  I can't tell you the number of times that torpedo bombers literally drop their torpedoes so close to my destroyer ... they don't arm and just pass harmlessly under me.  So close I think my crew could throw pots and pans from the kitchen and shoot down these planes by hitting them in a propellers.

 

Of course, if the CV driver can do it a bit further away, they do arm and kill me.  Any carrier driver who claims torpedoes can always be dodged is ... a bit odd I think.  I see them drop torpedoes really close up.  It's definitely NOT 1k-2km.  Perhaps 10m is an exaggeration given the game, but definitely within 200m.

 

 

Something is called Fuse time, and it had been further nerfed in 3.1. 

Edited by Alvin1020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

Honestly? I'm starting to get incredibly bored by CV gameplay.

Pre-3.1 I used to run the air superiority setup on all my US CVs, but now that the 3rd fighter squad is gone

there is next to no reason to use it.

 

With just 2 fighter squadrons it's impossible to intercept all/enough enemy bombers prior to them unleashing their payload.

Sure you'll take out 1-2 squads worth of bombers, but that still leaves plenty of them to deal crippling damage to whatever ally you tried to protect.

And that's in addition with allied AA fire, otherwise the losses pre-drop will be even less.

 

The main problem is that with just 2 squads you can't cover the entire map, hence chances are your fighters won't even spot enemy aircrafts soon enough.

After all you still need to keep them somewhat close to each other in case that the enemy has fighters, too.

So you end up with giant holes in your aerial sector that have pretty much zero air defense aside from the AA guns on the ships.

 

Oh, but you'll get revenge kills, tons of them, once the 2nd squad actually joins the combat (depending on how far away you ordered them to fly for scouting)

you'll get to pretty much shoot down the majority of the enemy bombers... which brings up the next problem.

Who the bacon cares about revenge kills?

If you kill just a few of the bombers it's all fine and dandy, but here's what'll happen, or atleast how I do it when my bombers get obliterated.

 

I send out my bombers, they only get intercepted seconds before the drop and only by 1 of 2 enemy fighter squads.

Pre-drop I lose 2 bombers... *shrug* nobody cares, enemy BB takes heavy damage and I lose an entire squad of dive bombers to the combined AA+fighter force.

2nd dive bomber squad and torp bomber squad return unscratched, but the 3rd dive bomber squad is down to 1 plane.

Now let's see... I have tons of replacement dive bombers... ... *flies single dive bomber over nearby enemy AA*

 

Aaaaand instant return to my CV, thx, now to launch the 2 destroyed dive bomber squads before the enemy fighters are even re-supplied,

because they have to return to their CV, reload, and fly out again.

 

Nobody cares about bomber losses.

I sacrifice bombers throughout the entire game and it still takes a 1-2 tiers higher AS CV the entire match to even get me close

to running out of replacements.

 

The only time I've ever been out of bombers was pre-patch, when I tried out bomber loadouts and faced CVs 1-2 tiers higher with fighter loadouts.

And that's just completely and utterly boring to me.

 

Right now to play CVs efficiently I pretty much just do this:

  1. Send out bombers
  2. Maneuver through giant holes in the opponent's no-flight zone
  3. Bomb target
  4. Return bombers and suicide the squads that have 1-2 aircrafts left for instant re-supply
  5. Repeat steps 1-4

 

Atm CV gameplay feels more shallow than SPG gameplay in WoT.

You still have to maneuver your CV around to reduce your squads flight time like you have to move around

an SPG to reduce shell travel time.

You still have to order your bomber into the enemy's general direction, but without the danger of getting counter artied (I.e. being unable to

do anything due to enemy air superiority) it's just a boring RTS mini-game, feels like one of those really bad F2P RTS games on Steam... no wait...

those are prolly better gameplay-wise...

Edited by Retia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,033 posts
1,487 battles

WG should just introduce a whole new system for CVs.

 

1. Make the plane system point based so people can choose their own loadout

2. Planes flying high up can't be hit properly with AA fires

3. Planes need to do bombing runs, which leave them venerable to AA fire

4. Fighters are the only one who can reliably hit planes flying high

5. Make BB AA firepower lesser and CA AA firepower higher. They made CAs the AA machine, yet BBs have better AAs. What a joke.

 

This wouldn't happen anyway, because the BB players will be going "muh AA" and "planes OP".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
6,604 posts
2,477 battles

WG should just introduce a whole new system for CVs.

 

3. Planes need to do bombing runs, which leave them venerable to AA fire

 

This wouldn't happen anyway, because the BB players will be going "muh AA" and "planes OP".

 

 

Except number 3
Edited by Harpoon01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
6,604 posts
2,477 battles

 

It's paired with point 2 where it takes forever to take down a plane when they are flying high. 

 

Particulary Fighter and Dive Bomber

Share this post


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

×