Adding playable carrier in enduring confrontation naval

[Bombe18]

[Would you like to see this in-game?]

• Yes
• No

Hello everyone

I would like to offer you a new style of play for enduring confrontation.

Currently, our mission was to protect an aircraft carrier which in most cases is… Bugged.
depending on the missions, as in the Strait of Dover, the western team’s aircraft carrier leaves the map and is therefore impossible to kill.
And for the southern team, the aircraft carrier remains static, patiently awaiting its death.

To correct this, I would like these aircraft carriers to be playable and have a real strategic utility.
The aircraft carriers can only be taken out 1 at a time per team.
If carrier die, another can be taken
They will serve as spawn for allies, whether planes or warships.

So we all agree that aircraft carriers are gameplay that will be passive and that few players will use them. This is why the aircraft carrier destruction mission will have to disappear and will have to be changed to something else.
For example, the destruction of a port by boats.

You will tell me, but what’s the point of playing aircraft carrier if you don’t win points or money.
My idea is simple, as soon as a player spawns on you (aircraft carrier) you will gain research points, SL and reappearance points. (see example below).

In addition, the same method as in enduring aerial confrontation, the more players who spawn on you, the more “useful action” bonus you will have.
If an aircraft carrier commander plays strategically and makes his team win by strategy, more players will spawn on it. And the more useful action points the commander will gain.
Conversely, if the commander plays aircraft carrier and no one spawns on it, he will not gain any useful action points because no one will spawn on it.

For players who spawn on the aircraft carrier, they will also gain bonuses.

We have 2 solutions for allied ship spawns on the aircraft carrier.

• Either the spawns are automatically placed in the direction where the aircraft carrier is located.
• Either the commander must choose the direction of the spawn using a small compass. “see picture”
  

To be able to take an aircraft carrier, I think it would be better if it cost a certain spawn points.

Currently, I don’t see the aircraft carrier capable of spawning planes to attack targets. I see them more as commanders for enduring confrontations.
If they can have a capability to launch aircraft, I think it should be as fighters to protect themselves from air attacks.

I think carrier could be able to send only 1 fighter controlable without bomb (as like scout planes) to protect itself and scout. With a stock or 10~

I know a minority of people will want to play this. But that will add a new aspect of the game
Carriers are ready to be implemented in game, so we can add them here ?

Carrier will be optionnal for players, and if they do not want to play they, they could not play it !

[ImportantSimone5]

Hmmm approved. +1

[BeretBoi]

You could maybe have differing carriers depending on the tier and nation being played , like Essex-class carriers for USA players in tiers 1-4 , or maybe Nimitz-class carriers for top-tier US players.

[Bombe18]

Of course that could be a great idea ! And that should open carrier tree ?

[BeretBoi]

Definitely! I think that the USA , Japan and the UK should have carrier trees starting from world war 2. Japan’s carrier tree could be quite weak , as they had to stop building aircraft carriers after world war 2. Also , the UK had some short periods when they stopped building carriers, meaning that the US would be the only stable tree throughout the time period that the game takes place in.

[ImportantSimone5]

Just for asking, are you talking about the carriers of all the nations that have they or only USA, URSS and UK?

[Bombe18]

Actually, my idea is to add only carrier for everyone.
For exemple :
US and UK carrier (japan havent catapults)

but if there a tree, german could have graff zeppelin

[lxtav]

the thing is that the UK has several modifications and modernisations of carriers, the illustrious class alone can have like three variations that are unique, not to mention the different aircraft loads and partially constructed ones like the Malta and CVA-01 classes

Japan also has a large enough amount of carriers to keep it going for a while, if it gets a Thai subtree it could use Thailand’s aircraft carrier as well

[ImportantSimone5]

And italians can have Sparviero and Aquila.

[Arcadia_Nyx]

+1 for Naval EC only, as in Nuke plane or drone.
As for an aircraft carrier to TT, I would not think it is desirable, but it could be added in this way.

[theAngelofDeath]

i fully agree with this

[Bombe18]

I agree about italy, so that only remain USSR without carrier, not a problem !

[ImportantSimone5]

Finally something in which Russia is the worst.

[AspandaIV]

USSR does have a couple of carriers

the issue is that all of them as far as i know are all cold-war designs

[Bombe18]

I’m really glad to see that 88% are ok with this idea !
I never thank that it would interest players to play this !

Maybe its time for a new era in Warthunder ?

[Vianochka]

So if I understand this correctly the whole gameplay would be just you waiting until someone spawn on you?

[CapitanVento]

Well… good point.

In my naval EC experience, it’s very rare to have the convenience to spawn on a carrier… unless somebody is trying to sink the carrier or is placed ( randomly…) on a good position on the battlefield.

I seriously would like to have playable aircraft carrier on EC game, but the gameplay must be more interesting than waiting some fellow to spawn on you.

Let me say… why not use carrier as a mobile spawn zone, not only for planes, but also for ships.

In this way a carrier could be used to lead and move allied position over an enemy base o convoy.
This part works if ther’s cooperation between players, a thing always in doubt, even if I would say in naval EC events I’ve encountred the best teammates, people who actively collaborate to gain the victory ✌️

On the other hands, player must protect carrier, and enemy should be rewarded for its destruction.

Even said this, due to naval EC mechanics, a fellow with Lancaster and a 12000 lb bomb can evaporate any ship in a single hit… Soo… taking off carriers from sea could not be so hard…

[Vianochka]

Lancaster should not be able to take off from carrier.

The gameplay seems pretty poor to me. Sure you can give your team advantage as movable spawn but it will boring af. And (I think) every map in Naval EC has several airfields so unless we get full sea map, like Battle of Midway, there is no use for aircraft carriers.

I mean there is, similar to what it is in WoWSh, where you can spawn airplanes yourself.

[CapitanVento]

@Vianočka

Lancaster should not be able to take off from carrier.

I knew that 🤣 it was not what I meant

[Bombe18]

Let me say… why not use carrier as a mobile spawn zone, not only for planes, but also for ships.

As my idea said : ships could be able to spawn on them

They will serve as spawn for allies, whether planes or warships.