The cap points should be much larger than they are currently. The sizes are fine for boats but once you get to ships, the caps are basically the same size as you ship. They could take a page out of WoWS 's book and have a very large cap point in the center of the map that helps to encourage players to not just sit along the edges while allowing for ships to cap without it being a suicide mission.
3 Likes
I can’t even play using battleships without getting kicked out of the match by the servers. It makes me lose SL constantly.
I don´t mean to make spawns directly in line of sight from the other spawn. IMO the spawn should be “behind” islands and much much larger areas then they are currently and they should be directionally separated. So when the spawn is behind island there should be at very least 2 “spawns” facing different ends of the island.
I just think that placing for example cruiser spawns 30+ km eway isn´t really feasible. Not to mention the 60+ km for BBs.
Yep, especially for torpedoes and bombs.
Keep in mind that the suggestion was made way back in 2016 before even DDs were implemented and when I had no idea the true performance of BBs, DDs or CL/CAs. So I have made a lot of asumptions. But I still think that forcing direct controll for attacks is must since it would force direct fight between the CV player and the vessel player and IMO would greatly limit damage output of the CVs which is needed because we can´t have them as main damage dealer since only 3 nations really have them.
I have pondered the CV gameplay based on all new realities. And I came up with this:
New CV gameplay "suggestion"
The first thing that needs to be said is that for CVs to be implemented current gameplay/objectives should change since currently the game isn´t able to acomodate the CVs.
Another thing which must be considered is vehicle and nation balance so the CVs can not be too powerful and the loss of planes should have serious SL consequences.
Looking at the current in game mechanics and the gameplay contrains. I believe that best approach is to allow CV player comand limited amount of planes in several squads and then give the player ability to take control of one of the squads for attacks against the surface combatans. Since this approach would both limit the damage output and give player to prepare and perform several tasks and objectives simultaneously.
The gameplay would basically combaign both old and current WOWS style CV gameplay.
In battle the CV player would have acces to up to 3 different types of squads to which player could assign numbers of planes based on their preference in same way as with ammo for guns.
The CV would also have new “weapon control group” replacing the main battery with “aircaft command”. There they would have acces to launching the 3 different squads, command view and switching between squads.
The command view would be the main way how to command the plane squads.
Command view
-
On the left, next to the the DM view is an overview of the state of the aircraft complement showing destroyed, rearming/repairing and ready for flight planes divided into the 3 types the player chose.
-
Above the DM view is the deck/hangar overview. Which displays the progress of launching and landing of the squads. This action would take time based on the number of lifts, plane catapults the deck arresting gear and deck layout.
For example in case of the USS Saratoga used in the example she has only one elevator which will slow down the deploying of the planes to the deck / from the deck. But she has two aircraft catapults so the lanching will be quite fast.
And as all WW2 carriers she has straight flight deck so she can´t land and launch planes at the same time.
Squad launching view
-
On the right is the squad overview which shows current number of squads in the air, the type of plane in the squad and its main armament and also current task and remaining fuel time.
It also highlights the selected squad and shows the actions which can be done with it.
-
In the centre is the sommand map. Which would show locaition of each squad and the point where the squads is heading to and in case of the patrol also the area which the squad patrols.
To send squad to specific point on the map the player will choose the squad which they want to give command to with the cycle button [V] simmilarly to the cycling between the gunners. And then by clicking on the map with LMB to place pin on the map to wich the squad will now fly. Player can also decide to send the squad back to CV [Z & +/1], make it patrol the area around the pin [Z & ě/2] or to take direct control over the squad [ř].
The amount of planes and squad would be limited to only 5 squads with 5 planes per squad. This is done to limit the server impact and also to limit the disparity betweent he different CVs. And to make the controls easier.
In the direct control the the player would control only 1 plane from the squad while the other planes would fly after it / circle around.
Direct control
Dive bomber squad
Torpedo bomber squad.
-
In the hotbar player has option for quick switch to “Comand view” and to “Ship control”
-
There would be also button to switch between different planes in the squad simmilarly to the squad cycle. Next to it is dispay of the state of the other planes in the squad and if the plane still has the main weaponry.
After the player performs the attact with the plane they can switch to different plane in squad to perform the attack again. This is done to allow player to precisely place attecks and to limit the possible damage of completly RTS gameplay and if the AI planes would attack with the player. If the damage output and or the planes would be too easy to shoot down (even despite the distraction of other planes) the player can be given one ore more wingmen to perform the attack too.
The modification for CV would consist of two types.
- These would be new armament/plane modification which would allow the use new planes or new armament.
- These are more general amrmament upgrades which would improve the performance of the air arm.
Modification screen for the USS Saratoga
New armament/planes
-
F6F-5 Hellcat and the TBF-1C Avenger these would allow to use new fighter planes / new torpedo bomber planes in the respective squads
The stock USS Saratoga would have acces to F4F-4 Wildcat, SBD-3 Dauntless and the TBD-1 Devastator
-
There is also modification which allows to equip F6F-5 with Tiny Tim rockets as one of the squads (this isn´t replacement for the F6F-5 just another different squad)
Upgrades to the equipment
-
Aircraft elevators would spead up the preparation/move of planes from the hangar and make the lift more resilient to damage
-
The arresting gear would spead the landing procedures
-
The combat air patrol would make fighter actively target enemy planes even without the patrol area command.
The landing/launch would be completly independent from the player, the launch would be animated just after the launch when the AI would take over. The laning would work in simmilar way where the AI would just fly into square right behind the carrier and rest would be amimated.
Both of these function are in the game but aren´t polished enough to be used in closeups on the CVs
Current AI landing
1 Like
Worth noting that weather systems don’t have to be universal. Out on the water rain squalls are quite localised hence could be used as cover. Tides and currents would make close manoeuvring inshore quite interesting. And as you say make the race in or out of cap zones more challenging. Even low cloud cover or completely overcast would add something, planes could pop out of it and climb back up to escape the AAA. Night or the battle advancing into dawn would add another aspect… Searchlights, radar and flashless powder could add something to the tech tree.
Having all three cap zones roughly equidistant seems like a wasted opportunity too. Reduces the effective use of mines, do we even have minesweepers in game?
Overall I think they have the vehicle models set up very well. It’s the environmental aspects and constraints that are needed to add some tactical spice. Otherwise it’s just bigger tanks with little or no terrain as cover.
2 Likes
Are Prinz Eugens that bad? I find their crew gets thinned out very easily and quickly. Also I find my Italian and British 203 blap them pretty often.
I do like the Prinz Eugen, but I dont find I perform better than my other ships.
5.7 is such a great tier
South Hampton, London and Norfolk wrecks
Abruzzi, Trento and Zara wreck
Graf Spee and Eugen/Hippa wrecks
Americans and Russians wreck in general
I have Furutaka but havent really used yet.
Ah, fair enough! Yeah, placing an island to block the line of sight could be pretty good start of map design. Although I think that might have a slight issue of you being focus fired upon as you leave the cover though… Unless the exit itself is covered by another island chain. Either way, one problem that might come up would be that the map would end up feeling kinda same-y. Already a good amount of existing maps just feel like mirror for both sides for balance reason and that removes the gameplay possibilities a bit (although I guess this problem also exist for Air Battles so it’s not a unique problem)
I might need a more visual graphic to comprehend all that was raised but from the basic overview of things, I largely still agree with what is being discussed although to avoid retreading old points, I still think that the players shouldn’t have direct control over the plane squadron, despite the strengths you have raised. I feel like having players at the control would enhance the fighters more than nerf them. Perhaps to make things balanced from the RTS view is the idea that you won’t know what kind of ship you are attacking beyond their class. You might see a battleship but that could either be something bristling with AA like some American thing or just a dreadnought with like 2 MG mounts. As for the SL loss, I don’t know if it should be that heavy for losing the squadron but I think losing the carrier itself could be a bit costly (or at least higher than their like-BR’d counterparts).
They are deadly if they decide to focus on you, at least in my experience. I have the Aoba and the Furutaka at that BR and find myself destroying their armor but otherwise not dealing enough damage at range. And damaging their ammo elevator when I try to hit their front ammo racks. But other than that, 5.7 is a decent enough tier, although the recent BR change that sends battleships down there is…less than favorable.
1 Like
Well yes, But anyone of those ships I mentioned focusing you is deadly (with solid aim that is)
I really love my Italians for ammo wracking. really good for sharp shooting.
1 Like
So, fighters, bombers and torpedo bombers. No recon planes… No option to just choose 2 types or just a single type of planes?
No multi-role capability, or mounting lighter bombs on fighters? Or swapping torpedoes for bombs?
It could be an interesting equipment management game of sorts - torpedo attacks are the safest kind of attacks for pilots, at least at the limits of torpedo range. Rockets being the the compromise option, and bombs being the most risky.
With CVs limited armament stocks, if similar mechanics are going to be used on them, as we see now on other ships with secondary armament like depth charges and torpedoes, maybe there can be funny situations where carrier runs out of specific kinds of ammo mid-battle. And thus, basically it’s squadrons now have only the strafing option…
Seems a bit weak… For a proper carrier.
I imagine the fellow wingmates circling around this dive bomber above it, also subject to AAA fire…
Oh, it goes down! Switching to another plane… Another one! Oh boy, one wingmate that was circling around was shot! The last bomber in a squadron… Bomb dropped! Miss! Just a few shrapnel hit it. Then shot down on the way to the carrier…
Frankly, I’m more curious of early rank/low BR CVs - that being experimental/escort/light carriers and seaplane tenders, as big boys would be… looking like a joke, with that semi-single plane control. With low rank/BR, this single plane control may make a bit more sense, as these are early carriers, intended to escort convoys and scout around, rather than participate in a proper combat operations.
1 Like
If the map is large enough to give players options how to go around the island or which side to choose and allows them to at very least dodge the shells I think it is fine. Afterall this would also be present in the much larger maps at the point where the player reaches the firing range.
Yes the mirror maps are a bit dull but I would say it is still better then some maps where one side has obviously much better spawns.
But I think with larger size of the maps they can be made unique and different with different setups and island layouts which ultimately achieve same cover.
@Norris_Aznable @Blogaugis As for the CV discussion I replied in detail in the Aircraft Carrier topic which is better suited for the in depth discussion about them.
2 Likes
Maybe improve RP? I mean an 8 kill game in my Fuso with Premium only got me 10k rp while trying to grind a 380k rp ship… it’s no wonder some people don’t play. they are asking so much rp for so little rewards.
4 Likes
I guess well have to see how good this will be…
1 Like
Fair enough, looking it up it seems like most ships you mention, including the Eugen, can shoot at a rate of 5 rounds per minute. For some reason I always feel like they can lob the shells at double that rate whenever I see them. Probably cause there’s a horde of them owned by scripters on that particular swathe of the map.
And it’s probably due to this same script-density that you’d find them downtiered where they do absolutely slap destroyers.
1 Like
Yeah this is true as well, the RP gain could be substantially boosted to match the demands. I’m currently stuck at 6.0 and although I’m by far not doing so good (getting uptiered to battleships I can’t even pen… yay…), trying to inch by so I can spade stuff and move on is taking so long, I just chose to avoid it altogether.
And yep…wish they give us more details on their vision so we can offer them feedback before they change everything for the better or worse, but in a way I guess this is par for the course.
1 Like
They are when their 203mm guns have a15sec reload while my 200mm guns have an 18 sec reload. I have only even gotten 2 ammo racks on them even after spending countless rounds focusing on their ammo. I have not found a good way of taking them out yet. I try SAP but it doesnt do enough damage fast enough and AP only works if you can somehow ammo rack them. Of course, HE wont do jack to them.
I probably doesnt help me that I dont know how exactly spotting works in naval. I say this because I will be behind an island that I cant even fire over and the enemy ships are behind an island yet they will pin point my location.
1 Like
Im guessing you are in an early American Heavy Cruiser? (Pensacola, Portland or Northhampton)
I Havent spent any time in them because I find the Light Cruisers deadlier (So I have no idea how to use them, as in make up for their weaknesses). But I have played against them alot and American Heavy Cruisers have Huge weakspots that detonate them so easily. Any of those Heavy Cruisers Up to and including the De Moine are favourite targets for me to blap (in any cruiser).
Cant say I feel sorry for those ships with all the Moffits and Helenas that have been around forever :P (Although I like moffits cos they detonate good :P)
Or sinking a few WITH Moffets! :)
Puts a/c in a useful place but not overpowering.
Agreed
IMO it is the idiot manouvering in spawn that is the issue - mostly ships can’t actually hit each other much at spawn-spawn ranges.
I see these as advantages - IMO there is no sensible gameplay option trying to incorporate these 2 into WW1-WW2 naval surface fleet gameplay.
Trivial - in that every game always needs UI improvement! :)
IMO neither are true - shells do damage, and the game is already so far removed from reality that differences between AP and HE are arbitrary - pick whichever you think is best.
And I have no trouble with using light bombers at appropriate BRs - they are perfectly capable of sinking vessels on their own.
The bots used to pad out numbers are not a problem - indeed they are a feature that helps with SL gain as noted being a Pro!
Players botting O… well TBH hardly ever see any that I can recognize, and few that I think might be doing so always seem to be an easy target too
Just putting these in cons just because I know people are highly anticipating them/the power creep. I also would be perfectly happy if these two don’t get included.
I don’t think they are as arbitrary as it seems. HE’s effectiveness for me kind of ends with destroyers. Unlike WoWs implementation (and I guess US purpose-made HEs) they aren’t exactly easy fire-starters. They often just splash harmlessly on the armor, and with the update moving the crew further behind ammo belts, this just makes the kill that much harder. Recent attempts at playing the Akizuki, the ship I used to be able to dominate in have resulted in hardly more damage than continually breaking their turret/torpedo launchers of Moffetts. And this especially becomes a problem higher up in BR (although there the AP also don’t do much because I keep getting uptiered to battleships, but when faced with lower tier things, AP very much is a superior shell)
Yeah, which is why I suggest the wingman feature to start at like 5.0. At that point, people either got good enough crew points to timely repair the damage (unless they are preoccupied by an ongoing damage control), or got the AA suite to fill the sky with lead.
Yeah I mean player bots, not the Gaijin matchmaker padding bots. They are exceedingly common the higher you go. More often than not the Frank Knox, Helena, Des Moines, Prinz Eugens and other premiums you see are bots. They might be an easy target but they ruin the playing experience, especially if they just chose to sit still at the back of the map/near caps.
4 Likes
Japanese heavy cruiser, Kako. I understand it it 1.0br lower but it still has 200mm guns that should still be able to do damage.
oohhhh the Kako (I couldnt remember anyone having 200mm guns, I just asumed typo). Yeah full up tiers can be rough. On the upside the Kako at its own tier or as top dog is pretty godlike. I Havent played it for a while, but I used to love taking this thing out