Proposed CV and Submarine changes discussion thread

[Helstrem]

15 minutes ago, Itwastuesday said:

So carrier buffs then.

Those are not CV buffs.  They are DD buffs.

[Sailor_Moon]

15 minutes ago, Itwastuesday said:

So carrier buffs then. Hah. The way they talked about it sounded like you can go into the zoom around the map mode so you're more effective from back of the map, also able to bypass AA bubbles for whoever you're going for, then when you reach combat zone you descend and start to strike normally. Like they're not making it so that you have to start attack run in order to spot, only that you have an alternate flight mode in addition to the current one.

That is certainly one way of looking at it. IF CVs can auto-switch flight modes, that could be like CV dolphining basically, which would break the CV vs surface ship AA interaction REALLY badly. That....is concerning.

[Aragathor]

The proposed changes, with their counterintuitive complexity, will most likely fail at the testing stage. Others already raised the possible issues, including the fact that the changes might buff the two classes.

WG stated that at the end of February they will update us on the progress. I firmly expect either the concept to be dropped, or in an even worse situation, WG pushing through with something that will work opposite to what everyone expected.

 

I am not optimistic as to the changes as proposed. Save for smaller things, like changes to ASW of cruisers and adding ASW to ships that were missing it.

 

PS: I'll add a Discord statement by a WG mod as to why minimap spotting is not being implemented:

It's been pointed to me why minimap spotting is a terrible idea. The server needs to send the ship position, even approximate, to the client, so people with aimbot cheats  could shoot the location with higher accuracy than people eyeballing the blindshot using the map.

Edited December 14, 2023 by Aragathor

[HogHammer]

Several threads have popped up regarding this topic and I just want to inform everyone that they have been merged here or provided links. It looks like this topic will be heavily discussed so it is best to keep it all in one place.

[Jakob Knight]

50 minutes ago, cheapinkc said:

I read it as strictly your second option as a direct mitigation to crap gunning.

 

That would leave Subs helpless at close range.  Rather than incentivizing long-range fire (which does poorly right now anyway), it would basically make Subs vulnerable in a situation they are almost certain to face if the battle progresses as expected.

It also would encourage Subs to stay out of ranges where surface ships actually have a good chance to sink them.  A good thing?

 

 

 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

5 minutes ago, Sailor_Moon said:

That is certainly one way of looking at it. IF CVs can auto-switch flight modes, that could be like CV dolphining basically, which would break the CV vs surface ship AA interaction REALLY badly. That....is concerning.

Indeed. That's a possible exploit waiting to happen.

6 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

Those are not CV buffs.  They are DD buffs.

The point is that CVs are nerfed so heavily that WG will need to buff them to get the right class balance in the matchmaker.

We saw this with 0.8.5, where changes much less punishing were made and CV play dropped by an order of magnitude.

If these proposals go through unaltered, CV play is going to drop even more...

[Sailor_Moon]

Just now, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Indeed. That's a possible exploit waiting to happen.

To be fair, Gaishu DID say on WoWs Discord just a couple mins ago that Wargaming was aware of this particular issue and will monitor it, so we'll have to see how Wargaming works around this potentially balance-breaking issue...

If Wargaming can figure that out though, I think the other changes could be interesting. We'll see how it goes in testing.

6 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said:

It also would encourage Subs to stay out of ranges where surface ships actually have a good chance to sink them.  A good thing?

[Helstrem]

2 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Indeed. That's a possible exploit waiting to happen.

The point is that CVs are nerfed so heavily that WG will need to buff them to get the right class balance in the matchmaker.

We saw this with 0.8.5, where changes much less punishing were made and CV play dropped by an order of magnitude.

If these proposals go through unaltered, CV play is going to drop even more...

As stated in the stream, there will be balancing that is needed.

As to the minutia of how the systems work, we can speculate but none of us should be making absolutist statements as none of us know.

[Subtle_Octavian]

Hybrid BB the best CV now. They won't remove spotting from those planes, it's the whole mechanic of the ship.

 

[Verblonde]

6 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

If these proposals go through unaltered, CV play is going to drop even more...

Just for clarity: you view this as a Bad Thing?

[Andrewbassg]

8 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

The point is that CVs are nerfed so heavily that WG will need to buff them to get the right class balance in the matchmaker.

 

Not necessarily, coz they may intend to allow 2 Cv's per side. And they can artificially boost their income, a la subs. I mean they have to, to compensate for the loss of spotting DMG.

[Capt_Kookmeyer]

They should just make a new game - World of Submarines

[ArIskandir]

1 hour ago, Jakob Knight said:

What stands out to me is how the Devs expect a CV to attack units it can't see unless it is already attacking them?  If the current times and agility restrictions remain, that will mean CVs will have very little chance to attack unless another friendly unit does the spotting for them.

I think that's precisely the point, with the ultimate objective of "opening up" the map and reduce the risk/vulnerability of isolated flanking units. There's a lot of blank spaces yet to fill tho, nothing was said about fighter consumable spotting for example. In ultimate instance the CV can still initiate an attack but not deliver the payload to get some spotting going without losing the attack wing. So the option will still be there to spot by and attack by yourself just like it is currently the case for attacking a DD with AA guns switched off. 

1 hour ago, Jakob Knight said:

Also, giving Cruisers the ability to spot any Sub within 6-9 Km and drop ASDC on that Sub seems a bit too extreme.  I do like how it will give some Cruisers more utility, but it's also an extremely lethal addition.  The slight improvement in turning rate for Subs seems not in proportion to this addition.

I've advocated for that solution since fuggin' ever. The values for range and active time for the consumable can be adjusted for balance, don't get too worried about having 9km detection, I doubt it would match the range of the own ASW strike, the action time will be likely also much shorter. Also, don't underestimate the impact of better turning rate on Subs, Airstrikes have a very significant time to target and even with the current values it isn't difficult to dodge them if you maneuver out of the way. 

I'm particularly pleased by the ship lines proposed for the consumable. It will provide a good reason to play them in a more supportive role, closer to the action instead or the usual boring long range spam. 

1 hour ago, Jakob Knight said:

An interesting question on the Sub torpedoes is:  will the torpedoes do more damage with greater range than they do currently (advantage), or only do their current damage after travelling a long distance (penalty).

 

 

As I understand, the objective is to provide a buffer zone to mitigate shotgun attacks. I'm fairly sure the values will stabilize at "normal" once the torps have cleared the buffer zone.

[Ensign Cthulhu]

I think aircraft inability to spot ships for themselves will fail, partially because there will be even more pressure on the destroyers than before to push forward and spot. I suspect they'll probably have to fall back on the model they've got for the Bearn, where the spotting is limited to a couple of clicks where it even exists. As a CV player I would approve of that. With several prominent CV mains either in the CC program or as actual employees, they're going to face a lot of heat. 

The sub changes seem alright. 

[Nevermore135]

I don’t understand why the solution to CV spotting isn’t some variation of the mechanic used for team-spotting with radar. Some form of mini-map only spotting for a certain period of time (the time needed for pilots to relay information to the carrier, and for that information to be passed on to the rest of the fleet) would seem like a much more elegant solution.

Edited December 14, 2023 by Nevermore135

[Sailor_Moon]

2 minutes ago, Nevermore135 said:

I don’t understand why the solution to CV spotting isn’t some variation of the mechanic used for team-spotting with radar. Some form of mini-map only spotting for a certain period of time (the time needed for pilots to relay information to the carrier, and for that information to be passed on to the rest of the fleet) would seem like a much more elegant solution.

Strangely enough, Wargaming is claiming that minimap spotting was "not the solution they were looking for"...no further explanation yet regarding this. But apparently Wargaming DID test this concept a while back (also according to Wargaming).

I don't see HOW it wouldn't solve their issues with too much CV spotting power, but.... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Helstrem]

8 minutes ago, Sailor_Moon said:

Strangely enough, Wargaming is claiming that minimap spotting was "not the solution they were looking for"...no further explanation yet regarding this. But apparently Wargaming DID test this concept a while back (also according to Wargaming).

I don't see HOW it wouldn't solve their issues with too much CV spotting power, but.... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It doesn't stop the incidental spotting of surface ships, primarily DDs.  The difference between knowing the Shimakaze is on your flank and having no idea where the Shimakaze is huge for both you and the Shimakaze.  In addition this allows Def AA and Fighter to be perhaps useful.

[aleksi111]

CV planes being wholly immune to AA during transit would allow them to just B-line over hostile AA ships to strike at a target that is spotted otherwise, and not needing to skirt around the AA defences in order to preserve their strike craft..

 

This would obviously shorten the cyclic time between strikes, and make succesful disengaging/breaking off to try to let DCP cooldown lapse harder for any ships.

 

The CV pilot, if posessing a brain, could also do general approach vector set-up in transit mode based off on what they see in screen, and then just prosecute the attack with fine adjustments

Edited December 14, 2023 by aleksi111

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

48 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

Just for clarity: you view this as a Bad Thing?

My view isn't the relevant one...

WG will view a massive drop in CV population as a bad thing.

4 minutes ago, aleksi111 said:

CV planes being wholly immune to AA during transit would allow them to just B-line over hostile AA ships to strike at a target that is spotted otherwise, and not needing to skirt around the AA defences in order to preserve their strike craft..

 

Except defAA and fighters will be able to attack planes in transit...so AA traps will be a thing.

[aleksi111]

Also, vessels such as Minotaur or most Battleships could not do anything to Transiting Planes as are entirely lacking even the option to pick Def AA

 

And fighters are very much hit or miss

Edited December 14, 2023 by aleksi111

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

46 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

Not necessarily, coz they may intend to allow 2 Cv's per side. And they can artificially boost their income, a la subs. I mean they have to, to compensate for the loss of spotting DMG.

They will have to boost the damage output as well, because they want CVs executing fewer attacks.

The whole thing seems very much based on ignorant assumptions.

[Verblonde]

2 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

WG will view a massive drop in CV population as a bad thing.

Depends on whether there is a concurrent rise in population in everything else; they'll view a net increase in money as a Good Thing, I imagine.

(For clarity: I'm not vehemently anti-CV - I just think they need some tweaks.)

[Andrewbassg]

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

No. Just no.

That is ass backwards.

It will be impossible to actually line up attacks, which is a current core part of CV gameplay.

Let's read on.

 

We don't know yet how the transition between the two mode is solved. Minimap  also exist.

And to be honest...... the fact that PT didn't warned people about being attacked by Cv's was also ,at least, very much the same thing.

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

 

Oh look, invsi-fire returns.

Sigh.

Reading on....

Subs say hi. But I don't think that ALL AA will count. Only flak, me thinks And again, minimap.

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

This is just dumb.

At least let the CV alone see what his planes are doing...

Well...... I don't think is possible mechanics wise. IAnd it is s possible that the Cv would not be in control of his planes while travelling. Remains to be seen how that actually is solved.

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Attack timers are currently FAR too short to allow this to work practically.

 We don't know how the travelling will be implemented. It could be a "send planes to area" kinda thing.

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Stupid idea. Better to not have AA mounts be destroyed.

Well...it has historical basis. But I'm in limbo about this. A Cv should be able to repeatedly strike the same ship for target priority reasons. However on the stream they gave the example of lone ships so.....we don't know much yet.

As for the other.... its not possible they, also act as sec guns and the module integration is deep in the game.

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I.e., more invsi-fire mechanics, because you can just squad wipe with defAA on a blinded set of planes.

Stupid.

Although, this could be the setup for brining missiles into the game.

Don't think so. The deterrence effect of AA is not implemented. And again this was the lone ship example/reasoning.

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

WG thinks CV captains spend a lot of time not in control of their planes. LOL.

Clueless change.

Yet, this is NOT WowP. So....

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

They will not be able to launch more attacks...AA is much more punishing, and you can't spot for your own attacks.

They've basically killed the class...

 They could if like i said the travel is solved via some "go to area" command.

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

...which means they will be massively buffing CVs in the near future to make up for the neutering.

Not necessarily.

[ArIskandir]

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

It will be impossible to actually line up attacks, which is a current core part of CV gameplay.

Oh c'mon that's already a thing when you need to attack a DD with the AA turned off, and that's the most difficult scenario. Lining up attacks on BBs and CAs shouldn't be more difficult than that.

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Oh look, invsi-fire returns.

Again, it's very likely the same thing as a DD switching on and off the AA, it is already a thing in the game. My guess is if fires, you can spot it. 

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

This is just dumb.

At least let the CV alone see what his planes are doing...

Actually looks like a very nice consumable to gain situational awareness. More defensive oriented.

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Attack timers are currently FAR too short to allow this to work practically.

They could be buffed case by case if needed. But it is a double edged sword, my guess is spot-attack runs (you don't finish the attack and let the timer expire) will become a thing, so a longer attack time is not necessarily desired.

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Stupid idea. Better to not have AA mounts be destroyed.

Maybe a bit heavy handed meassure, but consider the most annoying and hateful situation, the one that makes most people rage is when the CV focuses hard on you, until you die without any chance to do anything, simply because you spawned isolated or with little support. 

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I.e., more invsi-fire mechanics, because you can just squad wipe with defAA on a blinded set of planes.

Stupid.

Although, this could be the setup for brining missiles into the game.

Yeah, it's weird... maybe something flare-like?  Why do you think it relates to missiles?

I don't think it would carry too much impact as the planes will still be able to see and attack ships spotted by allies. 

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

WG thinks CV captains spend a lot of time not in control of their planes. LOL.

Clueless change.

I think having more options is never bad. Opens the door for more meme sec spec CVs, and interesting playstyle options. Also may give something to do to guys being deplaned.

1 hour ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

They will not be able to launch more attacks...AA is much more punishing, and you can't spot for your own attacks.

They will be launching more attack because you reduce the flight time to targets (the most boring part of playing CVs imo), also very likely you won't need to waste boost in the approach flight so you will have your full boost to spend on your attack runs. I think you are overstating the trouble presented for "not spotting your own attacks", you will be spotting your own attacks. Also consider the positives, you will be able to bypass AA screens at no cost in order to attack ships in the back. 

 

[Andrewbassg]

16 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

They will have to boost the damage output as well, because they want CVs executing fewer attacks.

The whole thing seems very much based on ignorant assumptions.

I've said my contraarguments but.... tbh....this whole thing is an overkill.

What they should do is - remove spotting and allow minimap spotting on attacked ships, ONLY

                                        - allow Cv's to take module DMG to plane launching and producing

                                        - Restrict Cv's to see + ONE tier. Then AA could be balanced.

But......this way a LOT more balancing is involved vs balancing by mechanics. Aaand they are lazy so..... 🙂 

Edited December 14, 2023 by Andrewbassg