World of Warships- Even More Hand Holding Mechanics For CVs!!

10,348 views
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (510 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...

Hey guys, today we take a look at some upcoming mechanic changes coming to CVs! Enjoy!

DevBlog:https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/361

Discord: https://discord.gg/P5aR2PzVXB
Music:
Ross Rowley:
https://music.apple.com/us/artist/ross-rowley/1524460114
https://www.rossrowley.com

Music by Karl Casey @ White Bat Audio

Outro Music: Stranger Think- C418

Have a replay?

Music: Stranger Think- C418
Ross Rowley: https://music.apple.com/us/artist/ross-rowley/1524460114
https://music.apple.com/us/album/radon/1553896834?

Music: Stranger Think- C418
Ross Rowley: https://music.apple.com/us/artist/ross-rowley/1524460114
https://music.apple.com/us/album/radon/1553896834? i=1553897018&app=itunes

35 Comments:

  1. As a quality of life improvement for CVs, I’d have preferred the addition of fighter consumable support for low tier carriers. God knows low tier surface ships need cover support since they have virtually no AA, and yet CVs have no ability to help.

    Now, with regards to ASW for CVs, I’m ok with this as long a it provides some sort of counter play whereas there isn’t any right now. I just don’t think it needs to be automated, since carriers already get auto DCP and other hand held features.

  2. CV’s don’t have much of a way to deal with submarines. Except an automatic DCP that lasts for 1 whole minute.

    Meanwhile, Dutch cruisers have literally no means of dealing with subs.

    • They have one thing against them
      Look evil at them and hope you get ignored 😅

    • ecept a dcp and guns to fight subs when they are on the surface while CVs have only secondaries and maybe he bomber. BUT YES all ships should have anti sub weapons

    • doomguy .23 from mars

      @Steffen Raab i don’t think WG will do this it’s like to them its asking give all ships radar to counter DDs ofc they don’t do that iv seen a pattern in which most ships that don’t have sonar have ASW but the ones that do don’t get ASW since they can spot subs

    • @doomguy .23 from mars teh ships i have seen without any for of anti sub weapon are the netherland cruiser line, hybrid ships and CVs. So even ships with sonar have an ASW your radar comparison is lacking one Point I was talking about a way to fight subs not counter or spot them.

    • @doomguy .23 from mars do DDs have any way to attack you while you can do nothing about it? DDs don’t have homing torpedoes, in order to both spot and damage you they need to become visible themselves. Meanwhile subs can sonar ping, torp and spot you, and still remain undetected. Steffen is right, every ship needs to be able to damage any other ship, otherwise there is no counterplay. Dutch cruisers having no depth charges is shit design.

  3. Would have preferred a sub spotter automation with a “tactical” depth charge squad.

  4. I would like having a small flight of maybe 2 or 4 ASW planes equipped with depth charges with a similar aiming reticle as the dive bombers. CVs historically carried some degree of ASW armaments, usually in the form of ASW planes.

  5. I agree with this would also love to control the depth charge planes

  6. I had this awkward battle yesterday in my ark royal
    A sub Was hunting me around the whole map i couldnt do anything but Spot him
    And he couldnt do anything to me because he couldnt catch up when he was diving 😅
    It was awkward but fun

    I mean i wouldnt mind having a deapthcharge squadron that i can fly around with or make it manually

  7. The CV use to carry ASW specific fixed wing aircraft and these days ASW helicopters. Fixed wing relied on radar and magnetic anomaly detection (MAD), or sonar buoys that were both passive and active and would be dropped in a pattern, helicopters used dipping active sonars.

    • @A Username I would add a forth dedicated squadron for asw make it a slow moving heavily armored flying boat or patrol aircraft kind of like the hornets b25s and has the mad system it has to drop, then the player has to cycle weapons systems for the depth charges, one thing that would be interesting for US and UK is you could opt for an attack squadron with a reduced rocket load but have 2 mini depth charges that again you cycle through to use. Historically speaking allied navies did use this tactic of loading up fireflies, avengers or even f4fs with the mixed rocket depth charge loadout in conjunction with patrol aircraft to hunt enemy subs. They would have one or 2 aircraft flying low scanning the surface for a periscope or silhouette have the squadron drop depth charges to force the sub to the surface then finish it off with rockets. The Russians and super carriers like you said could get asw helicopters/gyrocopter with dipping sonar but have to do it 3 times around a sub and then could drop a short range asw torp but the squadron would be extremely fragile and wouldn’t used in a offensive capacity strictly defensive.

    • can’t have that for WW2 era, but bombs work, straffing works, and torpedo bomber bays could be loaded with depth charges

    • @Bill Schara I mean ww2 era is subjective when half the russian line that existed is built post war because russias metallurgy tech couldn’t let them mass produce steel plate thicker than 5in and let’s not forget a good chunk of the European dd line was built late to post war, and united states is a post war refit of midway, along with Forrest sherman that was built post war and Austin if it would have been built.

    • @Stryker K Yeah the thing is, with RTS CVs these mechanics would be really easy to implement, just a new squadron type that searches for submarines and one that drops depth charges (just like real life), but since the CV rework you can’t operate several squadrons at once so it throws the entire “historically accurate aerial ASW” thing out the window as it has to be with 1 squadron only.

    • @A Username when I mean cycle through the squadron carries both peices of equipment/weapons you have the asw patrol squadron (which can’t deploy fighters or have an engine boost consumbales) drop the mad system or sonar buoys first you then come back around and now have depth charges and wait to see if the sub captain passes through the net or if a allied ship is nearby that has hydro running that “spots” the sub and you can drop your depth charges but again it’s 1 squadron massive squadron and one drop for US and UK, for Germany and Japan you could split the squadron in half and give it 2 attack runs. The attack planes with depth charges and rockets you pick which ordinance to drop/use like how you switch between ammo and the reticle is similar but the animation between the 2 is slightly different.

  8. Reflects real world capability. USNI News has a very long article on it. I still maintain that subs should not be part of a surface engagement. Nimitz Grey Papers have numerous battle if Midway dispatches reminding US Commabders that there are friendly subs in the area and not to attack them.

  9. Next patch: CVs have automated evasive maneuvers and automated strike squadrons.

    Patch after: CVs can now leave the match without penalties and still get rewards

  10. The whole CV vs sub thing doesn’t really bother me to begin with. If a DD/sub or heck even the other CV goes after me when I play CV I feel it’s actually beneficial for my team. They contribute nothing to their team while you can strike where your team’s fighting and push the engagement in their favor. Maybe they could add something like a tactical squadron with ASW but even then idk that it’s necessary. The average sub has very little battle impact so adding additional pressure from anywhere in the map isn’t gonna help. Of course there’s the odd sub player that can be a nightmare but those are rare.

  11. Yes the CV’s have become the “protected” class in the game. They don’t need any more help!

  12. I 100% agree here. I feel like I’m good with the ASW planes, and I enjoy playing CVs. I actually was down to a 1v1 CV vs sub about a week ago and there wasn’t much I could do. I hit him when he surfaced, but couldn’t do much. I would love the Airstrike, and I want to fly it.

  13. My CV ASW weapon so far has been just running them over… funniest thing… I agree, automatic ASW for CVs makes no sense, if anyone is adept at managing planes, that”s a CV player… no need to hold it’s hand

  14. I think the best option is to open a new fighter plane just for ASW, attack only within a limited area (BECAUSE OF FUEL if you need an excuse to stay fair with the BB’s ASW range), and put it in player control and not automatically. The carrier should CONTROL of the planes. I believe the rework was amazing but I still wish that the fighters that patrol and shoot down other aircraft should be controlled by the player like they used to be, not automatic, just like the carrier should have ASW planes, it’s ridiculous a battleship and a cruiser have ASW aircraft and an aircraft carrier do not. I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF AUTOMATING AIRCRAFT CARRIERS. Opnion of a Main Cv player.
    Players hate aircraft carriers now and before the rework, but they are part of this naval battle scenario, just like we have radar, sonar, we have planes and anti-aircraft guns, players don’t feel it. As they shoot down planes, they feel that it is possible to fight in some way, but when a carrier comes beyond the limit of its AA, it fires EVERYTHING in a single salvo and leaves unharmed, the feeling of powerlessness reigns.
    Even though it is a MAIN CV; I believe Nakhimov is unfair to his mechanics.

  15. I understand where you are coming from Mountbatten, but I think that an AI-controlled ASW is likely to underperform. If the carrier had its own power over the ASW it might prove to be more effective. I think an AI ASW gives the sub more of a chance to strike. So personally I think a consumable that is AI controlled in this instance is better than one that is controlled by the player entirely for balance purposes. On another note, I do hope that the range for this ASW consumable is rather low so the sub has a chance to hit the CV with conventional torps. Even as a person who plays CVs fairly regularly, it’s always fun having to deal with challenges.

  16. Seriously, just give CVs the option of switching one of their squadrons for depth charge squadrons! Manually control these planes to effectively and accurately hunt subs!

    But no, even MORE handholding for THE most protected ship type in the game. Meanwhile, surface ships like battleships and cruisers are still struggling to locate the damn subs in the heat of battle, let alone use their limited range airstrikes to even try to engage them…if there’s any ships that should be getting auto DC airstrike, it’s the warships that are DIRECTLY IN THE HEAT OF BATTLE, NOT CVs!!

  17. All these years later and CV’s are still an issue. We knew this back in Beta.

  18. The fact that it’s automated might make it easier to dodge for the sub, similar how the cv dodges flak which is automated.

  19. I have a suggestion that might solve this problem if they’re implementing an automatic depth charge or anti subsystem maybe that shouldn’t make it automatically launch but we should get a ping on the CVS or a radar we have to activate and if it finds a sub at launches one of the anti-sub planes at it basically use their idea but at a manual used to it

  20. I find it amusing when the sub goes after the CV and usually they end up failing miserably. Too reliant on homing torpedoes that don’t end up homing cuz of the carriers ten year DCP. I also laugh when the CV starts complaining about nobody helping them and being utterly helpless. Welcome to World of Surface Ships.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.