carriers will be the birth and death of naval in war thunder, make cruisers useful again to shred planes and also enforce teamwork so battleships stick together
The concept of carriers in WT fascinates me (I even made a video about the possibility), but it being a counter to BB's I don't know. They'd need a seperate, and further away, spawn point to not be immediatly obliterated. But then what counters CV's? Other CV's? that would just move the problem to another vehicle type. adding CV's also wouldn't really help with BB's clubbing cruisers, as it would leave cruisers just as vulnerable to BB's, if not more so to dodge air attack. raising the BR's of BB's even further might be a better option, and the recent "plate mechanic" where armour plating of BB's degrade from taking fire has helped cruiser v BB fights a bit. also, as to why so little people were engaging you in your BB, there is a severe problem with bot accounts at the moment in naval sailing around in all sorts of premium cruisers. It's a bit hard to explain how you can tell, but look at the way they move, fire their main guns, and AA guns. Anyways, love to see a bigger CC play naval and seemingly enjoy it!
The issue with CV's would be that there's basically no way to have them be player Controlled unless they go the WoWS-Way of things and have the Player Controll a entire Flight, in which case there's pretty much no way to effectively balance them. If you make the Planes AI-Controlled they'll just get shredded by AA, if you make them Player Controlled they'd be overpowered as Hell. If the entire Carrier is AI-Controlled like the Carriers in Air Battles (only that they'd actually have to do something) they'd get Sunk by Torpedo Boats and Destroyers like it's nothing, remember the German and Japanese 14km Range Torpedoes, or be shelled by Battleships relentlessly. Really no way to balance Carriers unless you'd have a Game Mode where theres, for example, a AI-Controlled Carrier or Carrier Group which is used as a Spawnpoint by Player Controlled Planes one one Team and the opposite, with Player Controlled Ships on the other. This might be Fun for some Time, until you get the People who Cry because they only want to play in the Plane or Ship Team which would lead to mass leaving or intentional loosing, if People would even play that Gamemode. Also the Engine is already instable enough, adding something as complex and large Scaled as Carriers and Carrier-Centric Scenarios would require yet another Engine Update or revamp that needs a thousand Years to Fix because Gaijin refuses to publish a Project after it's finished. (I know, it's a F2P-Game and that is a somewhat neccesary Evil, but come on.)
BR decompression would be the far more logical, reasonable and not game breaking change to fix the issue of battleships annihilating cruisers, just look at WoWs for why playable carriers are a bad idea and I don’t trust Gaijin with adding them in a non game breaking way, it was already a mistake to add in Dreadnoughts when they did, we don’t need more broken ship classes to add fuel to the dumpster fire that is naval
Fun Fact: The IJN Hyuga and Ise, were both converted into Floatplane carriers in late war. Sooooooooo May be Gaijin will take this into consideration...*5 years later*.
@@magiaconatus Doesn't mean we can't have multiple versions of the same ships, that's partly why they have years in their names. I bet we'll see an Ise-class conversion as well as Mogami's conversion eventually.
Problems with adding carriers: 1: Battlegroups are too small to properly incorporate a carrier, if you consider the battles in the pacific that focused around sinkinh enemy carriers. If we had 1 carrier per 16 player-team it allready stretches the proportions heavily. 2. How do you limit the amount of carriers per battle? How do you choose who gets to play carrier? First come first served? Random? Oh I can see the ragequits allready. 3. Anti-air from ships needs a complete overhaul before that, atm it's just too stupid. You got a target on your right? Guns on your left will sleep until it's gone. Each gunner or gun-group for cruisers and bbs need their own AI. And we need to have a way to effectively set the priority of secondary and aa guns pre-battle and in emergency situations, so we don't have hard hitting guns shooting aircraft, when they should shoot boats, or have aa guns shoot boats when there are fighters. 4. We need better AA guns on tech tree ships. About 70% of all cruisers and dds barely have the aa armament to protect themselves, let alone cover nearby ships. Gaijins marketing for premium ships until now basically was: "You want aa guns on your ships? Got a credit card?" Pretty much all premium ships are similar or identical to one tech tree ship, except they have double or tripple the aa-armament. Lastly, I doubt (or hope) that gaijin doesn't release carriers until they got everyrhing figured out, so they don't get to a shitshow as some competitor with a somewhat similar naval pvp game *coughcough*. And Phly, I love your face, but are you sure, that if you are "new to naval" you should call for something with such big potential for change? You got a massive reach, maybe you start a fire everyone will be sorry for later x) Take ppl! ^^
I just want to point out aa on ships are deadly ,you just may suck at aiming or your crew are too low of a level ,I got 3 planes yesterday in hms Liverpool 4km out without the proxy shells, its not bad but I do agree ,carriers would be a bitch and honestly should never be added directly unless it's a separate event/mode
ratio doesnt matter when the battleships already break that "rule" wouldnt matter if carriers also broke that "rule", aa will eventually catch up so i dont think that's a problem either, and also i think it's inevitable so it doesnt really matter if it'll be unbalanced cuz this is gaijin and balancing is an afterthought, if even that... oh and subs are basically confirmed since they got new sounds added with the rest of the ship sound overhaul, and that would be even more unbalanced but we're getting that
More Phlynavy! I reckon the 'hydroplane' mod is a lead-in to seaplane carriers as a counterpart to the hydroplane-equipped cruisers. Things that start with hydroplane equipped and maybe can even unlock other planes as modifications. From there, the carriers can start trickling in. The other way to get planes into the battle is to give some ships (coastal ships, maybe), a scouting role and the Airstrike mod. And the other great counter to battleships... more battleships. Day ninety-something: take the Scimitar, the last Supermarine, out for a spin.
I was a long time world of warships player and the idea of carriers in WT scares me. They are so incredibly hard to balance with the ability to sit out of range or hide behind an island where they can't be attacked but they can strike anyone anywhere on the map. WT is a different enough game that I won't say they can't make it work but it would be extremely tough to get it right.
A bit like a real indirect fire option in Ground Battles. Sure: You _Could_ try to use the HE yeet machines as artillery, or some of the secondary gimmick armaments, but there is no hand holding or real system to make it a viable strategy. For VERY obvious reasons.
Aircraft Carriers aren't invincible or untouable, I'm a Aircraft Carrier player myself in WT the enemy lacks teamwork this happens in many random matches.
I believe that having air craft carriers can enable a new kind of metas to develop and such. With players even landing on player carriers. It would be gosh darn pretty cool
Thatd be nice, and maybe some players, possibly like 2 or 3 can start immediately in a plane that way the carrier isn’t useless in the beginning of the match
I swear to god, when that intro melody played I was like 'That's gonna be a oneshot' and I saw that Wyoming go up in flames. That intro is legendary af and I hope you won't let it die 😍
@@lanfrancoadreani9212 there planes man how often to the actuality kill you also if they have a limited number planes that would help even it out the more you shoot down the less they have to send out also plane repair should take some time for the ones that make it back full of holes if they dont crash on deck just some of my own ideas
@@lanfrancoadreani9212 Anti Air cover of players will be more effective than the anti air of WW2. Mixed with planes running CAP too will make the mode interesting
Huge nostalgia trip right here. The original intro from when I first followed the channel waaaaay back in the World of Warships days. Thanks for that Phly.
Maps are WAY too small! We need much larger maps, even for what we have now. The moment you spawn in half the time it's a bloodbath right off the bat. No room or time to maneuver or position, apart from where you spawn... I'd love CVs in WT, but we definitely need bigger maps for Naval.
@@Jadefox32 you see THAT is the problem. If EC was a permanent mode, or at least would start every weekend - then this would be cool. And Gaijin could experiment with its settings as much as they like, too. But for now we get 1-2 instances of such gamemode per half a year, and this is actually ridiculous given that it is the best and most fun way to actually play naval - even as half-assed as it is now
@@nickcher7071 yea it should be a permanent gamemode so long as the current gamemodes continue to be an option. Those games can take over an hour, and some of us dont have all the time in the world.
Aircraft Carrier Concept for Warthunder. You basically the limited Plane respawn anchor, based on Aircraft loadout and the amount of aircraft in the carrier ofcorse, the aircraft will also get acessed by teamates to use it one at the time. Carriers can also sending a Squadrons to take down battleships similar how World of Warships works however, during attack, you can only use 1 Aircraft at the time and the rest will auto Attack by the AI. Now you have limited amount of aircrafts as well as it takes quite a long time to bring new aircraft on the deck of the carrier. And if you got hit by enemy fire or bombs in some area, Aircraft that hung in the storage will also get destroyed too. Japanese Carrier will have more chnace to sunk due to its design choices but they will service aircraft a lot faster than other nations.
AW YEAH. The nostalgia train has arrived at port station, and the cargo has been loaded aboard IJN Hyuga for transport on the high seas! With the sound of Phly’s naval intro, the Hyuga departs! SailDaily soon TM? (Maybe not, but hopefully naval will improve over the rest of the year to where it becomes fun and engaging enough for more frequent videos) Aircraft carriers might be difficult to use because of map size in random battles, but they would be great in EC. But it is basically the same with early helicopters (at least prior to the Ka-50), they suck in tank battles but (were) usable in EC with the right play style. So that shouldn’t be an obstacle to their addition. The only issue might be the huge numbers of planes some carry, but even if it is limited for balance purposes, it would still be worth adding. After all, they originally planned on adding supersonic jets with no long range air-to-air missiles, so why not add carriers with a reduced load of planes? Also, submarines would be a nice complement in the overall dynamic between different types of vessel. Carriers counter battleships, but subs counter carriers. Subs would also give destroyers a role at top tier.
Say it with me Phly: eee-say, far as I know that’s the correct way to say it. And you’re right, she’s a beauty of a super dreadnaught. Late war conversion to a float plane battle carrier hybrid. Challenge: If they release a mod for that you need to do some harrier vtol work on the deck. Take off, 5 air kills, 2 ground kills, land back on deck.
Modern ships would also be cool. Imagine modern ships and stuff engaging modern jets and helicopters with missiles. Imagine how much fun that would be.
The irony here is that (at least with the way it is now), most modern ships would actually be at lower BR compared to their WW2 equivalents because the lack guns and armor. Just look at the Mitscher and Wilkinson - they’re from 1954 and 58, but are .7 lower than the Somers from 1941.
A little too late but something really underated about Hyuga is its secondaries. It got 10 x 140mm per side with 6seconds reload and SAP. When manually controled you melt destroyers and light cruiser faster than your main guns take to reload. Even against other BB, using secondaries can make the difference by causing fire/ small leak or break light stuff preventing your ennemy BB from repairing. The strategy against other BBs in close combat is to make alpha strikes with your main guns then switch to secondaries to cause a 1000 papercuts death for 30 seconds.
They need to add aircraft carriers, then make a mode like those videos phly made a year or so ago like the battle of midway. If there could be actual carrier captains that can authorize takeoffs and attacks for air squadrons, that would be so much fun.
or it starts with both teams have ships that spawn round their carriers and they have to defend against waves upon waves of air attacks. if successful they can push for the enemy cv along with aircraft. battleships can engage anyways, maybe with escorts and a large battle can ensue. in theory it should allow for almost every type of vessel to exist in a single battle. where different playstyles can exist.
@@Caktusdud. ohhhh maybe they could have naval pve like the new heli mode. Even if the carrier is just ai at that point it would still be fuckin cool to have a full fleet with different roles for different players
@@lanfrancoadreani9212 well that's why there is multiple? Even in that battle midway video phly made its all real people and playing with carriers and escorts and it was really close. It would be interesting to balance but not THAT hard
In real life battleships had to be somewhat scarred of cruiser and destroyer squadrons because a couple of torpedos carried by ships that large could do serious damage to them AND, as proved by US forces in a few pacific fleet engagements, the guns on destroyers and cruisers could, if they got close with their speed, fire much faster and lay waste to their superstructure taking out radar, bridges, turret conductors and other systems that could render battleships and battle cruiser combat ineffective even though they could still float and maneuver. Is it a case of War thunder incorrect modeling or people not playing those ships correctly in the game when it comes to battleships? Honestly maybe what the game really needs are subs. Those could take out battleships with a few torpedos.
They need to buff torpedos. IRL, a torpedo salvo could take out a dreadnought no matter if it was launched by a destroyer, light cruiser, or heavy cruiser. Torpedo interdiction and avoidance was the absolute most important defensive job on a battleship. You could not just sit at range with a battleship and destroy everything without a care in the world for this very reason.
Honestly I think the only reason battleships aren't threatened more by torpedoes is simply because of a lack of team coordination. Because you don't have any coordinated fleet movement you don't see screening maneuvers or an established line of battle you see a group of ships shooting at one another.
@@thatdudeinasuit5422 Well thats mainly because most players have no idea how naval battles actually went down. That and Gaijin kind of turned off chat because they couldn't handle people talking about Mother Russia over this war.
I think people often underestimate how powerful battleships were because of games like WoWs. Yes, destroyers and cruisers were strong, but they definitely weren't strong enough to take on battleships themselves. (Normally functioning ones at least) They were there to support capital ships, scout, and escort. It was not easy for destroyers to 1. get close to a battleship because secondary guns were actually pretty strong against destroyers (HMS Ardent and Acasta both got destroyed by these, but they did land 1 torpedo on the Scharnhorst.), 2. land torpedoes as battleships tried their best to evade them. I don't think I have to explain why it was difficult for cruisers to "out-gun" battleships. The only problem I see in War Thunder is that it is a bit too easy to land shots on other ships. But I think it is totally accurate that destroyers and cruisers cannot do anything against a battleship shooting at them. There is a reason why the Brits sent every ship possible to destroy that one German battleship. I think players can still do what the HMS Ardent and Acasta did in real life if they use their smoke, though.
I think they need to seriously expand the map sizes at the higher br's even without carriers. If they add carriers I def think they would expand the maps.
Ah yes, because waiting a Minute for my Shells to land on Targer or having to sail 5-10 Minutes before even making Contact with an Enemy is so Fun. Because who doesn't want a Game of Naval to last 30 Minutes, at least. The Current 20x20km Maps are large enough.
@@FTWIHA @FTWIHA (sorry or the essay)I mostly agree with you. I def dont want to be sail for 10 min to the battle just to be nuked by a BB. What I meant was to give more space in between the spawns so I'm not shooting as soon as I spawn. Plus when you look down the aimming sight in a battle, you just see a jumble of ships and its a bit over whelming. If and when carriers are added they will need to be put back farther for defence. Its just a thought anyway. Navel is fun just the way it is for the most part but most maps feel the same to me. Mabye huge maps could be added to a new game mode. Unpractical but possible.
When the music started playing and I saw the ship rising my brain was trying to figure out where I've seen this before. WOW that brings me back. love u phly
I play carriers in World of Warships, I think carriers would be great, but at the sacrifice and balance you have to bring your own planes, and pay normal repair costs for every plane, interesting dynamic might include a carrier spawn for your team, and they lose it if you die and have to use the airfield
@@BugattiONE666 Respectfully, I think it sets a baseline, or how a game as a whole discredits someone. World of Warships is the only game that has user controlled warships and playable carriers. With great contrast I was describing what I think fits the war thunder genre the best
@@bryson5950 No i mean as a Carrier player you take joy in completely and unreservedly ruining the game for other people who have no defense against you. Its to the point you dont even trulyh care if you do well or not you just like upsetting other people.
Tbh if planes spawned in squadrons I think it’d make things so much better. Simply use the Battlestations/Enlisted mechanic of becoming the next member of the squadron once you die. Imagine taking off one by one from a carrier, waiting for the AI to form up on you, and then flying high and diving onto battleships and carriers against massive flak, seeing your planes fall left and right, but still having a chance to get a hit off. Right now, there simply isn’t that adrenaline because you just… die. There’s no chance for success, you’re a single plane (that for some reason costs more to spawn than a battleship) diving against 5+ ships often times
Day 185: Phly, you should play the Hawk III Chinese fighter; 900lbs of bombs in a biplane at 1.0 that you can dogfight in after dropping. Totally balanced.
Fun fact about the Ise-class, they were converted into hybrid-carriers, with their aft two turrets removed and a large, concrete flight deck installed in its place. It still retained its direct fire capability with four turrets and plenty of secondaries, but could also launch a decent complement of aircraft as well.
that talk in the intro about how (im assuming OP) battleships are is pretty scary considering these are dreadnoughts. i cant imagine even something like an iowa
At this point, I don't see the purpose in limiting the potential of what we can add to this game. Would love to see carriers, submarines, WWI tanks and planes, zeplins, modern day. Let's make this game the largest combat type game with something for everyone :)
me and my friend usually run 1 or 2 battleships followed by 1 or 2 light cruisers and it works really well we just be bullet sponges and reak havoc with giant guns while the light cruisers deal consistant damage and take care of less big targets
well, if you limit CV squadrons to those dumb AI from custom missions it probably won't be OP, it will become a battle of attrition between the battleship AA and the continuous waves of "dumb" AI attacks, obviously with the possibility of the player taking control of a SINGLE aircraft per squadron
I just have to say that this intro is one of the most epic intros ever. I know its being in phly's channel for a couple of years but its amazing. I dont get tired of it
"We need aircraft carriers" As a world of warships player I can say that history teaches us that Russian companies can't balance a CV even less make it fun
wa gonna say that cvs would ruin naval again because all it takes is 1 or 2 torp hits in wt to cripple a battleship and i can see cvs wiping whole teams insanely quickly
The Ise Class was the updated version of the Fuso Class. Ise and Hyuga were originally part of the Fuso Class but were later decided to classify as a different class since Fuso and Yamashiro had a very faulty ship design.
I will literally never touch ships in this game just because of the fact that I like to fly my plane, but in naval everyone has auto targeting to air targets so its impossible to fly without getting shot down randomly. If they either removed that, or had a game mode with all 3 vehicle types, then I would finally start using boats again.
@@magiaconatus Air RB sucks because it marks every enemy like 10 miles away. I like when there isnt a giant flashing red title over me and the enemies.
Except auto targeting air is a combination of gun-laying radar and the fact you have hundreds of men willing to fight for you. So your opinion is shit.
To be honest I don’t really want carriers, they would just end up being made ridiculous (such as who controls them, how the aircraft would work and what not) and unplayable. What we really need is a rework so you have proper nation-based teams (rather than brits vs brits for example) a change so that you can only bring naval aircraft into naval, and the implementation of subs. I would really, really like to have subs in the game, it would be such a counter to the battleship domination (and historically accurate), silent thunder showed that they would work and people enjoyed them. The other issue is the fact that the ships being sent against each other are not historically competitive, as you have shown you have an advanced Japanese battleship or an advanced USA battleship going up against a Dreadnaught (that does not compare to a battleship). However, this is a problem endemic to the entirety of war thunder and not as vital as the others (looking at you especially helicopter battles with a AH1G Huey cobra going up against KA50s and Apaches).
or you could do it like Battlestations pacific, where you control the squad leader just like warthunder controls and can give commands to your squad, follow, dive, bomb, evasive, etc.
@@freykakumei2308 possibly yes, would you also control the carrier as well or only the air wing? I can see it working if you had a limited amount of aircraft and you chose how many of each you wanted to take (e.g. if you could only take four squadrons you could choose how many of those would be dive bombers, torpedo bombers, or carrier fighters). World of warships used to have good controls when it came to carriers, in which you could both control the carrier whilst having aircraft in the air. It also had limited numbers of aircraft which worked well, and you could also control the movement of the air wings (to an extent). I can see a third person view of a force of say six aircraft, and being able to fly all of them at once (as one solid block so to speak) being something that could be quite good. The only concern I have is that I don’t see carriers stopping the battleship spam/overpowering of naval battles, as in an engagement in which the enemy can be seen (and more importantly shot at using main caliber weaponry) a battleship will always win against a carrier, or at the very least will be able to knock it out in retaliation. To be honest I just don’t see the need for carriers at the moment, they wouldn’t solve any problems in current games as they would be decimated, and at the same time there are already aircraft in naval battles the mechanic just need overhauling.
Fuck have I really been watching your channel for a decade now?! That intro sent some chills! Much love Phly! Thank you for the positivity you continuously spread.
Add submersibles then. Limit time underwater and make it so destroyers and light cruisers can uses sonar and the subs would have to surface to cap zones. The carrier thing would just be spammed really really really hard is what I think the downside would be for those. Controlling multiple planes at once is whatever but we all know the whole game would be CVs
1:10 "There is no real encounter" i agree, but before adding carriers, maybe Gaijin should give realistic armament to some ships. Like anti-ship missiles(On Albatros Exocet missile), they could balance out some kind of problems. Edit: P.S. I would like to see ship missiles in game.
As a naval player who has spoken to other naval players profusely the the topic, I can say that AShMs would be a net negative for enjoyment if they were just landed in game as it stands. They would need entire BRs for themselves, and even then the gameplay would be fairly boring at best, and infuriating at worst
Hey Phly. I agree. We need Carriers in WT. Not only to balance BBs, but Carriers played an important role in Military history. Plus with the Introduction of Catapult Planes, we are closer to Carriers than we were before. So yeah, Gaijoob, give CVs.
Carriers would be way too op. You could just launch squadrons like crazy. Many problems arise. 1. There are no real squadron mechanics in multiplayer war thunder. Already one plane is deadly enought when player controlled so multiple tens of planes would be way too op. 2. The maps are way too small for carriers to even be a minimal amount of balanced. The planes would take 2 min to get to their targets and come back. 3. Everyone will play carriers so it’s not naval but air rb with naval AI targets. 4. A new mechanic would need to be added. Maybe instead of playing warships you play as a carrier strike fleet with a player controlled carrier and a carrier escort group following and covering you. This would also lead to many problems and a totally new type of battle. 5. If the first carriers are gonna be seaplane tenders they will operate tier 1 biplanes while players can spawn in jets and such other modern planes. 6. Submarine addition would be sure at this point since they will be a good counter to carriers. And again the maps are way too limited (except maybe enduring conflict)
I feel like the Team compositions just dont work for the naval battles gaijin has set up. There needs to be some sort of uneven ranks on each team. and bigger teams. imagine 1 BB 3-5 Cruisers 5-8DD and 10-15 PT boats. Or at least something like that. Where theres a varied composition and the smaller ships have a chance to shine.
As a Toptier naval player (Yes I have the Hyūga and Kongō) I can't agree more in this statement. First of all , 5.7 cruisers will and always gets uptiered to 6.7 giving them less chances to perform well in a certain battlefield environment with battleships and battlecruisers (not excluding the fact that there are also ships like Admiral Graf Spe in 5.7) The addition of Aircraft carriers opens up a world of possibilities for the Cruisers , not just as surface combatants but also as acting escorts for battleships. Since in this game , the only battleships that has AA are Scharnhorst , Parizhkaya Kommuna , and Kongō. It does answer the question to fill a Cruisers role in the battlefield, but there are several points that I would like to mention , such as : How would Gaijin balance aircraft carriers ? Where will aircraft carriers be on the tech tree if it was to be on a tech tree ? Universally cruisers has a decent amount of AA firepower , but will the other cruisers that has almost no AA firepower stays the same ? Also tbh gaijin is confusing lmao , I like this idea to add CV to the gane but ehhh
Possibly yes, would you also control the carrier as well or only the air wing? I can see it working if you had a limited amount of aircraft and you chose how many of each you wanted to take (e.g. if you could only take four squadrons you could choose how many of those would be dive bombers, torpedo bombers, or carrier fighters). World of warships used to have good controls when it came to carriers, in which you could both control the carrier whilst having aircraft in the air. It also had limited numbers of aircraft which worked well, and you could also control the movement of the air wings (to an extent). I can see a third person view of a force of say six aircraft, and being able to fly all of them at once (as one solid block so to speak) being something that could be quite good. The only concern I have is that I don’t see carriers stopping the battleship spam/overpowering of naval battles, as in an engagement in which the enemy can be seen (and more importantly shot at using main caliber weaponry) a battleship will always win against a carrier, or at the very least will be able to knock it out in retaliation. To be honest I just don’t see the need for carriers at the moment, they wouldn’t solve any problems in current games as they would be decimated, and at the same time there are already aircraft in naval battles the mechanic just needs overhauling. I would rather have subs since they would actually pose a threat to battleships and seem to potentially be very good fun (and reasonably easy to counter).
I agree with (player controled) carriers should be in game. Have players launch off other players, or use existing mechanics like either the existing scout plane launch mechanic that some ships have already or use the system from ground AB to spawn in a random plane (but have the plane be something that the carrier historicly had on it, USS Enterprise (CV-6) for example would be able to spawn SBD-2 Dauntless, F4F-3 Wildcat & TBD Devastator aircraft), perhaps a hybrid of the 2 mechanics? At the same time, the carrier would be a base that other players would need to escort/defend?
That Helena sunk because while you think you didn't do any damage with those overpens ( gonna happen with AP and even the SAP on Hyuga ) have put massive holes in the hull of the ship below the waterline causing flooding
The only way I could see carriers being added to the game would be to also put in a new que for people playing planes to have the option to play planes in a naval battle, allowing 10 or so players per team to specifically fly from their teams carrier, using only the planes allowed to be launched from that carrier, but with unlimited lives and a respawn timer. (Different planes cost different amounts per flight) The carrier player would be responsible for positioning the carrier, and be able to launch AI controlled planes. ( player assigns them basic waypoints and targets and the AI pilots, but once the planes have left the carrier they cannot be ordered again, and if their target is destroyed they target the nearest ship/aircraft or return to the carrier with no cooldown for relaunch) The downside to this would be massive wait times if you wanted to play with the carrier or carrier planes if it wouldn't allow a carrier into a match without a specified number of player pilots.
Normally cruisers are relentlessly trying to set fires to battleships, plus if you're as close as you were you normally have torp troubles, just seemed to be ignired that game. Also odd that there were no plane spawns after people died
Goddamn, what a beast. Those superdreadnoughts were really a glorious era of battleships. I really want one and to get stuck into WT naval but the grind is so intimidating after already doing so much of it in WoWS... Plus I mean I really oughta be doing all this work and shit to like achieve my dreams and all that and not just be playing yet more goddamn video games. BTW "Hyuga" is 2 syllables (by English reckoning) and pronounced much like the man's name "Hugh" with a "ga" at the end (incidentally this pronunciation formula applies every time you see a "y" after a consonant in romanized Japanese, e.g. Ryu, Tokyo, etc. ...As long as I'm at it, another good rule to know is "u"s beyond the first syllable that come after an "s" are almost always silent).
100% agree. I'm having a blast (and making great SL) in naval RB right now. BUT like Phly says, the addition of aircraft carriers would give cruisers a better reason to actually fulfill their combat roles, not to mention a reason to finally use our naval strike aircraft. GAIJIN PLZZZ!!!
Instead of carriers, what about night battles with limited visibility? If it's hard for BBs to spot DDs with torpedoes, then the CLs would have something to do by screening for the BBs or spotting with radar.
*SUPER OLD INTRO HYPEEE*
Yes i know the thumbnail is the Arizona but I couldn't resist )))
ALSO what do ya'll think about the carrier discussion?
That intro sent me back 6 years ago and I'm not complaining (a surprise for sure, but a welcome one)
carriers will be the birth and death of naval in war thunder, make cruisers useful again to shred planes and also enforce teamwork so battleships stick together
The concept of carriers in WT fascinates me (I even made a video about the possibility), but it being a counter to BB's I don't know.
They'd need a seperate, and further away, spawn point to not be immediatly obliterated. But then what counters CV's? Other CV's? that would just move the problem to another vehicle type. adding CV's also wouldn't really help with BB's clubbing cruisers, as it would leave cruisers just as vulnerable to BB's, if not more so to dodge air attack.
raising the BR's of BB's even further might be a better option, and the recent "plate mechanic" where armour plating of BB's degrade from taking fire has helped cruiser v BB fights a bit.
also, as to why so little people were engaging you in your BB, there is a severe problem with bot accounts at the moment in naval sailing around in all sorts of premium cruisers. It's a bit hard to explain how you can tell, but look at the way they move, fire their main guns, and AA guns.
Anyways, love to see a bigger CC play naval and seemingly enjoy it!
The issue with CV's would be that there's basically no way to have them be player Controlled unless they go the WoWS-Way of things and have the Player Controll a entire Flight, in which case there's pretty much no way to effectively balance them.
If you make the Planes AI-Controlled they'll just get shredded by AA, if you make them Player Controlled they'd be overpowered as Hell.
If the entire Carrier is AI-Controlled like the Carriers in Air Battles (only that they'd actually have to do something) they'd get Sunk by Torpedo Boats and Destroyers like it's nothing, remember the German and Japanese 14km Range Torpedoes, or be shelled by Battleships relentlessly.
Really no way to balance Carriers unless you'd have a Game Mode where theres, for example, a AI-Controlled Carrier or Carrier Group which is used as a Spawnpoint by Player Controlled Planes one one Team and the opposite, with Player Controlled Ships on the other.
This might be Fun for some Time, until you get the People who Cry because they only want to play in the Plane or Ship Team which would lead to mass leaving or intentional loosing, if People would even play that Gamemode.
Also the Engine is already instable enough, adding something as complex and large Scaled as Carriers and Carrier-Centric Scenarios would require yet another Engine Update or revamp that needs a thousand Years to Fix because Gaijin refuses to publish a Project after it's finished.
(I know, it's a F2P-Game and that is a somewhat neccesary Evil, but come on.)
BR decompression would be the far more logical, reasonable and not game breaking change to fix the issue of battleships annihilating cruisers, just look at WoWs for why playable carriers are a bad idea and I don’t trust Gaijin with adding them in a non game breaking way, it was already a mistake to add in Dreadnoughts when they did, we don’t need more broken ship classes to add fuel to the dumpster fire that is naval
Yo holy moly phly you’ve just unlocked a huge memory for me through that revival of that intro
Yoooo same broo
I was a little disappointed it wasn't world of warships ngl.
Same!!!
@@Jakezillagfw can't blame him for not wanting to play Wows. The game became a shitshow sponsored by sekrit document and Russian bias.
Yo holy moly Mr Phly you just made pure sailum for me through that gray ship
THIS IS LIKE WATCHING A KING TIGER VS. RESERVE TIER! LOL
I rather fight a Tiger with a BT5 than a Hyuga with any top tier destroyers.
Haven’t seen a ship just one shot ships like this before
I'm thinking a Maus. Slow with no way to damage it.
I HATE THE M18 😣
@@lukerodman4732 I like Hellcat
I will never forget that intro phly and i hope you never let it die. Great video as always :)
Hans Zimmer
Still has the old logo, lol.
@@TheSpartan227 yea i had almost forgoten that logo :/
@@TheSpartan227 Change isn’t a bad thing
@@OA-B song name
Fun Fact: The IJN Hyuga and Ise, were both converted into Floatplane carriers in late war. Sooooooooo May be Gaijin will take this into consideration...*5 years later*.
More like Carrier Battleships. Yokosuka D4Y2a KAI Suisei Model 22A dive bombers were designed specifically for launch from Hyuuga/Ise catapults.
and then it'll become a premium just like the elefant
Not happening, Ise had already leaked, and she retains all her main guns.
@@magiaconatus Doesn't mean we can't have multiple versions of the same ships, that's partly why they have years in their names. I bet we'll see an Ise-class conversion as well as Mogami's conversion eventually.
@@BleedingUranium Doubt it. There hasn't been an instance where it happened yet.
Holy moly... now that's an intro I haven't seen in a very, very long time.
I'm now 16 again.
HAHAHA😥😥😥😥😥
Same here, I've been watching him ever since his World Of Warship videos since 2015...
How time flies...
Problems with adding carriers:
1: Battlegroups are too small to properly incorporate a carrier, if you consider the battles in the pacific that focused around sinkinh enemy carriers. If we had 1 carrier per 16 player-team it allready stretches the proportions heavily.
2. How do you limit the amount of carriers per battle? How do you choose who gets to play carrier? First come first served? Random? Oh I can see the ragequits allready.
3. Anti-air from ships needs a complete overhaul before that, atm it's just too stupid. You got a target on your right? Guns on your left will sleep until it's gone. Each gunner or gun-group for cruisers and bbs need their own AI. And we need to have a way to effectively set the priority of secondary and aa guns pre-battle and in emergency situations, so we don't have hard hitting guns shooting aircraft, when they should shoot boats, or have aa guns shoot boats when there are fighters.
4. We need better AA guns on tech tree ships. About 70% of all cruisers and dds barely have the aa armament to protect themselves, let alone cover nearby ships. Gaijins marketing for premium ships until now basically was: "You want aa guns on your ships? Got a credit card?" Pretty much all premium ships are similar or identical to one tech tree ship, except they have double or tripple the aa-armament.
Lastly, I doubt (or hope) that gaijin doesn't release carriers until they got everyrhing figured out, so they don't get to a shitshow as some competitor with a somewhat similar naval pvp game *coughcough*.
And Phly, I love your face, but are you sure, that if you are "new to naval" you should call for something with such big potential for change? You got a massive reach, maybe you start a fire everyone will be sorry for later x)
Take ppl! ^^
There is no Horizon either. Carriers can be seen at any distance.
How about making that big event mode that you could use Battleships and carriers there and not being able to use them in RB
I just want to point out aa on ships are deadly ,you just may suck at aiming or your crew are too low of a level ,I got 3 planes yesterday in hms Liverpool 4km out without the proxy shells, its not bad but I do agree ,carriers would be a bitch and honestly should never be added directly unless it's a separate event/mode
What about subs. Would they be any good in wt?
ratio doesnt matter when the battleships already break that "rule" wouldnt matter if carriers also broke that "rule", aa will eventually catch up so i dont think that's a problem either, and also i think it's inevitable so it doesnt really matter if it'll be unbalanced cuz this is gaijin and balancing is an afterthought, if even that...
oh and subs are basically confirmed since they got new sounds added with the rest of the ship sound overhaul, and that would be even more unbalanced but we're getting that
I love your opening animation with the ship rising from the deep. It was your channel and that animation that got me into World of Warships.
More Phlynavy!
I reckon the 'hydroplane' mod is a lead-in to seaplane carriers as a counterpart to the hydroplane-equipped cruisers. Things that start with hydroplane equipped and maybe can even unlock other planes as modifications. From there, the carriers can start trickling in.
The other way to get planes into the battle is to give some ships (coastal ships, maybe), a scouting role and the Airstrike mod. And the other great counter to battleships... more battleships.
Day ninety-something: take the Scimitar, the last Supermarine, out for a spin.
I know a good amount of people don’t like naval, but the fact that someone hasn’t made a carrier mod with the new seaplane feature is criminal
I was a long time world of warships player and the idea of carriers in WT scares me. They are so incredibly hard to balance with the ability to sit out of range or hide behind an island where they can't be attacked but they can strike anyone anywhere on the map. WT is a different enough game that I won't say they can't make it work but it would be extremely tough to get it right.
I mean, at least you can control your own aa, and proxy fuse shells will help in case it happens
Personally I hunt Carriers there would be no hiding at least from me I'm relentless
A bit like a real indirect fire option in Ground Battles. Sure: You _Could_ try to use the HE yeet machines as artillery, or some of the secondary gimmick armaments, but there is no hand holding or real system to make it a viable strategy. For VERY obvious reasons.
When they reworked aircraft carriers in WoWs I stopped playing. I loved the asymmetrical rts
Aircraft Carriers aren't invincible or untouable, I'm a Aircraft Carrier player myself in WT the enemy lacks teamwork this happens in many random matches.
I believe that having air craft carriers can enable a new kind of metas to develop and such. With players even landing on player carriers. It would be gosh darn pretty cool
Thatd be nice, and maybe some players, possibly like 2 or 3 can start immediately in a plane that way the carrier isn’t useless in the beginning of the match
@@TrentMcShall Pssst Battlestations Pacific gamepaly would be pog
It Is almost impossible to engage a carrier with cannon, considering they can unleash hell from hundreds of km. Carriers would destroy this game
Using float plane is Enduring confrontation was so badass.
I'm curious about Carriers.
I swear to god, when that intro melody played I was like 'That's gonna be a oneshot' and I saw that Wyoming go up in flames. That intro is legendary af and I hope you won't let it die 😍
Been watching for 5 years now! helped me get through my years in the Coast Guard! Love you Phly! Got me through hard times! ❤
if we have carriers as respawn points with 2 per team that would be great
Light escort carriers would be awsome , with your own linup inside
Again, how do you defend your ship from a carrier? And how do you Plan to engage a carrier than can Seat on a corner of the map?
@@lanfrancoadreani9212 heavy bombers that ppl spawn
@@lanfrancoadreani9212 there planes man how often to the actuality kill you also if they have a limited number planes that would help even it out the more you shoot down the less they have to send out also plane repair should take some time for the ones that make it back full of holes if they dont crash on deck just some of my own ideas
@@lanfrancoadreani9212 Anti Air cover of players will be more effective than the anti air of WW2. Mixed with planes running CAP too will make the mode interesting
god that old intro had me in tears i replayed it like 5 times, its been so long. Phly your videos are the highlight of my day.
I remember this intro from when you played world of warships with the Bismarck
I hope they add radar guided fire control for a continuous range updates of contacts in the future
Huge nostalgia trip right here. The original intro from when I first followed the channel waaaaay back in the World of Warships days. Thanks for that Phly.
Maps are WAY too small! We need much larger maps, even for what we have now. The moment you spawn in half the time it's a bloodbath right off the bat. No room or time to maneuver or position, apart from where you spawn... I'd love CVs in WT, but we definitely need bigger maps for Naval.
You missed Naval EC over this last weekend.
@@Jadefox32 you see THAT is the problem. If EC was a permanent mode, or at least would start every weekend - then this would be cool. And Gaijin could experiment with its settings as much as they like, too.
But for now we get 1-2 instances of such gamemode per half a year, and this is actually ridiculous given that it is the best and most fun way to actually play naval - even as half-assed as it is now
@@nickcher7071 yea it should be a permanent gamemode so long as the current gamemodes continue to be an option. Those games can take over an hour, and some of us dont have all the time in the world.
@@Jadefox32 Oh i got into it, haha. Its the only way I can get any meaningful progress on my naval tree lol
Like the game isnt camping heaven enough
Aircraft Carrier Concept for Warthunder.
You basically the limited Plane respawn anchor, based on Aircraft loadout and the amount of aircraft in the carrier ofcorse, the aircraft will also get acessed by teamates to use it one at the time. Carriers can also sending a Squadrons to take down battleships similar how World of Warships works however, during attack, you can only use 1 Aircraft at the time and the rest will auto Attack by the AI. Now you have limited amount of aircrafts as well as it takes quite a long time to bring new aircraft on the deck of the carrier. And if you got hit by enemy fire or bombs in some area, Aircraft that hung in the storage will also get destroyed too. Japanese Carrier will have more chnace to sunk due to its design choices but they will service aircraft a lot faster than other nations.
Love the Naval Gameplay, Keep it going!
Dude that intro was clean, specifically the way you made the lighthouse in-game transition to the bismark's light in the cinematic *chefs kiss*
I would like to see a gamemode where both sides need to take out an AI carrier group that player aircraft spawn from.
AW YEAH. The nostalgia train has arrived at port station, and the cargo has been loaded aboard IJN Hyuga for transport on the high seas! With the sound of Phly’s naval intro, the Hyuga departs!
SailDaily soon TM? (Maybe not, but hopefully naval will improve over the rest of the year to where it becomes fun and engaging enough for more frequent videos)
Aircraft carriers might be difficult to use because of map size in random battles, but they would be great in EC. But it is basically the same with early helicopters (at least prior to the Ka-50), they suck in tank battles but (were) usable in EC with the right play style. So that shouldn’t be an obstacle to their addition. The only issue might be the huge numbers of planes some carry, but even if it is limited for balance purposes, it would still be worth adding. After all, they originally planned on adding supersonic jets with no long range air-to-air missiles, so why not add carriers with a reduced load of planes?
Also, submarines would be a nice complement in the overall dynamic between different types of vessel. Carriers counter battleships, but subs counter carriers. Subs would also give destroyers a role at top tier.
Say it with me Phly: eee-say, far as I know that’s the correct way to say it. And you’re right, she’s a beauty of a super dreadnaught. Late war conversion to a float plane battle carrier hybrid.
Challenge: If they release a mod for that you need to do some harrier vtol work on the deck. Take off, 5 air kills, 2 ground kills, land back on deck.
3:06 ...4 how many Dreadnoughts are in my shore..
lol
Modern ships would also be cool. Imagine modern ships and stuff engaging modern jets and helicopters with missiles. Imagine how much fun that would be.
But ship to ship combat would involve launching harpoons at each other from over the horizon. Not sure it would fit in with the game currently
The irony here is that (at least with the way it is now), most modern ships would actually be at lower BR compared to their WW2 equivalents because the lack guns and armor. Just look at the Mitscher and Wilkinson - they’re from 1954 and 58, but are .7 lower than the Somers from 1941.
A little too late but something really underated about Hyuga is its secondaries.
It got 10 x 140mm per side with 6seconds reload and SAP.
When manually controled you melt destroyers and light cruiser faster than your main guns take to reload.
Even against other BB, using secondaries can make the difference by causing fire/ small leak or break light stuff preventing your ennemy BB from repairing.
The strategy against other BBs in close combat is to make alpha strikes with your main guns then switch to secondaries to cause a 1000 papercuts death for 30 seconds.
They need to add aircraft carriers, then make a mode like those videos phly made a year or so ago like the battle of midway. If there could be actual carrier captains that can authorize takeoffs and attacks for air squadrons, that would be so much fun.
Bro aircraft carriers are OP they can't be countered, they can't even be engaged since they can Seat on a corner of the map unleashing mayem
or it starts with both teams have ships that spawn round their carriers and they have to defend against waves upon waves of air attacks.
if successful they can push for the enemy cv along with aircraft.
battleships can engage anyways, maybe with escorts and a large battle can ensue.
in theory it should allow for almost every type of vessel to exist in a single battle. where different playstyles can exist.
@@Caktusdud. ohhhh maybe they could have naval pve like the new heli mode. Even if the carrier is just ai at that point it would still be fuckin cool to have a full fleet with different roles for different players
@@lanfrancoadreani9212 well that's why there is multiple? Even in that battle midway video phly made its all real people and playing with carriers and escorts and it was really close. It would be interesting to balance but not THAT hard
@@sushiman3817 yep, I think just more pve gamemodes all together are better
About pronouncing the Hyuuga 日向: Think of humid and make the first syllable longer than the second one.
In real life battleships had to be somewhat scarred of cruiser and destroyer squadrons because a couple of torpedos carried by ships that large could do serious damage to them AND, as proved by US forces in a few pacific fleet engagements, the guns on destroyers and cruisers could, if they got close with their speed, fire much faster and lay waste to their superstructure taking out radar, bridges, turret conductors and other systems that could render battleships and battle cruiser combat ineffective even though they could still float and maneuver.
Is it a case of War thunder incorrect modeling or people not playing those ships correctly in the game when it comes to battleships? Honestly maybe what the game really needs are subs. Those could take out battleships with a few torpedos.
They need to buff torpedos. IRL, a torpedo salvo could take out a dreadnought no matter if it was launched by a destroyer, light cruiser, or heavy cruiser.
Torpedo interdiction and avoidance was the absolute most important defensive job on a battleship. You could not just sit at range with a battleship and destroy everything without a care in the world for this very reason.
We had a April fools with subs it was quite interesting to play. One of the most underrated April fools events ever IMO
Honestly I think the only reason battleships aren't threatened more by torpedoes is simply because of a lack of team coordination. Because you don't have any coordinated fleet movement you don't see screening maneuvers or an established line of battle you see a group of ships shooting at one another.
@@thatdudeinasuit5422 Well thats mainly because most players have no idea how naval battles actually went down. That and Gaijin kind of turned off chat because they couldn't handle people talking about Mother Russia over this war.
I think people often underestimate how powerful battleships were because of games like WoWs. Yes, destroyers and cruisers were strong, but they definitely weren't strong enough to take on battleships themselves. (Normally functioning ones at least) They were there to support capital ships, scout, and escort. It was not easy for destroyers to 1. get close to a battleship because secondary guns were actually pretty strong against destroyers (HMS Ardent and Acasta both got destroyed by these, but they did land 1 torpedo on the Scharnhorst.), 2. land torpedoes as battleships tried their best to evade them. I don't think I have to explain why it was difficult for cruisers to "out-gun" battleships. The only problem I see in War Thunder is that it is a bit too easy to land shots on other ships. But I think it is totally accurate that destroyers and cruisers cannot do anything against a battleship shooting at them. There is a reason why the Brits sent every ship possible to destroy that one German battleship. I think players can still do what the HMS Ardent and Acasta did in real life if they use their smoke, though.
I think they need to seriously expand the map sizes at the higher br's even without carriers. If they add carriers I def think they would expand the maps.
with better BBs they NEED to expand the map.
Ah yes, because waiting a Minute for my Shells to land on Targer or having to sail 5-10 Minutes before even making Contact with an Enemy is so Fun.
Because who doesn't want a Game of Naval to last 30 Minutes, at least.
The Current 20x20km Maps are large enough.
@@FTWIHA you have a point
@@FTWIHA @FTWIHA (sorry or the essay)I mostly agree with you. I def dont want to be sail for 10 min to the battle just to be nuked by a BB. What I meant was to give more space in between the spawns so I'm not shooting as soon as I spawn. Plus when you look down the aimming sight in a battle, you just see a jumble of ships and its a bit over whelming. If and when carriers are added they will need to be put back farther for defence. Its just a thought anyway. Navel is fun just the way it is for the most part but most maps feel the same to me. Mabye huge maps could be added to a new game mode. Unpractical but possible.
When the music started playing and I saw the ship rising my brain was trying to figure out where I've seen this before. WOW that brings me back. love u phly
I play carriers in World of Warships, I think carriers would be great, but at the sacrifice and balance you have to bring your own planes, and pay normal repair costs for every plane, interesting dynamic might include a carrier spawn for your team, and they lose it if you die and have to use the airfield
I mean you de-valued your own opinion with that first bit but ok
@@BugattiONE666 world of warships does ships ten times better since it’s a ship game
World of tanks is the opposite
@@BugattiONE666 Respectfully, I think it sets a baseline, or how a game as a whole discredits someone. World of Warships is the only game that has user controlled warships and playable carriers. With great contrast I was describing what I think fits the war thunder genre the best
@@bryson5950 No i mean as a Carrier player you take joy in completely and unreservedly ruining the game for other people who have no defense against you. Its to the point you dont even trulyh care if you do well or not you just like upsetting other people.
@@BugattiONE666 I also play Cruisers :) just meant I have experience with carriers
Tbh if planes spawned in squadrons I think it’d make things so much better. Simply use the Battlestations/Enlisted mechanic of becoming the next member of the squadron once you die.
Imagine taking off one by one from a carrier, waiting for the AI to form up on you, and then flying high and diving onto battleships and carriers against massive flak, seeing your planes fall left and right, but still having a chance to get a hit off.
Right now, there simply isn’t that adrenaline because you just… die. There’s no chance for success, you’re a single plane (that for some reason costs more to spawn than a battleship) diving against 5+ ships often times
Day 185: Phly, you should play the Hawk III Chinese fighter; 900lbs of bombs in a biplane at 1.0 that you can dogfight in after dropping. Totally balanced.
I would love to see that as well
Hey man.. keep it up HE WILL SEE IT
My god you're still going
He already did
PHLY, just.. DO IT!!
Fun fact about the Ise-class, they were converted into hybrid-carriers, with their aft two turrets removed and a large, concrete flight deck installed in its place. It still retained its direct fire capability with four turrets and plenty of secondaries, but could also launch a decent complement of aircraft as well.
Naval players are actually the most Chad players of war thunder
Naval players think you're chad aswell :)
@@j.kearney484 :D
that talk in the intro about how (im assuming OP) battleships are is pretty scary considering these are dreadnoughts. i cant imagine even something like an iowa
Day 267: play the Rbt-5 at top tier
Thats such a good idea
Oh my god the memories, every naval game should have this into from now on
At this point, I don't see the purpose in limiting the potential of what we can add to this game. Would love to see carriers, submarines, WWI tanks and planes, zeplins, modern day. Let's make this game the largest combat type game with something for everyone :)
pretty sure it already is and modern stuff is coming this year they said
me and my friend usually run 1 or 2 battleships followed by 1 or 2 light cruisers and it works really well
we just be bullet sponges and reak havoc with giant guns while the light cruisers deal consistant damage and take care of less big targets
well, if you limit CV squadrons to those dumb AI from custom missions it probably won't be OP, it will become a battle of attrition between the battleship AA and the continuous waves of "dumb" AI attacks, obviously with the possibility of the player taking control of a SINGLE aircraft per squadron
I just have to say that this intro is one of the most epic intros ever. I know its being in phly's channel for a couple of years but its amazing. I dont get tired of it
"We need aircraft carriers"
As a world of warships player I can say that history teaches us that Russian companies can't balance a CV even less make it fun
wa gonna say that cvs would ruin naval again because all it takes is 1 or 2 torp hits in wt to cripple a battleship and i can see cvs wiping whole teams insanely quickly
DDs are worse than any CVs could ever be.
Hello darkness my old friend. I liked world of world ships, but the carrier gameplay was not it's strong point
you forget, Wargaming isnt owned by Russia anymore.
^^^ THIS - 10000000000000000000000%
The Ise Class was the updated version of the Fuso Class. Ise and Hyuga were originally part of the Fuso Class but were later decided to classify as a different class since Fuso and Yamashiro had a very faulty ship design.
I will literally never touch ships in this game just because of the fact that I like to fly my plane, but in naval everyone has auto targeting to air targets so its impossible to fly without getting shot down randomly. If they either removed that, or had a game mode with all 3 vehicle types, then I would finally start using boats again.
Well, play air RB then. Easy.
@@magiaconatus Air RB sucks because it marks every enemy like 10 miles away. I like when there isnt a giant flashing red title over me and the enemies.
Except auto targeting air is a combination of gun-laying radar and the fact you have hundreds of men willing to fight for you. So your opinion is shit.
I FORGOT ABOUT THAT INTRO!!! I love that you brought it back for today! lmao that was great
To be honest I don’t really want carriers, they would just end up being made ridiculous (such as who controls them, how the aircraft would work and what not) and unplayable. What we really need is a rework so you have proper nation-based teams (rather than brits vs brits for example) a change so that you can only bring naval aircraft into naval, and the implementation of subs.
I would really, really like to have subs in the game, it would be such a counter to the battleship domination (and historically accurate), silent thunder showed that they would work and people enjoyed them.
The other issue is the fact that the ships being sent against each other are not historically competitive, as you have shown you have an advanced Japanese battleship or an advanced USA battleship going up against a Dreadnaught (that does not compare to a battleship). However, this is a problem endemic to the entirety of war thunder and not as vital as the others (looking at you especially helicopter battles with a AH1G Huey cobra going up against KA50s and Apaches).
or you could do it like Battlestations pacific, where you control the squad leader just like warthunder controls and can give commands to your squad, follow, dive, bomb, evasive, etc.
@@freykakumei2308 possibly yes, would you also control the carrier as well or only the air wing?
I can see it working if you had a limited amount of aircraft and you chose how many of each you wanted to take (e.g. if you could only take four squadrons you could choose how many of those would be dive bombers, torpedo bombers, or carrier fighters).
World of warships used to have good controls when it came to carriers, in which you could both control the carrier whilst having aircraft in the air. It also had limited numbers of aircraft which worked well, and you could also control the movement of the air wings (to an extent).
I can see a third person view of a force of say six aircraft, and being able to fly all of them at once (as one solid block so to speak) being something that could be quite good.
The only concern I have is that I don’t see carriers stopping the battleship spam/overpowering of naval battles, as in an engagement in which the enemy can be seen (and more importantly shot at using main caliber weaponry) a battleship will always win against a carrier, or at the very least will be able to knock it out in retaliation.
To be honest I just don’t see the need for carriers at the moment, they wouldn’t solve any problems in current games as they would be decimated, and at the same time there are already aircraft in naval battles the mechanic just need overhauling.
Fuck have I really been watching your channel for a decade now?! That intro sent some chills! Much love Phly! Thank you for the positivity you continuously spread.
Phly: " We need aircraft carriers..."
WoWS playerbase: "No!!!"
And Submarines 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Add submersibles then. Limit time underwater and make it so destroyers and light cruisers can uses sonar and the subs would have to surface to cap zones. The carrier thing would just be spammed really really really hard is what I think the downside would be for those. Controlling multiple planes at once is whatever but we all know the whole game would be CVs
Aircraft carriers would be very fun and maybe more people will come to naval if they add them
I think the hardest part is probably Low BRs, as hitting anything is difficult when everything is small and miles away
True that’s why they can make them at a higher br
That intro! I had forgotten it! That inception music really hits HARD
1:10 "There is no real encounter" i agree, but before adding carriers, maybe Gaijin should give realistic armament to some ships.
Like anti-ship missiles(On Albatros Exocet missile), they could balance out some kind of problems.
Edit: P.S. I would like to see ship missiles in game.
we seen how post war vs ww2 goes in ground and air, no need to bring that bs to naval aswell
To WW1 and WW2 ships? We are not there yet
@@ricardoviana4422 i think Gaijin will add it in game anyway. Just wait untill they offer it as premium for 80$...
As a naval player who has spoken to other naval players profusely the the topic, I can say that AShMs would be a net negative for enjoyment if they were just landed in game as it stands. They would need entire BRs for themselves, and even then the gameplay would be fairly boring at best, and infuriating at worst
That intro brings back so many memoires. Please bring back more of those
Love how you are making more Naval videos!
Well yep i do agree we need aircraft carriers and also bigger maps as well as more battleships like Iowa class
Hey Phly. I agree. We need Carriers in WT. Not only to balance BBs, but Carriers played an important role in Military history. Plus with the Introduction of Catapult Planes, we are closer to Carriers than we were before. So yeah, Gaijoob, give CVs.
Carriers would be way too op. You could just launch squadrons like crazy. Many problems arise.
1. There are no real squadron mechanics in multiplayer war thunder. Already one plane is deadly enought when player controlled so multiple tens of planes would be way too op.
2. The maps are way too small for carriers to even be a minimal amount of balanced. The planes would take 2 min to get to their targets and come back.
3. Everyone will play carriers so it’s not naval but air rb with naval AI targets.
4. A new mechanic would need to be added. Maybe instead of playing warships you play as a carrier strike fleet with a player controlled carrier and a carrier escort group following and covering you. This would also lead to many problems and a totally new type of battle.
5. If the first carriers are gonna be seaplane tenders they will operate tier 1 biplanes while players can spawn in jets and such other modern planes.
6. Submarine addition would be sure at this point since they will be a good counter to carriers. And again the maps are way too limited (except maybe enduring conflict)
Actual goosebumps with that memory of an intro Phly. Godspeed.
0:22 Oh that intro music brings back memories bruh!
Got goosebumps watching that intro... brings back fond memories!
Ti seguo dall'Italia da quando giocavi a world of warships, e rivedere la vecchia intro mi ha sciolto il cuore,
Grazie.
Oh my god, that intro, last I’ve seen it was back in your World of Warships days. Wooooooo!!!!! Flashback!!!
Damn Phly makes it look so very easy.
Been getting back in to it a bit and getting smoked left and right of late.
Love the old Intro again too!
I feel like the Team compositions just dont work for the naval battles gaijin has set up. There needs to be some sort of uneven ranks on each team. and bigger teams. imagine 1 BB 3-5 Cruisers 5-8DD and 10-15 PT boats. Or at least something like that. Where theres a varied composition and the smaller ships have a chance to shine.
As a Toptier naval player (Yes I have the Hyūga and Kongō) I can't agree more in this statement.
First of all , 5.7 cruisers will and always gets uptiered to 6.7 giving them less chances to perform well in a certain battlefield environment with battleships and battlecruisers (not excluding the fact that there are also ships like Admiral Graf Spe in 5.7)
The addition of Aircraft carriers opens up a world of possibilities for the Cruisers , not just as surface combatants but also as acting escorts for battleships. Since in this game , the only battleships that has AA are Scharnhorst , Parizhkaya Kommuna , and Kongō. It does answer the question to fill a Cruisers role in the battlefield, but there are several points that I would like to mention , such as :
How would Gaijin balance aircraft carriers ?
Where will aircraft carriers be on the tech tree if it was to be on a tech tree ?
Universally cruisers has a decent amount of AA firepower , but will the other cruisers that has almost no AA firepower stays the same ?
Also tbh gaijin is confusing lmao , I like this idea to add CV to the gane but ehhh
Possibly yes, would you also control the carrier as well or only the air wing?
I can see it working if you had a limited amount of aircraft and you chose how many of each you wanted to take (e.g. if you could only take four squadrons you could choose how many of those would be dive bombers, torpedo bombers, or carrier fighters).
World of warships used to have good controls when it came to carriers, in which you could both control the carrier whilst having aircraft in the air. It also had limited numbers of aircraft which worked well, and you could also control the movement of the air wings (to an extent).
I can see a third person view of a force of say six aircraft, and being able to fly all of them at once (as one solid block so to speak) being something that could be quite good.
The only concern I have is that I don’t see carriers stopping the battleship spam/overpowering of naval battles, as in an engagement in which the enemy can be seen (and more importantly shot at using main caliber weaponry) a battleship will always win against a carrier, or at the very least will be able to knock it out in retaliation.
To be honest I just don’t see the need for carriers at the moment, they wouldn’t solve any problems in current games as they would be decimated, and at the same time there are already aircraft in naval battles the mechanic just needs overhauling.
I would rather have subs since they would actually pose a threat to battleships and seem to potentially be very good fun (and reasonably easy to counter).
Phly, if you enjoy naval I have suggestion: Play the Ki-109 in naval with coastal vessels (type T-38) on 2.0. Its a challenge, but lots of fun.
I agree with (player controled) carriers should be in game. Have players launch off other players, or use existing mechanics like either the existing scout plane launch mechanic that some ships have already or use the system from ground AB to spawn in a random plane (but have the plane be something that the carrier historicly had on it, USS Enterprise (CV-6) for example would be able to spawn SBD-2 Dauntless, F4F-3 Wildcat & TBD Devastator aircraft), perhaps a hybrid of the 2 mechanics? At the same time, the carrier would be a base that other players would need to escort/defend?
YES PHLYDAILY IS IN NAVAL!! It is soo nostalgic to hear the world of warships intro it brings memories when i was just a child.
That Helena sunk because while you think you didn't do any damage with those overpens ( gonna happen with AP and even the SAP on Hyuga ) have put massive holes in the hull of the ship below the waterline causing flooding
6:57, He's not going down he's just pulling a USS Texas and getting a better angle
Ahh the old intro!!! Started me down a path of listening to zimmer in a whole new way that continues to today!!!😊
The only way I could see carriers being added to the game would be to also put in a new que for people playing planes to have the option to play planes in a naval battle, allowing 10 or so players per team to specifically fly from their teams carrier, using only the planes allowed to be launched from that carrier, but with unlimited lives and a respawn timer. (Different planes cost different amounts per flight) The carrier player would be responsible for positioning the carrier, and be able to launch AI controlled planes. ( player assigns them basic waypoints and targets and the AI pilots, but once the planes have left the carrier they cannot be ordered again, and if their target is destroyed they target the nearest ship/aircraft or return to the carrier with no cooldown for relaunch) The downside to this would be massive wait times if you wanted to play with the carrier or carrier planes if it wouldn't allow a carrier into a match without a specified number of player pilots.
Loved that intro! I agree with you on aircraft carriers but I think WT will introduce submarines first.
IJN Hyuga likes to go pop when the scharnhorst slaps it. HMS Marlborough is also really powerful as is the Russian Mariya.
the Intro omg the goosbumps. so awesome i missed it so much ❤️
Loved that intro with the ship comin outta the water
Nostalgia intro, have not seen that one in a VERY long time
that intro brought back day from when I first started watching your vids, still here
IMO what we need is 1. longer range maps, so smaller ships can use their mobility vs BBs' slow reload, and 2. proper AP aerial bombs.
This reminds me of a Drachinfels video where he talks about a German battleship that went untargeted in the battle of Jutland, a total free for all.
That torpedo aim is so nice to see dance over the screen😂
Normally cruisers are relentlessly trying to set fires to battleships, plus if you're as close as you were you normally have torp troubles, just seemed to be ignired that game. Also odd that there were no plane spawns after people died
Goddamn, what a beast. Those superdreadnoughts were really a glorious era of battleships. I really want one and to get stuck into WT naval but the grind is so intimidating after already doing so much of it in WoWS... Plus I mean I really oughta be doing all this work and shit to like achieve my dreams and all that and not just be playing yet more goddamn video games.
BTW "Hyuga" is 2 syllables (by English reckoning) and pronounced much like the man's name "Hugh" with a "ga" at the end (incidentally this pronunciation formula applies every time you see a "y" after a consonant in romanized Japanese, e.g. Ryu, Tokyo, etc. ...As long as I'm at it, another good rule to know is "u"s beyond the first syllable that come after an "s" are almost always silent).
What a throw back, I miss your old wows vids
I’d say submarines would be a good counter and the implementation of sub hunters would be cool too but subs would definitely be a threat to BBs
100% agree. I'm having a blast (and making great SL) in naval RB right now. BUT like Phly says, the addition of aircraft carriers would give cruisers a better reason to actually fulfill their combat roles, not to mention a reason to finally use our naval strike aircraft. GAIJIN PLZZZ!!!
Swarms of aircraft overhead would be so cool
Instead of carriers, what about night battles with limited visibility? If it's hard for BBs to spot DDs with torpedoes, then the CLs would have something to do by screening for the BBs or spotting with radar.
I love them to add Carriers have no idea how to make it work but it be ace
Too look around in scope, after pressing "Shift", press and hold " C" to look around while not moving the turrets
That intro bro, those were better times and memories you brought back!
Actually, I remember that intro when Baron did that "TAIGAH" gameplay.
Not a huge fan of Naval in War Thunder, but I'm really enjoying these Navy videos from you Phly!
That intro! That brings back memories. Definitely my favourite intro 😁
WT: *"We need aircraft carriers"*
WoWs: *"Now you will feel our pain"*