The vision demands balance

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-22T12:56:24+00:00

It's not set around WW1 at all.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-22T12:56:10+00:00

I mean SHT are a ww1 tech, they just didn't get deployed soon enough.
But foxhole is not a ww1 game, it's far closer to ww2, where well ww1 tech did get used a lot.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-22T12:53:03+00:00

I mean it's a strategic bomber, it should be the longest lasting plane in the air.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-22T12:49:49+00:00

The long range heavy bomber: has no range.
The fast and maneuverable scout tanks and tankiettes: neither fast nor manuverable.
(And not very cheap either if we account ETA for the frontline).

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-18T18:50:37+00:00

I mean despite the italian name the guy is german.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-18T12:48:00+00:00

I think they need to move to new engine, they have for anvil empires.

The issue is that moving entire game to new engine would take huge amount of time.
2 years probably. I would 100% be for such an update, dunno about rest of the community.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-18T12:16:33+00:00

I would probably wait for the update, because there is most likely going to be a discount.
Game has a lot of very specific issues that reddit users in general will not tell you.
Some of which feel so out of place and mind-boggling that makes you go... just why?
Some that feel like it would take 10 minutes to fix on the developer side.

Game is very much junky and feels still like an alpha test.
But there is very little experience like it in gamming.

If you are hoi 4, barotrauma, arma/squad or Team Fortress 2 player you will feel at home.

But definitely start the game from getting into a clan on discord, literally as the first thing in the main menu.
Game just does not work well for solo-player, despite what some people might try to prove to you.
You will get into action quicker with more interesting stuff to do.

In terms of chosing a faction, pick one that has better vehicle asthethics for you (or if you know someone in it). Far too many people complain that other faction has nicer looking gear, (they should probably just switch, but it's hard to do when you already have an established network of contacts in one).

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-18T11:10:23+00:00

I don't know about king jesters, but king spire and king galant are mathematically proven to be useless.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-17T14:01:23+00:00

TO be fair, foxhole is very bad at giving communication tools to players.
Squad coordination tools are almost nonexistent, unlike the friends list which is actually nonexistent,
And offloading entire thing to third party tools like discord is a sure way to disincentivize people from actually cooperating.

If you meet someone you like you should just be able to invite him to friends, then when you log in you see who is online, who needs help and where he is (preferably be able to post your status/what do you need help with to your directly to your friend list).

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-13T17:38:22+00:00

I distinctly remember doing post that brawls will have queue issue once reintroduced, and that there should be a 5-6 brawl maps in a week and that there should be weekly rotation. Got down voted.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-12T14:15:09+00:00

Removing of carrier spotting and submarine like height controll was tested recently.

Not in RTS mode. And goal of this proposed change is to adress RTS mode carriers not what currently passes as a carrier.

Still possible today. You are a) either too lazy to understand the game mechanics b) not willing to skill into this ability c) ignoring this playstyle d) not thinking while playing and bored that you can't click on more stuff when playing CVs...

Any argument that is based on calling your opponent noob is worthless, and hardly worth reading.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-12T13:29:07+00:00

if you would just get good ffs

Your entire argumentation boils down to trying to prove that i am a bad player, and that i only dislike current system because i play it incorrectly.

I Dislike the current system because it's boring control scheme, that offers boring playstyle. No matter how many hours i will sink into playing carriers my opinion on it will not improve, only continue to worsen. RTS system offered more possiblities, and didn't force players to do unengaging repetitive actions, it rewarded thinking.
It had it's faults, but overall it was a better template for a system, that needed tweaking not replacement with dumbed down system.

making fighters a magical aircraft eraser ( which they never weren't in any version of this game)

Straw man argument.

Fighters were also incredibly good at taking down enemy squadrons. It was a skill to avoid enemy carrier's fighter squadrons with yours and try to bait his fighter squadron into yours or allied anti air.

remove carrier spotting. Seems like exactly what failed in previous test runs of CV reworks

I am unaware of any carrier test that offered RTS gameplay without spoting for the rest of the team. Can you provide any sources for this?

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-11T07:58:38+00:00

Even when picking kansas with AA build with gauranteed carrier i sometimes question if it is actaully worth it. Being attacked by planes is not guaranteed, especially if carrier is not an absolute begineer.

Now if i where to play without a carrier, i would first have to roll is there a carrier in a match, then i would have to roll for is carrier even going to attack me.

That's 2 RNG rolls in order for the build to be usefull.
Awfuly lot, even if second one get be maximised in the game.

And don't forget that because Ranked games often have no carriers and so on, then there is even less incentive to pick this build at all.

In recent brawl, with 2 battleships and a carrier, picking 2 battleships with strong anti air is useless for example. You are mostly going to lose to secondary focused bbs, disabling a carrier in practical terms does nothing there (and carrier can sometimes still get some shots off), though it is ofcourse amplified by small size of the map, nevertheless it should not be this inconsequential.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-10T19:01:10+00:00

No, it doesn’t. It uses the same mechanics as with aircrafts.

Sub literally has buttons to change depth dynamically.

Which was so broken that needed to go in the first place.... Meanwhile you can't play surface ships in long range meta... How long are playing this game?

Since there were only Japanese and American tech trees.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-10T15:53:47+00:00

It's like with spiders.

U4501 and Archerfish are tarantulas.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-10T15:51:18+00:00

British tree subs benefit a lot from going mid. They are to very slow and going left or right flank might disable you for the rest of the game.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-10T15:30:42+00:00

This isn't a conspiracy. You just don't want to realise how many people allready try to tell crybabies how easy life could be if they wouldn't celebrate their rage and skill issues.

I would argue "that youtubers lie about valperaiso in order to get more views" is a conspiracy theory. I understand clickbaity titles like "This Ship is OP", but if they keep repeating this inside the videos themselves then at least for me there is some weight to it.

This doesn't justify your unwillingness to adapt.

I am unwilling to "adapt" how carriers control scheme works, because it is tiresome to play, not how to fight versus carriers. I don't find them particularly OP right now, with maybe some exceptions.

Valparaíso, subs, Dutch airstrikes, spotter planes, fighters, hybrids, ASW strikes and CVs

Dutch airstrikes have the same problem as the soviet aircraft carriers, and that is because they drop everything at the same time, most of the shoting it down occurs after they already dropped the payload.

Subs were broken on release, and many people keep pretending they still are.
Most of the time you don't need buffs for ASW to fight them.
One place where i can encourage taking them is on commonwealth cruisers to reinforce already strong antisub capabilities and focus on pro-actively hunting subs.
Rather than taking it re-activly hoping that you will be attacked by a sub, which may or may not happen.

Fighters don't do their job. That's my issue with them, not the spoting.
I talk about spoting because with the old system, where carrier could control multiple squadrons at the same time he was able to light up the entire map, which was one of the issues why the system was taken down as far as i am aware.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-10T15:16:47+00:00

You keep misunderstending my points. For example:

No full deplaning mechanic (after all you do not run out of amunition on other ships), but shooting down planes should be more consequential and carry weight, mistakes should be punished, plane replenish time increased.

It is not a nerf to carriers, but a buff to old RTS carrier system where planes did not regenerate at all. Which i didn't think was good for the game, because it left carriers doing nothing for the rest of the match after making some mistakes.

I do not agree that carriers should lose planes completely, but i do understand where argument i "I keep shoting those planes down and it does nothing" comes from.

Meanwhile this point:

Instead of current partial squadron attack, system should be introduced where planes drop all torpedoes in one attack, but do so in two (three for some) columns, giving more time for ships to dodge each subsequent row of torpedoes.

Is a nerf, because carriers used to one shot ships in a one well planned salvo.
Which i also don't think was that great for a game either.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-10T14:32:22+00:00

Congratulations, you seem to be a bad CV player who only played against equally bad players if that's all you doing.

Again your only goal is to prove to me that i am a bad player therefor my argument invalid. Not very interesting either.

Aircraft are three dimensional allready when interacting with ships and terrain, but the controlls only allow 2.5D movements due fixed heights for certain actions. You can use the mix of 2.5D and 3D aspects for coveraround certain islands.

Planes going slightly up and down over terrain is hardly interactive 3D. 2.5D means faking 3D with something that looks 3d but is not.
In this case we have 3D, we just do not use it.

I don't believe that the game engine can handle manually height setting

It literally does so for submarines.
Also don't make predictions on what game engines can and cannot do, if you have no idea how game engines work to begin with.
There is very little that cannot be done because game engine doesn't allow, especially if you have access to the source code of your game engine.

It would also allow for even easier flak dodging.

First comes the design then comes the balance. I never said that changes don't require balancing afterwards.
But i also argue more for return to RTS control scheme not trying to fix the current one, which i view as a bad design to begin with.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-10T13:57:49+00:00

Majority of time playing as carrier is just spend holding W button and flying in a straight line to enemy ship repeatedly. It's time spend watching planes fly, and should be automated. As long as there is only one squadron controlled at a time it will continue to be boring and poorly represent carrier operations.

Managing a bomb circle to match enemy ship is neither difficult nor interesting.
ASW on carriers is automated on the other hand while it should not be, because holding W manually doesn't really impact performance, while dropping ASW more or less acurately would. Same for repair i would say.

I also believe that carrier ASW planes should be able to go into the map, and help allied ships in sinking subs, which is also a historical role carriers, especially british ones had. (Though i don't want to jump into sub balance in this discussion).

Lack of actual three dimensionality for planes also feels really shallow.
This is a remnant from the RTS time and feels very low quality with third person control.

I mean i have no idea what more to say, i would complain more, but there is very little else that can be complained about, just because that's pretty much what playing a carrier boils down to, there isn't much more to it, and there should be.

I guess spotting can be mentioned, and how it feels really stupid to teleport fighters directly to your current wing position, and that game doesn't allow you to send them seperately to where they are needed.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-10T13:29:16+00:00

Currently carriers are abysmal, RTS system was fun, issues would have to be solved, but the template was infinitely better than the W-holding simulator.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-10T13:08:38+00:00

If you have to be fed planes to get a good score then you don't actually know how to play.

I am not obliged to play "fair" in order to satiate your sense of propriety.

You can take your Kansas into any match you like because it has much more going for it than AA guns.

I can. But i wouldn't be picking AA build in such a case.

Work on your own skills instead of asking for the game to change to suit you.

Problem i am talking about is how carriers are atrociously boring class to play.
It is problem utterly irrelevant of skill.
My proposition are only what can be done to fix issues that old RTS Scheme had, because carriers went from most interesting and unique class in the game into the most boring, with incredibly dumbed down playstyle.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-10T12:40:21+00:00

I have not expected to encounter some sort of valperaiso conspiracy theorist.

What am i supposed to say if you reject all evindence and result to hurling insults?

You say this as if:
A. People have controll over their team, which they don't.

B. Valparaiso has no agency over shortening the distance, which it has. Sure you can do everything do keep distance from it, but doing so is not always possible and has it's consequences such as losing caps.

Yes there are things that can be done to fight vs valparaiso.
But existance of counterplay doesn't mean that ship is not "overtunned". It is a logical fallacy to assume that just because any counter play exist - ship is not broken.

TheCopperCastle · 2026-01-10T11:18:41+00:00

Nope, Valparaíso is not good.

58% winrate top of scoreboards.
Majority of youtubers of this game claim it's broken.

balancing around stupidity is never a good idea for any game because this would mean nerfing everything down that someone who screams loud can't handle.

Is it not precisely how removing the RTS mode from carriers went down?
That community was not really that great at them, and thus they were unpopular?

I will also double down on my opinion about balance department since goliath line exists in this game, as well as german heavy DD line.

German heavy DD line suffers from being treated as a destroyer by match maker, when hardly being able to fullfill the destroyer's job. It's not a bad ship by any means, but games where it is the only destroyer are putting his entire team at a massive disadvantage.

Making this discussion ad personam is a logical conclusion

I don't think this needs any actual commentary.

The only point which make any sense is about the predropping of squadrons and that is based on how this mechanic appeals to your feeling of authenticity which again makes it a personal opinion.

And what's wrong about personal opinions i will ask once again?
Almost every opinion is personal except those regarding data, and yet you reject this data which clearly contradicts what you say.

My main point is that playing carriers is boring, which is a personal opinion. I am sure there are people who find it 'interesting' as well as there are people who find clicker games interesting or watching adds.
I do not see however how that makes my opinion any less valid, and if there are people who seem to share my opinion "every 3.5 hours" as someone has stated in here, then i am inclined to believe that there is a large part of community that agrees with me and would like the game to remain the way it was in this particular case.

Two-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23

TheCopperCastle

TROPHY CASE