xxNihilanxx

Given the number of IFHE Henris in circulation, particular for Cws, I think we would have heard about it by now if WG had changed things.

Move the replay you want out of the "replays" folder (in my case I just copy it to my desktop) - et voila! Working replay!

How many more times!?!? This is not and never has been a case of one class wanting the removal of another but rather this is all classes of surface ships wanting removal of aircraft. Not even remotely the same and, in all honesty, not that difficult to understand. Why are you struggling so much with it? See above. Yep, they certainly lack anything remotely akin to subtlety. CVs are the reason. The community is clear about that. If they are causing such decline in an otherwise quite congenial community then doesn't this add weight to their removal. They are obviously just too controversial.

They won't, they will gradually nerf CVs incrementally until they are so unpleasant to play that only the truly masochistic will still play them. It is possible that they may offer some kind of doubloon refund at some point but that is all. The €150 that you spent on four premium CVs is not the issue for WG, it is the far-in-excess-of-that that players like myself haven't spent on the game since the rework that they will want to get their hands on. At the same time that WG are starting to gradually nerf CVs we will see an influx of new premium surface ships with godly AA to make them hyper-attractive in the CV meta, designed to tempt the surface players into buying them whilst at the same time becoming a "free-nerf" for the CVs. "Feast on the tears" of others all you like but it won't be long before those tears are yours and you will find that they taste far less sweet then.There will come a time when you are calling on the very people you have been trolling to lend their voices to your cry for a refund.

Possibly a new record for me. At one point I was on target to beat my lowest damage Kraken (currently around 18K) when I had 4 kills for 10K damage but I'll settle for 6 kills at 34.5K.

The only change I can think of that will fix CVs is to totally remove spotting by aircraft and have them rely on surface spotting. Sure it is far from realistic but I cannot see any other way. It isn't so much the damage that they do that is the problem but the constant spotting is the issue.

I can understand you hating CVs but that should not translate to you hating CV players. The players did not make these ships, WG did. Your attitude on this matter is pretty $hitty. People paid good money for these ships, they have a right to be pi$$ed off when changes are made. Sure, they were naive if they thought that no changes were coming but naivety does not warrant such vitriol.

As as has been stated before and as we are seeing now they will hit CVs with "global changes" rather than ship-specific nerfs exactly so they don't have to give refunds. It looks like they are doing it a bit at a time so as to cause the minimum of outrage. It's a shame and I truly feel sorry for those who bought premium CVs but, in true WG fashion, you got played. To nerf the Gulio they would have to do it as a ship-specific nerf or they would have to nerf all BBs and, to be honest, given the popularity of that class I can't really see it happening. If you bought the premium CVs then I can understand your pain but as I have already said... If you think this has a happy ending... you haven't been paying attention.

Much as I despise the presence of aircraft in this game and the impact that they have on the enjoyment of the players of the other classes it would be churlish of me not to agree with you, OP. Even though I predicted that there would be global changes to CVs (this is just the first round, by the way, there will be more) I do think that these changes should bring the offer of a doubloon refund similar to those offered to owners of the Belfast & Kutuzov when the smoke-firing global changes affected those ships. I do not think it will happen, though, for the same reason that I know there will be more. It seems obvious to me that the route that WG are taking this time is to introduce small global changes that seem to barely affect the CV but they will do this often, chipping away at their effectiveness over time while never appearing to make a single change that alters them too much. This way they are hoping to avoid a massive outcry that would warrant even doubloon refunds. They are going to nerf CVs incrementally in a manner similar to the "boiling a frog" idea. I feel for you, OP, really I do but I did try to warn the potential buyers of Premium CVs as soon as they were released, informing them of what was to come because I could see how these people were about to "get played". I have to confess that this has begun sooner than even I expected but that is down to the fact that they are taking the incremental approach rather than one massive set of "global changes". I guess people did not want to listen as they were too busy gloating about their ability to "feast on the tears" of surface ship players with the newly available premiums. Such is life, I guess.

It happens. What does it matter? The worst that will happen is that you turn pink for a couple of games, something that you can get rid of in less time than it takes to create a thread and argue the toss about it. We get so many of these threads and every one is pointless.

Most cars (with the exception of three-wheelers) should be banned if they have only four wheels. How would you steer it reliably? Most cars require five wheels to be road-worthy. I have never experienced an acid attack to the face and yet I can fully understand what happens when acid is poured on skin. The argument that one must experience something to understand it is demonstrably false. This is my point, my whole point and nothing but my point.

This is not a class v class issue, it is a ships v aircraft issue. Do keep up! To answer your irrelevant question, however, yes I have more fun when BBs are in game if I am in a cruiser - BBs are little more than XP Pinatas. I don't tend to get slapped from full health to zero at the start of a game by BBs.

Quick question, how can it be a fallacy if it is, by your own admission, true? That would be a contradiction in terms. What is a fallacy is that one has to experience something to understand it. Maybe you do, but that doesn't apply to everyone. I have played CVs, I just find the gameplay boring. I didn't install a ship game so that I could fly aircraft, I have other, far more well designed, games for that.

I guess for me my five most fun ships would be: Companionship Friendship Courtship Relationship Scharnhorst.

I never said a word about AA - I just pointed out the fallacy in your attitude. The idea that you have to own something to understand its effect is completely wrong. I don't need to know how to drive a car in order to understand that getting run over is a potentially life-changing event.

Irrelevant point. One does not need to own a gun or be a member of a gun club to understand that bullets are lethal.

Try moving the file out of the replay folder - someone else suggested it in a previous thread and it worked for me.

Thanks for the clarification.

I'll talk to you in a high-pitched squeaky voice (or any voice you like) for half that price, sweetie.

How can you be addicted to AL? I mean, seriously. I really like GoT but that doesn't mean I feel the need to buy action figures or merchandise and they could stick captains in WoWS with the voices of the cast and I would not give two phuqs*. *Although it would be quite amusing to hear The Hound say "You're a torper. Listening to torpers makes me thirsty" or "I understand that if any more shells come pouring out of you [edited] guns I'm going to have to eat every [edited]chicken in the room"

While I agree that the rework has been an unmitigated disaster I have to ask, what am I supposed to be looking at? I have to confess I am totally missing the point here.

If people keep buying gambling boxes then WG will keep selling them. If people keep buying them in quantity then WG will keep putting up the prices. I think I see a way out of this problem.

Could you do us all a favour and delete the first post as it is a real pain to have to scroll past.

Posts like these indicate a total inability to follow logic. The problem here is not a class v class balance it is one of three classes of surface ships who all play the same way versus one class that is essentially just playing aircraft so I will say it again, feel free to include an option for "no surface ships".