Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'rebalance'.
Found 3 results
Hi everyone! I've noticed something in the game lately. And to no suprise it is the CV EXP system. I have sent a ticket to Wargaming, and they directed me to here. So why not make use of it? As you can see on the picture, I earned less EXP in my Essex, than in my Fuso, altought I did better in most ways in my Essex. And I bet I am not the only one complaining that we have to use premium camo, for CV EXP to become relevant. Take note: On both ships, I ran no other economy flags than the +50% EXP bonus. Both were not my first victory of the day. I don't have a premium camouflage on both ships. So my ideas on it, and how we can improve CV gameplay a bit, by rebalancing CV economy. Some of my ideas: Plane kills give EXP, not much, but they do. So what I would do is increase the EXP earned by these ribbons, after all, your team loves you for killing enemy planes. Example: If we say a single plane ribbon gives 10 EXP, then we could increase it by halve, to 15 EXP. I would increase the base EXP gained by CVs overall a little bit, maybe with 5-10%. The credits earned is very poor, I got more credits in my Fuso than in my Essex, yet the Essex has higher maintenance costs. So I would seriously buff the credits gained from CV gameplay. I don't know how the algorithm works for CV credits, but in general, I would buff it with a serious 20%. Lower the maintenance on high tier ships in general, not by much, but maybe like 5-10%. It would not only please the CV community, but all high tier players. These were some of my ideas. I am open to other ideas and to people who know how to balance it more, write a comment! Thank you.
I think a real problem occurred in wows, was when WG decided to give the global AA buff (which was too much imo something a little less would have done) and either later or around the same time (i'm not 100% sure) they got out their new best friend (at this point) Mr sledgehammer and hit the american CV's making them not comparable to the Japanese . This fixed problems that were good in the short term as american CV's were extremely good as they were back then, however it has now created longer lasting problems by the virtue that american carriers just are not used anymore (or at best rarely) why ? because your planes get shot down just as easily as Japanese and yes you might not lose the squadron but you may come out with only 2/3 planes after a strike. Also this pushed the Japanese out further since AA was better you didn't need as good fighters since you could depend on teammates AA a help you out more. So we have now reached a point where I really do think its carriers that now (more than ever before) need to have their re-balance. i'm not sure how to do it, I have some ideas but they are just some guys ideas nothing more. If carriers got their re-balance and perhaps a very very minor drop in AA range (not dps just range and i'm sorry BB's this nerf should be aimed at you) with the hopes that players will now play cruisers more, as Def AA makes a difference, american BB's have a good role again, rather than just another 9/12 16" battleship. it should make Russian dd's less strong as they have the highest Air detect and finally make the american carrier viable as an alternative to the Japanese.
We should remove strike planes from carriers so that they can't hurt battleships anymore. Carriers should be 100% fighter loadout and those fighters shouldnt be able to spot anyone. That way Battleships can kill all the aircraft while taking little in retunr, as intended. We should also remove smoke from DDs and CLs because they are fast, they can run away. BBs are slow so we should give them smoke becuse as it is now, they have nowhere to hide. Also since DDs and CLs are fast and BBs are slow logic implies that speed boost should be removed from DDs and (French) CLs and be given to BBs, so that they can run from enemy if they get into a bad situation. Now we all know that BBs will be primary targets of enemy fighter planes so we should give BBs AA defensive fire. That will of course result in too much defensive fire in the fleet so we should remove it from cruisers. Furthermore, I dont think anyone has ever witnessed a CL or DD being attacked by enemy fighter planes so we should remove AA guns from those ships. Fire is also one of the primary causes of BB sinking and fire mainly comes from CL HE shells. Those should be removed. This will of course have an unintended consequence of CLs being pretty much useless against DDs as they will overpenetrate every single shot, hence no one will be playing CLs anymore. That will lead to DDs becoming a severe threat to BBs with their torpedoes, so as a solution torpedoes should be removed from destroyers. That leaves DD HE shells. They should be removed too. There is also one more problem with destroyers. Namely, they are too fast and should be nerfed. Being nerfed so much I think it will be too expensive to repair the engine of destroyers after every battle so DDs should have their engines removed. This will, of course, make DDs sitting ducks among enemy CLs even if they do only have AP shells. This means that CLs will be overpowered and inevitably leads to cruiser guns being completely removed. I realize that at this point this is a little ahistorical since many WW2 cruisers did in fact have guns, it can, however be "explained" as a result of the Washington naval treaty. The goal of the treaty was to stop an arms race and what better way to do it than not having guns on cruisers. This will have dire consequences for cruisers leaving them with no offensive capability other than ramming and the most numerous victims of that tactic will be carriers who will be dying in droves being rammed to death by cruisers. In my opinion, the best way to go about this is to make carriers unsinkable. My idea was to change carriers into islands with airfields on them, they never move around the map much anyway. This should result in a fair, balanced and most importantly, fun game for everyone.