Console Ready CV's....We all told you so ;-)

[Redcap375]

World of Warships Legends

 

"The CV rework has nothing to do with consoles and is because of bla, Skill gap, bla bla, RTS, bla bla*".....................................What a bunch of *****.

 

Majority of CV players told you so.

 

Does everyone know now why WG has changed CV's? I mean the REAL reason....

 

Why oh why couldn't they have just had the guts to just say it in the first place is completely bewildering.  It's not the fact that they are doing it...It's the fact that they fed us so much crap regarding CV's without telling us the REAL reason why.  

 

They had to leave it up to the players to tell everyone why CV's are being changed, the real reason.

 

Basically to cater for the younger kids that spends daddies money.  You put it onto console and the game gets dumbed down, always happens.

 

  On 12/12/2018 at 3:04 AM, Reaper_JackGBR said:

I'm actually starting to form what might be considered a tin hatter opinion, but...

Okay so, we all know that the CV rework is hashed and not looking too good at this point, but it does mean one thing - they can port the game to consoles finally. Think about that for a moment, console gamers are, by and large, younger in demographic and more willing to spend bucks than their PC counterparts (not trying to generalize, but this is the general gist of the demographics. 

So what if Wargaming is now purposefully trying to milk the PC product for every last penny before the players inevitable fizzle out and moreorless stop playing, that's all fien and dandy...if the game becomes successful on console. Because gents and ladies, that means that Wargaming can reopen the entire game's market to an entirely new consumer base, in effect restoring any money lost from the PC audience no longer being interested, and basically restarting the cycle all over again for another few years. 

Like I said, tin foil hat territory, but not something I would put past WG unfortunately. 

 

TLDR: 

Game tanks on PC, slowly or quickly, after CV rework. 

But game is now ported to consoles. 

Opens entire new market for Wargaming.

Game profits are therefore not affected. 

 

Not tin hatted mate, it's business.

 

If everyone understands that WG it's a business then things become alot clearer in everything that they do.  This is no different.

 

Consoles are and have been for a while the future, money comes from kids now with skins, DLC and what-not.  Games like Fornite that my young kids keeps on repeating when coming home from school that makes me wanna chuck every computer we have out of the house. 4-5-6 year old kids talking about tooling each other up and parents letting them play it, under-age, not giving S***. 

 

WOWS HAS to be console friendly, they have to continue to make money as it's a business.  Like high street shops that are closing down because of online sales.  Those that don't adapt to the current needs, die. 

 

Like this new WOWS premium account.  We don't think for 1 second that it's got nothing to do with them making more money in the long run which it will (if you read between the lines).  They know their customers when money is concerned.  

 

Now i'm not against business making money or some sort of anti capitalist, but when it directly effects the game then i'm against it.

 

Right now it's killing the game and driving alot of people away from it. But they are milking what they can RIGHT NOW, in the short term, before it becomes another game like WT where people are leaving in their droves.

 

Do we think Tier 10 Clan Battles was anything to do with fairness? £££££

Do we think adding premium ships that they said they were never gonna bring into tier 9-10 was by chance? ££££

Do we think giving people a taste of tier 6 clan was them being nice?  ££££££

MOST premium ships are BETTER than there silver counterpart? £££££

The new arsenal with coal and steel? £££££

New World of Warships premium account? ££££

Nerfs to ships like the Hindy and Alsare? £££

Even the Nerf to BB AP shells*? ££££

 

*They know what is selling and grinding and what isn't.

 

We think they are doing us a favour. But their first thought is "what can make us more money".

 

Very few decisions are made for the pure benefit of us.  Those that have been has always had my praises  but they are very few and far between now.

 

Kids and young folk don't care about gameplay, just shoot, shoot, damage and damage, gimmick, gimmick.  That is what this is turning into and i am very sad for it.

 

The gaming market used to be for teenagers or old skool gamers that were brought up on consoles like the Sega and Commodorer 64 but as technology is the norm with my 6 year old knowing more about computers and smart phones than i do then that is where more money can be farmed. 

 

Look at fornite and how much money that is raking in? A console game that is aimed at YOUNG KIDS.  How many older players play that game hummm?

 

"Daddy, i want a skin that looks like i am wearing someones cut off face for my Christmas present, please".  I mean want happened to a good old bike hey?

 

I have loved this quote from someone commenting on WG as a whole:

 

Conclusion : WG is a business they have all the means (and incentives) to influence matches to be profitable. Play Freemium games at your own risk.

 

Total War arena was a total flop that cost them alot of money.  

 

*sigh*

 

I first came onto these threads to help people out and give them some advice to new players.  How can i do that now knowing what this has changed into?

 

How can i hand on my heart tell anyone to grind the CV line in it's current form to casual players? Even more so when they bring this new dumbed down damage machine that is the new CV re-work.  My Only advice would be "fly around and kill things". That's not even tactics.  Cv's have lost all sense of tactics. The only choice is what method are you going to use to blow that ship up.

 

Excluding CV's and Bringing a ship like the Stalingrad into Clan's and soon to be more tier 10 premiums (IJN and French) is the straw that broke the camels back.  The last bastion of equal play in a equal environment has now gone, never going to return. Great for business, crap for balance (please see LoL). 

 

 I only wish to highlight yet another debacle from WG regarding honestly and integrity and their current contempt for loyal players.. Scratch another one to the list (along with tier 9-10 premiums, GZ and ect..)

 

What the hell has happened to this game i've enjoyed since Beta. So disappointed yet expected at the same time.  I wish i could say positive things like in the past 

[Fat_Maniac]

CV's were OP in the right hands everyone knew that.

 

WG wanted to change them, but didn't know how without pissing off CV mains.

 

WG start the console development and want CV's in game, but RTS style gameplay doesn't work well on a console

 

WG now have an economic reason for changing CV's. hence the rework is born.

 

What's the problem with that?

 

I see absolutely no issue, Everyone knew CV's in their current form were OP in the hands of skilled players, and something had to change to restore some sort of balance.

[Tjerk_Hiddes]

17 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

Kids and young folk don't care about gameplay, just shoot, shoot, damage and damage, gimmick, gimmick.  That is what this is turning into and i am very sad for it.

Amen to that bro, hence the legendary crap at T10.

[Aotearas]

26 minutes ago, Fat_Maniac said:

I see absolutely no issue, Everyone knew CV's in their current form were OP in the hands of skilled players, and something had to change to restore some sort of balance.

 

In the current test iteration, CVs can still sink everything with one attack squadron commitment. With more CVs per match, they can still spot every important part of the map. Hell, unless someone's been pulling my leg CVs (aircraft) even get access to the Radio Location perk now. And there is little to no counterplay as enemy CVs don't have any meaningful way of protecting their allies and the same goes with how the new AA system works on surface ships. Plus every good CV player I know has no problems dropping through the new AA system (@El2aZeR feel free to drop those Youtube clips).

 

Tell me what changed to restore some sort of balance.

[Redcap375]

29 minutes ago, Fat_Maniac said:

CV's were OP in the right hands everyone knew that.

 

WG wanted to change them, but didn't know how without pissing off CV mains.

 

WG start the console development and want CV's in game, but RTS style gameplay doesn't work well on a console

 

WG now have an economic reason for changing CV's. hence the rework is born.

 

What's the problem with that?

 

I see absolutely no issue, Everyone knew CV's in their current form were OP in the hands of skilled players, and something had to change to restore some sort of balance.

*cough*

 

4 points:

 

1) Because at no point did they connect Consoles with the CV rework stating that it was not a reason why it was being changed (rings a bell?).  That was the REAL reason why they made the changes.  You can not be that naive believing some of the divvle you was being fed.

 

2) You haven't played a single game in a CV so how can i take your word for CV's being OP?  CV's arnt even my main and i can categorically state that at no point in this game (apart from 2 CV beta) has CV's ever been a problem for any ship that i have sailed.  Please look at my Plane death numbers which for even Battleships, are staggering. WASD did the rest.  The last year has been hell for many casual CV players with even Battleships like the Alsar, Jean Bart, Lion, Conquare and Republic able to cut down planes like they were butter. 

 

3) Those "right hands" probably counted for 10% of all CV players.  The ones that stuck it out to get to tier 10 and learnt to play the hardest class in the game.  And how do we reward them for all their hard work? Accuse them of skill gap, really .  Love it in society how we crucify the people who do well instead of patting them on the back.

 

4) I want to remind you and all those that WANTED this rework (saying anything, like them being OP, to get it) to suck up what will be thrown at you regarding the new CV rework. Because my friends, after playing quite a few of them its a new kinda PAIN for DD's, CA and BB's.   You know when you pressed that magic button and the planes just evaporated on 3/4 of your ships? Yeah, well now not even a Woster can stop them being battered by AP bombs.  You asked for this. 

 

But i'm sure you have played the rework and have first hand experience regarding the new CV's? Bring back balance? Lol.

 

[10ThousandThings]

34 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

It's not the fact that they are doing it...It's the fact that they fed us so much crap regarding CV's without telling us the REAL reason why.  

I guess if they had done so, it would have created reasonable expectations that console and PC players would play on the same server, hence growing the playerbase. Or that if it wasn't going to be cross-platform, they could retain the current iteration of CVs for PC (given that such a significant proportion of current players – CV mains and otherwise – are not happy about the rework), and put a more console-friendly version on console.

 

But no, neither of those seemingly sensible things are happening either, comrade

[veslingr]

55 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

 

 

Now i'm not against business making money or some sort of anti capitalist, but when it directly effects the game then i'm against it.

 

 

I agree with you 100% BUT one thing i dont get how you did not get in your analysis.  it is easy - NO MONEY NO GAME. WOWs does not have sustained profitability as it lacks massiveness like WOT. They basicly live or die by couple of thousands of players who will come or go in next month/year period. Profitable desktop games do not need console (do you play WOW on console?).

 

to sumerize it, WOWP has 2 paths....consoled dumbed down play, arcade style or death in mid term. 

 

WOWp is dead

WOWS is alive but with grim future if player base dont d

WOT is moneymaker stil but with obvious decline of player base

[FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor]

The hypothesis is of course complete BS since WoWs and WoWs Legends (the console game) are not just different versions of the same game. They are incompatible to a degree that they might as well be called two different games.

 

Nothing, literally nothing about Legends necessitated the CV rework. Very obviously they don't even intend to eventually merge the player bases, not even in the distant future. Otherwise they would not have made it such a different game.

[Redcap375]

5 minutes ago, veslingr said:

I agree with you 100% BUT one thing i dont get how you did not get in your analysis.  it is easy - NO MONEY NO GAME. WOWs does not have sustained profitability as it lacks massiveness like WOT. They basicly live or die by couple of thousands of players who will come or go in next month/year period. Profitable desktop games do not need console (do you play WOW on console?).

 

to sumerize it, WOWP has 2 paths....consoled dumbed down play, arcade style or death in mid term. 

 

 WOWp is dead

 WOWS is alive but with grim future if player base dont d

WOT is moneymaker stil but with obvious decline of player base

 

How about i flip that statement of "No money, no Game" with:

 

No game, no Money?

 

Like you have clearly stated, WOT has a decline of players (myself being one of them when i seen the light *cough premium ammo*).  That is because of WG making a rod for their own back. Not because of the console or PC debate. 

 

WG are turning customers away in their droves due to their business practices. Console online games are 10 to a penny and this will get lost amongst the rest. Dumbing down play brings in some types of players (children, younger kids) but get rid of older ones.  When WW2 is concerned and the nature of the game it's self, they will be better off keeping the older (mine) generation happy. 

 

Kids likes modern stuff. 

 

6 minutes ago, Nautical_Metaphor said:

The hypothesis is of course complete BS since WoWs and WoWs Legends (the console game) are not just different versions of the same game. They are incompatible to a degree that they might as well be called two different games.

 

Nothing, literally nothing about Legends necessitated the CV rework. Very obviously they don't even intend to eventually merge the player bases, not even in the distant future. Otherwise they would not have made it such a different game.

 

I will remind you of that when it come to fruition.   They didn't "intend" to bring tier 9-10 premiums into the game as well as subs, hummm look what happened. 

 

 

[Uglesett]

8 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

They didn't "intend" to bring tier 9-10 premiums into the game as well as subs, hummm look what happened. 

Current design for Legends has ships at different tiers than the PC version (e.g. watch Jingles' vid on it), and the way progression, upgrades and commander skills work is totally different. They can't merge them without a complete redesign of either game.

 

It's more likely that we might see a PC version of Legends at some point. I don't think mouse and keyboard is such a huge advantage in a slow paced game like this that it's beyond the realm of plausibility.

[veslingr]

7 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

 

 

No game, no Money?

 

 

 

 

Sadly complex "harder" games are for much smaller number of players, every attempt to "easy" the game and to make it more "user friendly" or to use right word "dumbed down" is forced by small playerbase. We had game but we did not have players translating WG did not have money, now we have half-product thats attracks more players and will continue so while it is on path of dumbing it down and attracting players who "grow up" on FB and arcade games.

 

As we agree that this game exist for earning money and not because naval entusiast gather to create best naval game, WG is going for money (money=player base) and most of their decisions we dont like is driven by that idea - increase playerbase/earn more money

 

CVs as class got fucked up and as much as I/we hate it it is for benefit of game (console adjustment)  in long run.

 

Wows in its "original" state did not appeal larg player base and that it major problem for WG and in the end for us who wold like to continue playing this game.

[philjd]

I don't confuse 'we need to change the CV gameplay" with "we need to get onto console and must change CV's to do this". They are not in conflict with each other.

 

Currently a CV in good hands has neutered it's counterpart and is currently free to dominate the battle as a whole (IMO), this remains the reason why players want to change CV gameplay. Nothing changed here. WG agreed with that situation but weren't sure how to fix it. 

Along comes the business reason 'we need to get onto console', fair enough, we all want the game to survive. 'Oh, but CV game play currently prevents that', 'darn' says WG, 'oh but hey, we need to change that anyway, so lets change it to something that works on console, simples'.

Job done, two birds one stone.

Although having tried the test servers as both CV and 'prey' I, so far, fail to see how this changes the potential for CV's to dominate 

 

(and I have a lot of admiration for [good] CV players  - I cannot do it, tried and backed off with a definite shake of the head).

[Starchy_Tuber]

2 hours ago, Redcap375 said:

Majority of CV players told you so.

Well, the majority of a tiny minority of active posters that are also CV players, maybe.

 

The rest of the post is built on a foundation of the console game being somehow merged with the PC game, which it isn't... so the whole conspiracy thing comes tumbling down.

It's much more likely that they changed CVs because they, like the majority of vocal players, thought that they were broken. 

Whether or not what follows is better or worse is an entirely separate issue.

[AndyHill]

I don't know if the new carrier gameplay is going to be any more fun or even make the class less stupidly powerful than it is now, but odds are it can't be much worse than what we have right now. I'm certain the console port was a factor in the redesign at some point, but that doesn't mean a giant rework wasn't required. The class simply makes the game so much less enjoyable for anyone unlucky enough to end in a match with one. 

 

Of course at the moment the console game doesn't even have carriers in it, but that's probably just because they won't be implemented before the rework is finalized. However, if WG swear there will never be any form of carriers in the console version I'll run into the nearest store and convert right away.

[MrWastee]

it's quite simple:

ofc rework is highly related to console! it gave the chance to hit 2 nails in one go. they needed a cv rework anyway and a working iteration for consoles. so, why fix rts and put seperated ressources into console cv's when u can have it all in once?

as the upcoming problems with the change in gameplay gotta be solved for consoles anyway, this is the most economic approach one could have. and, imho, the most stupid!

...still i'm convinced in the long run this absolutely not will cater the games lifespan, even more by the fact that this game just isnt too fast paced to appeal console crowd(?)

[_Dunc_]

I've been away for a year. The CV and HE spam drove me mad back then, so I went back to tanks. Before that, I tried some of the no skill sky cancer for myself, even buying a Saipan... My god but it was hard, and a really steep learning curve. Gave up because it was apparent the difference between a skilled and bad CV player was immense, and usually directly affected the match to a disproportionate level, more so than even old arty in WoT.

 

I'm back now, because WoT is basically unplayable for a green/blue veteran. I can say that in my opinion as a beta tester who has dipped in and out since release, the game is far better now than at any point I've played it. 

 

CVs have so far proven themselves to be a minor nuisance, even for a tomato BB player like me. I can only think of one game in the last week where I had to deal with a skilled CV player cross dropping, working with DDs, waiting for repair party to be used before attacking. Other than that, they've mostly been free xp and credits... To such an extent I've taken catapult fighters off ships with them. 

 

However, I expect WG will want to bring them back, not least to drive premium revenue. How they do that is another matter - whilst WG are legendary in their ignoring of the WoT player feedback, the WoWs studio seems to be more switched on, especially as the playerbase is much smaller and generally older. 

 

As long as the rework doesn't make the game revert to the old post beta thing of dodging bloody planes whilst occasionally getting to shoot at things, then I'll be happy.

[Redcap375]

17 minutes ago, philjd said:

I don't confuse 'we need to change the CV gameplay" with "we need to get onto console and must change CV's to do this". They are not in conflict with each other.

 

Currently a CV in good hands has neutered it's counterpart and is currently free to dominate the battle as a whole (IMO), this remains the reason why players want to change CV gameplay. Nothing changed here. WG agreed with that situation but weren't sure how to fix it. 

Along comes the business reason 'we need to get onto console', fair enough, we all want the game to survive. 'Oh, but CV game play currently prevents that', 'darn' says WG, 'oh but hey, we need to change that anyway, so lets change it to something that works on console, simples'.

Job done, two birds one stone.

Although having tried the test servers as both CV and 'prey' I, so far, fail to see how this changes the potential for CV's to dominate 

 

(and I have a lot of admiration for [good] CV players  - I cannot do it, tried and backed off with a definite shake of the head).

 

How can you say that CV's dominate the Battlefield with 79 Plane kill in your Atlanta? 

Or your Mino?

or your Hood?

Ect...

 

Now i understand that you are a DD player too, so i expect some resentment, i get it mate, really do.  But please don't think CV's are OP because when you do meet a CV it's your direct counterpart (sad, but true).  DD players HATE CV players as it takes away that one thing they live or die on.....Concealment. 

I am a CV captain, i will make your life a misery if you don't do something about it....Most don't and expect to play the same game when a CV is in the MM.  

 

What CV's need is people NOT to spec skills in AA or to switch their defensive AA consumable out for something like hydro.  The funny thing is that most do, hence it makes life that bit easy for them.  But it is THEIR CHOICE that they do so, like most things in life.

 

The second is not knowing what to do with it when they have it.  Popping the defensive AA when the planes are at extreme range and get out is one of the most basic mistakes people make.  And it happens ALOT! Next is sailing in a straight line, happens ALOT! Next is not turning into the torps, happens ALOT! 

 

Please, it's not that CV's were too strong, it was the fact that noone could be bothered to counter them, in any form.  Those that did (like me) had no problems what-so-ever with them thought this game.  

 

I would like to think i am one of the "good" CV players, yet even i am unable to get more that 56% WR in the Essex (68% in Tahio)? Is it because of the enemy CV player? Nope, not really to be brutally honest.  It's because of the amount of AA that is currently knocking around in the game and has got stronger and stronger for the last 2 years to the point now. 

 

A CV is only as good as his team lets him.  If they are plums then all the bombers in the world isn't going to help. Unless you meet a AA/CV div (alot now) then the enemy CV isn't the problem.

 

There are OM/OMNI players that have alot (alot) high WR in simple ships like the Yam, Republic and Conq.  Do they dominate the Battlefield? So how is my 56% WR dominating? Wouldn't i have something like 70+ like some have in other ships? The difference is that ships cant choose to equip themselves with anti shell defensive gating guns that can shot them out of the air.

 

There is a set of skills that can completely nurture a whole class of ships (CV's).  No other set of captains skill are as brutal or effective against another class.   I know, i play ALL classes.

 

Prime example is your Atlanta, imagine 2 of them (any AA ship) at the caps.  2 NO-fly zones, period. In-fact in some games you can cover TWO caps with one ship. 

 

IMHO, just like yours mate which I totally respect, is that i have never had a problem facing a CV and the amount of times i have actually been sunk by one is very very small.

 

IMHO the ones that really want the re-work are the ones trying to make their own territory safe and not caring about other classes. I'm sorry to say and will get lynched mobbed but  DD players are the worst for it, BB's players that refuse to have AA skills comes a close second. 

 

9 minutes ago, antenociti said:

Well, the majority of a tiny minority of active posters that are also CV players, maybe.

 

The rest of the post is built on a foundation of the console game being somehow merged with the PC game, which it isn't... so the whole conspiracy thing comes tumbling down.

It's much more likely that they changed CVs because they, like the majority of vocal players, thought that they were broken. 

Whether or not what follows is better or worse is an entirely separate issue.

 

Consoles are linked with the change to the current CV rework.

 

And please before saying how broken they apparent were, how about playing more than 33 games out of 3535 in them!  

 

Or are you another player that minces around without any thought of AA or even picking a ship (few of them) that has crap AA anyway? 

 

Please don't take that to heart but really does my head in when people say that not even a ship, but the whole class is broken because of this and without even playing the bloody line.

 

It's like me trying to buy a car with the seller saying "It's got great handling on turns, handles like a charm and feels very comfortable" and replying "Have you actuality drove it yourself"....Errrr, nope? How much credibly has that chap got now. Am i going to take his opinion with a pinch of salt? Defo.

 

You have a higher WR in tier 7-8 normal silver ships than i do in some of my tier 7-8 CV's..How is CV game play more dominate?????

 

Has anyone seen any of the big online matches where CV's are allowed? Do they wipe the floor with the enemy team, even the best one's? Nope. Are they killing 4-5 ships a game? Nope. 

 

6 minutes ago, MrWastee said:

it's quite simple:

ofc rework is highly related to console! it gave the chance to hit 2 nails in one go. they needed a cv rework anyway and a working iteration for consoles. so, why fix rts and put seperated ressources into console cv's when u can have it all in once?

as the upcoming problems with the change in gameplay gotta be solved for consoles anyway, this is the most economic approach one could have. and, imho, the most stupid!

...still i'm convinced in the long run this absolutely not will cater the games lifespan, even more by the fact that this game just isnt too fast paced to appeal console crowd(?)

 

Bingo...

 

3 minutes ago, _Dunc_ said:

CVs have so far proven themselves to be a minor nuisance, even for a tomato BB player like me. I can only think of one game in the last week where I had to deal with a skilled CV player cross dropping, working with DDs, waiting for repair party to be used before attacking. Other than that, they've mostly been free xp and credits... To such an extent I've taken catapult fighters off ships with them. 

 

Totally agree.  Yet people still have it in their heads that they are some sort of killing machines every single game.  Really don't understand it, never have. 

 

The only time i will say CV's can completely dominate is with ships like the Kaga and Sapain.  They are 2 very powerful ships even in a casual hands with good MM (A Kaga in a tier 5-6 game is the most destructive force in this game, bar none).  The Saipan in the hands of a good player is the single worse CV to come up against (CV vs CV) in tier 7 MM.

 

But it's no more powerful than 2 Belfast's in a  div that slaughter DD's. Or Stalingrads that are dominating the stats and effecting Clans. 

 

It's ok for players to have 70%+ WR in other ships but as soon as a CV has more than 55%, people are up in arms.

 

There are far, far, far more players with more skill in normal ships that can alter the battle more then the small handful of players that are considered "very good" in CV's.  The rest (like Dunc has rightly stated) do close to nothing. 

 

Anyway, forgetting about all of that, the rework is truly powerful.  This what you have at the moment is chicken feed.  If you chaps are struggling with CV's (lol) at the moment, i pray for your soul when this goes live.  You asked for it. 

 

 

[El2aZeR]

1 hour ago, AndyHill said:

but odds are it can't be much worse than what we have right now.

 

Bwahahahahaha

Boy, do I have bad news for you.

- literally no counterplay options

- increase in scouting due to higher flexibility and number of CVs

- ludicrous increase in damage potential

- more survivability due to CV access to heal and DoT literally only lasting a few seconds on them

- massive increase in skill gap

 

Imagine a Conqueror that is more accurate, attacks more often and has both more HE penetration, alpha strike and DoT chance while being essentially unkillable. That's pretty much reworked CVs in a nutshell.

[ghostbuster_]

4 hours ago, Fat_Maniac said:

CV's were OP in the right hands everyone knew that.

 

WG wanted to change them, but didn't know how without pissing off CV mains.

 

WG start the console development and want CV's in game, but RTS style gameplay doesn't work well on a console

 

WG now have an economic reason for changing CV's. hence the rework is born.

 

What's the problem with that?

 

I see absolutely no issue, Everyone knew CV's in their current form were OP in the hands of skilled players, and something had to change to restore some sort of balance.

CVs were OP back in Beta. When there wasnt strafing mechanic, much weaker AA and insane amount of strike planes. (Hakus 5 torp squads) but right now, CVs are far away from being OP with all the counters they have. Besides its the easiest class to counter. Stick with your teammates and you are gonna eat maybe 2 torps from one CV strike. 

 

If you sail all alone in a CV game, ofc you are gonna get destroyed by CV and you are gonna think that CVs are OP.  But this is just dumb. 

 

But like many players have been saying: AP bombs are r.tarded and should be removed.

[Kieodo]

even if the CV rework is utter toxic sh*t then it will still be an improvement on current CV's, so nothing to lose for WG in changing it to literally anything. It would simply not be possible to make CV's more of a balance sh*t show than it currently is.

[Redcap375]

5 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

But like many players have been saying: AP bombs are r.tarded and should be removed.

 

Depends on which side of the fence you are on.  People forget about this:

 

If your a DD then you thank god daily that they have AP bombs, so do CL.  However, if your a German BB (as well as some others) or CA then your days CAN be really numbered.  Depending if you equip t any sort of AA. Tirps are normally dead meat. 

 

AP bombs were a good idea but implement wrongly.

 

They should have never have had the killing power against CA.  Should have been BB's only. 

 

6 minutes ago, dubhda87 said:

even if the CV rework is utter toxic sh*t then it will still be an improvement on current CV's, so nothing to lose for WG in changing it to literally anything. It would simply not be possible to make CV's more of a balance sh*t show than it currently is.

 

And how much experience have you had in CV's? Pre...cis...ely. 

 

Take it you don't like them in your DD's right? How did i guess.

[Chiledip]

15 minutes ago, dubhda87 said:

even if the CV rework is utter toxic sh*t then it will still be an improvement on current CV's, so nothing to lose for WG in changing it to literally anything. It would simply not be possible to make CV's more of a balance sh*t show than it currently is.

There is an old saying "it couldn't be any worse". Very rarely is this applicable, things CAN pretty much always be worse,even if they are currently awful. Watching fara  take out US cruisers like they were nothing certainly concerned me more than a little. I guess we have to wait and see, but these CV players are not warning you for nothing.

[Alipheese_XV]

So, as someone who grinded one of the CV lines until TX back than in 2015, I've seen a lot regarding this class:

- switching to long range AA without fitting the planes for that and so having litterally no CVs in queue with 15 Min waiting time

- announcing year of the carrier a few times to only buff AA

- even have a meeting with some people and two WG mods from german forum on the WG Teamspeak to share thouths about CV gameplay and then only getting "cruiser deleting AP bombs"

 

I've seen many things and myself being only a mediocre CV player.

But at least playing CV myelf helped me "making my peace with this class"!

And to know, what to do against them and even know the consequences, when I choose Hydro in my cruiser over defensive fire.

So CVs had the import role, to show me the consequences of my choices at equipping and skilling my ships!

And thats what most people didn't like - making choices that will eventually leave you as simple prey for CVs...

 

What personally stopped me from playing my CVs is, I miss the "normal" players!

Going in CV queue meant matching me against either potatoe or unicum - nothing between them!

Before someone says something, I have no problem that there are unicum players. And as my stats are open, feel even free to say that I am maybe myself a CV potatoe.

But as I've seen more and more normal CV players skipping playing them, it got uninteressting for me.

Nonetheless I still have valuable insight in the class which helps me.

So at least I am no one to say "CVs are op, nerf plox, WG!!!111elf"

 

As (in my opnion) WG did nothing to have a broad CV playerbase (I don't mean numbers like the other classes, but also have players in between potatoe and unicum), I was at least somewhat hopeful for the rework...

But boy, did all the videos crush my hopes!

No, I haven't tested them myself...

But my first thought was "doesn't WG already have a game about (war-)planes!?"

Sure, I will try it, when it hits live server, but I actually think it will bore me to death after max 2 days!

And even I can see, that the Dev strike potential was removed (why isn't the dev strike potential from BBs never removed, only from other classes?), but then there will be even more salt from other players, when their "death by CVs" is now 5 minutes long thankfully to DoT???

 

That CVs with the rework will fit better for consoles wasn't obvious to me until recently, as I am mostly play RPGs on consoles - and as I am old, I play those old RPGs, which take time to understand and enjoy the plot in there.

So, yes, I get the point of "WG is targetting a new market with young console kids"...

[BLUB__BLUB]

1 hour ago, _Dunc_ said:

The CV and HE spam drove me mad back then, so I went back to tanks....

That explains it. I hope it never gets that bad with me.

 

1 hour ago, _Dunc_ said:

I'm back now, because WoT is basically unplayable for a green/blue veteran.

I'm happy those green and blue pills worked. Welcome back! 

 

[BLUB__BLUB]

34 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Imagine a Conqueror that is more accurate, attacks more often and has both more HE penetration, alpha strike and DoT chance while being essentially unkillable. That's pretty much reworked CVs in a nutshell.

I imagine a Conqueror with radio-guided missiles... Probably correct?