Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
kfa

CV rework poll from Flambass

63 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[I401]
Beta Tester
1,079 posts
8,354 battles

According to Flambass, Wargaming is monitoring carefully his poll's results and we might be able to change their 0.8.0 plans if the majority of the playerbase wants the same thing.

 

Link to the poll:

https://goo.gl/forms/pnRoa5C6bhOSvxeL2

  • Cool 10
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Modder
4,001 posts
7,112 battles
16 minutes ago, kfa said:

According to Flambass, Wargaming is monitoring carefully his poll's results

hahahaha ^^

 

sure

  • Funny 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RONIN]
Beta Tester
2,815 posts
5,688 battles

Some of the questions are a little hard to answer prescisely - for example I LIKE that a new/average CV player cant be completely locked out of the game by being strafed to oblivion. But Im equally not hugely keen that the total interaction is dump a consumable and hope they loiter in its area.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AVRDM]
Players
1,434 posts
6,693 battles

There is no going back, assume it.

 

The balance will come in the next patches, such as the speed of the squadrons and the effectiveness of the rockets on the DDs.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SM0KE]
Players
2,432 posts
6,141 battles
1 hour ago, Hesp said:

The balance will come in the next patches, such as the speed of the squadrons and the effectiveness of the rockets on the DDs.

This is pretty much what I'm hoping for; at the risk of sounding a bit 'Candide' I think we'll probably eventually get to the stage where this is an excellent game again, maybe even with more people playing CVs.

 

The key question, for me anyway, is how long it'll take to get there (given the normal glacial pace at which re-balancing occurs)...

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,051 posts
7,560 battles
3 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

This is pretty much what I'm hoping for; at the risk of sounding a bit 'Candide' I think we'll probably eventually get to the stage where this is an excellent game again, maybe even with more people playing CVs.

 

The key question, for me anyway, is how long it'll take to get there (given the normal glacial pace at which re-balancing occurs)...

That and how balancing premium CVs will go. Its easier to buff than nerf to avoid whine and general noise, I guess WG could release premiums in somewhat lacking state and gradually buff them if needed. Issue is, WG loves to balans things with sledgehammer

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,893 posts
6,228 battles
2 minutes ago, Panocek said:

WG loves to balans things with sledgehammer

They upgraded, went with the times. 2030232795_download(4).jpeg.ff58f3ffcdc5f9de605b0ea1e920aba4.jpeg

:Smile_trollface:

  • Funny 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,051 posts
7,560 battles
1 minute ago, Major_Damage225 said:

They upgraded, went with the times. 2030232795_download(4).jpeg.ff58f3ffcdc5f9de605b0ea1e920aba4.jpeg

:Smile_trollface:

You mean they apply sledgehammer to top of jackhammer because power supply was traded for vodka crate?

  • Funny 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NED]
Players
4,291 posts
11,774 battles

Finally a good poll. Filled in immediately. spoiler alert: get rid of them please.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IS-FT]
Players
147 posts
9,696 battles
2 hours ago, Panocek said:

Since when WG follows playerbase input?

since rework didnt come out of nowhere, and now stop cry and use ur chance of change

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
7,896 posts
14,234 battles
1 hour ago, Hesp said:

The balance will come in the next patches, such as the speed of the squadrons and the effectiveness of the rockets on the DDs.

 

On the other hand it is well within the realms of possibility that CVs are going to get buffed because the average potato can't do well with them.

I wouldn't trust much in balancing a fundamentally broken concept.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
455 posts
1,635 battles

Well, there'll be a lot of groupthink and institutional inertia to overcome if feedback from, among other sources, this poll goes against the rework, but hats off to Flambass for a good poll and a proper contribution to the community :Smile_medal: and thanks to OP for sharing :cap_like:

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
17 posts
1,915 battles

Remove them from PvP completely and keep them only for operations for those that really really like them (5% of the playerbase?)

  • Cool 7
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[O-P-C]
Players
392 posts
8,599 battles
35 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

On the other hand it is well within the realms of possibility that CVs are going to get buffed because the average potato can't do well with them.

I wouldn't trust much in balancing a fundamentally broken concept.

Its not broken , its the same lame smartassess who always gets to ships first and play it into oblivion , ofcurse they will be superunicum after the patch, same like after game went open beta...

Then the rest of us, we have to grind and try to catch up ,some may never do it , its the same same people , stop it already.

Stop giving anybody like this flambas selfproclaimed experts who dont know crap a chance to test except some new base players that just got into game and creators.

ofcourse they  have and will get huuuge advantage compared to other players....right from the start. 

ask wider base nobody asked me what to do nore many others.

same crap always .

wont vote the guy is a newb , tried to watch his videos and deleted after 30 sec, who cares....

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EST]
[EST]
Players
803 posts
18,520 battles
23 minutes ago, RepSrb said:

always gets to ships first and play it into oblivion , ofcurse they will be superunicum after the patch, same like after game went open beta...

Then the rest of us, we have to grind and try to catch up

They grind in advance. Both grind, so where is the problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[L7P]
Beta Tester
135 posts
6,933 battles
1 hour ago, El2aZeR said:

 

On the other hand it is well within the realms of possibility that CVs are going to get buffed because the average potato can't do well with them.

I wouldn't trust much in balancing a fundamentally broken concept.

That's the feeling I get as well.
How do you balance a class that runs no risk at all while being able to influence the whole map?
 

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I401]
Beta Tester
1,079 posts
8,354 battles
4 hours ago, Gl0cK_17 said:

That's the feeling I get as well.
How do you balance a class that runs no risk at all while being able to influence the whole map?
 

No risk? Have you tried navigating with wg's autopilot only? :cap_book:

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,238 posts
11,727 battles

WG always "closely monitor" our feedback and proceed as they see fit anyway.

 

I thought Flambass would know better :cap_book:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AXIS]
Players
683 posts
9,987 battles

i don´t understand the "remove cv entirely" faction.

has some cv touched you inappropriately when you were little?

hilarious joke aside, cv are an integral part of the game, both from a historical and gameplay perspective.

why do you folk think removing them is even remotely a good idea?

  • Cool 7
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×