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

CVs and gaming enjoyment in WoWs: Polls

A few CV polls  

362 members have voted

This poll is closed for new votes
  1. 1. 1. Before the rework - what did you enjoy more, battles with or without carriers? By and large? (PvP - excluding scenarios/operations)

    • I generally found battles with carriers more enjoyable.
      103
    • I generally had more fun in games without carriers.
      259
  2. 2. 1. And after the rework? (PvP - excluding scenarios/operations)

    • Battles that have carriers in them are generally more fun.
      60
    • Battles with no carriers participating are generally more fun.
      302
  3. 3. How do you like the new carrier gameplay?

    • I think the new carriers are the most fun to play / my new favourite, and I will play little else in future.
      14
    • The new carriers are fairly enjoyable. I'm going to play them about as much as any other ship type.
      61
    • I don't think they're much fun. I'll play carriers occasionally, especailly when there's an incentive or bonus of some kind to be farmed.
      76
    • These aren't even carriers - they are squads of airplanes. I don't like this. I come here for the warships. No incentive WG are prepared to hand out can make me play them.
      211

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 02/08/2019 at 02:10 PM

86 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
14,121 posts
20,098 battles

Quite frankly the poll is inherently biased. It is your direct goal in any PvP game to ruin the fun of others by making your opponent lose. Naturally that means most people would prefer not to have an extra enemy type, especially when it is (or at least used to be) a mechanic that punishes bad play. If you were to ask the general playerbase in e.g. CS whether it is more fun to play without AWPs or with you can safely bet that most players will prefer to not have AWPs in play.

  • Cool 15
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,408 posts
20,829 battles
Vor 8 Minuten, El2aZeR sagte:

Naturally that means most people would prefer not to have an extra enemy type, especially when it is (or at least used to be) a mechanic that punishes bad play.

This is not an argument that can be carried to the extreme of logic because that would mean players preferred there to ideally only be a single ship type in the game.

 

Which is of course bollocks.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CROTZ]
Beta Tester
1,196 posts
8,325 battles

True - CV players have been and are a minority. The result is that its easy for the majority to vent their frustration of being sunk by good CV players or venting the frustration of being forced to move from sniping park positions behind hills. Navigating well and staying with fellow AA ships, incl. CV`s, is much more important now. Skilled CV players can reach any map position now very fast with alpha strikes or perform 3-5 ship sequenced chain attacks or several 360 degree circling attacks until a ship is sunk.

 

Riding with 3 partner ships is a safe minimum for map movement.

 

Once submarines are in the game, the game will get even more tactical and exciting :)

14 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Quite frankly the poll is inherently biased. It is your direct goal in any PvP game to ruin the fun of others by making your opponent lose. Naturally that means most people would prefer not to have an extra enemy type, especially when it is (or at least used to be) a mechanic that punishes bad play. If you were to ask the general playerbase in e.g. CS whether it is more fun to play without AWPs or with you can safely bet that most players will prefer to not have AWPs in play.

  • Funny 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
14,121 posts
20,098 battles
17 minutes ago, Nautical_Metaphor said:

This is not an argument that can be carried to the extreme of logic because that would mean players preferred there to ideally only be a single ship type in the game.

 

Except it depends entirely on the population of said classes. If you were to make this thread about DDs e.g. the results would be vastly in favor of DDs due to the fact that generally speaking most of us here on the forums actually play DDs.

 

Very few players played CVs pre rework, so inevitably that means the amount of people who found enjoyment of CVs being in the game will be a lot lower than those who did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GRNPA]
Beta Tester
1,296 posts
6 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Except it depends entirely on the population of said classes. If you were to make this thread about DDs e.g. the results would be vastly in favor of DDs due to the fact that generally speaking most of us here on the forums actually play DDs.

 

Very few players played CVs pre rework, so inevitably that means the amount of people who found enjoyment of CVs being in the game will be a lot lower than those who did.

 

Doesnt change that skyaids is still OP and somehow WG found a way to make them even more annoying. I wonder why there was never such a huge sentiment against any class other than CVs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CROTZ]
Beta Tester
1,196 posts
8,325 battles

IMHO a players CV gameplay skills can now play out weaker or much stronger, compared to the previous CV implementation. Perhaps it a natural way the game develops, as every added new ship characteristic, gadget, module, skill, flags, environment(storms) etc. adds more variety and therefore adds more variables to the game.

 

A new big variable will be submarines in the game + its modules, skills, tactics, and gadgets.

 

Players can combine all the available variables clever and play them out strong ( or weak :) in the game map.

The more variables are added to the game, the more players which were used to a simple game may get frustrated.

New or existing players seeking in-depth simulations with lots of variables will find their joy with WoWs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OCTO]
Players
398 posts
18,569 battles
4 minutes ago, puffpuff134 said:

IMHO a players CV gameplay skills can now play out weaker or much stronger, compared to the previous CV implementation. Perhaps it a natural way the game developers, as every added new ship,gadget,module,skill etc.adds more variety and therefore adds more variables to the game.

 

A new big variable will be submarines in the game + its modules, skills, tactics and gadgets.

 

Players can combine all the available variables clever and play them out strong ( or weak :) in the game map.

 

Perhaps you should consider how annoyed a large percentage of the player base is before you talk about implementing submarines........how can they ever be balanced into the game. We just received this 'update' and you talk about adding subs.....

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CROTZ]
Beta Tester
1,196 posts
8,325 battles

I don't want to hurt players feelings which don't like submarines, I always saw WoWs as a naval arcade simulation an Im not afraid of new content.

 

In the game title "Crossout" players where upset with the patch enabling "Flying". This made some players angry as they did not want to face flying enemy cars.

The wheel focussed players found it was too much scifi. After a few months they got used to the change nobody is talking about it anymore.

 

Big game titles tend to develop over the years, it would be good if players remember this as they get into other big game titles, as its a reoccurring development pattern.

A lot of things get added over time in long term developed games, as the years go on.

 

I would welcome plane loopings, colored smoke consumables and big sea waves in storms - That would be great :D

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SUM69]
Players
13 posts
11,997 battles

Just played a T4 game in my Orion hoping for no CVs...had 2, they both spent most of the game bombing, rocketing and torping me, eventually I was sunk by  a cruiser firing torps into me. I had basically given up trying and just watched the crap unfold. There is no defense at this tier to CV Planes so they are to all intents and purposes immune to damage, so while they do only a small amount of damage it becomes a death by a thousand cuts. Broken class that should not be in the game at all. CVs changed the way naval warfare was fought and signalled the end of the Battleship, all other ships became escorts for the carrier group. How about WG design an Aviation game to allow people who want to play with planes a chance to do so without wrecking the Gun and Torp game that the vast majority love? They have you say? then why don't they just push CV players onto world of warplanes then? Is it because War Thunder is a far better flying game and they are frightened that people will see that?

Perma spot is still a feature after the rework, in fact it is worse as the speed of the planes means they can cover the map within the first couple of minutes and spot the whole enemy team. It forces players to huddle in a group to combine AA, while this may be historical, IT IS NOT FUN.

At the moment I have a mission where I need to spot ships to finish...I will not play a CV as I feel that would be dishonest of me, I despise the class and wouldn't want to inflict it on others, so that leaves a DD...not gonna happen with the new CV spotting Meta.

I deleted WoT because of OP premiums and Artillery after 3 or 4 thousand games because the game was no longer fun to play. This unfortunately is looking like what I will be doing with WoWS.

Before this rework I believe 5% of players played CVs, it will shoot up as people try the new system out but I really hope it drops to the previous low number very quickly. This is the only reason I am holding off deleting the game. ( It does beg the question why you are catering for that 5% ahead of the rest of the player base...how about new maps or operations instead of putting so much resource into a bad idea?)

At the moment it is frustrating, not an enjoyable experience and as for the Arms Race Ranked....WTF were you thinking?  Take an really interesting tactical battle requiring Team work into some sort of arcade shooter where luck has more to do with victory than having a plan, add to this the fact you will get no CV's in ranked and you have buggered DD play in random with CV presence means that teams are comprised of 4 DDs and any 2 others. Boring game mode and usually boring games.

 

Please fix it sooner rather than later.

 

Rant over

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RO-RN]
Players
901 posts
11,460 battles

Of course the game feels way better when these [edited] who sit in the back and farm damage with no counters! now fix the gun bloom, these abominations became again unplayable by the most people and we are back to normal! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WONLY]
Players
427 posts

recent haku stats from a dude on SEA server.

 

as it is possible to achieve these numbers WG could just accept that they've failed horribly and nothing will change except that almost everyone is annoyed by constant spotting and DD lifes are even more miserable than before.

 

RTS CV was broken, this is broken again, can we just get rid of the class for the sake of the game?

 

image.png.e047aa603dad69ff3b72158471105594.png

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[L4GG]
Players
3,298 posts
10,918 battles

1-

 

It depends of the game itself, sometimes more fun with cv, other times less fun with cv

 

2-

 

it depends, now there are a lot of people failing  their mark big time , more fun, later will be worst. Especially with the AA acting funny.

 

3-

 

you must be joking about this one, right , who comes to World of warships only to drive a bathtub that can hardly move.

 

PLANES, OFC.

 

FIGTHERS PLANES to be more exact.

 

But I don't know yet, for now I chose option three, occasional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
581 posts
5,199 battles

i didnt like the battle cards gameplay before the rework, though it wasnt as bad as players claiming it was rts. before the rework a small different in player skill between teh cv players resulted in a huge disparity in ability. the fact that a cv had little counter-play for ships and that little counterplay was very clunky.

 

i find the follow cam planes boring, though they remind me of an old sega game. its not as bad in mid tier as it seems to be at high tier, but its entirly down to if im am +2 to the carrier or -2, since if im +2 i can do something about the planes, where as at -2 i can do nothing but try and dodge.

 

the problem of +2/-2 is still as apparent, even if a one cv cant massacre the other at the start of a match anymore.

 

they should have based the rework on the formations found in homeworld gameplay and made altitude selection a factor in how squadrons perform. that would have been rts. and fairly straight forward. they have taken the focus away from the "warship" and replaced one half baked gimmick with another.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,408 posts
20,829 battles

My conjecture is that you will be hard pressed to find players who have more fun in battles where any one of the surface combattant types is entirely missing, especially if that means the type is also missing from their own teams.

 

Battleship players may moan ever so loudly about DDs until they get into a battle where there are none.

 

OTOH, few players would miss aircraft carriers, were they gone entirely, be it RTS or the new, "action packed" type.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
37 posts
8,168 battles

I for one will just a take a break from the game until its more enjoyable again. If I don't like it even after the balancing then I guess I gotta vote with my feet and wallet since nothing else I can do. I kinda wish I can come back to the game again. For the time being I will be focusing on ranked and after that I'll be done for a while I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GRNPA]
Beta Tester
1,296 posts
1 hour ago, Marble_Eyes said:

recent haku stats from a dude on SEA server.

 

as it is possible to achieve these numbers WG could just accept that they've failed horribly and nothing will change except that almost everyone is annoyed by constant spotting and DD lifes are even more miserable than before.

 

RTS CV was broken, this is broken again, can we just get rid of the class for the sake of the game?

 

image.png.e047aa603dad69ff3b72158471105594.png

 

It is almost as if WG ignored people's feedback for several years while the CV apologists spammed the forums with their nonsense that CVs are fine.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
14,121 posts
20,098 battles
6 hours ago, Nautical_Metaphor said:

Battleship players may moan ever so loudly about DDs until they get into a battle where there are none.

 

I actually found BB gameplay to be more fun without DDs in a match.

You don't see me moaning and whining about that tho.

 

Fact is fun is, ironically, the last thing that is relevant in a game, especially in a PvP one. Mechanics have to be fun to use, whether you have fun being interacted with by a mechanic is completely irrelevant.

And yes, game designers are in fact some of the most sadistic people you will ever meet.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PONY]
Beta Tester
6,172 posts
10,500 battles
1 hour ago, 10ThousandThings said:

First two questions are missing a 'neutral'/'I don't care' option...

I miss that too

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-URK-]
Players
21 posts
7,366 battles

This rework is a nightmare, especially so when you get 2x T10 CV's and your CV's have an avg exp of 800, and the enemy 2500 avg exp and up.

 

Well done WG, what a great job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BYOB]
[BYOB]
Players
4,619 posts
20,473 battles

I've played CVs before the rework (badly and mostly in coop). After the rework I played them in coop again, and found them boring. And the worst thing is that I don't hate them from a  historical POV, they were critical ships in the battle for the Pacific. But neither the RTS nor the squadron play styles do those ships justice.

I love this game, been playing too much of it in the last 2 years. But I want a game that is balanced, a game where a counter to one ship is countered by another, where playing smart matters. I'm not interested in a game in which one class of ships can dominate the whole battle for reasons. That's why I don't like how the CVs are in the game right now.

 

I'm not a quitter and I'm not interested in making a loud and useless exit. I dropped to low tiers to play ships I like and maybe rediscover some old ones (I really like the Karlsruhe now). But the whole negativity to the rework by players and the callous nonchalance displayed by WG staff frighten me. It looks like WoWS is hurtling down an abyss and no one is doing anything to stop it.

  • Cool 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
628 posts
2,129 battles

The last poll question caught my attention, yes they are squadrons of aircraft and not CV's, they are played like a mobile island on the red line and not a CV. 

 

CV's should only be able to go into battle in a division of three ships, the CV and two DD's who are restricted in the distance they can move from the carrier. So a) it means the CV can maneuver because they have normal CV protection, and b) it gives the redundant DD's something to do, :Smile_teethhappy:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OCTO]
Players
398 posts
18,569 battles
4 hours ago, Aragathor said:

I've played CVs before the rework (badly and mostly in coop). After the rework I played them in coop again, and found them boring. And the worst thing is that I don't hate them from a  historical POV, they were critical ships in the battle for the Pacific. But neither the RTS nor the squadron play styles do those ships justice.

I love this game, been playing too much of it in the last 2 years. But I want a game that is balanced, a game where a counter to one ship is countered by another, where playing smart matters. I'm not interested in a game in which one class of ships can dominate the whole battle for reasons. That's why I don't like how the CVs are in the game right now.

 

I'm not a quitter and I'm not interested in making a loud and useless exit. I dropped to low tiers to play ships I like and maybe rediscover some old ones (I really like the Karlsruhe now). But the whole negativity to the rework by players and the callous nonchalance displayed by WG staff frighten me. It looks like WoWS is hurtling down an abyss and no one is doing anything to stop it.

 

I have played for 3 years and share the same sentiments as you. This is my last forum post on this subject, or any others. The developers must have been given opinions on the result of implementing this game play change by the testers, Community Contributors and streamers. Still the implementation arrived. I have premium time, which means I pay to play. I do not pay to be a guinea pig  game tester, getting annoyed in my leisure time. Watching Flamu and the like playing the RN CV's on stream just seems like a sick joke, when the game play for CV's needs sorting before adding another CV line. The developers sure as hell won't care about any post I make, so why should I care or bother about this game anymore. I will play just for sh1ts and giggles, as and when. 

  • Cool 6

Share this post


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

×