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

Carriers 0.8.0-3 Please WG stop punish us!

279 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
14 posts
7,036 battles

My dear company

you said u want a new gameplay..a new future for your carriers.O.K!

From 0.8.0 to now you nerf them 3 times already(ο.κ most of changes are in fair direction)

BUT....why all your patches regulate the"O.P"carriers ONLY?Carriers is nt just 8-10 tier megacv's.

Please take a look what happens in lower tiers....Do u realise that a new player will not have the 

patience to pass through the rediculus --NO POWER--tier 4 CV's?

Your tier 6 CV's has little power --BUT --when --and only when--any U.S cruiser not be there.

You want new play styles eh?OK...A dd or any other nation cruiser with an Helena or Dallas or(lol) Atlanta(!) even an Omaha came down in map....

IF defended team have nt there surface ships ,CV player stay and just observe them cap the green base.

YOU dint let us to DO ANYTHING!!! PLANES  they do not even go close to them!...they fall like pigeons!!!

WoS its a GAME...ok..we play 4 fun...dont punish us...after 3 years and almost 7000 battles is easier give up and go from your game,

than you break our nerves with experiments clearly unfair!

I dont know what is with your LOVE with U.S cruisers...you have given them everything!!!

Yianna

  • Cool 5
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BLITZ]
Players
2,194 posts
9,415 battles

https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/asmlik/cv_changes_and_roadmap/

"Balance settings, general to specific. We are now at the stage of adjusting the balance between the classes and focussing on addressing specific issues (e.g. alternate torpedo Hakuryu to 0.8.0.1). The individual fine-tuning of the ships is out of the question for now. For example, first we need to find the optimal balance of air defense and aircraft losses at each tier, and then, if individual aircraft carriers lose too many aircraft, we can individually increase the survivability (or, if the air defense of individual ships is too weak, it can be strengthened). In addition, it should be understood that the gameplay has changed greatly, and players are still learning and adapting. Statistics of the combat effectiveness of CVs and other ships on the part of air defense is changing literally every day and only after some time will it stabilize. Therefore, it should take at least a few days after each balance change before making preliminary conclusions."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
749 posts
2,918 battles
9 minutes ago, Lady_godiva_s said:

My dear company

you said u want a new gameplay..a new future for your carriers.O.K!

From 0.8.0 to now you nerf them 3 times already(ο.κ most of changes are in fair direction)

BUT....why all your patches regulate the"O.P"carriers ONLY?Carriers is nt just 8-10 tier megacv's.

Please take a look what happens in lower tiers....Do u realise that a new player will not have the 

patience to pass through the rediculus --NO POWER--tier 4 CV's?

Your tier 6 CV's has little power --BUT --when --and only when--any U.S cruiser not be there.

You want new play styles eh?OK...A dd or any other nation cruiser with an Helena or Dallas or(lol) Atlanta(!) even an Omaha came down in map....

IF defended team have nt there surface ships ,CV player stay and just observe them cap the green base.

YOU dint let us to DO ANYTHING!!! PLANES  they do not even go close to them!...they fall like pigeons!!!

WoS its a GAME...ok..we play 4 fun...dont punish us...after 3 years and almost 7000 battles is easier give up and go from your game,

than you break our nerves with experiments clearly unfair!

I dont know what is with your LOVE with U.S cruisers...you have given them everything!!!

Yianna

This is just the true face of wargamings new cv concept showing its face. There is nothing more frustrating for surface ships, than having tha play the entire match around a "ship" that is sitting on the other side of the map with no risk to himself, so wargaming nerfs carriers to make surface ships happy. Of course that doesnt work, because the frustration of surface ships doesnt come from the damage or combat effectiveness of the carriers, the frustration comes from the carrier being able to limit their moments, spot them and do damage to them with zero risk to himself.

 

On the other side of the coin, we have the carriers, who are greatly frustrated because their planes gets nerfed and nerfed because of all the surface ships complaint, but none of these nerfs make the carrier less frustrating for surface ships, all they do is make the carrier practically useless, frustrating the carrier player in the process.

 

"No risk safe reward" classes do not and will not ever work in these kind of games. All that happens is that they become super frustrating to both the players commanding them, and every other ship in the match, its stupid, and not fixable by balance.

 

The cv rework as a concept is flawed. World of tanks has a "no risk safe reward" class aswell, it is the single greatest cause of frustration in that game, and they have been trying to fix it for 8 years unsuccessfully, all they have managed is to nerf it into uselessness, while keeping it just as frustrating to other tanks as always.

 

  • Cool 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DAVY]
Beta Tester
1,291 posts
7,659 battles
6 minutes ago, thiextar said:

This is just the true face of wargamings new cv concept showing its face. There is nothing more frustrating for surface ships, than having tha play the entire match around a "ship" that is sitting on the other side of the map with no risk to himself, so wargaming nerfs carriers to make surface ships happy. Of course that doesnt work, because the frustration of surface ships doesnt come from the damage or combat effectiveness of the carriers, the frustration comes from the carrier being able to limit their moments, spot them and do damage to them with zero risk to himself.

 

On the other side of the coin, we have the carriers, who are greatly frustrated because their planes gets nerfed and nerfed because of all the surface ships complaint, but none of these nerfs make the carrier less frustrating for surface ships, all they do is make the carrier practically useless, frustrating the carrier player in the process.

 

"No risk safe reward" classes do not and will not ever work in these kind of games. All that happens is that they become super frustrating to both the players commanding them, and every other ship in the match, its stupid, and not fixable by balance.

 

The cv rework as a concept is flawed. World of tanks has a "no risk safe reward" class aswell, it is the single greatest cause of frustration in that game, and they have been trying to fix it for 8 years unsuccessfully, all they have managed is to nerf it into uselessness, while keeping it just as frustrating to other tanks as always.

 

I agree the feeling when your in a "normal" ship and getting attacked by a cv can be very frustrating

the compare to wot is kinda screwed as in wot you cant shoot the arty shells before they hit you

 

personally im kind of fed up that I get used to learning how to counter cvs and then wg go and change them in a patch and then you have to relearn how to avoid cv making a mess of your ship

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BOATY]
[BOATY]
Players
664 posts
9,695 battles

@Lady_godiva_s It was stated few times that until patch 0.8.4 only global changes will be applied to CV / Ground ship balance. Targeted buffs and nerfs of particular ships will happen after. 

 

If you so much dislike the current state, just stop playing it and try something else. There are plenty of other ship classes :Smile_honoring:

 

P.S. I will try them once I unlock all ground ship branches T10  as I am not much about playing planes ... :cap_old:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
5,446 posts
9,358 battles

Makes me wonder what you guys expected from the rework and the goal to "balance" AA vs CVs

 

1 hour ago, Boris_MNE said:

We have already 723 topics about this. You sure you couldn't redirect it to one of existing CV topics?

Like here: https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/105510-cv-rework-discussion/?page=70

...what happened to you? :cap_wander:And WHO thought it a good idea to make you a mod? What's next? Skybuck as admin? 

 

edit: Actually, if Skybuck wrote the news articles, I would read them.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,559 posts
13,440 battles
10 minutes ago, aboomination said:

 

 

...what happened to you? :cap_wander:And WHO thought it a good idea to make you a mod?

From troll to mod. Fine line. :Smile_trollface:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
787 posts
4,801 battles

I do feel like a kid  given a shiny new toy, happily playing with it and then someone comes, breaks someting off the toy and give it back. And again. And again.

 

Ofcourse this does not feel pleasant. I liked the rework after release, i still play but i am not as happy as i was before as things that worked well are broken. And again. And again.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
4,372 posts
6,242 battles
1 hour ago, thiextar said:

This is just the true face of wargamings new cv concept showing its face. There is nothing more frustrating for surface ships, than having tha play the entire match around a "ship" that is sitting on the other side of the map

 

 

Plus id like to add "DDs totaly OP NERFFF!!!111, CVs need BUFFZ"

Flamus first game today :cap_fainting:vs double Midway

flamu.thumb.jpg.7c563c659bfe01de186dd9243d7e900b.jpg

 

Game is broken - for everyone. WG has done a great job :cap_like:

  • Funny 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
749 posts
2,918 battles
2 hours ago, beercrazy said:

the compare to wot is kinda screwed as in wot you cant shoot the arty shells before they hit you

In wot you have to stay in arty cover to be safe from arty, in wows you have to aa spec your ships and sail and dodge.

 

Both games are running the same faulty principle that forces you to play around a class that exposes itself to zero risk, so id actually say that the two systems are more or less identical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,834 posts
10,289 battles
1 hour ago, aboomination said:

Makes me wonder what you guys expected from the rework and the goal to "balance" AA vs CVs

 

...what happened to you? :cap_wander:And WHO thought it a good idea to make you a mod? What's next? Skybuck as admin? 

 

edit: Actually, if Skybuck wrote the news articles, I would read them.

Repeated visits to gulag has made Boris a fine patriot :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,834 posts
10,289 battles
14 minutes ago, thiextar said:

In wot you have to stay in arty cover to be safe from arty, in wows you have to aa spec your ships and sail and dodge.

 

Both games are running the same faulty principle that forces you to play around a class that exposes itself to zero risk, so id actually say that the two systems are more or less identical.

Its actually an assumption shallow players make to justify their dislike of CVs.

 

CVs can only do real damage through their planes, which have to get through AA in order to deal damage to another ship. Planes are not invincible, can miss target etc.

 

So saying CVs are similar to arty is pretty stupid, unless WG start equipping tanks with anti-arti shell guns that are able to shoot down arti shells and give arti a reload penalty whenever their shells are shot down.

 

 

  • Cool 3
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
749 posts
2,918 battles
30 minutes ago, pra3y said:

Its actually an assumption shallow players make to justify their dislike of CVs.

 

CVs can only do real damage through their planes, which have to get through AA in order to deal damage to another ship. Planes are not invincible, can miss target etc.

 

So saying CVs are similar to arty is pretty stupid, unless WG start equipping tanks with anti-arti shell guns that are able to shoot down arti shells and give arti a reload penalty whenever their shells are shot down.

 

 

Counterplay in wows = shoot down as many planes you can, reducing carriers dpm after a while.

 

Counterplay in wot = utilise arty cover whenever possible to lower the dpm taken from arty.

 

Both concepts are the same, you can mitigate the incoming damage, but you cant completely avoid it without making yourself useless.

 

Same concept, slightly different implementation, different, but the same.

 

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NC]
[NC]
Beta Tester
54 posts
4,620 battles
3 hours ago, thiextar said:

This is just the true face of wargamings new cv concept showing its face. There is nothing more frustrating for surface ships, than having tha play the entire match around a "ship" that is sitting on the other side of the map with no risk to himself, so wargaming nerfs carriers to make surface ships happy. Of course that doesnt work, because the frustration of surface ships doesnt come from the damage or combat effectiveness of the carriers, the frustration comes from the carrier being able to limit their moments, spot them and do damage to them with zero risk to himself.

 

On the other side of the coin, we have the carriers, who are greatly frustrated because their planes gets nerfed and nerfed because of all the surface ships complaint, but none of these nerfs make the carrier less frustrating for surface ships, all they do is make the carrier practically useless, frustrating the carrier player in the process.

 

"No risk safe reward" classes do not and will not ever work in these kind of games. All that happens is that they become super frustrating to both the players commanding them, and every other ship in the match, its stupid, and not fixable by balance.

 

The cv rework as a concept is flawed. World of tanks has a "no risk safe reward" class aswell, it is the single greatest cause of frustration in that game, and they have been trying to fix it for 8 years unsuccessfully, all they have managed is to nerf it into uselessness, while keeping it just as frustrating to other tanks as always.

 

nothing more frustrating than just assaulting a bunker killing 5 guys in a row, getting radared by the commander and have the elite skill jet player bomb you to crap. "BF2".

 

life aint fair deal with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DC-DK]
Players
2,413 posts
24,466 battles
2 minutes ago, thiextar said:

Counterplay in wows = shoot down as many planes you can, reducing carriers dpm after a while.

 

Counterplay in wot = utilise arty cover whenever possible to lower the dpm taken from arty.

 

Both concepts are the same, you can mitigate the incoming damage, but you cant completely avoid it without making yourself useless.

 

Same concept, slightly different implementation, different, but the same.

 

Try play the CV's then.. Maybe you change your mind with damage dealing without risk....

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
749 posts
2,918 battles
12 minutes ago, hgbn_dk said:

Try play the CV's then.. Maybe you change your mind with damage dealing without risk....

Thats exactly the issue tho, the ship wont see it from the carriers perspective. The only thing the ship sees, is planes which are impossible to completely defend against, they will always get atleast one strike in, and the will force you to make bad maneuvers during combat, or force you to position in a suboptimal way, simply to be safe from carriers.

 

in a carrier there is zero risk of dying, the only risk that is present is losing dpm, but this isnt something that the surface ship will notice or care about.

 

Of course from the carriers perspective its super frustrating because it will be very difficult to get any real damage done with all the nerfs that always hits this kind of class.

 

The end result is that both sides are frustrated, and its all because of the "no risk safe reward" playstyle. Its not about carriers being overpowered, they arent, i would say they are underpowered right now, but that doesnt stop their very concept from being toxic for everyone, both target and driver.

 

The old system worked better in this way, because the carrier had a hard limit on his plane reserves, and attack runs were much more scarce, so there was much more riding on their attacks. They were op, but the concept was simply better.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DC-DK]
Players
2,413 posts
24,466 battles
1 minute ago, thiextar said:

in a carrier there is zero risk of dying, the only risk that is present is losing dpm, but this isnt something that the surface ship will notice or care about.

.

Think you should play CV and see if there is zero chance of dying.... You obvious don't know facts... You can get blapped instantly when being spotted by BB's it just take a spotter...

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
749 posts
2,918 battles
1 minute ago, hgbn_dk said:

Think you should play CV and see if there is zero chance of dying.... You obvious don't know facts... You can get blapped instantly when being spotted by BB's it just take a spotter...

If you get spotted in a carrier, you are doing something wrong. With the extreme speed of planes, there is no reason to be in any position close enough to the enemies to be bale to get spotted.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NC]
[NC]
Beta Tester
54 posts
4,620 battles
5 minutes ago, thiextar said:

Thats exactly the issue tho, the ship wont see it from the carriers perspective. The only thing the ship sees, is planes which are impossible to completely defend against, they will always get atleast one strike in, and the will force you to make bad maneuvers during combat, or force you to position in a suboptimal way, simply to be safe from carriers.

 

in a carrier there is zero risk of dying, the only risk that is present is losing dpm, but this isnt something that the surface ship will notice or care about.

 

Of course from the carriers perspective its super frustrating because it will be very difficult to get any real damage done with all the nerfs that always hits this kind of class.

 

The end result is that both sides are frustrated, and its all because of the "no risk safe reward" playstyle. Its not about carriers being overpowered, they arent, i would say they are underpowered right now, but that doesnt stop their very concept from being toxic for everyone, both target and driver.

 

The old system worked better in this way, because the carrier had a hard limit on his plane reserves, and attack runs were much more scarce, so there was much more riding on their attacks. They were op, but the concept was simply better.

 

Surface ships have no idea. Also you dodge what? 1 torp that does 5k dmg? You dodge a volley that does 10k from a bb? What sense does it make? Also many players are unaware of the type of armor their ship has. For instance the Yamato has a anti torp belt. You can tank a torp on the middle of your ship. It doesn't do a thing. Some damage that is all. I see some players desperately dodge a torp wave, which 1 or 2 torps would hit the middle and you are fine. While on the rear or front you get flooded. 

Bad players who only excel in "aiming their guns" are the ones complaining the most.

 

Also what is no risk play? In a Yamato you outrange anyone. You can "safely" camp the border. Or does that not count? What about DDs with low detectability range? They don't risk anything when engaging a BB. It is just spewing hate vs 1 class of ship that is fairly unique. That is all it is.

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-RM-]
Players
367 posts
5,226 battles

Try playing some CL / DD at mid tier, while you are at it choose a ship that isnt an AA monster. 

You will soon find that your whole game is dictated by the carrier,  if he takes interest in you then you are going down either by focus fire or the carrier will get you.

The carrier on the other hand will be untouchable from your point of view.

 

 

  • Cool 7
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
97 posts
462 battles
Vor 3 Minuten, thiextar sagte:

If you get spotted in a carrier, you are doing something wrong. With the extreme speed of planes, there is no reason to be in any position close enough to the enemies to be bale to get spotted.

You really don't know what you are talking about mate. DDs , even some Cruisers can easily sneak up on you since 0.8.0.3 and oh please let me see that first attack that always hits on a Mino ^^.  Once spottet every BB will open up on you and some of the buggers have quite the reach ^^ :cap_haloween:

  • Cool 3
  • Bad 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×