Tiers 7 tp 10 totally unplayable.

[DocStrangeFruit]

Tiers 7 to 10 are no longer fun anymore. The reasons being I feel are:-

 

1. 1-2 CVs per side every battle with deadly accurate bombs and rockets (yes the players have got rather good with them) and Destroyer's and Cruiser's are suffering badly due to the amount of damage they can pile on, the amount of attack runs they get and the fact AA at high tier is no longer sufficient  (even more so since WG nerfed it badly in the latest update) even in groups to counter the unlimited planes CVs now have.

2. 2-4 radar ships per side with up to 10 to 12 Km radar that can last up to and beyond 40 seconds making capping untenable.

 

Some possible ideas:-

 

a. Radars ships should be hard capped at 2 maximum per side from tiers 7 upwards or 2 potential radar ships per side as I know some can swap it out for smoke/def fire etc.

 

b. CVs should also be hard capped at 1 per side from tier 7-8 upwards.

 

c. Defensive AA needs buffing, the stats for ship AA needs to be returned to our port and in game screens so we can see how much damage we could potentially do instead of this AA is at 100% max health rubbish.

 

d. Carriers should have to wait a certain period after their last squadron was destroyed before another can be launched.

 

e. Rockets and bombs need to be made harder to hit destroyers that are not actively manoeuvring.

 

f. Chance of fires needs to be reduced same as flood chance has been on torpedo's.

 

[sgtmarple]

Shesh, seems like another DD player wants free and easy reign of the sea.

[Mr_Snoww]

NERF CARRIERS WAHHH!!! that's all I heard from that 

[Blixies]

2 minutes ago, sgtmarple said:

Shesh, seems like another DD player wants free and easy reign of the sea.

Meanwhile DDs post CV rework:

(coming from an avid CV player).

[DocStrangeFruit]

5 minutes ago, Mr_Snoww said:

10 minutes ago, sgtmarple said:

Shesh, seems like another DD player wants free and easy reign of the sea.

from that 

Nope I clearly stated Cruisers and Destroyers, maybe before replying you to a post try reading it properly first.

[Bics93]

34 minuti fa, Dr_Strangefruit ha scritto:

Cruiser's are suffering

 

22 minuti fa, Dr_Strangefruit ha scritto:

Nope I clearly stated Cruisers and Destroyers, maybe before replying you to a post try reading it properly first.

 

Nah, my cruisers are doing fine 

[asalonen]

28 minutes ago, Dr_Strangefruit said:

a. Radars ships should be hard capped at 2 maximum per side from tiers 7 upwards or 2 potential radar ships per side as I know some can swap it out for smoke/def fire etc.

 

b. CVs should also be hard capped at 1 per side from tier 7-8 upwards.

Can't do either, simply because there are too many radar ships and CV's in the queue. Like everyone else, they go to battle with same priority. The only exception is currently the soft cap of 1 CV per side in T10, which can make CV's wait longer. T8 has too many CV's in queue for that to work.
 

28 minutes ago, Dr_Strangefruit said:

c. Defensive AA needs buffing, the stats for ship AA needs to be returned to our port and in game screens so we can see how much damage we could potentially do instead of this AA is at 100% max health rubbish.

AA stats are currently confusing, with too many variables. Also Wiki is out of date. I hope WG does something here. For all the work done on the rework, updating documentation seems like a very minor task. Not that it's not often neglected...

 

28 minutes ago, Dr_Strangefruit said:

d. Carriers should have to wait a certain period after their last squadron was destroyed before another can be launched.

They would be more boring to play then, not what WG wants. Also then the alpha damage should be increased to balance it -- not what other players want? Nobody misses the instadeaths of pre-rework...

 

28 minutes ago, Dr_Strangefruit said:

e. Rockets and bombs need to be made harder to hit destroyers that are not actively manoeuvring.

Bombs will harder to use against DD's in the next patch (the reticle gets longer and narrower). Not sure why you would present a stationary target to a CV though?

 

28 minutes ago, Dr_Strangefruit said:

f. Chance of fires needs to be reduced same as flood chance has been on torpedo's.

No opinion here... If you reduce damage over time, either it's a nerf or the alpha damage must be increased. 

[Sigimundus]

13 minutes ago, Bics93 said:

 

 

Nah, my cruisers are doing fine 

My DD to

[HaachamaShipping]

Sorry, but I find it hard to take a complaint about radar serious after the delay introduction.

[quickr]

While CVs sure can be a pain in the arse, I still find tier 7 to be one of, if not the best tier to play. It's just the amount of very good / strong ships at that tier that makes it really fun and enjoyable to play.

Radar was never an issue to me, unlike CVs, radar has limited range and time, so it's (relatively) easy to play around it.

[cpt_edward]

oooooh poor dd/cv/bb show me in this doll where the bad cv touched you

[Maihon]

Whilst recognising the CV queue problem at T8 and below, it is still very frustrating for other players at T7 and below, the tiers that are generally the least equipped to cope with aircraft, to have to repeatedly face 2 carriers and the most aircraft, not that any of that is a CV players fault.

[Sub_Human]

I did however find something in this... 

1 hour ago, Dr_Strangefruit said:

d. Carriers should have to wait a certain period after their last squadron was destroyed before another can be launched.

What if CVs would have a cooldown, but were able to keep flying untill that timer expired.

 

Say that you had 60 seconds from launch till you gain control of that squad, but you could play your previous squad untill the next is available. At that point F would be pressed and control would go over to the new squad.

 

2 things would be gained by this. Cv-players would have to plan ahead more and would have to rotate squads.

 

If you dont plan ahead and your squad gets wiped you are left without planes for a whole cooldown.

 

Just a thought 

[Ubertron_X]

The most annoying thing about CV's while captaining cruisers and destroyers is that in order to avoid much of their payload you probably have to do some crazy maneuvering, probably showing broadside to the entire enemy force that happens to be on your flank...

[Cambera_1]

16 minutes ago, quickr said:

While CVs sure can be a pain in the arse, I still find tier 7 to be one of, if not the best tier to play. It's just the amount of very good / strong ships at that tier that makes it really fun and enjoyable to play.

T7 is imho the MOST fun tier to play. I regret that in all of these points based competitions the competition payback on T7 makes them less useful. 

13 minutes ago, Maihon said:

Whilst recognising the CV queue problem at T8 and below, it is still very frustrating for other players at T7 and below, the tiers that are generally the least equipped to cope with aircraft, to have to repeatedly face 2 carriers and the most aircraft, not that any of that is a CV players fault.

And at T7, unless you get a T8 carrier, you face some of the weakest planes in game with pretty good AA.

And of course T7 always is at a disadvantage compared to T8 due to the extra module slot that normally takes the Concealment module.

 

[Sigimundus]

27 minutes ago, cpt_edward said:

oooooh poor dd/cv/bb show me in this doll where the bad cv touched you

You do not attached the warship doll

 

Or do you mean this doll?

 

Spoiler

 

[naztb]

1 hour ago, Dr_Strangefruit said:

Tiers 7 to 10 are no longer fun anymore. The reasons being I feel are:-

 

1. 1-2 CVs per side every battle with deadly accurate bombs and rockets (yes the players have got rather good with them) and Destroyer's and Cruiser's are suffering badly due to the amount of damage they can pile on, the amount of attack runs they get and the fact AA at high tier is no longer sufficient  (even more so since WG nerfed it badly in the latest update) even in groups to counter the unlimited planes CVs now have.

2. 2-4 radar ships per side with up to 10 to 12 Km radar that can last up to and beyond 40 seconds making capping untenable.

 

Some possible ideas:-

 

a. Radars ships should be hard capped at 2 maximum per side from tiers 7 upwards or 2 potential radar ships per side as I know some can swap it out for smoke/def fire etc.

b. CVs should also be hard capped at 1 per side from tier 7-8 upwards.

c. Defensive AA needs buffing, the stats for ship AA needs to be returned to our port and in game screens so we can see how much damage we could potentially do instead of this AA is at 100% max health rubbish.

 

d. Carriers should have to wait a certain period after their last squadron was destroyed before another can be launched.

 

e. Rockets and bombs need to be made harder to hit destroyers that are not actively manoeuvring.

 

f. Chance of fires needs to be reduced same as flood chance has been on torpedo's.

 

a. There are not a lot of tier 7 ships with radar 

b. CV should be hard capped to 1 in all tiers. DDs should be hard capped to 3 at all tiers also.

C. AA is adequate for same tier if up tiered AA is OP if down tiered then AA is inadequate

D. dont agree

e. If you are not actively maneuvering then you deserve all the rockets and bombs that hit you

f. I agree as long as they reduce the chances of fire and floods from DDs and CA.  

[Norris_of_Quirm]

FWIW Tiers 7-10 are amongst my favourites at the moment, and I'm a DD main. I must be doing it wrong...

 

(To be fair, I gave up playing anything with poor AA some time ago, but still)

[Puffin_]

CV´s are to popular to be  hard capped to 1 

They must be fun ships to play.

[pzkpfwv1d]

Well, in some instances I would actually agree with the general point the poster is playing, but this is actually the responsibility of your own teams CV player rather than a general fault with the game, I have seen instances where with 2 CV's on your side, the Cv's do not seem to understand the area denial effect of dropping a fighter squadron near a cap to assist the DD's in capping and therefore, you end up with a situation where a stealthy DD is constantly visible to the enemy team and subject to incoming fire from anything in range which generally results in the demise of said DD rather quickly as smoke does not blind the aircraft (it should be able to hamper the aircraft as a smoke band is quite dense and large enough to hide the said ship)

[MrWastee]

#classicthursdaythread

[beercrazy]

personally I don't have that much of a problem with cvs unless I do something stupid then hey ho I deserve to be punished

my preferred tier at the moment is 9 and that's in a musashi and that's got cack aa and I still shoot planes down with it and though I have been sunk by cvs its easier now than when it was insta delete any class by cv in pre rework

 

 

[Besserwisser3000]

Vor 3 Stunden, sgtmarple sagte:

Shesh, seems like another DD player wants free and easy reign of the sea.

 

Seems like another CV apologist is making up stories. Meanwhile in the real world:

[Altsak]

50 minutes ago, GudmundurG said:

CV´s are to popular to be  hard capped to 1 

They must be fun ships to play.

 

S_O said many DD players took CVs after rework. Looks like the DD players adapted to the new meta and that's the reason why we have now so many CV players roaming freely in the oceans.

[Deltateam70]

I hate radar cruisers with a burning passion, but thats because they're doing their job and flushing me out my smoke, other than that. I enjoy tier 7-10. Radar cruisers and CVs just make you have to play more aggressively or passively depending on the situation. Don't get me wrong, CVs have their flaws, but right now I have zero problems with tier 10. Except from the occasional "special" teammates I get, and the occasional "special" me moments I do which is just part of the game.