CV players and the joys of playing new lines at T3-5

[Gnolfus]

I am a pretty new player, but I consider myself a fast learner and according to the stats I am doing relatively okay. Managed to climb up from a 40% something WR when I was completely new to 50%+ at just below 400 battles, with the more detailed stat pages showing I am at least on the right side of the bell curve in more specific metrics.

However, starting any new lines require you to go through the absolutely worst experience in this game, which is T3-5 and the constant carrier (often double carrier) games while you're sailing ships with shitty AA.

Usually cruisers (which is what I primarily play) have good turning circles and rudder shifts at this tier, so it's usually not that bad because you can dodge a lot of stuff.

 

Enter the Kirov, which actually is a fun and great ship, but with a battleship-tier turning circle, no torpedo protection belt and bad concealment (12.4 with CE and camo, 14 something base I think), playing it has really reignited by hatred for CVs.

 

Especially when you come across crap like this:

 

My biggest gripe with CVs however aren't even that at tier 4-5 they absolutely dumpster everything on the map if the player remotely knows what he is doing (which apparently isn't very hard to achieve, judging by the pictures above).

It's that the game changes completely. What's good but slightly risky/opportunistic positioning in a non-CV game can become certain death simply by the CV accidentally sending some planes nearby. It encourages stale and boring gameplay. I am by nature an aggressive player in nearly any game I play, I enjoy juggling the risk/reward factor while trying to play to win.

 

Why can't CVs start at tier 6+, hard locked to tier6+ matches only? Historically it makes no sense that pre-WW2 ships are facing off against CVs, and in terms of gameplay it makes even less sense. A lot of tier 4-5 ships are fun to play, but the experience is very often completely destroyed by seal clubbing lowlives. I mean you can do that with any other ship class, but it at least requires some skill and your decisions and actions on the map carries the risk of people firing back at you. Rant over.

[ulcusrodens]

you have definitely a point. i'd ban CVs from every kind of battle, but surely below tier 6 there's no reason to keep them besides ruining the game for everyone else. on the plus side, anyway, low tier CVs are meat against DDs and most tier 3-5 battles are full of them

 

P.S. just lose any hope that mid to high tier AA is worth anything against carriers. there will always be 4 or 5 planes able to drop on you, even if you kill half the squadron with the best AA known to man. plus, AA range has been nerfed to plain uselesness and grouping ships doesn't really solve the problem. conventional sea battles were a memory of the past around 1941-42 because of carriers. you can't expect a game about sea battles to be any different.

 

[CptBarney]

Yeah for tier 4-5 it's messed atm.

 

That guy on youtube doesnt think cvs are broken/op at tier 8+ (i believe).

[Aixin]

Tier 4 cvs needs to be much weaker to be actually keepable. But WG wants them op as crap so newbies in cvs don't have frustrating experiences. They want more CV players. Personally I would ban T4 cvs into coop so that tier 4 5 is cured. On T6 + idc Cuz most cvs are simply extremely bad( the players) and thus no thread at all. 

[Gnolfus]

13 minutes ago, ulcusrodens said:

you have definitely a point. i'd ban CVs from every kind of battle, but surely below tier 6 there's no reason to keep them besides ruining the game for everyone else. on the plus side, anyway, low tier CVs are meat against DDs and most tier 3-5 battles are full of them

  

P.S. just lose any hope that mid to high tier AA is worth anything against carriers. there will always be 4 or 5 planes able to drop on you, even if you kill half the squadron with the best AA known to man. plus, AA range has been nerfed to plain uselesness and grouping ships doesn't really solve the problem. conventional sea battles were a memory of the past around 1941-42 because of carriers. you can't expect a game about sea battles to be any different.

  

 

I've played a lot of tier 6-8. First of all the frequency of carrier games (or god forbid, double carrier games) are much lower, and also the ships at least do some plane damage back along with having torpedo belts etc. Tier 3-5 is definitively worse than T6+ in terms of CV intrusion.

[ulcusrodens]

2 minutes ago, Gnolfus said:

 

I've played a lot of tier 6-8. First of all the frequency of carrier games (or god forbid, double carrier games) are much lower, and also the ships at least do some plane damage back along with having torpedo belts etc. Tier 3-5 is definitively worse than T6+ in terms of CV intrusion.

all you said is true. however, a competent CV player can (and very often will) win the game alone.

[Breezewind]

11 minutes ago, ulcusrodens said:

all you said is true. however, a competent CV player can (and very often will) win the game alone.

This could not be further from the truth, and is complete BS.

[ulcusrodens]

11 minutes ago, Breezewind said:

This could not be further from the truth, and is complete BS.

whatever, dude. i won't be dragged in another endless discussion, now that CV fans are in i leave you guys having fun. as always.

 

[Aixin]

Vor 12 Minuten, Breezewind sagte:

This could not be further from the truth, and is complete BS.

It is the truth tho..... 

[El2aZeR]

22 minutes ago, Breezewind said:

This could not be further from the truth, and is complete BS.

 

Hi there.

[Henning77]

Just expect to be ignored and laughed at.Wow's community is toxic, kind of like chernobyl reactor.

WG was supposed to buff carriers, but made them hopelessly OP.

They buffed carriers, and at the same time made aa guns useless.

This is the usual result, when they buff anything, exept Izumo.

And with OP ships left, right and center ( read Smolensk, somers.)this game is getting more like a nightmare instead of fun.

 

[CptBarney]

1 minute ago, Henning77 said:

Just expect to be ignored and laughed at.Wow's community is toxic, kind of like chernobyl reactor.

most peeps agree with how rediculous cv's are at tier 4 and 5. seen many people lose friends before tier 4 even because of the madness from bottom tier cv's.

 

gg weegee.

[veslingr]

1 hour ago, ulcusrodens said:

you have definitely a point. i'd ban CVs from every kind of battle, but surely below tier 6 there's no reason to keep them besides ruining the game for everyone else. on the plus side, anyway, low tier CVs are meat against DDs and most tier 3-5 battles are full of them

 

P.S. just lose any hope that mid to high tier AA is worth anything against carriers. there will always be 4 or 5 planes able to drop on you, even if you kill half the squadron with the best AA known to man. plus, AA range has been nerfed to plain uselesness and grouping ships doesn't really solve the problem. conventional sea battles were a memory of the past around 1941-42 because of carriers. you can't expect a game about sea battles to be any different.

 

I think wot is better game for you  :)

[veslingr]

34 minutes ago, CptBarney said:

most peeps agree with how rediculous cv's are at tier 4 and 5. seen many people lose friends before tier 4 even because of the madness from bottom tier cv's.

 

gg weegee.

Ah the genocide of wows quiters who can not pass till t5 in 10 games.....we would have 100k players if those poor soldiers did not fall on t4 :)

[CptBarney]

17 minutes ago, veslingr said:

Ah the genocide of wows quiters who can not pass till t5 in 10 games.....we would have 100k players if those poor soldiers did not fall on t4 :)

Why dont you go troll elsewhere?

[veslingr]

18 minutes ago, CptBarney said:

Why dont you go troll elsewhere?

This is ideal topic not to be serious. 

[Sir_Sinksalot]

2 hours ago, Gnolfus said:

 

Enter the Kirov, which actually is a fun and great ship, but with a battleship-tier turning circle, no torpedo protection belt and bad concealment (12.4 with CE and camo, 14 something base I think), playing it has really reignited by hatred for CVs.

 

 

The tier6 Budyonny addresses a lot of the Kirovs failings including much improved AA. In fact the Budyonny is one of my favorite T6 cruisers along with the La Galisson.

 

It also doesn't take that long to race through those lower tiers and get to T6 with their small xp requirements at least that's what I found so wasn't bothered getting worked up about it after I noticed how little time I actually had to spend there plus there was hardly anyone there so it took ages to get a battle which was annoying and was just happy to move on up sooner rather than later. 

[Kejoz]

There is an easy fix, tier IV CV's - bombs only, Tier VI bombs and torps, Tier VIII and X should add rocketplanes. History nerds - happy, balance - restored. But CV's will be broken as long as there is no interaction between them.

[Lakedaemonios]

T3-T4 ships must be WW1 ships and no CV fight this days. Imo T5 must be a WW1 tier.

But WG has mess every tier with fiction gameplay...

remember that T1 ships r newer than T2...

[El2aZeR]

1 hour ago, Sir_Sinksalot said:

The tier6 Budyonny addresses a lot of the Kirovs failings including much improved AA.

 

Budy has effectively the same AA as Kirov when it comes to self-defense as she shifts her AA strength from her long/mid range to her short range.

That also means in terms of fleet defense (which in itself is a dead concept I suppose) Budy actually has much worse AA than Kirov.

[Rionnen_marksman]

5 hours ago, Gnolfus said:

I am a pretty new player, but I consider myself a fast learner and according to the stats I am doing relatively okay. Managed to climb up from a 40% something WR when I was completely new to 50%+ at just below 400 battles, with the more detailed stat pages showing I am at least on the right side of the bell curve in more specific metrics.

However, starting any new lines require you to go through the absolutely worst experience in this game, which is T3-5 and the constant carrier (often double carrier) games while you're sailing ships with shitty AA.

Usually cruisers (which is what I primarily play) have good turning circles and rudder shifts at this tier, so it's usually not that bad because you can dodge a lot of stuff.

 

Enter the Kirov, which actually is a fun and great ship, but with a battleship-tier turning circle, no torpedo protection belt and bad concealment (12.4 with CE and camo, 14 something base I think), playing it has really reignited by hatred for CVs.

 

Especially when you come across crap like this:

 

My biggest gripe with CVs however aren't even that at tier 4-5 they absolutely dumpster everything on the map if the player remotely knows what he is doing (which apparently isn't very hard to achieve, judging by the pictures above).

It's that the game changes completely. What's good but slightly risky/opportunistic positioning in a non-CV game can become certain death simply by the CV accidentally sending some planes nearby. It encourages stale and boring gameplay. I am by nature an aggressive player in nearly any game I play, I enjoy juggling the risk/reward factor while trying to play to win.

 

Why can't CVs start at tier 6+, hard locked to tier6+ matches only? Historically it makes no sense that pre-WW2 ships are facing off against CVs, and in terms of gameplay it makes even less sense. A lot of tier 4-5 ships are fun to play, but the experience is very often completely destroyed by seal clubbing lowlives. I mean you can do that with any other ship class, but it at least requires some skill and your decisions and actions on the map carries the risk of people firing back at you. Rant over.

Ok, to address a couple of points (not all you) 

 

1. those who play cv at low tier probably aren’t capable of playing at t8+. 

2. there definitely does need to be Something done To address this. Maybe max 10 t6 games per week per player?

[Sir_Sinksalot]

2 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Budy has effectively the same AA as Kirov when it comes to self-defense as she shifts her AA strength from her long/mid range to her short range.

That also means in terms of fleet defense (which in itself is a dead concept I suppose) Budy actually has much worse AA than Kirov.

Sure it's still not amazing for AA but it does come with an AA boost consumable option which makes it a bit better than the T5 though still not outstanding by any means and a fighter consumable would have been delicious. To expand on my point what I mean is that the Budy addresses a lot of the flaws the T5 has while maintaining most all of the positives and expanding on them, it's a great ship but so far as AA goes, by playing T6 what that means is you are now a tier where you will encounter a lot of teammates that very much do have a highly effective AA complement on their ships, especially U.S. ships so at this tier you'll rarely struggle to find this "borrowed" outlet and basically never stray too far from a teammate bristling with AA so when the carriers are coming for you they eat your teammates AA along with your not so great AA thus becoming a pretty impregnable umbrella or at least very unattractive so while you can still be attacked from the air chances are that carrier player will go to an easier and less punishing target.  

[Capra76]

53 minutes ago, Rionnen_marksman said:

there definitely does need to be Something done To address this. Maybe max 10 t6 games per week per player?

 

Doesn't that say something truely profound though?

 

If you have to place MM limits on ships, is it the MM that is the problem, or is it the ship itself?

 

And if WG thinks that one CV is acceptable at higher tiers whilst 5 x any other class is reasonable then just how broken is the class?

[Aixin]

Vor 6 Minuten, Capra76 sagte:

 

Doesn't that say something truely profound though?

 

If you have to place MM limits on ships, is it the MM that is the problem, or is it the ship itself?

 

And if WG thinks that one CV is acceptable at higher tiers whilst 5 x any other class is reasonable then just how broken is the class?

They wanted it that way to begin with.. They never intended to equal a CV with any other ship. 

[lovelacebeer]

I truly feel sorry for anyone starting out in the game these days the lower tiers and considering that most low tier ships come from a time before aircraft were a serious threat the balancing is very poor. 

 

However there is is no way WG would want to make any effort to help the lower tiers (prehaps as incentive to buy your way out of the lower tiers). Considering that throughout most of 2019 if you joined the game you were given a free Langley to start out with, I get the impression WG were determined to force CVs down our throats, come hell or high water.