Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Capra76

CV poll (take two)

CV poll (take two)  

200 members have voted

  1. 1. If it's a choice between CV as they are or no CV at all then:

    • keep CV in the game as they are;
    • remove CV as a class entirely.
  2. 2. If you were the game's head of development and could do whatever you liked then:

    • keep them as they are or with no more than minor changes;
    • keep them as is with but with major changes;
    • rework number 2, start again from scratch;
    • RTS rollback with or without changes;
    • remove CV as a class entirely;
    • other (please specify).

88 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
4,604 posts
7,604 battles

A new CV poll, as impartial as I can make it, my thinking behind the questions is:

  • question 1 is I believe the only realisitic choice (and then only just), RTS is not coming back and there isn't going to be a rework version 2, it's this CV or no CV;
  • question 2 is every possible option I can consider, it is mostly unrealistic but hopefully posters can answer question 1 truthfully even if they don't really want either option if their preferred option is available in this question.

 

If you have suggestions for improvements or would like other options added to question 2 I'll edit the poll and include them as best I can.

  • Cool 5
  • Boring 3
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Players
2,824 posts
25,528 battles
5 minutes ago, Capra76 said:
  • [...] it's this CV or no CV
  • [...]

it's not. they gonna stay, that's a set one....

 

if u want to make a poll rather ask for things like plane/cv spotting, AA interaction and strenght and such. imho this way this poll is useless, cause it's pretty obvious that most do want changes, isn't it? also u did include options which are not on the table in any way, like rts rollback.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 2
  • Bad 1
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,106 posts
9,568 battles

Remove them completely.

 

This is World of Warships.

 

World of Warplanes is another game. Which I don't play and have no plan on playing, ever.

 

Plus, they are the most unbalanced class in the game and the ones that caused so many issues since the beginning.

  • Cool 9
  • Boring 4
  • Bad 4
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,604 posts
7,604 battles
Just now, MrWastee said:

it's not. they gonna stay, that's a set one....

 

Probably, but on the off chance that WG ever did take their had out of the sand, or if it started to make financial sense to them, that is the only realistic option I can see.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[INTRO]
[INTRO]
Players
1,445 posts
18,635 battles

I would remove CVs as a playable class and implement an "airstrike consumable" that brings in off-map bot-planes as a way to still have some use of AA in the game.

  • Cool 4
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Players
2,824 posts
25,528 battles
5 minutes ago, Capra76 said:

 

Probably, but on the off chance that WG ever did take their had out of the sand, or if it started to make financial sense to them, that is the only realistic option I can see.

i doubt they gonna see monetary benefit in removing a class. rather, like happening at some point, introduce even more classes. who ever said torp boats and alike are off in the long run? or even post war ships... classes can be monetized and appeal fanboys which not necessarily would find their way in here without such connection....

in short: won't happen either.

 

edit:

@Hanse77SWE, u can like it or not, but actually that is more realistic than the whole thread lol :Smile_great:.... on top, funny u downvote a constructive post and rather stick with this "more realistic" poll i guess. njoy :Smile_coin:

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,604 posts
7,604 battles
1 minute ago, MrWastee said:

in short: won't happen either. 

 

Well, lets pretend then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[INTRO]
[INTRO]
Players
1,445 posts
18,635 battles
3 minutes ago, MrWastee said:

u can like it or not, but actually that is more realistic than the whole thread lol

The reason I downwote is that you sabotage the whole vote by you posts. Don't worry, you won't hear from me again.

  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Players
2,824 posts
25,528 battles
1 minute ago, Hanse77SWE said:

The reason I downwote is that you sabotage the whole vote by you posts. Don't worry, you won't hear from me again.

that's sad, i smell quite some munching potential there lol :Smile_popcorn:.... but it's ok. as said, njoy and just ignore why this poll is useless :Smile_veryhappy::Smile_great:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
968 posts
9,107 battles
20 minutes ago, Capra76 said:

 

Probably, but on the off chance that WG ever did take their had out of the sand, or if it started to make financial sense to them, that is the only realistic option I can see.

 

What? Remove the class and refund all those premiums already sold? MMM that's not gonna happen.. 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UKMD]
Players
139 posts
3,374 battles
Vor 18 Minuten, Hanse77SWE sagte:

sabotage

It is a poll

if he wants to vote and give an explanation he can do so

that isn't sabotaging

 

furthermore MrWastee is right, complete removal is never gonna happen

just imagine the calls for refunds lol

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Players
2,824 posts
25,528 battles
2 minutes ago, MagicMooby said:

[...]

if he wants to vote [...]

1st off

lujAVMf.png

 

2ndly, i didn't vote and wouldn't on a poll i not think fits the given matter. as op asked for constructive feedback though, that's what i provided... thats nther reason for the fun meter ticking out on that reaction :Smile_veryhappy:...

anyways.... :Smile_honoring::Smile_popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-SBF-]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
8,315 posts

1. Keep them of course! Game about warships without such important class? It’s like World of Warships without without battleships...

 

2. Depends what we understand by minor and mayor changes; I’d change the way AA works, changed few other things as well,  also add more carriers to the game, to have every tier covered - I guess that mayor changes.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 2
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,604 posts
7,604 battles
32 minutes ago, Kenjiro_ said:

 

What? Remove the class and refund all those premiums already sold? MMM that's not gonna happen.. 

 

As I said let's pretend.

 

Maybe @El2aZeR is an AI created by the US Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency to test the next generation of unmanned airiel vehicles, maybe it escapes and starts to self replicate, soon every CV player in the game is an El2aZeR and in an act of desparation WG does the unthinkable and, for once, listens to what the players say and acts on it.

 

Or maybe, lets pretend something even more absurd, that anything that's posted on here matters in the slightest and just go with the poll to see what the consensus is.

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[_I_]
Players
724 posts
19,496 battles

1) remove them and tweak ships with high AA for some other goodies

 

2) tweak the RTS a bit - as said before if they spent all these resources on tweaking them and removing all the bugs, it'd probably be a hell of a lot better than now.

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


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

The problem you've got with player base polls in WoWs is the small player base. In WoT there are so many more players, and consequently WG get scared of pissing them off, so rolling back proposed changes isn't unheard of.

 

But in WoWs WG are instead looking for new players who want to play an additional but integrated CV game, or play an additional but intergrated submarine game. So in WoWs you will have three games going on, in WoTs you have one. WG are always going to be tempted to use WoWs as a big experiment because the kickback is still minimal, we are the mice being fed a toxic diet to see how we react. I mean, can you imagine how the WoT players would react if bombers where introduced into the game?

 

For the the record I voted no CV at all, ever. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SM0KE]
Players
6,411 posts
14,935 battles

Much as they've wrecked my fun in a lot of my DDs, and the balance is still a long way from being right, I wouldn't remove CVs: the period that the game encompasses goes all the way from the 'lucky to get off the ground in one piece' stage of aviation, all the way through to CVs becoming the preeminent warship type in the major blue water navies, so it would feel a bit artificial (in the later period ships, anyway) to ditch them.

 

The key reason though IMO to keep them is that they add variety to the game; it might even be entertaining variety too, if WG ever got the AA interactions/details right (I miss things like Atlanta being able to ambush gormless planes). Ditch the planes and we get 2D battles rather than 3D (by the same logic, of course, subs should be a Good Thing, and I'm really not convinced about that), which would be less interesting.

 

A secondary - and probably pi$$-poor - reason is that they are very pretty and I quite like zooming around admiring the planes in Coop; then again, I like 'pretties' generally.

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
427 posts

As much you people love to cry about P2W and unbalanced and Russian Bias the game development have two choices ... either more ships that will start to obsolete others simply because of the number of then or alternative classes.

 

Without CVs what WG can only do is add more paper ships that will then have people complain about them, there is no point in removing then because for some people it doesnt matter if all they did was having a bulleye painted on with no planes or weapons, its a question of being a Redditor karma farming,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
968 posts
9,107 battles
38 minutes ago, Capra76 said:

 

As I said let's pretend.

 

Maybe @El2aZeR is an AI created by the US Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency to test the next generation of unmanned airiel vehicles, maybe it escapes and starts to self replicate, soon every CV player in the game is an El2aZeR and in an act of desparation WG does the unthinkable and, for once, listens to what the players say and acts on it.

 

Or maybe, lets pretend something even more absurd, that anything that's posted on here matters in the slightest and just go with the poll to see what the consensus is.

 

Nothing posted here had ever any meaning on WG side. You should have learned that on Pay2Rico shitstorm if not before. As a business, WG is only interested on bottom sales figures and they say it's fine. Forum and reddit combined is probably less than %5 of total playerbase. There is a huge silent crowd who only speak with their wallet and they approve WG policies. We, as forum and reddit communities,  are nothing more than a couple of whiners who scream about every attempt WG makes to monetize the game...

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,270 posts

They won't go back to RTS CV play, the old way of playing CV's.

 

Nobody was really interested in playing CV looking at a 2D map all the time, clicking on it. Only die-hard CV players was interested in playing CV's like that.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
187 posts
1 hour ago, Capra76 said:

 

Probably, but on the off chance that WG ever did take their had out of the sand, or if it started to make financial sense to them, that is the only realistic option I can see.

agree. WG has no real intrest in the players. Its just looking how to make $. Thats fine but don't pretant you listen to the players and do things for the players

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,270 posts

There really wouldn't be much point having AA on ships if they removed CV's. Have you thought about that one, if they removed CV if would make AA on all ships completely useless and pointless even having AA guns.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
496 posts
10,962 battles

I quite enjoy the occasional spin in my Premium CVs but can you honestly see WG reimbursing all 5 of them for say £150 ? Not a chance folks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NSVE]
[NSVE]
Players
421 posts
12,958 battles

The first problem as I see it is... As a surface vessel you can lose a turret/s which reduces your ability to fight effectively. CV's on the other hand can avoid this by rotating squadrons and keep their main armament the entire battle.

 

The second, even CV's can't kill CV's.... 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,270 posts
3 minutes ago, peoplescavalry said:

I quite enjoy the occasional spin in my Premium CVs but can you honestly see WG reimbursing all 5 of them for say £150 ? Not a chance folks.

 

They would never give you the cash back anyway. They would give you doubloon value to spend on other ships instead

 

Which in real terms, they ain't really refunding anything at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×