General CV related discussions.

[BLUB__BLUB]

3 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

Accurate but slow shells - no wonder the playerbase cant use that ship properly

If you aim badly, you wont get proper hits in, and aiming properly is made harder because shells are so slow.

The problem is more like, at distance they have about half an hour to change speed and direction. Incoming! ....denied.

If you close in it's not THAT good, you take pens from a lot - T8 gets usually lots of T9 "supercruisers" on the reds. 

 

3 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

NC probably best T8 silver BB, maybe on par with Vladi. Havent played the latter in Randoms tho, only CBs, so dont want to comment on that one.

Spreadsheet says no... 

FWIW the Iowa is a whole lot better IMO. 

 

[DFens_666]

10 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

The problem is more like, at distance they have about half an hour to change speed and direction. Incoming! ....denied.

If you close in it's not THAT good, you take pens from a lot - T8 gets usually lots of T9 "supercruisers" on the reds. 

 

Spreadsheet says no... 

FWIW the Iowa is a whole lot better IMO. 

 

 

First i thought, lets not derail this CV thread, but then i changed my mind: Let it have some use afterall

 

NC seems to be rather accurate most of the time, while Iowa (or Missouri too), tend to be extremely derpy at times. You might get a godlike devstrike at 20km, next time you get 2 overpens on a broadside Cruiser at 12km. Didnt really have that with NC. Infact, i had much better avg damage with NC, but then i got several roflstomp wins in a row and my avg damage fell behind the T9s

Massa-choochoo confirmed OP, its T9

[BLUB__BLUB]

28 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

First i thought, lets not derail this CV thread, but then i changed my mind: Let it have some use afterall

 IMO there is no harm since it is about OP ships.

 

28 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

NC seems to be rather accurate most of the time, while Iowa (or Missouri too), tend to be extremely derpy at times. You might get a godlike devstrike at 20km, next time you get 2 overpens on a broadside Cruiser at 12km. Didnt really have that with NC. Infact, i had much better avg damage with NC, but then i got several roflstomp wins in a row and my avg damage fell behind the T9s

Well yes, depending if your adversaries are anything capable. 

Usually I am the lucky one getting all the taters, means the reds avoid most of my shots in NC. 

When Iowa derps, yes it derps. But even then, the reds might avoid and run straight into them... 

 

28 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Massa-choochoo confirmed OP, its T9

I have same sort of thing with T8 Chapayev, only 10x worse. Because T9 Donskoi... 

 

[arquata2019_]

1 ora fa, OVanBruce ha scritto:

Check my profile, I do have plenty of experience on surface ships. It's simply that lately I only play carriers.

you've got many cvs (excluding prerework ones)

[arquata2019_]

46 minuti fa, DFens_666 ha scritto:

Massa-choochoo

Pikachusetts

[Lordcrafty]

is nobody going to point out how pointless this thread is? There are 191 pages? How are people even meant to have a meaningful discussion on such a heavily charged and badly understood topic?

edit: what I would also like to say is that far too many players blow the CV class up to be OP or game destroying for players, but if every match with a CV you're getting hurt that bad by it being there you're simply doing something wrong. Yes CVs below t10 are kind of ridiculous, new players of the class shouldn't need ships this broken but at t10 that suddenly falls off to the point that CVs are simply dealing a very good amount of average damage if the player is skilled and that usually to key targets. It also seems that a lot of players in the class never learn to play it correctly due to the lack of a decent tutorial, hence a skill gap is created leading to ridiculous 80% win rates for skilled players who play with CVs that are known to be strong.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

5 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

is nobody going to point out how pointless this thread is? There are 191 pages? How are people even meant to have a meaningful discussion on such a heavily charged and badly understood topic?

Did you miss the 500+ pages cv feedback topic we had before? Badly understood what? 

[Yosha_AtaIante]

4 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

is nobody going to point out how pointless this thread is? There are 191 pages? How are people even meant to have a meaningful discussion on such a heavily charged and badly understood topic?

This topic... isn't the first one. 

The first CV discussion topic went 500+ pages. It's just the same forum users walking in a circle page for page. Like one of these Netflix series that should have ended after season 2 but now launch season 16.

[Lordcrafty]

1 minute ago, Europizza said:

Did you miss the 500+ pages cv feedback topic we had before? Badly understood what? 

badly understood since a lot of players who complain have minimal to no experience in the class and hence only see it as something they can't counter which can deal massive damage to then whenever.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

1 minute ago, Lordcrafty said:

badly understood since a lot of players who complain have minimal to no experience in the class and hence only see it as something they can't counter which can deal massive damage to then whenever.

So you assume all these people have no clue what they are talking about and just blindly follow what some Unicums who also resent the rework are saying? 

 

Oh my oh my :D

[Lordcrafty]

no because most of the players who get pissed off at CVs have probably just tried to push a flank on their own in a GK...

[Lordcrafty]

I have talked to a lot of players with very little experience in CVs who have complained about the class, it's that simple, I'm not assuming that the people in this discussion are like that I'm just saying that a large portion of the player base just don't understand the class, (Just like I don't understand BBs somehow...)

[Lordcrafty]

11 minutes ago, Zuihou_Kai said:

So you assume all these people have no clue what they are talking about and just blindly follow what some Unicums who also resent the rework are saying? 

 

Oh my oh my :D

yeah, you see the title of this thread is also general CV discussion not rework specific. also, do people need to be reminded that it was possible to dev strike surface ships in a CV before the rework?

disclaimer: The rework is of course obviously not perfect and I'm not trying to suggest that it is.

[_HomTanks_]

2 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

I have talked to a lot of players with very little experience in CVs who have complained about the class, it's that simple, I'm not assuming that the people in this discussion are like that I'm just saying that a large portion of the player base just don't understand the class, (Just like I don't understand BBs somehow...)

You have a point, that there are many cry babies or BBabies that complain about everything. But read this thread when you have time and you will see some very good cv players along with all-class players mention good points about how broken cvs are, how they overinfluence games and how they could be fixed (or maybe not). CVs should be in the game but not with their current state.

[Lordcrafty]

The CV apparently has to have the biggest damage output of all ships for some reason as well,

 

it was far too easy to find a dumb quote like this.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

5 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

badly understood since a lot of players who complain have minimal to no experience in the class and hence only see it as something they can't counter which can deal massive damage to then whenever.

 

9 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

yeah, you see the title of this thread is also general CV discussion not rework specific. also, do people need to be reminded that it was possible to dev strike surface ships in a CV before the rework?

disclaimer: The rework is of course obviously not perfect and I'm not trying to suggest that it is.

Lol, that's actually funny  There are plently of people here in this thread, and the previous one which was over 500 pages long LMAO, who do know what they are talking about who think the carriers are poorly designed and mostly pretty bad for gameplay in general.

I'm amazed how people think having an abundance of 4 carriers in tier 4 matches where ships have little to no AA is 'well... not perfect'. And think a 'healthy' carrier population is when we have low tiers overflow with sealclubbers while in high tiers, we meet as few carriers as we did before the carrier rework. ^^

 

Not perfect.

 

 

[Lordcrafty]

19 hours ago, Admiral_Fene said:

CV:s are completely unbalanced still, and you are yet to fix the issue. I understand that you only care about money and don't care at all about the community, but some of us are still here trying to enjoy the game even when it tries to screw us over. The CV:s impact on the game is enormous, far exceeding any other ships' impact. Not only can it keep targets spotted for minutes, it can damage targets without being in danger itself, witch doesn't work from a game balance perspective and breaks the game. The CV apparently has to have the biggest damage output of all ships for some reason as well, when they from a balance perspective should do the least damage. The spotting is enough to get ships killed, and the CV doesn't need to do enormous damage as well. Not to mention, of course, the impact of torpedo bombers, witch force the player to turn and expose broadside. So instead of rewarding the player with little damage when he  has positioned in a good way, he is now forced to move and put himself in danger.

 

And lets address the fundamental other issue with carriers, witch is complete disregard of AA. Lets begin with an example where I played in my Thunderer and got attacked by the German t10 carrier. I activated my priority sector as soon as he was in my AA range and activated the defensive AA consumable. Not only did he get his drop of torpedoes off but I didn't shoot down a single plane. After the first strike, he was able to attack me again, without any issues. This showcases a fundamental problem, the AA doesn't actually make him unable to attack, but instead limits the amount of times he is able to do so. In other words, it is completely useless to even attempt to anything to a carrier in a destroyer (except Halland I guess) because you wont do any damage and he will still be able to strike you multiple times.

 

After all this, I want to highlight that I post this because I feel I have to. The issue has been going on for too long, and I (and probably many others) can't take it any longer. The carrier breaks fundamental rules when in the game, and goes against many things that players should be doing. The example of positioning is not the only one, take the destroyer trying to capture a base. The base is a fairly small area, and the carrier can easily spot any and all destroyers in the base. Not only is the carrier then able to crush the destroyer without issue, but he will spot the destroyer as well, making the damage the destroyer takes enormous. One (small) fix would be to add a delay to the spotting, so that when the carrier inevitably spots the destroyer, the carriers team will have to wait 10s (for example) before being able to fire at it. This would work similarly to radar. It is not like the DD will go undetected in 10s, unless he uses a smoke screen. This is also an issue, because the destroyer only has a limited amount of smoke screens and consumables are wasted, and instead of them working towards the objectives they are used to fight off one class of ships.

 

I hope you see this post and do something soon,

 

best regards Admiral_Fene

 

[Lordcrafty]

yeah I was just about to say how broken the low tier CVs are, it's complete BS

[Lordcrafty]

I was trying to be moderate with my language but I can call it a [edited]shitshow if you want.

[Lordcrafty]

some intelligent individuals in Wargaming decided that they should introduce t8 premium CVs back without balancing the class properly, and we all know how much WG hates changing the balance of premium ships.

 

edit: and how are new players going to benefit from being giving an OP version of a ship they're meant to be learning for when they play low tier CV?

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

I'm confused. You have just shy over 3500 battles. Does that nullify your opinion to mine in the same regard as you contest other players opinions for not having experience enough in carriers to be calling carriers ? 

[Lordcrafty]

I have 4800 battles... and how can you equate not having enough experience in a class to not having enough games to have a say?

I can't believe you have to visit my WoWs stats and numbers page to try and make a point against me.

 

edit: to make it clear what I meant, I'm talking about people who probably don't even own a CV and certainly not a single t10 CV. I'm just annoyed by the idea that those people are the ones I encounter in randoms and am taking it out here, there's no reason that people shouldn't be involved in discussions but I like to think that it would be better if some people at least tried to understand the class a little more by playing it

[CptBarney]

Says, thread is pointless.

Proceeds to converse in it anyways.

 

Also fails at quoting people properly.

 

Jesus christ.

[Aixin]

Vor 9 Minuten, CptBarney sagte:

Says, thread is pointless.

Proceeds to converse in it anyways.

 

Also fails at quoting people properly.

 

Jesus christ.

He is still right that it's pointless tho. 

[arquata2019_]

1 ora fa, Europizza ha scritto:

Did you miss the 500+ pages cv feedback topic we had before? Badly understood what? 

which?  can i have the link?

 

1 ora fa, Lordcrafty ha scritto:

ith CVs that are known to be strong.

i'm curious so i can be happy, which ones?