General CV related discussions.

[Deckeru_Maiku]

3 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

On 11/6/2020 at 5:08 PM, Lordcrafty said:

We need more interesting consumables/abilities and a far better AA system, preferably more arcade style to bring it in line with the CV gameplay. It is indeed stupid that the CV should be so separated from interaction from the ships.

so, you're opinion @Deckeru_Maiku is that this is bad? So what are your thoughts? CV should continue to be separated from the ships and there shouldn't be interaction beyond the CV dropping and getting damage?

Using even more arcade play for ships to defend against incoming planes, while having shells and torpedoes fired at them, is about the least helpfull idea that I read on this forum for quite a while.

Dedicated AA cruisers, that would really have an impact on the amount of planes a CV has - so we of course would also more severely limited numbers of planes on the CVs - would be a good way to punish CV players that just spam planes because "we can do it..."

And to get the whole CV lines in line with reality a little bit, the toughest enemy of an enemy should be - wait for it.... - an CV of course. CV fighters (and probably ship fighters) should changed into something that really can damage enemy planes, and not being just some spotting tool for the CV.

 

And of course nothing like that will happen, as WG sees no problem with CVs... except maybe for them not bring into enough revenue... so making playing them any harder is no option...

[UnterSeeBot]

8 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

what I meant is that currently CVs aren't designed that way, they may have been originally, but that doesn't matter since they aren't now. It would be much more interesting if there was risk to the CV through the enemy CV/team but with the arcade style system I just don't see it working.

Having asked DM, and had a reply, you should now understand why DM's downvotes are far preferable 

[Lordcrafty]

2 minutes ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

Using even more arcade play for ships to defend against incoming planes, while having shells and torpedoes fired at them, is about the least helpfull idea that I read on this forum for quite a while.

Dedicated AA cruisers, that would really have an impact on the amount of planes a CV has - so we of course would also more severely limited numbers of planes on the CVs - would be a good way to punish CV players that just spam planes because "we can do it..."

And to get the whole CV lines in line with reality a little bit, the toughest enemy of an enemy should be - wait for it.... - an CV of course. CV fighters (and probably ship fighters) should changed into something that really can damage enemy planes, and not being just some spotting tool for the CV.

 

And of course nothing like that will happen, as WG sees no problem with CVs... except maybe for them not bring into enough revenue... so making playing them any harder is no option...

1: all AA does right now is reduce plane reserves. that is one of the issues with it. AA is pretty much not designed to actually defend against strikes.
2: the idea that I'm proposing isn't to add another layer of complexity, you're right it would end up being too much, just maybe some unique abilities for AA ships which hamper the CV, not just direct AA guns.
3: at least at t10 players can't just spam planes without being smart about it but of course at the lower tiers it's easy. Then again currently CV gameplay is all about maximising time doing stuff in the air and always flying attack runs so It kind of is plane spamming in a way. It would be awesome if CVs somehow had to fight for air superiority in areas first before they can attack.
 

[Deckeru_Maiku]

10 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

what I meant is that currently CVs aren't designed that way, they may have been originally, but that doesn't matter since they aren't now. It would be much more interesting if there was risk to the CV through the enemy CV/team but with the arcade style system I just don't see it working.

 

Yep, that seems to be one of Your problems, because for quite a few other players posting here it does matter. Being an nearly inmortal being able to send death to every spot of the map without having to risk anything - as even the planes that get shot down get replenished - is THE one thing that makes reeeworked CVs the pest as what they are seen by so many players.

And - oh wonder - WG had been told right from the start by good CV players that their reeeeworked concept was bullfeces... so there probably would have been chances to implement the reeeworked CVs in a different way... except that CV is - Vodka at work again - alsways sure to know better than every players - what their skill in the game whatever is - what will work or not in the game... only to later suddenly (!) and surprisingly (!!!) finding out that they f*cked up... once more...

 

So, yes, you are right. With the arcade - which isn't really arcade, as it's only a very single sided "Whack a mole" mode - gameplay and the risk that potatoes would stop playing CVs as soon as would get any more complicated, there is no way to get any more skilled based CV play "working"

 

[Lordcrafty]

2 minutes ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

Yep, that seems to be one of Your problems, because for quite a few other players posting here it does matter. Being an nearly inmortal being able to send death to every spot of the map without having to risk anything - as even the planes that get shot down get replenished - is THE one thing that makes reeeworked CVs the pest as what they are seen by so many players.

And - oh wonder - WG had been told right from the start by good CV players that their reeeeworked concept was bullfeces... so there probably would have been chances to implement the reeeworked CVs in a different way... except that CV is - Vodka at work again - alsways sure to know better than every players - what their skill in the game whatever is - what will work or not in the game... only to later suddenly (!) and surprisingly (!!!) finding out that they f*cked up... once more...

when I mention that "it doesn't matter" I am implying that since WG threw that gameplay out of the window (the highly intelligent developers that completely understand and want the best for their game as they are), it Unfortunately it does not have an impact when considering changes right now.

[Deckeru_Maiku]

15 minutes ago, LoveZeppelin said:

Having asked DM, and had a reply, you should now understand why DM's downvotes are far preferable 

 

I prefer them too... way either than having to compose a post in a foreign language in the full knowledge that it doesn't change neither the mide of the recipient nor the WGs vodka fueled game "balancing" attempts.

 

10 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

1: all AA does right now is reduce plane reserves. that is one of the issues with it. AA is pretty much not designed to actually defend against strikes.
2: the idea that I'm proposing isn't to add another layer of complexity, you're right it would end up being too much, just maybe some unique abilities for AA ships which hamper the CV, not just direct AA guns.
3: at least at t10 players can't just spam planes without being smart about it but of course at the lower tiers it's easy. Then again currently CV gameplay is all about maximising time doing stuff in the air and always flying attack runs so It kind of is plane spamming in a way. It would be awesome if CVs somehow had to fight for air superiority in areas first before they can attack.
 

 

1. It doesn't really even do that. If one isn't utterly braindead. Even I manage to have full squads of planes available on my T6 CVs even when confronted with mostly T8 ships in the battle... which shouldn't be possible...

2. It might not might not proposed as another complexity, but it would be one. And a not needed one anyway, as enhanced AA and the mechanics the special AA skills in the RTS time would be good enough, if their efficiency would just be big enough...

3. Which probably is the reason why there are about as many T10 CVs in battles as before the Reeework, right? And as any need for skill would make the CV potatoes leave the sinking ships... well, no need to explain it again and again and again...

[Deckeru_Maiku]

8 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

when I mention that "it doesn't matter" I am implying that since WG threw that gameplay out of the window (the highly intelligent developers that completely understand and want the best for their game as they are), it Unfortunately it does not have an impact when considering changes right now.

Which on the other hand doesn't keep you from posting apologetic stuff here about that CVs aren't hald bad as the players here in the thread seem to see them... and then wondering why there people showing there different opinion by using those tool this forum offers them, without having the need to trying to explain why you are in there view just not quite right with your opinion.

 

So... I guess I'll go back to using them little opinion markers again from now on

[Puffin_]

Franklin D. Roosevelt vs Halland  Clan battle

 

[El2aZeR]

4 hours ago, Puffin_ said:

Franklin D. Roosevelt vs Halland  Clan battle

 

FDR is a terrible DD killer.

I really fail to see what the point of that video is.

[159Hunter]

15 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

I really fail to see what the point of that video is.

CV apologist: Halland AA OP

CV unicum: FDR wasted all his planes for nothing

DD player: great fun; spotted the entire game

CT hater: FDR is OP

 

Sums it up, no? 

 

[DFens_666]

3 hours ago, 159Hunter said:

Sums it up, no? 

 

People who like to play CBs: Can you just [edited]ban CVs from CBs?

[Yosha_AtaIante]

10 hours ago, Puffin_ said:

Franklin D. Roosevelt vs Halland  Clan battle

 

Yeah that FDR was terrible. Halland did a great job. 

During FDR struggles I had a fun time kekking on the enemy team in my Haku that match. 

[Lordcrafty]

12 hours ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

Which on the other hand doesn't keep you from posting apologetic stuff here about that CVs aren't hald bad as the players here in the thread seem to see them... and then wondering why there people showing there different opinion by using those tool this forum offers them, without having the need to trying to explain why you are in there view just not quite right with your opinion.

 

So... I guess I'll go back to using them little opinion markers again from now on

I'm sorry that I don't want to see CVs completely removed from the game without another word said. I should start campaigning with every post that I make that they should be removed and that there is zero way to even minimise the damage that you take from them right now. I want the class fixed not destroyed, maybe that's coming across wrong?

[Deckeru_Maiku]

23 minutes ago, Lordcrafty said:

I'm sorry that I don't want to see CVs completely removed from the game without another word said. I should start campaigning with every post that I make that they should be removed and that there is zero way to even minimise the damage that you take from them right now. I want the class fixed not destroyed, maybe that's coming across wrong?

Seems You also don't really write what other people write.

I don't want the CVs removed from game. I enjoyed playing CVs in RTS - before the reeework - quite a bit.

But in the current state that CVs in, they are damaging the game and it seems WG isn't able to "fix that class" as they have some dumb ideas of how they want to CVs to being played, which just work with the game - just like their ideas for submarines... so between having to play with unfixable CVs in their current state and CVs being removed from the game for people the choice is easy...

I also would prefer to see them fixed. But playing this game for so long I don't have any faith left in WG that they a) really want to fix CVs or b) really can fix CVs or c) can't both.

 

And the only what I take from your posts is: "Ah, come on... CVs aren't that broken... AA does work... just dodge..." so if You intend to mean some different, You do a real bad job trying to coming across with it.

[Lordcrafty]

33 minutes ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

And the only what I take from your posts is: "Ah, come on... CVs aren't that broken... AA does work... just dodge..." so if You intend to mean some different, You do a real bad job trying to coming across with it.

yeah I've really said nothing of the sort. I said that DFAA is useful, that you can minimise damage by dodging but it will most likely get you killed, and that AA just reduces the number of planes a CV has instead of defending you.
Even if AA is functional, which in most scenarios it isn't that doesn't mean that CVs aren't OP, just because I think there are ways to defend yourself it doesn't mean I think you can counter CV effectively (because those ways usually involve the map border and/or throwing the game as a team)

[Puffin_]

The title

"General CV related discussions"

Is misleading. It should be changed to

I Hate CV related discussions

This would make it clear that you are not supposed to post here anything other than hate for cv.

Ore take the consequence. 

[159Hunter]

28 minutes ago, Puffin_ said:

Snip

Show us where the bad surface ships touched your poor CV

[El2aZeR]

51 minutes ago, Puffin_ said:

This would make it clear that you are not supposed to post here anything other than hate for cv.

 

The majority of players hate a fundamentally broken and heavily disruptive mechanic that is unneeded on every game design level?

Shocker.

[Puffin_]

1 hour ago, 159Hunter said:

Show us where the bad surface ships touched your poor CV

Hand over the CV doll then. You should know the procedure.

[ColaholicA]

Could we please, PLEASE, get back control of the carriers while controlling aircraft. Either make the squadron keep flying straight or circle around like they do when losing connection.

 

I just ended up loosing my ship in Clan Battles because the CV AI refused to strand on an island (I didn't have autopilot on neither). Trying to micro the autopilot is frustrating because half of the time it doesn't respond well to multiple orders, being close to borders or islands. 

[BLUB__BLUB]

11 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

People who like to play CBs: Can you just [edited]ban CVs from CBs?

We don't use one that often in our clan, as we have better results with two BBs. 

However... since they are in, we WILL use them if needed... 

 

But you are right, the only "balanz" that they have is the "average damage" in 12 vs 12. 

They have no place in 7 vs 7. Also, in the hands of competent players they are broken AF. 

Same as a Smolensk - annoying, but totally broken, in in the hands of a good player... poisonous.

 

44 minutes ago, ColaholicA said:

Could we please, PLEASE, get back control of the carriers while controlling aircraft. Either make the squadron keep flying straight or circle around like they do when losing connection.

 

I just ended up loosing my ship in Clan Battles because the CV AI refused to strand on an island (I didn't have autopilot on neither). Trying to micro the autopilot is frustrating because half of the time it doesn't respond well to multiple orders, being close to borders or islands. 

Drunk autopilot is a feature, working as intended. 

It is WGs way to balanz CV. 

[TeaCupYuri]

4 hours ago, Puffin_ said:

The title

"General CV related discussions"

Is misleading. It should be changed to

I Hate CV related discussions

This would make it clear that you are not supposed to post here anything other than hate for cv.

Ore take the consequence. 

You meant Discussions that WG won't read?

CV discussions and plenty of innovative ideas has been said over the years. But WG doesn't care, carries on with their own "innovative ideas" and misguided stats.

As long as idiots pay for unbalanced stuff, WG doesn't care at all. Money machine goes Brrrrrrr.

[159Hunter]

9 hours ago, Puffin_ said:

Hand over the CV doll then. You should know the procedure.

You poor misguided soul. I will pray for you

[HystericalAccuracy]

8 hours ago, ColaholicA said:

Could we please, PLEASE, get back control of the carriers while controlling aircraft.

I don´t get why we can´t just use the arrow-keys to control the ship while flying the squad with wasd.

[El2aZeR]

3 hours ago, VIadoCro said:

I don´t get why we can´t just use the arrow-keys to control the ship while flying the squad with wasd.

 

Would cause overload in the brains of the average playerbase. Can't have that.