General CV related discussions.

[Kazomir]

5 hours ago, General_Alexus said:

Well with this we come full circle: CV sniping => you complain about your CV beeing dead and CVs having to much of an impackt. They removed all thouse thing precisely because the community (not the CV players I might add) complained.

CV Sniping is a valid tactic. If you in your CV die to strikes from another CV, that's fair game. You have great AA and CAP to counter.

 

CVs have too much of an impact because they are overpowered in their spotting capability, which is an entirely other can of worms, THat should too be nerfed. Ships spotted by CV's only should not be able to be locked on to. A pilot can report a position, but cant give you a damn firing solution. Other ships (with guns and rangefinders) can.  That will give some room for ships to be able to close the range as well.

[Ronchabale]

16 hours ago, General_Alexus said:

Well with this we come full circle: CV sniping => you complain about your CV beeing dead and CVs having to much of an impackt. They removed all thouse thing precisely because the community (not the CV players I might add) complained.

Thats damn stupid, would be better if the CV:s learned that they need to scout their positioning and take damage like all others

Most bad CV players would get fed up with it and quit - problem solved

[General_Alexus]

1 hour ago, Ronchabale said:

Thats damn stupid, would be better if the CV:s learned that they need to scout their positioning and take damage like all others

Most bad CV players would get fed up with it and quit - problem solved

Dont get me wrong, I would have nothing against it. I was just pointing out what lead to WG removing fires on CVs, Detonations,... in the first place. It was not WG wanting to buff CVs, it was whiners in the forum (this threat is 406 pages long you might even find it if you scroll back far enough) complaining about CV sniping.

[UnderDuress]

1 hour ago, General_Alexus said:

in the first place. It was not WG wanting to buff CVs, it was whiners in the forum (this threat is 406 pages long you might even find it if you scroll back far enough) complaining about CV sniping.

The "whiners" wanted balanced CVs that doesn't singlehandely decide games, WG decided the solution to an overly influential class was to make it even more surviable and lower the skill floor but not the skill ceiling. Somehow this is the "whiners"'s fault?

[General_Alexus]

1 hour ago, UnderDuress said:

The "whiners" wanted balanced CVs that doesn't singlehandely decide games, WG decided the solution to an overly influential class was to make it even more surviable and lower the skill floor but not the skill ceiling. Somehow this is the "whiners"'s fault?

Well yeah, if there is only one CV on each side, if one CV gets sniped the impact of this is way higher than if you have for example 4DDs on each side and one of them eats a torp and dies.

 

The influence of the performance of your CV player on the battle is directly a results of him beeing the only one of his class for your team.

Instead of limiting the ability of CVs to snipe themself, they could have unlimited the amount of CVs in the game, I dont know if you would have liked battels with 10CVs/side more, I suspect you would not have liked that.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

ah well, CVs ruining my games as usual. Barely can play my 8km torp shima against peak russian bias

[ARE_YOU_HUMAN]

Nakhimov is such a great addition to the game. Thank you WG!

 

 

[Deckeru_Maiku]

1 hour ago, Yosha_nai said:

ah well, CVs ruining my games as usual. Barely can play my 8km torp shima against peak russian bias

A slightly above average CV players, who still manages a shipload of damage done on average, gets sunk by Unicum Shimakaze pilot...

Also small sample size...

You gave an exellent non-argument.

[RuruushuVuiBuritania]

43 minutes ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

A slightly above average CV players, who still manages a shipload of damage done on average, gets sunk by Unicum Shimakaze pilot...

Also small sample size...

You gave an exellent non-argument.

It can also mean Nakhimov is bad against DDs, which is normally is, although I never play a lot of CVs. Looks to be low skill floor, low skill ceiling to me. ''Good concealment'' that the Russian carriers have also makes potatoes put them way too close.
Devastating against potatoes and lone ships, as long as you don't rush into flak clouds and massed AA.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

2 hours ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

A slightly above average CV players, who still manages a shipload of damage done on average, gets sunk by Unicum Shimakaze pilot...

Also small sample size...

You gave an exellent non-argument.

same as all the pepegas who select the most successful drop clips and act like it happens every game?

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

32 minutes ago, Yosha_nai said:

same as all the pepegas who select the most successful drop clips and act like it happens every game?

So you consider yourself pepega now? 

[Deckeru_Maiku]

46 minutes ago, Yosha_nai said:

same as all the pepegas who select the most successful drop clips and act like it happens every game?

nah, those are at least more than just marginally funny

[Yosha_AtaIante]

20 minutes ago, Europizza said:

So you consider yourself pepega now? 

it wasnt a clip :D:D:D.

[Aethervoxx]

11 hours ago, Yosha_nai said:

ah well, CVs ruining my games as usual. Barely can play my 8km torp shima against peak russian bias

Am I missing something here? Is someone 'bragging'? If someone torp sank a premium farce reworked CV, then, that's good . The game needs this as a 100% sink rate (but, ofc, Wedgie will never allow this).

[Yosha_AtaIante]

5 hours ago, Aethervoxx said:

Am I missing something here? Is someone 'bragging'? If someone torp sank a premium farce reworked CV, then, that's good . The game needs this as a 100% sink rate (but, ofc, Wedgie will never allow this).

No need to brag about regular occurances I just wanted to get my daily reactions by the same 3 people 

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

1 hour ago, Yosha_nai said:

No need to brag about regular occurances I just wanted to get my daily reactions by the same 3 people 

Double ney Triple brag detected 

[Deckeru_Maiku]

5 hours ago, Europizza said:

Double ney Triple brag detected 

...and a failed one, as there don't seem to have been 3 reactions.

[guy_incognito79]

On 11/14/2021 at 2:23 PM, General_Alexus said:

The influence of the performance of your CV player on the battle is directly a results of him beeing the only one of his class for your team.

Instead of limiting the ability of CVs to snipe themself, they could have unlimited the amount of CVs in the game, I dont know if you would have liked battels with 10CVs/side more, I suspect you would not have liked that.

What I don't like is that CV sniping just doesn't go far enough, everyone should even be able to snipe the buggers while they're still in port!

[Yosha_AtaIante]

8 hours ago, Europizza said:

Double ney Triple brag detected 

it was intentional. You should know me at this point :(

[UnderDuress]

On 11/14/2021 at 2:23 PM, General_Alexus said:

they could have unlimited the amount of CVs in the game, I dont know if you would have liked battels with 10CVs/side more, I suspect you would not have liked that.

I don’t have a problem with 5-ish limits on DDs or CA/CLs or BBs so why would a limit of 5-ish CVs be a bad thing? …Oh yeah I remember now, they are hilariously oppressive and unfun to play against, even WG knows this and set the soft limit to 1.

[Deckeru_Maiku]

33 minutes ago, UnderDuress said:

they are hilariously oppressive and unfun to play against, even WG knows this and set the soft limit to 1.

...except for the tier range where they are most unfun to play against (aka T4) where there still is a softcap of 2

Now imagine a division of two Kosmoprolets controlled by non-potatoish players going sealclubbing at T4 and all the joy they produce.

[anonym_8I80r0Qh1eM9]

6 hours ago, Yosha_nai said:

it was intentional. You should know me at this point :(

Ooooh :D

 

[Camperdown]

9 hours ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

...except for the tier range where they are most unfun to play against (aka T4) where there still is a softcap of 2

Now imagine a division of two Kosmoprolets controlled by non-potatoish players going sealclubbing at T4 and all the joy they produce.

I had a 2+2 CV match yesterday at T6. Wow, it does remind you why the cap of 1 is in place 

2+2 CVs at T4 is also a criminal stupidity.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

3 hours ago, Camperdown said:

I had a 2+2 CV match yesterday at T6. Wow, it does remind you why the cap of 1 is in place 

2+2 CVs at T4 is also a criminal stupidity.

oh no how terrible. I hope you are okay. The pain most have been unbearable

[General_Alexus]

13 hours ago, UnderDuress said:

I don’t have a problem with 5-ish limits on DDs or CA/CLs or BBs so why would a limit of 5-ish CVs be a bad thing? …Oh yeah I remember now, they are hilariously oppressive and unfun to play against, even WG knows this and set the soft limit to 1.

You are missing the point. It was about limmiting influence of CVs given limmiting circumstances of:

1) not removing them

2) not making them useless

3) keeping CV sniping a thing

 

Given thouse 3, you would need to unlimit the numbers.

Just think of games where you only have one DD (no CV) and the rest is CAs and BBs. If your one DD dies at the start (compare to CV sniping) your chance of winning, even if the enemy DD that is left just Spots and Caps, are next to zero.(aka the influence of the DD class increeses to unhelthy levels just because there is only one present in the game)