General CV related discussions.

[Excavatus]

2 minutes ago, redraven said:

What you are defending is akin to this: Suddenly boxers from the 100 KG weight category can fight against 80 Kg weight players. There would be a lot of people taking adaventoge of the fact. They can like it. But do not be so dishonest that you even try to defend the setup of the situation.

Enjoy CVs all you want. But dont be suprised when people call you out because of it. Sure go on and enoyj it.. at the expense of everyone else. You have to be prepared to take flak for it (pun intented)

situation doesn't matter.. 

you may be right you may be not..

I'm just telling you, 

you don't have the right to insult people over it.. 

especially the people who does not have anything to do with that. 

 

yes you have a right to be frustrated, to get angry, xpress your anger and frustration towards the company who designed that.. without instulting anyone there too ofcourse.. 

you have a right to say "I'm not gonna pay a single dime to you unless you fix this" you also have right to follow your promise, 

you even have a right to stop playing the game and bad mouth it everywhere (without insulting people again) 

 

but I'm just saying, 

you don't have a right to insult thousands of people over a game, 

just because they don't feel and think like you.. 

Is it hard to grasp? 

[AndyHill]

4 minutes ago, redraven said:

I know im just 1 player but if you want to i can record my number of shells fired over .. 100 games for example. Would be easy enough. Just screenshot the result screen. That way even the damage inflicted Will be recorded.

Well I really don't want people to put too much effort into this, but if you happen to play a Yamato, get a long game (this is important, because time is relevant for Midway's ability to print planes), I wouldn't mind if you posted the numbers and maybe an estimate on how well you think you managed to keep yourself and your guns in the game.

[Kriger3n]

4 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

It is clearly NOT balanced how? according to whom? don't tell me all the player base, 

because It has been told Sooooo many times, that all the social media presence of the community is just a very nice minority. 

Big majority of the player base never ever show theirselves in the open. Like the forum is only 2,5% of the playerbase 

and when we go down to the active forum users, you usually get below 1%

And why do they have to try suggestions from players? (although they've tried some, and they've told us) 

According to alot of players... I dont have numbers. I just talk to people, listen to other people and watch people play this game. It was my own experience of CV's after the rework that brought me here. Because this is supposed to be the place you give feedback to WG about CV's. Not that it matters. It seems no one that can do something about CV's read this thread or forum for that sake. If they did actually look at the number of threads and posts just here on the english speaking forum, they would do something about it, right? Guess not. And why is the only moderator i've seen commenting here lately also a CV unicum? Look at your own stats and say with a honest heart that CV's are balanced... Please. You are a little above average with dd's, cruisers and bb's, and super unicum with cv's..............

And where you are getting your numbers from to say so certanly that it is the nice minority that dont like cv's? I'd say it is alot more people then you make it out to be.

And why is it that CV unicums are the only ones giving smart replies like: "i doubt that you need a nerf personally" to a person just giving his feedback on the game in the right place. You as a moderator should moderate behavior like that so people actally can give feedback without getting humiliated just because they are an average player. Most players are average.... That does not mean they cannot give their honest oppinnion about CV's.

The only thing we as players can do is to give feedback in this thread to at least try to make WG do something about this mess of a class that is making alot of people not like to play the game they love to play. We all are here because we like this game. If not, we would not bother reading anything here. 

[redraven]

2 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

situation doesn't matter.. 

you may be right you may be not..

I'm just telling you, 

you don't have the right to insult people over it.. 

especially the people who does not have anything to do with that. 

 

yes you have a right to be frustrated, to get angry, xpress your anger and frustration towards the company who designed that.. without instulting anyone there too ofcourse.. 

you have a right to say "I'm not gonna pay a single dime to you unless you fix this" you also have right to follow your promise, 

you even have a right to stop playing the game and bad mouth it everywhere (without insulting people again) 

 

but I'm just saying, 

you don't have a right to insult thousands of people over a game, 

just because they don't feel and think like you.. 

Is it hard to grasp? 

So.. wait a minute. Let me get this straight. You are actively encouraging Devbashing? 
Nah of course not. But you know what they do with our suggestions right? Print it and use it as toilet paper.

[redraven]

7 minutes ago, AndyHill said:

Well I really don't want people to put too much effort into this, but if you happen to play a Yamato, get a long game (this is important, because time is relevant for Midway's ability to print planes), I wouldn't mind if you posted the numbers and maybe an estimate on how well you think you managed to keep yourself and your guns in the game.

Will try my best. Can replays be insterted here? Just in case i encouter something specific? (also im not the best player in the World so expect avg numbers.)

[Excavatus]

7 minutes ago, redraven said:

But you know what they do with our suggestions right? Print it and use it as toilet paper.

 

9 minutes ago, Kriger3n said:

It seems no one that can do something about CV's read this thread or forum for that sake.

They read it, they talk about it. 

But the thing I guess people don't read back :) 

even in the latest Q&A, WG stated that "CVs are fine, we are not planning to make big changes on them - we are monitoring the CB season now about CVs"

 

9 minutes ago, Kriger3n said:

And why is the only moderator i've seen commenting here lately also a CV unicum? Look at your own stats and say with a honest heart that CV's are balanced... Please.

The problem you have here.. I've never ever said CVs are balanced, 

actually If you go back, you can find my posts, stating that "CVs don't have a place in the game, because fundementally they are impossible to balance"

I personally believe, If a CV player knows what he is doing, there is so little way to counter it... 

I'm not defending CVs here, and please find If I did something like that in general.. 

I somehow know how to play CVs at some level.. and I enjoy it.. 
and I believe I do not deserve to be insulted because I like playing them.. 

 

My problem here is may be I need to write it 4th time, 

Some people, angry at a gaming company, comes here, and insults other people, players like them, just because they do not feel and think like them. 

Insult people who do not share their beliefs.. thats my problem.. 

 

7 minutes ago, redraven said:

wait a minute. Let me get this straight. You are actively encouraging Devbashing? 

ofcourse not, 
you have all the rights to think "these devs are doing a crappy job" and voice this opinion, 

but that does not mean you can bash them personally. 

 

There is HUGE difference between attacking someone or the job they've done.. 

 

[Kriger3n]

1 minute ago, Excavatus said:

Some people, angry at a gaming company, comes here, and insults other people, players like them, just because they do not feel and think like them. 

Insult people who do not share their beliefs.. thats my problem.. 

I agree that insulting people is not ok. But why do you not do something about @Yoshanai comments that are clearly insulting? She has done this several times to people giving feedback. 

[Excavatus]

Just now, Kriger3n said:

I agree that insulting people is not ok. But why do you not do something about @Yoshanai comments that are clearly insulting? She has done this several times to people giving feedback. 

ok now I have to write in red :) 

 

I'm sorry but cannot discuss moderation, and cannot give feedback over what has been done or not. 

But If you think a post is in violation, please report it. 
Sometimes moderators can miss, or sometimes a post which looks ok for us, may look bad for some others. 

Please use the report function. 

 

[Kriger3n]

30 minutes ago, Kriger3n said:

  49 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

It is clearly NOT balanced how? according to whom? don't tell me all the player base, 

 

21 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

The problem you have here.. I've never ever said CVs are balanced, 

Kinda contradicting yourself there. But i'll leave it at that.

[Pikkozoikum]

3 hours ago, redraven said:

 

 

-you see CV play like i were able to manually guide my shells from my BB. Sounds fun doesnt it?
-just wait till cruise missles get into the game. i bet my [edited]there is a reason those [edited]missles are modeled on the halland for a reason. I hope you wont mind when suddenly you are being attacked by a weapon you can do nothing against.
-And they were not really important untill the mid 40s... and even than only in the pacific theater.
-SO you want a combined arms game? There is one on the market. It starts with war and ends with thunder. Go play that.

CVs do nothing but aboslutely disrupt the balance between Surface ships.
Fact of the matter is cv players dont play Wows. They play a watered down retard-cousin version of World of warplanes. And it shows.

- Playing CV is like controlling a squadron of aircrafts to attack a ship. That's how CVs work in any game. But BBs never get guided shells, as long it's not a modern Warfare Game and then it would be fun, yes.

But it's quite weird going with "This ship has a feature, which my ship doesn't. So my ship should get also that feature. How about, BBs can fire there guns from 20+ km and hit in ~10s, My planes have to go close range, so give me 20km rockets. It's pointless in the same way.

- The Republique has also a Helicopter landing pad. Those won't get modelled, I would assume. The T10 is not only WW2, it's also a few years later. What you mean with "I hope you won't mind when suddenly you are being attacked by a weapon you can do nothing against" Just for your information, but I play all ship types pretty equally, so I would also play ships with cruise missles. Guess it's because of my profile picture, I just like the Kaga, but if you click my Profile, you will see the BB Kii. So I must be a BB main :D

- No idea what's the point of that. Torpedo planes existed in WW1. This game is also about the pacific theater, but also the RN has CVs. Shall we remove everything that only existed in one setting? Pan-Asia was only in the pacific theatre, too... and not even very impactful

- I told you, it's about naval warfare..... I even mentioned War Thunder beside Steel Ocean, Silent Hunter - they are part of the Naval Warfare. Those planes purpose is the naval warfare.

 

CVs existed since Beta, maybe you picked the wrong game. It's like playing World of warcraft and after 10 years you come up with "Yes, but healer are only disturbing, please remove" It's a bit weird, but if that is your opinion, then it's up to you, if you want play this game or not

[AndyHill]

57 minutes ago, redraven said:

Will try my best. Can replays be insterted here? Just in case i encouter something specific? (also im not the best player in the World so expect avg numbers.)

I think replays should work. At this moment I'd be interested in seeing any kind of numbers, since I don't really know what to expect. 

[redraven]

13 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

- Playing CV is like controlling a squadron of aircrafts to attack a ship. That's how CVs work in any game. But BBs never get guided shells, as long it's not a modern Warfare Game and then it would be fun, yes.

But it's quite weird going with "This ship has a feature, which my ship doesn't. So my ship should get also that feature. How about, BBs can fire there guns from 20+ km and hit in ~10s, My planes have to go close range, so give me 20km rockets. It's pointless in the same way.

- The Republique has also a Helicopter landing pad. Those won't get modelled, I would assume. The T10 is not only WW2, it's also a few years later. What you mean with "I hope you won't mind when suddenly you are being attacked by a weapon you can do nothing against" Just for your information, but I play all ship types pretty equally, so I would also play ships with cruise missles. Guess it's because of my profile picture, I just like the Kaga, but if you click my Profile, you will see the BB Kii. So I must be a BB main :D

- No idea what's the point of that. Torpedo planes existed in WW1. This game is also about the pacific theater, but also the RN has CVs. Shall we remove everything that only existed in one setting? Pan-Asia was only in the pacific theatre, too... and not even very impactful

- I told you, it's about naval warfare..... I even mentioned War Thunder beside Steel Ocean, Silent Hunter - they are part of the Naval Warfare. Those planes purpose is the naval warfare.

 

CVs existed since Beta, maybe you picked the wrong game. It's like playing World of warcraft and after 10 years you come up with "Yes, but healer are only disturbing, please remove" It's a bit weird, but if that is your opinion, then it's up to you, if you want play this game or not

Oh you must be new here. Otherwise you would remember how the Midway used to have  jet bombers. They flought through the toughest aa in literally under a second.
And im sorry but aiming with a BB at long range is a heck of lot [edited]more harder than you shoving your torps straight up my arse. 
And planes are not a feature. Its an etirely seperate game mode. One ship having spotters planes while another having fighters is a feature. Carriers are a game mode.
And if you dont believe me look at the trend WG is following. No guns bigger than 18 inch--- Yoshino. No subs--- subs are coming next patch. They also said: no guided ammo--- I'll let you draw the conclusion on your own on this one.

And air attacks have always been very unrelyable. 250 (or something close to that) planes have been thrown at the yamato. And yes the game isnt aiming to be a sim but the amount of compression and balance is way out of proportion. I have missed more than i can count at targets that were sub 3k ranges. A carrier Will not miss if it drops at point blank range. Its impossible for the game to screw the cv over. Meanwhile i get fucked in the [edited]by the game all the time. Long range mid range close range doesnt matter. RNg Will try to hit some sucker in another game just to make me miss. Meanwhile cv can make it happen THAT IT WILL NEVER MISS. (when shooting with the right weapon at the right target)
WT naval is still in development. And in other games you are playing against bots.

You example is totaly missed here. Healers are a core game design there and are acounted for. And more importantly. THEY PLAY THE SAME GAME EVERYONE ELSE DOES. You in a CV do not play wows no matter how hard you want to believe it.

 

54 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

ofcourse not, 

you have all the rights to think "these devs are doing a crappy job" and voice this opinion, 

but that does not mean you can bash them personally. 

 

There is HUGE difference between attacking someone or the job they've done.. 

 

I have always said "devs"  or "wg" when talking in realtion to anything about the game. 
Of course i have called people idiots and braindead. But thats only because what they say just.. whats the right Word? Requires it. And its more of the case of my expession towards their idea.. or viewpoint. If they feel offended by it its up to them. I have been called "idiot BBaby" more than i can count.

[Excavatus]

54 minutes ago, Kriger3n said:

 

Kinda contradicting yourself there. But i'll leave it at that.

eerm no I'm not :) 

one quote you have is MY own opinion, 

but from the game perspective, official sources say, I mean WG officials, said "They look good from our point of view" 

 

That was what I was trying to say. 

People may think whatever they want, it is only the WG's opinion, and they clearly stated they are ok :D

anyway. :) 

 

16 minutes ago, redraven said:

 

 

I have always said "devs"  or "wg" when talking in realtion to anything about the game. 
Of course i have called people idiots and braindead. But thats only because what they say just.. whats the right Word? Requires it. And its more of the case of my expession towards their idea.. or viewpoint. If they feel offended by it its up to them. I have been called "idiot BBaby" more than i can count.

 

Yeah, 

Then let me remember this piece of colorful post to you, 

 

4 hours ago, redraven said:

Dont even try to argue about it. CVs are blatantly unbalanced and nobody with more than 2 braincells likes them.

 

Thats what I'm against since the start of our conversation. 

You don't have a right to insult people.. 

like no one has a right calling you "idiot Bbaby"

 

This is not about being thick skinned or anything. 

This is about the general attitude I don't like. It is not about you only.. 

Probably I did that in the past too.. I was wrong too.. 

Nobody should do that.. especially in public.. 

[AirSuperiority]

9 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

Thats what I'm against since the start of our conversation. 

You don't have a right to insult people.. 

like no one has a right calling you "idiot Bbaby"

 

This is not about being thick skinned or anything. 

This is about the general attitude I don't like. It is not about you only.. 

Probably I did that in the past too.. I was wrong too.. 

Nobody should do that.. especially in public.. 

+1

 

Wishing everyone a nice time in the game

[ForlornSailor]

1 hour ago, Kriger3n said:

And why is the only moderator i've seen commenting here lately also a CV unicum? Look at your own stats and say with a honest heart that CV's are balanced... Please. You are a little above average with dd's, cruisers and bb's, and super unicum with cv's.............. 

 

I hate to defend @Excavatus () on that one but actually: If one player shows a much higher rating in one class, the only thing this shows, is, that he personally is better in this class. And if we really want to get down on this: IF CVs would be so overpowered (I think you are trying to say this with the stat analysis of exca), it would be harder for an individuum to reach a super unicum rating in his class. So him beeing super unicum in CVs actually shows this: there are a LOT of really bad players in CVs around. Because they fill the stats with average and below numbers. Super unicum is not some status that you reach automatically by performing a certain benchmark. Its individually calculated for each ship and only the best ... 5%? (i dont even know, but lets go with 5% for the example) get labled as super unicums.

 

But WG prolly has to take the blame for such arguments beeing around. After all, it was them who defined the "skill gap" as a gap in individual performance between classes. While everyone else pretty much defined skill gap as a global thing, comparing classes against each other and leaving individual performance out of it.

[Excavatus]

2 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

Because they fill the stats with average and below numbers.

so you think I don't have good stats on CVs because I don't play them good, but others play it bad... 

Words hurt my friend.. words hurt! 

 

[redraven]

4 minutes ago, AirSuperiority said:

+1

 

Wishing everyone a nice time in the game

Good luck having a nice time when the latest "balanced ships" have just been released. Also try having "fun" when cvs keep ruining everything you try to do.

 

16 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

 

Thats what I'm against since the start of our conversation. 

You don't have a right to insult people.. 

like no one has a right calling you "idiot Bbaby"

 

This is not about being thick skinned or anything. 

This is about the general attitude I don't like. It is not about you only.. 

Probably I did that in the past too.. I was wrong too.. 

Nobody should do that.. especially in public.. 

Okay maybe i should have: nobody with more than 2 braincells likes the way they are implemented and thinks they are balanced. You really have to look like shilling for WG or you just dont want your unfair toy taken away from you if you try to tell people they are balanced when the best CV players themselves are saying they are problemtic.  Like how they say flak is meaningless and easy to avoid and how clans are actively protesting their inclusion in CW.
It just sounds dishonest seeing people defend something that they themselves know is problematic  Those who truly do not understand the mechanic think is okay.

[Kriger3n]

2 minutes ago, redraven said:

It just sounds dishonest seeing people defend something that they themselves know is problematic

i agree with you, but after seeing posts in this very thread by cv unicums that state that the rework is great success, i'm sure they only see thing from their own perspective or just dont care that the rest of the classes suffers.

[Excavatus]

3 minutes ago, redraven said:

Okay maybe i should have: nobody with more than 2 braincells likes the way they are implemented and thinks they are balanced.

That would again be an insult :) 

I'd prefer to say If ı were you, Players who defend CVs and say that they are balanced, are dishonest and don't want their only class they can perform better to be taken away.. 

This I can respect.. 

anyway, I see we have almost reached and understanding I'm not gonna push it and leave it here :) thank you.. 

 

Yeah but CV balance is a way more deeper issue than people talk about, again, I believe they are impossbile to balance due to their fundemantals and they should be removed from the game.. 

But I accept it won't happen any time soon :) and on the other hand, CVs solve some other problems.. but that is not an excuse for some people :) 

anyway, I don't want to go in CV mechanics and balancing discussion, my issue was with the metality of the discussion and thanks again for reaching a some kind of consensus :) 
I'll take that.. 

[BLUB__BLUB]

4 minutes ago, Kriger3n said:

i agree with you, but after seeing posts in this very thread by cv unicums that state that the rework is great success, i'm sure they only see thing from their own perspective or just dont care that the rest of the classes suffers.

I haven;t seen such unicums in a while, please point them out to me.

Maybe I forgot (one braincell busy...). 

 

I have seen those that perform "sort of OK" in CV and suck in other classes state such, though.

[redraven]

6 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

 

anyway, I see we have almost reached and understanding I'm not gonna push it and leave it here :) thank you.. 

 

I would give you a highfive.. but.. you know.. corona and whatnot.

[Sunleader]

1 hour ago, Kriger3n said:

I agree that insulting people is not ok. But why do you not do something about @Yoshanai comments that are clearly insulting? She has done this several times to people giving feedback. 

 

"He"

Male. Not Female.

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, redraven said:

Good luck having a nice time when the latest "balanced ships" have just been released. Also try having "fun" when cvs keep ruining everything you try to do.

 

Okay maybe i should have: nobody with more than 2 braincells likes the way they are implemented and thinks they are balanced. You really have to look like shilling for WG or you just dont want your unfair toy taken away from you if you try to tell people they are balanced when the best CV players themselves are saying they are problemtic.  Like how they say flak is meaningless and easy to avoid and how clans are actively protesting their inclusion in CW.
It just sounds dishonest seeing people defend something that they themselves know is problematic  Those who truly do not understand the mechanic think is okay.

 

Nope. There is one thing which is not Ruined by CVs being Overpowered and Broken. And that is CVs. Now look at his Name and take a Guess at his Favorite Class in the Game :)

 

 

3 minutes ago, Kriger3n said:

i agree with you, but after seeing posts in this very thread by cv unicums that state that the rework is great success, i'm sure they only see thing from their own perspective or just dont care that the rest of the classes suffers.

 

No Wrong Accusations pls.

I have been Stating Repeatedly that CVs are Overpowered and Broken and so has the vast Majority of Good CV Players I know.

 

In Fact I actually dont think I know a Single Unicum CV Player which says the CV Rework is Fine. (or Fun for that matter)

[Kriger3n]

On 4/29/2020 at 7:01 AM, Yoshanai said:

The rework was a success objectively. 

If they weren't for some personally then it's none of WG's issues. 

 

More CV players than ever are regularly playing the class. 

CV premiums are selling well. 

A new line (German CV's) is being made proving even more that CV's are played. 

High population in lower tier CV's shows that more and more players are picking up the class. 

CVs entered clan battle and balancing is mostly finished. 

 

It's a success more so than the few haters in here want to believe and you can think otherwise if you like but I'm sad to break it all down for you... You and most naysayers here are a major minority. 

 

So have fun hating in something WG is considering a success. 

 

[Figment]

Andy, you're continuously referring to how CVs are and why they should be removed because they spoil certain things (too much) now, without ever attempting to find a compromise. I'm doing nothing but. I'm stating what I think is to be mitigated or toned down regularly, I point out where I think improvements can be made.

 

Whereas you seem(ed) unwilling to accept any variant period because of your dislike of the concept and implied abilities of aircraft. There's no discussion possible when all you're doing is trying to shut down discussion. However, I saw your response here you kinda admitted that because you feel you've seen it all and WG isn't listening anyway. I can understand and relate to the somewhat defeatism in that, but it is what it is. I'd like to move towards a balancing discussion, rather than the need discussion since that part seems more subjective. There can be no compromise in being a bit in it, it's either in or out, like you're pregnant or not, so either group will have to give way - if you catch my drift - and be disappointed to some degree. With a balancing discussion we can at least ensure that neither side is completely let down.

 

13 hours ago, AndyHill said:

Ok I'll just start replying like you didn't know the basics of the game. Actually I'm beginning to think that you are having trouble reading at all.

It's best if you're complete, we simply don't know each other's position well enough it seems and in interpretation things can get lost. But the latter insult is unnecessary.

 

13 hours ago, AndyHill said:

Once again: the problem with carriers is their ability to spoil any concealment plays and crab all over anyone without having to adhere to the limitations that other ships have to adhere to, which is disruptive to the general gameplay.

Aircraft are a resource to be used by the carrier, like ammunition on a ship. Killing a few planes while a carrier dumpsters you is like destroying BB shells with your ship.

That's subjective though. Any concealment is a generalisation based on selective bias. It disrupts a lot I agree and I think this has a lot to do with aircraft having no flight limitations like flight duration. If you lose fuel loitering in search of a DD,  you'd run out of fuel and crash. if you give CVs an incentive to move on or lose planes and an assault opportunity, they will have to make a practical and tactical choice. In WoWs you can endlessly hover over a fog bank till it's over, there's no need to move on, there's no choice to be made.

 

Similarly, if a DD is on the other end of the map w.r.t. a CV, it would be less likely that the CV can afford flying aircraft all the way there and have sufficient fuel for a return trip or loiter for very long. A fuel indicator that also denotes how much fuel is necessary to get home safe would add further mental and tactical pressure on the CV. Fuel introduces a lot of limitations that currently do not exist.

Furthermore, attrition becomes more important, shooting down planes on top of planes that can't make it home depletes the CV reserve more quickly.

 

Can we thus agree this is something that can be mitigated and limited with introducing a fuel concept and implicitly a range limitation?

13 hours ago, AndyHill said:

Theoretically, if a Yamato keeps firing from start to finish, he will be able to fire 20 x 2 = 40 volleys (of which the last one doesn't have time to leave the barrel) with 9 shells each, which is a total of 360 shells in a match. High tier carriers can fly in the range of 100+ planes total theoretically ( I recall Kaga being something like 150, but that's an exception). Now the Yammy won't be able to fire from the start, he will have to get close to make his shells effective and he needs to have a very good position to be able to fire all of his guns effectively on cooldown for a 20min match, so his number is very theoretical. The carrier, however, will be flying his planes from 0 seconds to the finish, so his numbers are a little bit less theoretical, but most calculations do include all squads regenerating basically from the start. So taking that 10-20k of Midway bombs plus potential fires while shooting down a few planes is roughly equivalent to getting shot at by a Yamato and taking 10-20k damage while not being able to shoot back nor being able to see him. I'd call that rather one sided.

Flying planes and delivering them is hard to get an average time for though. The amount of air strikes depends largely on the CV's proximity to target and the player's ability to efficiently find targets and line up shots. Which I don't doubt is easier if they just pay attention to the map as they should and while airborne they have a pretty good overview of the HP bars of all ships. The UI while airborne is also something one could look at btw. But, this is again a balancing argument. If those bombs did 4-6K damage instead of 10-20K, it'd already be a different discussion. If the bombs were spread more (and a lot of times bombs do fall next to ships) they deal no damage and it's a long time waster for the CV. These balance issues are something I don't particularly feel to be reasons for removal rather than finetuning (and I agree, it's more than a little tuning). Removing however is the nuclear option and I havn't heard a good reason why they should be removed yet either.

13 hours ago, AndyHill said:

The thing is, those suggestions have been seen here a great many times and although they would probably reduce the problem (and perhaps I should've put more effort into replying to them, even though I've seen them all a number of times by now in this discussion and elsewhere), what I'm really interested in is why do we have to have the problem in the first place. It all really has to start with why we need to have planes in the first place, only then can we start thinking how to balance them. Funny how you haven't been able to even start to answer that, eh?h, then it needs rebalancing at the least.

 

You're once again assuming things left and right. If a carrier has enough planes to fly effective strikes until the end of the game, he hasn't lost anything valuable in the attacks. And sure, AA power can be used as a means for balancing - except that with the design of current carriers WG has painted themselves into a corner, because every situation where one single squad is incapable of getting a strike through makes a carrier entirely powerless, which again isn't a good situation for balance.

I don't see it as a problem, but a design challenge. Different attitude towards the solution. The need is obvious to me and I think a lot of other people who like CVs for a variety of reasons and feel it should be part of the whole mix (it only makes sense to have them even though your argument from a historical perspective is that they effectively ended the battleship era), therefore it's clearly a subjective need on both our sides. Where I agree with you is that it shouldn't end the ship-to-ship combat in game (and I don't think it does), nor dominate (it can do that at times). You noticed I answered your question in the next post (they were really getting to long so I had to split it up), so I'll presume this question answered.

 

In the second alinea her you're once again talking about the current rework as a basis for discussion, I want attrition to play a much greater role, but I've covered that I think. I've been constantly trying to find a better tuned version and I have that in mind while talking about it. Can I handle the current situation? Yes. Do I think it's fine, no. Do I think people exagerate to get what they want? Yes.

Is a failed strike on AA cruisers a bad thing balance wise? No, everyone should be able to just miss. But hence why AA should be strong, but CVs still have some chance to try an attack (at high risk and cost). They should be deterred though. It means there's a form of dependence on others for the CV and reliance on others is the deeper level RTS and social gaming bit I like that it brings (or combined arms strategy bit, what you prefer as terminology). It encourages further coordination and teamwork, target prioritisation and adds a strategic level to the game. This is one of the reasons I think they should be in. If you lose you cruisers, you lose screening and spotting for BBs against DDs. But that's particularly true for hydro-cruisers. Lose your hydro-cruisers and your team becomes a lot more vulnerable to torp attacks. If you lose AA cruisers, you gain a different vulnerability to exploit by the enemy team, although you still have quite some mitigation with more standard levels of AA on other ships.

13 hours ago, AndyHill said:

Very adult behavior indeed, good job I'd say.

I wasn't talking about you there, but there's just too many insulting and unconstructive NERF/REMOVE ARTI, NERF/REMOVE CV, NERF/REMOVE TD, NERF DD/REMOVE TORPS whine fests on WG forums and the attitude of the people expressing those opinions is usualy pretty appalling. I'd say I put it very mildly even.

Btw, we might have some rough edges towards each other, but overall I think it's fairly civil. :) Besides, I'm Dutch, so if I haven't made you explode yet with straightforward bluntness it's probably going to be fine. :P

[Sunleader]

1 minute ago, Kriger3n said:

snip

 

@Yoshanai

Now have Fun Explaining to Everyone that you were just messing around all the time.