No CV mode?

[Infiriel]

So yeah, that's a very loose suggestion:

 

How about making a separate gamemode, where the CV's are not allowed?

(aka Random battle - no carriers)

 

Considering the results of polls regarding the CV's, vast majority of players would like to have them either changed in a major way, or removed altogether.

I'm not even going to touch on CB's, and competitive in general, because we can all see the prevailing clantags on our loading screens.
This will not happen though, as WG has apparently embraced the idea of giving everyone the equal share of misery, so now we end up with a single player per team, and 11 roadkills targets surface ships. 

 

The CV players get to be happy, and the other don't have to suffer anymore.

This is also beneficial for WG, as they would be able to keep the sales of premium CV's going and get to sell the ships the CV's have obliterated.

 

Would you play randoms with or without CV's if you had a choice?

C&C?

[Kenjiro_]

Why not if I'll be able to play randoms without dds when I'm In a BB or without BBs when I'm in a cruiser.. 

[lovelacebeer]

Of course it would be popular but there is no way WG would ever do it. 

 

WG is not a company that keen to create a lot of diversity in game modes, and they have been very defensive in relation to CVs, so no way would they want to upset CV players in that way. 

[Infiriel]

8 minut temu, Kenjiro_ napisał:

Why not if I'll be able to play randoms without dds when I'm In a BB or without BBs when I'm in a cruiser.. 

The point is: CV makes all other classes irrelevant, rather than just one.

In a BB you can avoid torps by not sailing straight.

In a CA you can mitigate BB salvos with manuvering and angling.

In a DD you can avoid CA's (radar) by looking at the map and experience - doesn't apply to russian radar though, because reasons.

 

And if you meet a CV you can do... well... nothing... (press sector, and DFAA/fighters and hope for the best)

[Pametrada]

12 minutes ago, Infiriel said:

Would you play randoms with or without CV's if you had a choice?

Without - every time.

 

This kind of topic comes up repeatedly, which is good because the more sh*t you throw at a wall, ( or WG in this case ) the greater chance some of it will stick.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

6 minutes ago, Kenjiro_ said:

Why not if I'll be able to play randoms without dds when I'm In a BB or without BBs when I'm in a cruiser.. 

Once we get over 2 major topics with over 700 pages of DD or BB complaints, why not :D

Why don't you start the DD complaint thread, and I'll make a BB complaint thread ^^

[Kenjiro_]

1 minute ago, Europizza said:

Once we get over 2 major topics with over 700 pages of DD or BB complaints, why not :D

Why don't you start the DD complaint thread, and I'll make a BB complaint thread ^^

 

Nvm this thread will be locked soon anyway 😊

[MacFergus]

1 hour ago, Infiriel said:

So yeah, that's a very loose suggestion:

 

How about making a separate gamemode, where the CV's are not allowed?

(aka Random battle - no carriers)

 

Considering the results of polls regarding the CV's, vast majority of players would like to have them either changed in a major way, or removed altogether.

I'm not even going to touch on CB's, and competitive in general, because we can all see the prevailing clantags on our loading screens.
This will not happen though, as WG has apparently embraced the idea of giving everyone the equal share of misery, so now we end up with a single player per team, and 11 roadkills targets surface ships. 

 

The CV players get to be happy, and the other don't have to suffer anymore.

This is also beneficial for WG, as they would be able to keep the sales of premium CV's going and get to sell the ships the CV's have obliterated.

 

Would you play randoms with or without CV's if you had a choice?

C&C?

 

The game is not about veteran players its about the player base as a whole , We make up a mere fraction of the players if WG can keep 80% happy and ignore the 20% long-term players than they will do.

 

Its about supply and demand and people want to play CVs in the present format.

 

In my opinion.

[ColonelPete]

47 minutes ago, Infiriel said:

The point is: CV makes all other classes irrelevant, rather than just one.

I wonder how 1 to 2 CV will then win alone vs 12 ships when the other ships on their team are irrelevant.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

6 minutes ago, MacFergus said:

 

The game is not about veteran players its about the player base as a whole , We make up a mere fraction of the players if WG can keep 80% happy and ignore the 20% long-term players than they will do.

 

Its about supply and demand and people want to play CVs in the present format.

 

In my opinion.

Nice made up percentages you got there bruh ^^

I would love me some awesome carriers in this game. Sadly WG is just really bad at aviation gameplay. Like, really, really bad. But that's just my opinion 

[MacFergus]

30 minutes ago, Europizza said:

Nice made up percentages you got there bruh ^^

I would love me some awesome carriers in this game. Sadly WG is just really bad at aviation gameplay. Like, really, really bad. But that's just my opinion 

 

Well it was a generalization but seriously its all irrelevant seems WG are dammed if they do and dammed if they don't.

 

Would you prefer to go back to crossfire torping and a skill level so high that only a very small minority can play CVs but if your good you would virtually guarantee your side a win.

 

The way to deal with CVs is to limited their squadrons like the old CV once there gone that's it.

 

Imo  

[asalonen]

16 minutes ago, MacFergus said:

The way to deal with CVs is to limited their squadrons like the old CV once there gone that's it.

The number of planes is still limited. The total number that you can throw at the enemy over the course of the battle is very similar to what it was before the CV rework. Try the German line for example and you'll find that the risk of having an empty deck is very real.

 

The fact that the planes regenerate just ensures that you can't waste them all in the first 10 minutes. This makes the class more forgiving to play. Somehow this has been turned into countless "unlimited planes" memes by simpletons who are unlikely to ever do well in this game.

[Kamisato_Ayato]

How much I like the idea of a no CV mode but unfortunately it will enrage the CV player base.

And you know how based Wargaming is when it comes to carriers. 

[Captain_Newman]

A separate game mode that includes CV’s so they can be removed from randoms won’t happen - nobody would play it, leaving WG with the undeniable fact that the reeework was a failure. Can’t have that.

 

Also, we get this suggestion like, once a week at least.

[Captain_Lootbox]

submarines are coming and thats going to make us forget about how bad CV is

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

50 minutes ago, MacFergus said:

 

Well it was a generalization but seriously its all irrelevant seems WG are dammed if they do and dammed if they don't.

 

Would you prefer to go back to crossfire torping and a skill level so high that only a very small minority can play CVs but if your good you would virtually guarantee your side a win.

 

The way to deal with CVs is to limited their squadrons like the old CV once there gone that's it.

 

Imo  

0/1 talk plz. ^^

 

I just want cool carriers in my favorite ship game. That's all. If I was forced to choose with a gun to my head, I'd prefer the RTS ones over the boring crap we have now. But I only say that because people keep bringing that nonsense up. For me it is not even being killed by carriers because that rarely happens to me. The carriers are just so - frikkin - abhorrent for the rest of the gameplay. A design folly.

 

I saw a QA video where a dev said they were fine with losing gameplay where you can't be low HP anymore. That's the stupidest crap ever a gamedeveloper can say to me. Being at the brink of dying but still managing to fight on and defying being sunk is frikkin AWESOME. It's grand. It's where skill really starts to shine. Seeing low HP ships in the middle of a 'protrective' blob being rocketed to death by some random low skill blergh in a horribly unfun to play carrier 'because one squaaaad neeeds to get thruuuuuuu' BS is seriously the worst gameplay design for PVP i have seen in 25 years of gaming.

[Uglesett]

I probably wouldn't play anything else, tbh.

 

Of course, then you'd probably have the queue for regular random battles consisting entirely of CVs. And I think there are some egos in WG that couldn't handle quite such a stark reminder that the CV rework is a colossal failure, which is why we'll never see such a mode.

[mdjmcnally]

The only way potentially is too force it by whenever in a game with cv then all the surface ships simply move to opposite corners and not engage in that game.

 

however that is never going to happen though.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

49 minutes ago, asalonen said:

This makes the class more forgiving to play.

That's the understatement of the year. Even MORE forgiving? They already have 30 sets of training wheels on. EVERYTHING makes carriers more forgiving to play. No other class has it so comfortable for 20 minutes straight. Selfscouting, AP bombing, in your face torping, baby rocketing, flak being nothing but a newbie filter, insane reserves in ranked (7 vs 7 with 12 vs 12 balanced reserves? Nice bruh), silly fire resistance, silly flooding resistance, silly lack of citadel, silly lack of detonation, sitting in silly far away mapcorners or humping islands alone (while 'enforcing teamplay' on everyone but themselves), silly lack of carrier vs. carrier fighting, ignoring enemy hard cover, being as fast as cruisers, having inpenetrable deck armor, having an auto warning system on their planes being spotted so (hey, DD much?), schrugging off low calibre shells.....  

 

Really. How much forgoving gameplay do carriers need?

[Pekoe_Darjeeling]

2 hours ago, Infiriel said:

 

And if you meet a CV you can do... well... nothing... (press sector, and DFAA/fighters and hope for the best)

ok

[asalonen]

3 minutes ago, Europizza said:

Really. How much forgoving gameplay do carriers need?

Looking at some of the CV players in randoms, maybe it's not easy enough yet... 

 

But if you consider the option, would you rather give the CV player all his planes immediately at the start of the battle? So instead of starting with 20 and regenerate max 15 over the course of the battle, rather let him just start with the 35? (Pulling these numbers out of my [edited]btw, consider them examples).

 

The CV unicums would love it for the additional tactical choice. They would do even better than now. Bad to average players would waste the immediately available reserves and would be irrelevant in late battle. The skill gap would be even greater. 

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

38 minutes ago, asalonen said:

Looking at some of the CV players in randoms, maybe it's not easy enough yet... 

 

But if you consider the option, would you rather give the CV player all his planes immediately at the start of the battle? So instead of starting with 20 and regenerate max 15 over the course of the battle, rather let him just start with the 35? (Pulling these numbers out of my [edited]btw, consider them examples).

 

The CV unicums would love it for the additional tactical choice. They would do even better than now. Bad to average players would waste the immediately available reserves and would be irrelevant in late battle. The skill gap would be even greater. 

Forgive me, but I'm getting a bit tired of the 'would you rather' and then forcing some silly statement to make a point. Nothing personal, just tiresome argumentation.

 

I would rather not have these stupid carrier designs in this game. I would much much much rather have great playing carriers (so i can play them without being bored after 2 rounds), that don't allow complete nitwits to ruin the gameplay for 22 other players for 20 minutes even when they are insanely bad, just by sheer accident. I would rather have carriers to be sent to port when making vital mistakes just like every other class we have. Etc.

 

Carriers should be like snipers in other FPS games. Hard to get into. Hard to master. Now we have a scout-heavy-sniper class without the drawbacks of any of them. How stupid is that in a class based game?

[Yosha_AtaIante]

45 minutes ago, Europizza said:

Forgive me, but I'm getting a bit tired of the 'would you rather' and then forcing some silly statement to make a point. Nothing personal, just tiresome argumentation.

Literally what every CV hater is doing to reinforce their argument however. Peak hipocrisy but that's just the usual state of this forum and community 

[HassenderZerhacker]

I would come back to play in  a no CV mode (assuming no submarines get added)

[MacFergus]

2 hours ago, Europizza said:

Carriers should be like snipers in other FPS games. Hard to get into. Hard to master. Now we have a scout-heavy-sniper class without the drawbacks of any of them. How stupid is that in a class based game?

 

That's the point though they were very hard to master , While I'm an admirer of skill to lock out people who want to play CVs by making them extra hard to master means WG are denying a whole class to the populous.

 

I never found crossfire torping much fun or CV sniping.