CV FAN ONLY ( Bring back Enterprise )

[_HomTanks_]

30 minutes ago, GarrusBrutus said:

@GeniusMage Sir what are your thoughts on this one? Hello sir?... Sir?

 

You are toxic. She won't respond to you...

[JohnMac79]

4 hours ago, GeniusMage said:

Shall we play 48 vs 48 then ? With the same amount of BBs (that hit next to nothing), a lot more CLs and DDs (with no torp reloads and passive hydro/radar), and of course, half a dozen carriers. Add limited ammo and severely increase reload.

Of course, we'll never go that historical. That's not the point of the argument. The point is carriers disrupted the old ways of naval warfare. That is represented ingame. You have to play differently.

 

Play differently? There are no effective counters to CV, so what you are really saying is "just play boring, sit at the back and blob up even though it makes no difference". Sounds like fun...

 

Yes CV disrupted naval warfare, and this is a GAME... Why on earth do you think this is a legit argument you are making? You really are just saying "CV disrupted naval warfare, so lets have them in the game to disrupt the game". Eh?

 

Its actually not an argument at all.

[Sunleader]

3 hours ago, SV_Kompresor said:

I'm guessing you meant HE dive bombers? Those are the dangerous ones for DDs, skip bombers are useless half the time and a minimal threat the other.

They can be quite effective too.

Nowhere near as good as Dives.

But they can kill DDs fairly reliably.

 

Their effectiveness is similar to Rockets.

 

But thats also the Problem.

Most CV Players are utter Potatoes that are completely unable to estimae a DDs path unless its permapotted and way too incompetent to Lead a Target by 3-4 Seconds.

 

So in most cases the Random CVs you meet are harmless with Skipbombs and Rockets.

[Pukovnik7]

3 hours ago, GeniusMage said:

There's a limit to how much aircraft can maneuver. Once the strike starts, maneuvering becomes much harder.

3 hours ago, Pukovnik7 said:

True, but a ship also takes time to change maneuver as well.

3 hours ago, GeniusMage said:

More like "if the DD is predictable."

3 hours ago, Pukovnik7 said:

DD is always predictable because DDs have a number of tasks that they have to perform, and this limits where they can go and how they can play.

 

Basically, if a DD is so unpredictable it absolutely cannot be found, you don't need to look for it cause he has already eliminated himself from the game.

3 hours ago, GeniusMage said:

Same can be said for DDs.

3 hours ago, Pukovnik7 said:

Maaybe? I've had situations when same destroyer spent half the game stealth-spamming torpedoes at me, and while it was certainly nerve-wrenching, I wouldn't say he ruined my game. It was fun, and most importantly, my actions mattered. With a CV, it is either he's an idiot, in which case he's not a threat anyway, or he's not an idiot in which case your actions don't matter.

3 hours ago, SV_Kompresor said:

 I'm guessing you meant HE dive bombers? Those are the dangerous ones for DDs, skip bombers are useless half the time and a minimal threat the other.

Probably. My memory's kinda crap.

[arquata2019_]

4 ore fa, GeniusMage ha scritto:

There's a limit to how much aircraft can maneuver. Once the strike starts, maneuvering becomes much harder.

American DBs can turn faster than their target can. Of course, that only happens in American DBs (except FDR), you can't really repeat the same thing with other planes (except IJN TBs and USA rockets)

[159Hunter]

5 hours ago, GeniusMage said:

Shall we play 48 vs 48 then ? With the same amount of BBs (that hit next to nothing), a lot more CLs and DDs (with no torp reloads and passive hydro/radar), and of course, half a dozen carriers. Add limited ammo and severely increase reload.

Of course, we'll never go that historical. That's not the point of the argument. The point is carriers disrupted the old ways of naval warfare. That is represented ingame. You have to play differently.

Brings up historical argument: check

Gets a reality check: check

Concludes he doesn't want reality: check

Confirmed as CV apologist: check

[Bear__Necessities]

On 5/13/2022 at 1:17 PM, Skywalker_369 said:

Hello Everyone with  respect to all other players but  this Topic is only for CV players and CV fans.

 

as we see first we are removed from Clan battles and now no CV in brawl . 

CVs are part of this game , and i only play this game for playing CV . there is no reason WG remove us from everywhere becuase some kids cry about CVs.  this is disrespect us and an unforgiven insult to CV players.

 

1. we request to bring back Enterprise to premium shop

2. Do not remove CV from Clan battles and brawls

3.Nerf AA guns or make them manual control

4.add more CV supership  

5.make some Buffs to all CV 

CV's take massive amounts of fun the game. Super CV's REALLY take the fun out of the game. End of discussion. 

[XDukenukemX]

42 minutes ago, Bear__Necessities said:

CV's take massive amounts of fun the game. Super CV's REALLY take the fun out of the game. End of discussion. 

Yes, because sneaking unseen and dropping torps is the fun in this game right? Why the hate about submarines is a thing then?

[GeniusMage]

Il y a 3 heures, GarrusBrutus a dit :

Sir what are your thoughts on this one? Hello sir?... Sir?

My opinion is that I don't care about competitive modes since I don't play them. CVs in randoms are fine.

I don't know why you're asking me though.

Il y a 2 heures, JohnMac79 a dit :

"just play boring, sit at the back and blob up even though it makes no difference"

Sounds like KOTS alright.

Oh wait, there's no CVs there.

Il y a 2 heures, Pukovnik7 a dit :

DD is always predictable because DDs have a number of tasks that they have to perform, and this limits where they can go and how they can play.

Making yourself hard to find as a DD is not that hard to do. Even I can do it, and I'm pretty potato in that class.

Il y a 2 heures, Pukovnik7 a dit :

With a CV, it is either he's an idiot, in which case he's not a threat anyway, or he's not an idiot in which case your actions don't matter.

Again, same can be said about DDs.

Il y a 1 heure, arquata2019 a dit :

American DBs can turn faster than their target can.

That's only really Lexi and Midway. It also severely reduces the accuracy of the drop.

Il y a 1 heure, 159Hunter a dit :

Concludes he doesn't want reality: check

Don't know where you got that. Never said I was against it, simply stated it wouldn't happen.

[Bear__Necessities]

1 hour ago, XDukenukemX said:

Yes, because sneaking unseen and dropping torps is the fun in this game right? Why the hate about submarines is a thing then?

Subs and DD are not the same and you know it. 

[El2aZeR]

13 minutes ago, GeniusMage said:

That's only really Lexi and Midway. It also severely reduces the accuracy of the drop.

 

 

Can almost see the reduced accuracy.

 

 

Nice of you to show your level of expertise.

Also plenty of DBs can maneuver while attacking with little to no penalty.

[GeniusMage]

Il y a 3 minutes, El2aZeR a dit :

Can almost see the reduced accuracy.

I can clearly see the reticle stuck at its widest while hard turning. Only when soft turning did it narrow, at which point the DD has taken little evasive maneuver (he literally sails straight until the planes are done turning).

[El2aZeR]

1 minute ago, GeniusMage said:

I can clearly see the reticle stuck at its widest while hard turning. Only when soft turning did it narrow, at which point the DD has taken little evasive maneuver (he literally sails straight until the planes are done turning).

 

And? Did it result in an inaccurate drop? Or are you just moving goalposts now since you cannot admit that you're wrong as usual?

[GeniusMage]

Il y a 1 minute, El2aZeR a dit :

And? Did it result in an inaccurate drop? Or are you just moving goalposts now since you cannot admit that you're wrong as usual?

No, it confirms exactly what I said. For American DBs to follow targets evading while dropping, which they admitedly can do, they'd lose accuracy.

In your example, the target isn't evading until the planes are right above him, done turning.

[JohnMac79]

13 minutes ago, GeniusMage said:

Sounds like KOTS alright.

Oh wait, there's no CVs there.

 

 

Spoiler

 

Spoiler

 

Spoiler

 

Spoiler

 

[159Hunter]

25 minutes ago, GeniusMage said:

Don't know where you got that. Never said I was against it, simply stated it wouldn't happen.

So first you ask for reality. After a reality check you say not that reality. 

Hence you stated: I don't want reality. What you do want is the part of reality that suits you: as in, the one where CVs are fine and okay in this naval arcade shooter game.

[El2aZeR]

14 minutes ago, GeniusMage said:

No, it confirms exactly what I said. For American DBs to follow targets evading while dropping, which they admitedly can do, they'd lose accuracy.

In your example, the target isn't evading until the planes are right above him, done turning.

 

Except they aren't losing accuracy as can be clearly seen? Given that no ship can outmaneuver US HE DBs, that means you can always get an accurate drop no matter the angle as you will always have time to maneuver then let the reticle close fully. Your claim that they lose accuracy is thus completely wrong.

 

Not that that matters given that I would have been able to follow his turn, again, without accuracy loss.

In general there are few DBs that lose accuracy while turning. Most of them have phases where they can turn without penalty or have no need to due to a circular reticle.

[GeniusMage]

À l'instant, 159Hunter a dit :

So first

Learn how to read.

 

I can also answer to all of your ideas:

- Fuel limit ? In the current scale of maps, it wouldn't matter. Planes had massive range.

- Historical hit ratio ? Sure, let's apply that to every class. Not sure most other class players will like it but who cares. Especially with how good AA was.

- CVs opearting alone are already quite vulnerable, so I don't know how you would change it.

- Vulnerability while refueling/rearming would mean refueling/rearming, so inconsistent AA, replenishment at sea (and all the risks involved, would give a role to subs though), and Vermont-like reload for all BBs.

- Reducing power of single CVs would imply removing any cap to them.

Would be interesting for sure.

Il y a 15 minutes, El2aZeR a dit :

Except they aren't losing accuracy as can be clearly seen?

Then why is the reticle stuck wide for most of the drop window ?

Il y a 21 minutes, El2aZeR a dit :

Given that no ship can outmaneuver US HE DBs

I'm gonna need a source on that though.

 

[Cammo1962]

5 hours ago, Pukovnik7 said:

DD is always predictable because DDs have a number of tasks that they have to perform, and this limits where they can go and how they can play.

 

Basically, if a DD is so unpredictable it absolutely cannot be found, you don't need to look for it cause he has already eliminated himself from the game.

1: DDs is not always predictable and i am main DD and BB player and yes we have task to do but not always in the same order and I always try to mix them and the task are: Spot, torp and cap.

2:No you are wrong the job as a DD is to be unpredictable and not play in the traditional way and i have played many games where I have been unspotted the hole game in a DD because i did not play it as most do in a DD with good result and I did not elimate myself from the by playing my DD in a not traditional way.

[Cammo1962]

16 minutes ago, GeniusMage said:

Learn how to read.

 

I can also answer to all of your ideas:

- Fuel limit ? In the current scale of maps, it wouldn't matter. Planes had massive range.

- Historical hit ratio ? Sure, let's apply that to every class. Not sure most other class players will like it but who cares. Especially with how good AA was.

- CVs opearting alone are already quite vulnerable, so I don't know how you would change it.

- Vulnerability while refueling/rearming would mean refueling/rearming, so inconsistent AA, replenishment at sea (and all the risks involved, would give a role to subs though), and Vermont-like reload for all BBs.

- Reducing power of single CVs would imply removing any cap to them.

Would be interesting for sure.

Then why is the reticle stuck wide for most of the drop window ?

I'm gonna need a source on that though.

 

@GeniusMage you are barking up against the wrong tree regarding @El2aZeR he is main CV and a unikum with a 80% win rate in CVs just telling you this.

[El2aZeR]

25 minutes ago, GeniusMage said:

Then why is the reticle stuck wide for most of the drop window ?

 

Better question, why isn't it going wider? They're supposed to lose accuracy, no?

 

25 minutes ago, GeniusMage said:

I'm gonna need a source on that though.

 

After over 2k matches in Midway I have yet to see one.

Though if you can provide an example, feel free.

[GeniusMage]

À l'instant, El2aZeR a dit :

Better question, why isn't it going wider? They're supposed to lose accuracy, no?

Nice deflection, but that's still semantics.

Il y a 1 minute, El2aZeR a dit :

After over 2k matches in Midway I have yet to see one.

Though if you can provide an example, feel free.

Charge on proof is on you, you're the one that made the claim.

[El2aZeR]

3 minutes ago, GeniusMage said:

Nice deflection, but that's still semantics.

 

More like you cannot admit that you made a factually wrong claim as usual.

Or do you want to imply that being able to always get an accurate drop of is somehow synonymous with losing accuracy?

 

3 minutes ago, GeniusMage said:

Charge on proof is on you, you're the one that made the claim.

 

Experience and fairly extensive training room testing has shown that there is no such ship. Whether you believe me or not does not change that fact.

[GeniusMage]

Il y a 1 minute, El2aZeR a dit :

More like you cannot admit that you made a factually wrong claim as usual.

How am I wrong exactly ? Accuracy is at its worst while the planes are hard turning. Hard maneuvers increase the spread of the reticle to its maximum, going straight or soft turning reduce it.

Il y a 4 minutes, El2aZeR a dit :

Experience and fairly extensive training room testing has shown that there is no such ship. Whether you believe me or not does not change that fact.

"Trust me buddy" hardly qualifies as a source.

[GarrusBrutus]

6 minutes ago, GeniusMage said:

Accuracy is at its worst while the planes are hard turning. Hard maneuvers increase the spread of the reticle to its maximum, going straight or soft turning reduce it.

Claim.

1 minute ago, GeniusMage said:

"Trust me buddy" hardly qualifies as a source.

... proof?