Wargaming please balance the number of CVs on each team

[CosMoe]

Especially at lower tiers a number imbalance means that either:

• Team A has 0 CVs and Team B has 1 CV. This results in the CV having an easy time using torpedo bombers on enemy BBs (which at low tiers have insignificant AA) while the fighter plane can freely scout (e.g., for enemy DDs).
• Team A has 1 CV and Team B has 2 CVs. This usually results in the single Team A CV being killed by the combined torpedo bombers of Team B a few minutes into the match. After that, the same as described above happens.

 

Both situations reduce the quality of a match for all involved players a lot.

 

There's a reason SPGs were eventually matched evenly both teams in WoT after months of numerous community requests.

I can not imagine a single reason why it should be done differently in WoWs. Please forward these requests to the developers.

 

 

Edit, because some people seem to misread the title of this topic: This is not in any way a call for CV nerfs! Imho CVs are balanced and matchmaking is the problem.

[bismark121]

hey don't worry once you get t6 now you get the special prize of meeting t8 cv's with players like plastikv and aerroon and get insta killed by them cause they used the broken mm to speed boost their way up

[Kaptain_Tripps]

While they're at it they can increase the reward they get for killing planes so we might actually get some air cover occasionally.

[AgarwaenME]

Stop comparing CVs to wot SPGs, they're not alike.

 

Also, merely balancing amounts is of little value unless you do that balancing based on air groups on those CVs.

[Sharana]

While they're at it they can increase the reward they get for killing planes so we might actually get some air cover occasionally.

 

The reward is more then adequate as WG said. Here is my last game for today, draw so we can easily compare the exp. 1 Lexington can make 2 Shokakus useless. The american fighters so balanced up to tier 8 that I will enjoy roflstomping them with the broken (because of the new perk) Taiho stock fighters 

 

 

[bismark121]

 

The reward is more then adequate as WG said. Here is my last game for today, draw so we can easily compare the exp. 1 Lexington can make 2 Shokakus useless. The american fighters so balanced up to tier 8 that I will enjoy roflstomping them with the broken (because of the new perk) Taiho stock fighters 

 

 

 

good for you (not)

[cuddlesRO]

Carrier in the enemy team , No carries in your team - 99% loss 

Carrier in your team , No carrier in their team - 99% win.

 

It has been overly discussed that low tier CV are extremely Overpowered. I suggest anyone who playing BB and low tier cruiser cancel the queue the moment they see a CV in the queue. Honestly there is no point. Low tier destroyers , cruiser and BB's lack proper AA and such you cannot stop a torp plane rush.

[Ishiro32]

hey don't worry once you get t6 now you get the special prize of meeting t8 cv's with players like plastikv and aerroon and get insta killed by them cause they used the broken mm to speed boost their way up

 

CV MM is really kicked in the head right now. 2 tier difference is not something you can play around with skill at all, especially at low tier.

I had 2 great games in my Zuiho tier V CV.

One was me tier V IJN vs tier VI US + tier VII IJN. Why MM decided it should be 2 higher tiers against 1 lowest and not 1 highest against 2 lower is beyond me. 

Second was me tier V IJN vs Ranger tier VII US. 

 

While I agree that in that 2 v 1 game I made mistake and I learned from it, overall performance of the player in those situation is meaningless. Because of raw stats the margin of error enemy has is just too big. The difference in speed of the planes means that you pretty much can not catch enemy off guard, they almost always have time to retaliate. 

 

I also noticed that low tiers CV no longer have access to the ruddershift upgrade and right now all CVL are acting worse than BBs. This pretty much kills any chance of outplaying enemy TBs as you were able to do in the past. 

 

Oh well, MM is harsh mistress, but for each game where I am expected just to suffer she gives me free buffet games, where I am solo CV. 

[Galadul]

The MM problem is one thing, but it's kind of telling that CVs are so powerful their inclusion or lack thereof completely controls most games.

CVs being evenly matched almost never happens. Like you said, either you're outgunned, or you get a free buffet. Fixing matchmaking is probably not going to happen, because CV players would get too long que times. Perhaps slightly reducing the impact a CV has on a game would be a better solution.

[Ishiro32]

The MM problem is one thing, but it's kind of telling that CVs are so powerful their inclusion or lack thereof completely controls most games.

CVs being evenly matched almost never happens. Like you said, either you're outgunned, or you get a free buffet. Fixing matchmaking is probably not going to happen, because CV players would get too long que times. Perhaps slightly reducing the impact a CV has on a game would be a better solution.

 

Current problem is that low tiers are balanced around new players. People like us with 500~2000 games in them are not supposed to use those ships.

There is also not enough CV players, if you just nerf their damage on low tier it will result in almost no CVs in game.

 

Few patches before we had situation where auto was better than manual. Anyone could be good without any dedication or skill. As a result low tier games queue was looking like this CV:15 BB:2 CA:2 DD:1 . Don't expect new players to do what we are doing and from my experience in CBT I can tell you that in healthy tier to tier MM, CVs are pretty much balanced.

[Galadul]

Hmm sure but that could be said of almost any ship line. Even after grinding out near 1000 battles, there would be nothing stopping someone from playing a T4-6 game whenever they felt like it. AFAIK economy is probably based around people -not- playing T10 all the time.

I hate to say this, but perhaps introduce RNG then? If the difference between a 50 battle person and a skilled person is so massive in CVs, and they can't find other ways to balance it...

 

Hate to say it because I hate the amount of RNG we have on BBs for instance, where RNG has clearly been put in so the very skilled still won't be gamebreakingly good.

I dunno. RNG is not a good way to balance things IMHO, at least not if you put in too much RNG. Then there is very little difference between skilled and unskilled. Unlike main guns tho, torpedos (DD or TB) have 0 RNG, which is perhaps the problem. In the case of DD a ship might could still be able to turn out of torps, but a close manual drop from CV is unavoidable, nevermind if he has 2-3 squads for an anvil. A very skilled CV captain has 0 RNG to contend with, so the difference between unskilled and skilled becomes so massive.

[mtm78]

Especially at lower tiers a number imbalance means that either:

• Team A has 0 CVs and Team B has 1 CV. This results in the CV having an easy time using torpedo bombers on enemy BBs (which at low tiers have insignificant AA) while the fighter plane can freely scout (e.g., for enemy DDs).
• Team A has 1 CV and Team B has 2 CVs. This usually results in the single Team A CV being killed by the combined torpedo bombers of Team B a few minutes into the match. After that, the same as described above happens.

 

Both situations reduce the quality of a match for all involved players a lot.

 

There's a reason SPGs were eventually matched evenly both teams in WoT after months of numerous community requests.

I can not imagine a single reason why it should be done differently in WoWs. Please forward these requests to the developers.

 

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/17333-is-it-just-me-or-cv-are-only-mostly-appearing-on-1-team/

 

Looks like there was already a topic on this 

[Hannibalurg]

Carrier in the enemy team , No carries in your team - 99% loss 

Carrier in your team , No carrier in their team - 99% win.

 

It has been overly discussed that low tier CV are extremely Overpowered. I suggest anyone who playing BB and low tier cruiser cancel the queue the moment they see a CV in the queue. Honestly there is no point. Low tier destroyers , cruiser and BB's lack proper AA and such you cannot stop a torp plane rush.

 

Sir, i need to call [edited]t on this one.

[Ishiro32]

And why is this bad? Why bad players need to get results? BB player who can't aim will not get good results, why do you think bad CV players need to be exception?

I am honest here, if they introduce rng elements into CVs I will just drop this game. They nerfed skill celling already enough. 

 

CVs are designed to be the heart of the fleet, especially on high tiers. With good healthy MM this worked very well.

 

Edit

I also don't belive good CV players will go back few tiers to rolfstomp. CV gameplay starts being intresting only around tier VI+. Anything before is snoozefest. While DDs have extremly fun Isokaze and Minekaze, BBs have Kongo and Wyoming which are fun ships and CA has a monster St.Louis, all low tier CVs are just not fun for anyone who knows how to play them.

[Galadul]

Yeah like I said I don't particularly like RNG myself, but they have certainly lowered the skill ceiling of BBs with the RNG.

[Kaptain_Tripps]

The MM problem is one thing, but it's kind of telling that CVs are so powerful their inclusion or lack thereof completely controls most games.

CVs being evenly matched almost never happens. Like you said, either you're outgunned, or you get a free buffet. Fixing matchmaking is probably not going to happen, because CV players would get too long que times. Perhaps slightly reducing the impact a CV has on a game would be a better solution.

 

Bang on there. If they do implement this then yes, there will be longer queues for CV players, but they have to do something because as it stands if one team has a CV advantage they almost always win. Thing is even if they do this then all that will happen is the CVs wil duel and then the winner will win the game for their team. It's too much influence for one player to have based just on their ship choice. 

[Del_Mare]

in a game where i have no cv opposition i can easily make 2-3 kills in my carrier (2-3 "from 100% hp to 0" kills)

in a game where i have 2 enemy cvs i can usually do nothing (given that they know how to play their cvs)

 

but in a game where i have the same amount of same tier enemy carriers, i have to fight, and usually we cvs are completely entangled in an airfight with each other and can't focus enemy bbs

 

i really like to actually have to fight in a game, so i say it again: change the carrier mm, so there are equal numbers of equal tier carriers enforced

[Lord_WC]

I had 2 CV on enemy team 0 on mine.

MM isn't even trying anymore.

[Aerroon]

 

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/17333-is-it-just-me-or-cv-are-only-mostly-appearing-on-1-team/

 

Looks like there was already a topic on this 

 

You mean this one:

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/16087-maybe-the-cv-issue-is-an-mm-issue

 

Enforced equal number of carriers means that US CVs who want to ruin somebody's game can always pick fighter layout and they will 100% have somebody to annoy. You can do very little vs a fighter Lexington that knows how to play in a same tier IJN CV, so this would break CV matches quite a bit.

 

No other class has a hard counter that hard on the same tiers.

 

[Lord_WC]

No other class has a hard counter that hard on the same tiers.

You mean like how torpedo CVs don't counter basically every other thing on t4-5?

 

If a CV pays with offensive power for air superiority he should get it. Do you think your CV free farming is due to your skill and deserved? The game currently is very out of balance due to CVs.

[mtm78]

 

You mean this one:

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/16087-maybe-the-cv-issue-is-an-mm-issue

 

Enforced equal number of carriers means that US CVs who want to ruin somebody's game can always pick fighter layout and they will 100% have somebody to annoy. You can do very little vs a fighter Lexington that knows how to play in a same tier IJN CV, so this would break CV matches quite a bit.

 

No other class has a hard counter that hard on the same tiers.

 

 

Well both have it's merits, I agree MM is the biggest concern right now and when OBT starts and in 2 weeks or so we should be seeing the people getting more carriers which should allow MM to quit making unbalanced teams.

[Aerroon]

You mean like how torpedo CVs don't counter basically every other thing on t4-5?

Nope, because you can still play the game when that happens.

 

US fighter CV at Lexington tier vs IJN CV is like having a 3vs3 game on the map North or Islands of Ice where the enemy team has a CV and you don't. In a 12 vs 12 game the game can still go either way because it's not possible for the CV to kill absolutely everything in the time given (especially at the tiers you mentioned) due to the slowness of the planes and the maximal damage output. However, in a 3vs3 it would easily be possible, and that's what CV vs CV is like if they have way stronger fighters than you do. There is no real counterplay available if the fighter CV plays even half decent (which is a miracle if they don't since you literally just need to click on planes).

 

Also, the other issue is matchmaking length - there just aren't enough CV players around to always get this. It would increase their MM time by a considerable amount, because too few people play CVs.

 

If a CV pays with offensive power for air superiority he should get it. Do you think your CV free farming is due to your skill and deserved? The game currently is very out of balance due to CVs.

But the thing is that there is no damaging at all if you're against that. Imagine if there was a ship that would snatch up all the shells you fire (and you wouldn't deal any damage with those shells) and then by the 10 minute mark permanently destroy all your guns regardless of where you are on the map. And unlike for other ship classes you are their only target so there is no chance that they will target somebody else with this and you still get to play the game.

[Lord_WC]

Nope, because you can still play the game when that happens.

 

US fighter CV at Lexington tier vs IJN CV is like having a 3vs3 game on the map North or Islands of Ice where the enemy team has a CV and you don't. In a 12 vs 12 game the game can still go either way because it's not possible for the CV to kill absolutely everything in the time given (especially at the tiers you mentioned) due to the slowness of the planes and the maximal damage output. However, in a 3vs3 it would easily be possible, and that's what CV vs CV is like if they have way stronger fighters than you do. There is no real counterplay available if the fighter CV plays even half decent (which is a miracle if they don't since you literally just need to click on planes).

 

Also, the other issue is matchmaking length - there just aren't enough CV players around to always get this. It would increase their MM time by a considerable amount, because too few people play CVs.

Yes, so the CVs are balanced with the fact that someone else gets some scraps as well.

 

Please, your account clearly shows what's wrong with the game currently. Slowness of the planes? I can't hear you over the awesome camo of low tier carriers. You can safely hang on 10-15km and nothing can and will touch you. Not even DDs as basically that's all you will leave for your team to hunt.

 

On long term it's the same kind of uneven fight that can happen between a BB and a CA for example. There are more stronger counters in this game than in WoT and this should include tradeoffs like giving up ship damage for increased chance of winning. CVs shouldn't be a freefarm no brain ship without risk. Currently it basically is. If you want to damage ships, take a bomber loadout but you might get shafted by an enemy fighter CV. If you want air superiority you can take a fighter loadout but that means you will have higher chance to win against a bomber CV and in case of an enemy fighter CV you will have to rely on your team much-much more giving up control. You shouldn't be able to do everything.

[Aerroon]

Yes, so the CVs are balanced with the fact that someone else gets some scraps as well.

 

Please, your account clearly shows what's wrong with the game currently. Slowness of the planes? I can't hear you over the awesome camo of low tier carriers. You can safely hang on 10-15km and nothing can and will touch you. Not even DDs as basically that's all you will leave for your team to hunt.

 

On long term it's the same kind of uneven fight that can happen between a BB and a CA for example. There are more stronger counters in this game than in WoT and this should include tradeoffs like giving up ship damage for increased chance of winning. CVs shouldn't be a freefarm no brain ship without risk. Currently it basically is.

 

It's nothing like that. Have you even TRIED playing CVs for more than 100 games to figure out what you're talking about?

[Lord_WC]

It's nothing like that. Have you even TRIED playing CVs for more than 100 games to figure out what you're talking about?

Have you ever tried playing something else than CVs to figure out what kind of power do you get?

You clearly had that's why you have 50% WR with them and 80 in CVs. It's not normal, sorry.