Carrier Commanders and tactical advice

[SkybuckFlying]

 

Well that's because you have a bloated ego that doesn't allow you to realise how incredibly clueless you are.

 

No, just lots of carrier experience ! HA-HA !

 

Convinced me with arguments not this gibberish !

[AgarwaenME]

 

No, just lots of carrier experience ! HA-HA !

 

Convinced me with arguments not this gibberish !

 

You can't be convinced until you start realise how much you fail. And again, your bloated ego stops that.

[SkybuckFlying]

 

You can't be convinced until you start realise how much you fail. And again, your bloated ego stops that.

 

Maybe, but for now my tactic/strategy is working mostly. Call it a "statistical strategy" if you like.

 

As long as there are carrier noobs at rank 10 to 5 I will continue on this path.

 

Though the occasional Saipan loss might think me otherwise, or maybe not...

 

I have seen some Saipan's do good as Spellfire40 wrote... it takes some skill though... to use those Saipan torpedoes well ! ;)

 

And strafing with those tiny little Saipan fighters requires some skill too ! ;)

[Purple_Alert]

I tell them to goto the forums and makes 100's of stupid threads.

[Takru]

 

As long as there are carrier noobs at rank 10 to 5 I will continue on this path.

 

[robihr]

[Mayv]

 

What would you do in your destroyer with an enemy Saipan around with fighters everywhere and a Ranger Strike Carrier on your team ? ;)

 

I dont expect any help from CVs on my team, doesnt matter if they are strike or not.

 

Playing USN and RU DDs much more lately, being spotted isnt as big of a problem as it is for IJN DDs. Saipans arent too bad to play against either as a DD. It is the high tier IJN CVs that can cause problems.

[bushwacker001]

 

Can be written with an c and and s ?

 

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/advise?s=t

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/advice?s=t

 

Sometimes english language is a bit funny ?! ;) =D

 

I guess the "c" version is the content and the "s" version is the act of doing so, so based on that assumption I will correct this typo to avoid any english persons from getting annoyed !

 

 

Learn the difference between verbs and nouns.

 

But then not understanding things is your only skill in this game.

 

I could spend my time arguing points about the game with you, but you're below my standards for who I discuss such matters with.

 

Agarwaen, just ignore the cilly sunt, it is less painful banging your head against a wall. 

[Devi1]

 

I understand that last part, I don't understand the first part (plane status ? huh ?). What do you tell them ? Can you give an example ?

 

Also why would that information be usefull to them or you ?

 

(Also I as guessing you don't play ranger then because it's planes are strong enough usually... at least currently in ranked... they can get to the enemy ships quite well... at least I have health upgrade and such ;))

 

So my guess is you play the weaker japanese cv planes ? Or very maybe saipan ?! HE to soften AA Hmmmm

 

 

Independence and Ryjo (excluding pts), what i mean is that might happen for an error in my part or an outplay of the enemy that a good part of my planes get shut down, so i will have to be more carefull with the remaining ones, this lead to me to not be able to support on an important target unless is "soften" beforehand.

[OopsIPennedYouAgain]

[Allessandaro]

The 2 games I had the misfortune of Skybuck being on my team.

First one he told DDs not to rush to cap, and asked CAs to screen him while he rushed to hide behind an island. Team was so confused everyone went in different directions.

Second one, everyone told him to shut up, so he refused to doing anything, letting his planes circle over him for 5 minutes while heading for the edge.

 

So, vote should rather be:

1) Would you listen to a competent CV tactician - Yes / No

2) Would you listen to Skybuck's nonsense - Yes / No

 

 

[Devantejah]

The 2 games I had the misfortune of Skybuck being on my team.

First one he told DDs not to rush to cap, and asked CAs to screen him while he rushed to hide behind an island. Team was so confused everyone went in different directions.

Second one, everyone told him to shut up, so he refused to doing anything, letting his planes circle over him for 5 minutes while heading for the edge.

 

So, vote should rather be:

1) Would you listen to a competent CV tactician - Yes / No

2) Would you listen to Skybuck's nonsense - Yes / No

 

 

 

Yes

No

[66Schwifty]

The 2 games I had the misfortune of Skybuck being on my team.

First one he told DDs not to rush to cap, and asked CAs to screen him while he rushed to hide behind an island. Team was so confused everyone went in different directions.

Second one, everyone told him to shut up, so he refused to doing anything, letting his planes circle over him for 5 minutes while heading for the edge.

 

So, vote should rather be:

1) Would you listen to a competent CV tactician - Yes / No

2) Would you listen to Skybuck's nonsense - Yes / No

 

 

 

i had the same misfortune with SkybuckFlying, had him on my team 3 times in RBs, and every time we tried to come up with a plan he presented a plan of his own, which included at least one CV staying with him to cover him (seriously?), and the rest of us doing exactly what he ordered us to do (to quote him - "FOLLOW MY ORDERS TO THE LETTER!!!"), even though we all agreed that his ideas were... stupid, to say the least. when we didn't FOLLOW HIS ORDERS TO THE LETTER!!! he started to insult us all, sailed to the edge of the map (away from all the action), circled his planes above him (or never launched them at all), and continued his ranting until he got sunk. just before that he informed us, that he put us all in his ignore list. what a great team work, mate..

 

@SkybuckFlying - i know that you are trying hard to look like a cool fellow here in the Forums, but unfortunately for you there are players here that have had the misfortune of having you in your team, so don't even bother. fortunately for me i at least don't have to listen to your rants in-game, because i am in your ignore list. but so are many other players, thus i wonder how effective your "advice" in-game can be, when most of your team (fortunately) can't even see what you write in the chat. as AgarwaenME has mentioned above - your bloated ego doesn't let you see that your "advice" and commands are rubbish, and not really helping the team..

[Kais_S012]

a few points
1) being a flat top does not automatically make you the flagship of the fleet or grant you the status of Admiral while in battle. you are not a 'commander' in any shape or form when using a carrier you just another WoWS ship punter like the rest of us plebeians so stop with the "carrier commander" bollocks

 

2) Every player reserves the right to make their own decision regarding commands or recommendations from other players. If a Idiot tells me to do something that I see as futile or risky without benefit for the fleet its gonna get ignored.

 

3) Showing a little respect to team mates you are trying to get to maneuver where you want them goes a long way. spitting the proverbial dummy out and berating players when they choose to disregard your plans wont get you anywhere.

 

4) Using a strike setup without fully understanding the risks and limitations involved especially when prone to blaming the team for your own failures only makes you look like a fool (especially with habits like failing to mention to the team that you have no fighters at the start of the round)

 

5) there is no best class for a fleet leader especially when every player has access to the map to begin with. there are just people who are competent or charismatic enough to give directions and recommend and request movement or tactics as well as take the opinions of their fellow players and ADAPT their plans of attack as well as support a plan that they where out voted on to the best of their ability.

 

Ive seen destroyer captain lead teams better than some carrier jockies that should go unnamed. Yes a sound CV tactician is a huge benefit just like a sound BB, DD or CC tactician... a over opinionated fool who thinks they are the second coming son of Mork or Gork when it comes to Carrier play either needs to take a step back and take the long awaiting reality check or needs to disable his chat to stop himself from sticking his foot any further that it already is inserted

[SkybuckFlying]

 

i had the same misfortune with SkybuckFlying, had him on my team 3 times in RBs, and every time we tried to come up with a plan he presented a plan of his own, which included at least one CV staying with him to cover him (seriously?), and the rest of us doing exactly what he ordered us to do (to quote him - "FOLLOW MY ORDERS TO THE LETTER!!!"), even though we all agreed that his ideas were... stupid, to say the least. when we didn't FOLLOW HIS ORDERS TO THE LETTER!!! he started to insult us all, sailed to the edge of the map (away from all the action), circled his planes above him (or never launched them at all), and continued his ranting until he got sunk. just before that he informed us, that he put us all in his ignore list. what a great team work, mate..

 

@SkybuckFlying - i know that you are trying hard to look like a cool fellow here in the Forums, but unfortunately for you there are players here that have had the misfortune of having you in your team, so don't even bother. fortunately for me i at least don't have to listen to your rants in-game, because i am in your ignore list. but so are many other players, thus i wonder how effective your "advice" in-game can be, when most of your team (fortunately) can't even see what you write in the chat. as AgarwaenME has mentioned above - your bloated ego doesn't let you see that your "advice" and commands are rubbish, and not really helping the team..

 

Let me be really short and clear about this: If you and the team followed my commands and it led to a loss than you have the right to b@tch.

 

If you or the team didn't I have the right to b@tch.

 

Plain and simple.

 

Trying playing without a CV with an enemy CV and let me know how that goes for you ! Your loss rate will sky-rocket !

 

(I have had plenty of games where team complemented me and my karma is now 10+, even after all that "abuse" some time ago ! LOL).

 

(Sometimes it takes a while to get people to know me/trust me in ranked, it took a while in "bracket 15 to 10", now I meet new people in bracket "10 to 5" and they need to get used to me/trust me and so forth, hopefully that happens soon since days are running out ! ;))

[eliastion]

 

Let me be really short and clear about this: If you and the team followed my commands and it led to a loss than you have the right to b@tch.

 

If you or the team didn't I have the right to b@tch.

 

Plain and simple.

(...)

 

You didn't follow the plan they agreed on and the team lost. And since they AGREED on the plan and you were apparently the ONE player who ignored it (and even sabotaged the match by not really participating in it) they have much more solid reason to complain about your actions than you about theirs.

Plain and simple.

[Mayv]

 

(I have had plenty of games where team complemented me and my karma is now 10+, even after all that "abuse" some time ago ! LOL).

 

Guys he has got 10 karmas! We better listen to him.

 

 

[SkybuckFlying]

a few points

1) being a flat top does not automatically make you the flagship of the fleet or grant you the status of Admiral while in battle. you are not a 'commander' in any shape or form when using a carrier you just another WoWS ship punter like the rest of us plebeians so stop with the "carrier commander" bollocks

 

2) Every player reserves the right to make their own decision regarding commands or recommendations from other players. If a Idiot tells me to do something that I see as futile or risky without benefit for the fleet its gonna get ignored.

 

3) Showing a little respect to team mates you are trying to get to maneuver where you want them goes a long way. spitting the proverbial dummy out and berating players when they choose to disregard your plans wont get you anywhere.

 

4) Using a strike setup without fully understanding the risks and limitations involved especially when prone to blaming the team for your own failures only makes you look like a fool (especially with habits like failing to mention to the team that you have no fighters at the start of the round)

 

5) there is no best class for a fleet leader especially when every player has access to the map to begin with. there are just people who are competent or charismatic enough to give directions and recommend and request movement or tactics as well as take the opinions of their fellow players and ADAPT their plans of attack as well as support a plan that they where out voted on to the best of their ability.

 

Ive seen destroyer captain lead teams better than some carrier jockies that should go unnamed. Yes a sound CV tactician is a huge benefit just like a sound BB, DD or CC tactician... a over opinionated fool who thinks they are the second coming son of Mork or Gork when it comes to Carrier play either needs to take a step back and take the long awaiting reality check or needs to disable his chat to stop himself from sticking his foot any further that it already is inserted

 

1. Wrong. The top ship is usually the most powerfull one. Care should be taken to defend it and make sure it survives. However it doesn't mean that it's the most experienced player on the team.

 

2. Tempting, but if everybody goes "a-wall" nothing will come from tactics and such teams are more likely to lose against a well organized and cooperating team ! Just a few days ago I gave my team/noobs advice in random battles and we won flawlessly multiple times. So tactics definetly work.

 

3. Some valid point here, however it can be very frustrating if they are making obvious mistakes. Especially in ranked battles where there are only 7 v 7 players. Plenty of players have felt this frustation by now.

 

4. Slightly valid point, slightly not valid. If it's obvious to me that the enemy carrier is going to strike me and if the setup of the game is in such a way that a cruiser on my team is probably going to get blown away anyway he might as well defend my carrier, not doing so is even more stupid. Cruisers are also very fast and can proceed to any part of the map within reasonable time, not defending the carrier on request is kinda stupid. However defending a battleship can be important as well. I do call out people on stupid mistakes, it's to prevent them from doing it again in the next match and to teach them. It's important that they learn and understand.

 

5. Part of this is the game's own fault, not showing experience of players. Having said that... what you wrote after this point I agree with, for carriers it's more save to have command because they are far away. The same goes for destroyer being in concealment, for destroyers it's a little bit more risky. For battleships and cruisers it's too risky... you don't want to be chatting while speedy torpedoes are "flying" at you ! ;) React a second to late and you toast or soon-to-be-toast ! LOL.

 

I have sometimes led team while being in destroyer, and I frequently do it after I am dead, as well as many others...

[SkybuckFlying]

 

You didn't follow the plan they agreed on and the team lost. And since they AGREED on the plan and you were apparently the ONE player who ignored it (and even sabotaged the match by not really participating in it) they have much more solid reason to complain about your actions than you about theirs.

Plain and simple.

 

Don't agree with this, if from my experience I know their plan is going to 100% fail I drive off and let them rott, then they can die by themselfes, saves me lots of credits (hopefully they learn from this for the next time ! ;)) ! If their plan was any good to start with they would not have died within 3 minutes or something stupid like that. (Besides anybody or any team agreeing on a plan that does not involve the approval of the carrier commander is completely stupid, they will not have the time to adept and communicate with each other while they are fighting, it's plain stupid, they don't have the overview, the chance of something like that working is less than 5% or so). One extremely excellent example of this is "Noobs focussing completely on flags, totally negflecting the roll of CVs in this game and then getting completely blown away by enemy CV sometimes even in combination with destroyer torpedoes and I am supposed to go along with this suicide run ?! Think not ! LOL).

[eliastion]

 

Don't agree with this, if from my experience I know their plan is going to 100% fail I drive off and let them rott, then they can die by themselfes, saves me lots of credits ! If their plan was any good to start with they would not have died within 3 minutes or something stupid like that.

 

They from their experience see that your plan is 100% fail. And they see you throwing a game. That last part, in fact, should be a good reason for a solid ban if there was an effective way of reporting such behavior.

From what I hear - both from them and from you yourself - you're literally the WoWs version of "mid or feed" MOBA player.

[Kartoffelmos]

Let me be really short and clear about this: If you and the team followed my commands and it led to a loss than you have the right to b@tch.

 

If you or the team didn't I have the right to b@tch.

 

Plain and simple.

 

Carriers have the most impact in ranked games (can elect to alwys be top-tier), yet you lose more than you win. Why is that? Is it because you always get "bad teams that do not want to follow your every order" or is it because you generally play sub-par and become a liability to the other team members?

 

Since you have played quite the number of ranked games, the law of large numbers implies the latter. As such you should not be giving advice to anyone, let alone demand that people follow said advice.

 

Don't agree with this, if from my experience I know their plan is going to 100% fail I drive off and let them rott, then they can die by themselfes, saves me lots of credits ! If their plan was any good to start with they would not have died within 3 minutes or something stupid like that.

 

Self-fulfilling prophecy. You thought the plan was unworthy of your commitment and thus your team mates died because you didn't pull your weight.

[SkybuckFlying]

 

They from their experience see that your plan is 100% fail. And they see you throwing a game. That last part, in fact, should be a good reason for a solid ban if there was an effective way of reporting such behavior.

From what I hear - both from them and from you yourself - you're literally the WoWs version of "mid or feed" MOBA player.

 

So I survive and they get blown away in 3 minutes ?! And I am the fail ?! Think not.

 

How about we ban everybody that dies in 3 minutes.

 

In real life this problem solves itself by death ! Bye !

[SkybuckFlying]

 

Carriers have the most impact in ranked games (can elect to alwys be top-tier), yet you lose more than you win. Why is that? Is it because you always get "bad teams that do not want to follow your every order" or is it because you generally play sub-par and become a liability to the other team members?

 

Since you have played quite the number of ranked games, the law of large numbers implies the latter. As such you should not be giving advice to anyone, let alone demand that people follow said advice.

 

 

Self-fulfilling prophecy. You thought the plan was unworthy of your commitment and thus your team mates died because you didn't pull your weight.

 

You wanna through statistics at this fine. My carrier statistics have been super unicom for months by now !

[RogDodgeUK]

moved to Ships / Aircraft Carriers

[Kartoffelmos]

You wanna through statistics at this fine. My carrier statistics have been super unicom for months by now !

 

Not even close. The Dunning-Kruger is strong in this one.