Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
DFens_666

Rebalance CVs

102 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles

Haku isn't an invincible monster although it may feel that way for the individual BB that's been farmed. Said BB is likely getting a taste of what it feels like to play Cruiser. 

 

Plus Haku being able to Alpha anything isn't a flaw with CVs the class, it's more of an issue with the ship. You can argue a Taiho in a T7 MM is far more brutal than a Haku as there are still T7s ships with very low AA.

 

4 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

There are 2 different types of people.

1. will look for any loophole, advantage etc and abuse it to the max. Also, denying that anything like this exists, while insulting everyone trying to argue against it.

2. Acknowledges the facts and tries to improve situation by giving usefull feedback with his experiance.

 

Time to pick the side I guess.

 

Hey there's no reason why someone can't do both :Smile_teethhappy: Besides if we didn't use ships to their maximum potential then WG wouldn't have any of their precious data to collect for ship balancing!!

 

11 minutes ago, MacFergus said:

 

WG need to imho re do the CV make in more user friendly to close that skill gap at the moment a few dominant good CV players are ruling the roost as they should being good however this will always be a contentious issue and of course you could argue that a good player in any class ship could do the same.

 

This is a debate where there are no winners do you punish a player for being good? or make the class more user friendly to encourage more equal play?.

 

 

 

I'm actually enjoying the tactical flexibility and depth to CV play right now... This game is inhabited by a lot of casuals who don't care or won't invest the time into learning a class properly, it would be unfair to dumb down mechanics further although judging by this season of CB that's the approach WG wish to take but they still choose to have competitive aspects of the game. 

 

WG won't do this as they're  busy having community competitions but in depth in game tutorials which reward the player with various rewards would go a long way to helping to educate people as not everyone watches YouTube, browses forums or even reads the main website. If incentives were waved at people and they played through engineered tutorials you would still have potatoes but at least most will have sat through a few lessons so should all understand how their ship works. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, Players
5,291 posts
21 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Go back, read again. But i could see how a change in CVs which would reduce the skill ceiling isnt very well liked by someone who likes to rape the enemy team with OP Saipan :Smile_trollface: Ye, hiding your stats doesnt help does it?

 

you can see stats that was 1.5 year ago^^ nothing special , and yes i play Saipan so plewbs open more topics  about cv^^

 

15 minutes ago, MacFergus said:

 

Hehe was in a game against you the other night , After you had made our CV irrelevant in a few minutes and then systematically took are team apart I remember you finishing top with 4 kills , This of course brings up the issue of skill gap between CV players which I think is the major issue not the actual class themselves you would know better than anyone what needs to be done?.

 

WG need to imho re do the CV make in more user friendly to close that skill gap at the moment a few dominant good CV players are ruling the roost as they should being good however this will always be a contentious issue and of course you could argue that a good player in any class ship could do the same.

 

This is a debate where there are no winners do you punish a player for being good? or make the class more user friendly to encourage more equal play?.

 

Like I said you wont resolve this issue ever.

 

as a OP cv player i can say , cv is ok now not need to balance even saipan , lose tb easy from full aa gn , scharn or any other bb who have brains to put aa :)

 

as for t10, dm , mino or other can do same , unless player go fully afk yachting

 

also just funny to see some players here , say about balance when some have 45+ winrate lol :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FDUSH]
Players
1,195 posts
6,749 battles
2 minutes ago, xXx_Blogis_xXx said:

also just funny to see some players here , say about balance when some have 45+ winrate lol :P

 

I still say that carriers are OK, there are minor issues with it's interface. But I don't want them to be changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles

All Saipan really needs is either a reduction in her fighter ammo or the removal of no exit strafe losses. Currently she makes Kaga almost unplayable as a good Saipan player will just dance around your squadrons then proceed to chop you up with no comebacks, especially if there is no allied AA to help you (which does happen as you can get T5 MM as a T7 CV). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, Players
5,291 posts
3 minutes ago, Sargento_YO said:

I still say that carriers are OK, there are minor issues with it's interface. But I don't want them to be changed.

 

indeed :cap_look:

 

@Negativvv oh really? and if you not play vs saipan ? kagas strike dps , is way more higher then saipan , in good player hand EZ dmg farm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,085 posts
6,276 battles
4 minutes ago, Negativvv said:

WG won't do this as they're  busy having community competitions but in depth in game tutorials which reward the player with various rewards would go a long way to helping to educate people as not everyone watches YouTube, browses forums or even reads the main website

 

I started to think more and more about the weekly missions and challenges. I find it really stupid, that there are things like "kill 5 cruisers" "sink 20 russian ships" etc in there. Instead, there should be challenges for certain classes with task, that would reward their gameplay. Thus somewhat pushing you in the right direction, rewarding teamplay, rewarding "doing the right thing" and so on.

 

6 minutes ago, Negativvv said:

Besides if we didn't use ships to their maximum potential then WG wouldn't have any of their precious data to collect for ship balancing!!

 

No2 is still a superunicum playing the ship to the max ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
4,408 posts
6,265 battles
5 minutes ago, Sargento_YO said:

 

I still say that carriers are OK, there are minor issues with it's interface. But I don't want them to be changed.

 

Looking at your stats your oppinion is totaly not biased. Should i show u?

Ofc u dont want them to change, because u couldnt statpad with them anymore. Getting better with CVs, while getting worse with all the other ships... :cap_like:Its not World of RTS CVs.

 

15 minutes ago, xXx_Blogis_xXx said:

you can see stats that was 1.5 year ago^^ nothing special , and yes i play Saipan so plewbs open more topics  about cv^^

 

No what i meant was, i know what u are playing without looking at the stats (didnt see the old stats, as i was looking on another page) Also i think werent hidden recently, how come? Obviously u dont want others to see how OP the Saipan really is, so that they cant make u a prime example.

 

@NegativvvBut they cant nerf saipan because Premium. SO they need a game mechanic change which wouldnt nerf the other CVs equally as hard (which would still let it have the role as OP CV).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
4,408 posts
6,265 battles
19 minutes ago, xXx_Blogis_xXx said:

oh really? and if you not play vs saipan ? kagas strike dps , is way more higher then saipan , in good player hand EZ dmg farm

 

QFT.

Kaga = OP

Saipan = More OP

Thx for admitting that.:cap_like:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles
8 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

 

@NegativvvBut they cant nerf saipan because Premium. SO they need a game mechanic change which wouldnt nerf the other CVs equally as hard (which would still let it have the role as OP CV).

 

Why can't WG nerf Saipan? They've buffed it from it's original release so they should be permitted to take from her too. Either that or give everyone the ability to exit strafe without losses when they hit 3 planes or alternatively raise the minimum plane number in exit strafing so Saipan can't dance strafe as easily. 

 

2 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

QFT.

Kaga = OP

Saipan = More OP

Thx for admitting that.:cap_like:

 

Kaga is only OP vs no significant AA or enemy fighter compliment, I find her utterly miserable to play vs anyone who knows how to deny strike planes. But then I'm bias towards fighters and see striking as an after option once you've won control of the skies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles
24 minutes ago, xXx_Blogis_xXx said:

 

indeed :cap_look:

 

@Negativvv oh really? and if you not play vs saipan ? kagas strike dps , is way more higher then saipan , in good player hand EZ dmg farm

 

I don't deny Kaga is crazy in the right MM but that's like Strike Lex. You're at the mercy of the MM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Beta Tester
1,330 posts
12,434 battles

While I agree that CV play does need some fundamental changes I am not sure if removing fighters will do the trick.

 

The problem is how to implement a CV's prime element - aka asymetric warfare - into the game without CV's becomming an overly decisive factor (or indecisive factor).

 

So let us take a look how CV combat looked in real life (not a fan of those comparisons but we need to take a quick glance here in order to better understand how the asymetric warfare is implemented in-game). First there never ever were extensive mixed air/sea battles involving planes and exchange of shells. Second each capital ship had their fair share of AA support ships in order to defend against CV strikes (and submarines). This meant that through clear roles a basic teamwork against a dangerous and common threat was already established and unless targeted themselves the support ships were not in danger of getting sunk.

 

Now have a look of what we have in-game. First and formost we have mixed air/sea battles which brings a phletora of problems/changes!

 

AA support ships are now supposed to participate both in the air war as well as in the surface war. Obviuosly that does not work as most AA ships (cruisers) are missing the tools/survivability and range (both gun and AA) to do so. They can either stay back with their capital ships, mostly doing nothing but warding against an AA strike that may never come or try to surface engage the enemy with a high chance of getting sunk by return fire (as we all know the current meta). This means that there simply is no natural teamwork against CV's and even if there is it can be and easily is shattered by surface engagements.

 

So the monumental task for Wargaming is to make their CV's fit in their mixed battles without sticking out (too much).

 

In regards to your suggestion if fighters are removed and CV's are designed as pure damage dealers this may indeed force some more "teamwork" but other than making players feel coerced to cuddle or be herded together I would still consider it some kind of forced teamwork (unliked by many players) instead of a more natural teamwork.

 

Also I do not agree that CV's do not need to fight themselves by removing fighters and adding defensive AA. Every single ship has to fight its counter-parts eventually (ask DDs) so why should CV's be an exception of this rule? That's like playing any MMORPG, MOBA or strategy game where ranged units (often the prime damage dealer) can not target each other. Other classes have fun being at the receiving end while your own CV can only shrug and continue the damage race?

 

P.S.: When talking about natural or forced teamwork think of roleplaying terms, where e.g. a tank and a healer is the smallest natural (and often said viable) team versus e.g. a team of a melee damage dealer and a ranged damage dealer who - apart form stacking damage - usually do not interact very much.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
4,408 posts
6,265 battles
3 minutes ago, Ubertron_X said:

Also I do not agree that CV's do not need to fight themselves by removing fighters and adding defensive AA. Every single ship has to fight its counter-parts eventually (ask DDs) so why should CV's be an exception of this rule?

 

This was ofc based upon my arguement of removing Fighters. If a CV cant defend himself with fighters, he would need to defend himself with AA. Otherwise u could just strike the enemy CV and we have the same problem as before. I was trying to go deeply as possible into the supposed change, trying to cover it from as many angles as possible.

 

5 minutes ago, Ubertron_X said:

This means that there simply is no natural teamwork against CV's

 

Finaly someone has the guts to say it out loud. Why would u play a game called World of Warships where the fun part is to shoot at other ships, but then play AA Ship close to your Allies and do nothing? U might see that once in 1000 battles where a Cruiser starts hugging some BBs or the CV for AA support. But at the same time he is robbing his team of his own firepower. So basicly we would need Bots to do that role, which is once again pretty dumb.

 

9 minutes ago, Ubertron_X said:

I would still consider it some kind of forced teamwork

 

But currently they are using CVs as their scapegoats so that they dont need to play with the Team. Its still a teamgame. Unfurtunately WG is throwing the Teamwork balance more and more overboard, so everyone (mostly BBs) can just play for himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles

I'll just add that last night I got utterly farmed in my Enterprise by an AS Shokaku with two high AA BB division buddies.

 

Basically he set up an air defence perimeter with BBs blockading a cap. When you're 2 fighters vs 3 who are camped above high tier BB AA you are basically helpless and so was our team. It was a slow and boring game with the outcome never in any doubt. 

 

It's party why I think AS loadouts should be removed but that might be salt enhanced thinking :cap_fainting:

 

In seriousness if WG removed all the decks and forced all CVs to have a single loadout then CVs would be far easier to balance as there wouldn't be as many freak show MMs which make a Strike CV unplayable and or an AS CV as the Anti-Fun Police for everyone else. Like the AS Saipan which is incredibly negative and boring for everyone, even for the Saipan himself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,085 posts
6,276 battles
17 minutes ago, Negativvv said:

It's party why I think AS loadouts should be removed but that might be salt enhanced thinking :cap_fainting:

 

I just had another great idea - instead of removing the fighters - all CVs get like 10 squads and a refill of 500. This way, CVs can have epic battles for air-superiority for most part of the game, other players can watch the firework going on and maybe, before the round ends, 1 CV can bring 1 TB through the lines without been immediatly shot down by 1 of the 10 fightersquads. Problem with alpha-strike-capability solved. LOL Ah and despite im going to write, that im ofc not serious, someone is gonna quote me on this. ^^

 

17 minutes ago, Negativvv said:

I'll just add that last night I got utterly farmed in my Enterprise by an AS Shokaku with two high AA BB division buddies.

 

I thought about this before. Im kinda hesitant to voice it but - is there maybe a problem with Div able to bring a CV? Should CVs maybe be locked into playing alone? Examples like yours make me think about it. CVs have such a different enviroment. Early in the game, they can only be directly attacked by the enemy CV. A Div will ofc (try to) stop this. At some later point, DDs may become a thread. Also, a Div will (try to) counter this. When I div-up with a CV, my priorities are: kill or HE-spam AA-ships, support my CV in Airfights, target DDs (or other ships) that get too close to the CV. Without a div-mate, ususaly the priorities are different. Its what makes a CV really untouchable.

 

Edit:

 

17 minutes ago, Negativvv said:

In seriousness if WG removed all the decks and forced all CVs to have a single loadout then CVs would be far easier to balance

 

Agree. I never understood the concept what WG wanted to achieve. If anything, they could have made the players choose totaly freely, Id understand this even better then the actual situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles
4 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

 

I thought about this before. Im kinda hesitant to voice it but - is there maybe a problem with Div able to bring a CV? Should CVs maybe be locked into playing alone? Examples like yours make me think about it. CVs have such a different enviroment. Early in the game, they can only be directly attacked by the enemy CV. A Div will ofc (try to) stop this. At some later point, DDs may become a thread. Also, a Div will (try to) counter this. When I div-up with a CV, my priorities are: kill or HE-spam AA-ships, support my CV in Airfights, target DDs (or other ships) that get too close to the CV. Without a div-mate, ususaly the priorities are different. Its what makes a CV really untouchable.

 

Edit:

 

 

Agree. I never understood the concept what WG wanted to achieve. If anything, they could have made the players choose totaly freely, Id understand this even better then the actual situation.

 

Yes... Good exploiters will deliberately play to strengths which is understandable. Like Kaga's quality of life would increase massively with a Gneisi and Atlanta division with full AA umbrellas as your buddies could swat anything you can't handle out the sky for you whilst your OP TBs 1 shot a BB every few minutes. Removing CVs from Divs would not be the way to go either as it would be a further nail in the coffin after the CB "no CVs pls" mess. 

 

Giving players free choice for decks would eventually work out to a common meta although you'd see some utter disasters for awhile like pure TB and pure Fighter decks. Arguably it would make the game more complex which isn't needed! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,085 posts
6,276 battles
4 minutes ago, Negativvv said:

Giving players free choice for decks would eventually work out to a common meta although you'd see some utter disasters for awhile like pure TB and pure Fighter decks. Arguably it would make the game more complex which isn't needed! 

 

True. I´d also think, that there would evolve some kind of common meta, which would be the most viable. You´d also see the full Fighter guys, just so that they can piss of the enemy CV.

 

About the complexicity - In some areas, I think, the game lacks it. Or better: it lacks to give players the options. The deck-setup is just one, and not even such a good example. Captain skills and Shipmodules are better. Most of them are no-brainers. You dont really have options, how to setup your ship, how to skill your captain, most things are a given and will just increase the overall performance. Like IFHE for 152mm cruisers. There just is no way around it. It would be kinda cool if there was an equaly viable option instead of IFHE, to stay on that matter. Going back to CVs - the captain for any CV is also set, there are no real options. There could be seperate trees with focusing on different aspects of the gameplay. Focus on fighter-advantages or strike or something like that. It would also make each round more random, if you dont know, what skills does your oponent posses? On that matter, I think, more complexicity is welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,836 posts
10,318 battles
1 hour ago, P2Win said:

There is a reason the HAKU has 10k more average damage than Midway, But what are stats right? 

 

For one, torps do more consistent damage than bombs given that with torps there is more control when you drop while bombs rely on RNG. That being said I can assure you 1000 pd bombs are nothing to scoff at. Secondly, it is more difficult to play USN CVs than IJN ones because it requires more skill. Any potato with some idea on how to play CVs will do reasonably ok with IJN. However given that its harder for most people to perform well in USN CVs given their loadouts as compared to IJNs, naturally the average stats of USN CVs will be lower than IJNs in most area.

3 hours ago, P2Win said:

It becomes rocket science when they send all their squad at you, which most of the smart ones do, because they are fully aware they can get rid of a target in 1 strike, give and take they lose a few planes here and there.

 

Dodging isnt rocket science. You do know CV players are human too right and can make mistakes. Not every CV player is a super unicrum. The more evasive action you take the more likely the CV player wilk make a mistake. Put yourself in their shoes. If a target keeps on turning while its AA are shooting down your planes, will you be abit rushed or panic to drop your torps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,085 posts
6,276 battles
11 minutes ago, pra3y said:

Not every CV player is a super unicrum.

 

Exactly - which is part of the problem itself. Its not only that experianced CV players will drop better, will be more confident in attacking, faster and more precise - but they are playing on a level of their own. There is the "water-level", on which 11 other ppl with different classes battle it out. The CV isnt part of this - unless things go wrong, which often do due to the other CV beeing the better player. Then there is the "air-level". Here we have the 2 CVs (or 4 if lowtier) fighting for air-control. Other ships occasionaly influence this, but ususaly also in favor of the better player - since he will avoid fights, that he is most likely to lose. Once won air-control, the remaining CV player can roam pretty much free. He won already part of the game. Thats why OP is making this suggestions - without fighters, neither CV could be shut down. The assesment, if this would be a viable idea for the game, can in the last instance only be done by WG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
4,408 posts
6,265 battles

@pra3yOnce again your own stats show that u can master everything with CVs, while being mediocre at best in the other classes.

- Highest WRs compared to battles played

- Top 10 Highest PR ships, 6 are CVs, where as the other 4 are lowtiers and played only a couple matches (where naturally every player has some at both ends, because its statistically irrelevant as the numbers are far too low)

- Top 6 highest avg dmg all CV

- High Averge kills thus More damage = more kills

 

This isnt an RTS game, yet every CV player makes the fault at the other ship classes. Air combat is one level of the game, and the other is water combat. ( @Ubertron_X put it nicely). Yet 22 players are playing on one field and only 2 are playing the other, which inevitably leads to one (the better) player dominating his counterpart.

Basicly we have a Game with a small RTS part in it, yet this small part is able to not only be on par with the others, but it can excel in every single stat against the main part namely:

Highest WRs

Highest Average Damage

Highest Average kills

+ ofc some others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4,497 posts
9,810 battles
5 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

@pra3yOnce again your own stats show that u can master everything with CVs,

 

 

Actually the only thing it proves that a very good player (he's not in any way "mediocre" in other ships, indeed he's as good or better than you) has a positive effect on his teams chances to win. He's within 1% win ratio on his two most played ships, one being a CV and the other a BB. His third most played has the same WR as your own fiji.

 

Unlike you, he's just the sort of player who plays ALL sorts, and thus isn't in your biased position of "I don't play them, so nerf them".

 

And again, no one is saying CVs don't have a higher impact, or somewhat larger effect, but not enough to not be justified given the games design and other CV limitations (nevermind the already dwindling relative population of players still playing them).

 

/btw, your stats prove you have no idea what you're talking about when talking about CVs, yet you keep pretending you do. Using others peoples statistics while whining that people refer to your completely lacking experience isn't that just a little hypocritical... just maybe?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester, Players
628 posts
11,995 battles
15 hours ago, hgbn_dk said:

Would be so much easier just to remove CV's from the game all together... CV gameplay differs so much from the rest of the ship classes that they deserve their own game IMHO

 then why not just remove all the classes and then close the game ..... 

 

mang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,836 posts
10,318 battles
3 hours ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

@P2Win is right in general. You just invent some kind of scenario, where a) the CV player is below avarage (coming with single squads? really?) b) the ENTIRE team plays as a team and relizses it has to defend against the biggest thread - CV (it never happens) c) there are lot of strong AA-ships around + they are AA-skilled + have a 19 or close to that captain (unrealisitc also). Also - with the +/-2 mm (for CVs), a T10 WILL meet T8 stuff. They cant drop those planes in time before beeing deleted. And the CV gets the bonus of doing extra heavy damage against the lower tier target. This however is not exclusiv to CVs. I find it hilarious that f.e. T8 cruisers are on such a disadvatage, that they are deleted by 2 T10 DD torps, cuz of the high dmg they take. Way to put a lowtierd Player even more ar disadvantage. Another thing about cruiser vs CV scenation: I play a lot of CA/CL. Before the round, I have to choose between DefAA / Hydro. I dont even know if I will face a CV or how many DDs on which map. Doesnt make sense. CA/CL need to have both consumables slotted. Especially with the low numbers of Cruisers around at high tiers.

 

 

I'm not inventing anything. Isn't it just as presumptuous to assume every CV player you meet is competent? Just like very other class there are potatoes who play CV. Assuming every single Hakuryu you meet is someone who can one shot you is false. Why would they not come in single squads? Some CV players do cross-drops all the time to make sure they do guaranteed damage/ it seems more effective to them. Some are just potatoes who don't know what they're doing. Some are forced by situations where they have to send one squad to kill a low health enemy target to get more pts while the other is reloading. Say for every strike the CV does he stacks all his TBs together. That would mean that instead of waiting for 1 squad to reload and go out there to strike a target, you wait for all 3 squads to rearm, then launch them, then stack them and then strike. How much time do you think it'll take to execute each strike? In exchange for better plane survivability and damage, you exchange DPS. If you mess up that stacked drop then you have to start all over again and that takes time. And each game at most last for 20 mins. On the other hand, you can throw survivability out of the window and just keep on throwing TB squads out and strike targets without stacking. You have increase DPS temporarily but in the long run you'll lose planes fast and lose your potential to deal any damage and effective just a floating brick worth 90 pts. Then if we're going to talk about match making what about a Shokaku meeting tier 10 ships? How effective do you think its planes are and how disadvantages is it for tier 8 CVs in tier 10 matches?

 

Exactly - which is part of the problem itself. Its not only that experianced CV players will drop better, will be more confident in attacking, faster and more precise - but they are playing on a level of their own. There is the "water-level", on which 11 other ppl with different classes battle it out. The CV isnt part of this - unless things go wrong, which often do due to the other CV beeing the better player. Then there is the "air-level". Here we have the 2 CVs (or 4 if lowtier) fighting for air-control. Other ships occasionaly influence this, but ususaly also in favor of the better player - since he will avoid fights, that he is most likely to lose. Once won air-control, the remaining CV player can roam pretty much free. He won already part of the game. Thats why OP is making this suggestions - without fighters, neither CV could be shut down. The assesment, if this would be a viable idea for the game, can in the last instance only be done by WG.

 

That's the thing I think. People think that CVs are playing a separate game when its not. Having skills in CV is one thing but what about helping out the team? For example the other day I had a game in my Taiho. Kagero went to cap a point so I sent my fighters out to help him scout and sent my TBs in to provide cover in case an enemy DD starts shooting at him. Enemy DD does pop out and I sank it while the DD capped the point. Then an enemy division of Mino and DM moved next to the cap and thus I'm hamstrung. So I try to hit targets attacking my team from a distance that are alone to relieve their pressure while they push into B to recapture and get rid of the division. When the enemy Taiho attacks them I provide AA as best as I can. After that I help the team to scout out the remaining enemies, a Montana and the other Taiho. Post game got complimented by the Kagero. CV play is not about trying to get as much damage as possible. Sure it's easier to do damage in a CV, but my goal is to try and help my team win. I've had games where I do tons of damage and get multiple medals, yet we lose because my whole team decides to camp. On the other hand, I've had games where I lose almost all my planes and did poorly in terms of damage, yet my team win because I made the right call on what target to strike or what actions I should take plus my team is able to take advantage of that and that's why we win.

 

In games where there are no CVs do you know which class is the best at winning games? DDs. As long as they survive to the end and cap, your team have a higher chance of winning. BBs and CAs are good at influencing the start and the middle of the game, especially with strong pushes that wreck the enemy team but the enemy team just needs one DD to cap your base while your team is pushing theirs to win.

 

Regarding this no fighter thing I feel that its not really effective. Perhaps at tier 4 WG could remove fighters, reintroduce manual drop but nerf the damage so that it'll discourage seal  clubbing while allowing new CV players a better environment to learn CV gameplay. It also allow other class players to not suffer that much. Then from tier 5 onwards the actual CV gameplay starts. Getting rid of that "air control" aspect would just be detrimental and unfair to the team you're on and encourage poor CV play in the long term.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
4,408 posts
6,265 battles

Ok only time im going to answer to u

 

30 minutes ago, AgarwaenME said:

he's not in any way "mediocre" in other ships indeed he's as good or better than you

 

Considering he has a lot of Premium ships (which are considered OP by most of the community (atleast from the part which is not biased)), and he has below average WRs in them, i do think he is mediocre. Ofc i give him credit for playing almost entirely Solo, also thats why i wouldnt compare stats directly with me and him, coz i play 2-man division mostly. Also did i say im a superunicum? :cap_hmm:

 

30 minutes ago, AgarwaenME said:

has a positive effect on his teams chances to win. He's within 1% win ratio on his two most played ships, one being a CV and the other a BB.

 

Oh ye, a BB considered totaly Broken and OP... I rest my case about u being biased. Or u just pretend to not have a clue. And the others are CVs, so yes, proves my point.

 

30 minutes ago, AgarwaenME said:

His third most played has the same WR as your own fiji.

 

Not sure when he played the bogue, but most likely before the changes to lowtier CVs. (between 14.4.2016 and 16.7.2017). And Bogue these days? lulz....

 

30 minutes ago, AgarwaenME said:

Unlike you, he's just the sort of player who plays ALL sorts, and thus isn't in your biased position of "I don't play them, so nerf them".

 

Well so do I, maybe not so many CVs, but im not biased because i do think they have issues. U are playing them and pretending all is fine, while it actually isnt. If u cant understand the things im saying (as always) its not my fault if u cant follow the logic as do why i think they should be changed. U know, my oppinion and stuff? Thats why its a forum?

U see a text like mine and in your mind its

NERF CVS

BUFF AA

NERF CVS MORE

BUFF DFAA

NERF CVS AGAIN.

What u make out of the words in your mind is hardly my problem.

 

30 minutes ago, AgarwaenME said:

And again, no one is saying CVs don't have a higher impact, or somewhat larger effect, but not enough to not be justified given the games design and other CV limitations (nevermind the already dwindling relative population of players still playing them).

 

Maybe u want to read my first post as to why I (!) think that the changes I posted for discussion would actually help the player base. U only want 1 player to have that advantage in every game. I want it for both of them.

 

30 minutes ago, AgarwaenME said:

/btw, your stats prove you have no idea what you're talking about when talking about CVs, yet you keep pretending you do. Using others peoples statistics while whining that people refer to your completely lacking experience isn't that just a little hypocritical... just maybe?

 

Probably would be the same in which way i would argue, because u would dismiss them anyway. Not playing (not true) doesnt mean that u dont have a clue about them. How could i whine to people refering to my lacking experience when u just pointed that out? Magic 8ball? :cap_hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AAO]
Players
401 posts
7,173 battles

CV rework requires complete balancing and over-hauling the UI and loadouts, there shouldnt be full strike nor AS without chance to hit the surface fleets. One thing that could work against massive scouting advantage of superior CV player is to limit wich type of squadrons can spot for the team and wich will spot for CV only.

Re-doing as example TB drop patterns and ammount of planes would allow US to get 2 TB squads back or split the 1 into 2 just like IJN, Dive bombers should be made more fun and can have national differense in ordanance and drop patterns.

Fighters need biggest rework, so its not so 1 sided 1vs1.

 

AA rework is also needed so there isnt perfect bubble with all guns firing, but make it like 2ndaries so they have fields of fire and getting rid of 1 sides AA gives you chance to strike easyer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×