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

“CV”, by —  

52 members have voted

  1. 1. I really care about CVs, I would gladly spare effort for serious thought on them, and direly wish to see them improved in WoWs.

    • Yes.
    • No. I really don’t care about CVs, I have no love for them and no time for them. I will not bother to give feedback in this thread and will gladly see myself out.

29 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
760 posts
4,326 battles

The Asashio situation is set, no more good to be done further fussing over it.

 

Time to focus on the only thing I truly care about, CVs.

 

It would be best that we write whatever we want to write, and say whatever we want to say, this time, before WG finishes the wip on the CV rework. For once they finish this rework it is unlikely they will do another.

 

The purpose of this thread is two-fold.

 

One is to gather ideas from the forums on what we should examine whilst considering this CV rework. From what perspectives, using what methods, asking what questions, gathering what data and insights, would an analytical approach to the intention of CV rework benefit from. 

 

Two is to gather personal ideas on what is the most definitive, representative, singular and final view of CV you hold. What is your version of the definitive CV experience. What in your imagination is the concept of the CV. What is your most symbolic experience in the old CVs. What do you hope for in the new. What will you carry on in memory to the new.

 

I myself will be preparing a writeup akin to a mini-version of notes. It will be subject to some of the same standards, but will be exclusively focused on CV in context of this rework. It will be a bit tasking so I should probably not waste any more attention cracking jokes and ranting sarcasm for a while.

 

Seeing which aspects of the CV the people on the forums  believe is important will also help me in defining my own plan and approach to the concept, while reading on the experiences and memories of fellow CV players will possibly provide insight and inspiration.

 

Thus I would like to invite you to please kindly post your “last words” for CVs, and your “final say” on this concept, in this thread.

 

I personally wish this collective memory of CVs to be exempt from meaner, rougher thoughts, as well as dismissive treatment in its characterisation, if possible. We need not patronise nor objectify WG in this either; as ideally concepts are just concepts, pure and ideal.

 

Remember the CVs as what not we had managed to make of them, but as what they deserve to be, and what their portrayal carries collectively and ideally, timeless and final.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
Players
2,001 posts

They don't work at all in the main game, they're either excessively dominant or hopelessly useless. Tinkering on the edges doesn't make them less unbalanced.

 

CV's should have their own game mode where they can fight each other with multiple CV's each side and a controllable set of AA bot ships. A true RTS game mode.

  • Cool 3
  • Bad 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,623 posts
6,487 battles

stupid biased poll and answers

 

Was there a need for another thread regarding that topic?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
Players
2,001 posts
11 minutes ago, principat121 said:

stupid biased poll and answers

 

Was there a need for another thread regarding that topic?

 

Of course there isn't, but as anyone who reads this forum is very aware the OP can't stop himself writing endless dull drivel while claiming he's quit the game. The fact I had him in the same team a couple of weeks ago being utterly useless in his Yamato while moaning constantly in the team chat that the game was rubbish means he's less than honest.

Yes the "poll" is a complete farce.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
136 posts
3,209 battles
1 hour ago, KarmaQU_EU said:

what we should examine whilst considering this CV rework

Cant do any sort of fancy analysis but I can provide my outlook on some issues that CVs have:

 

1. The removal of manual attacks at lower tiers was awful move. It caused that players starting their CV lines could not get better with most basic operation of their vessels. The other 3 classes on the other hand were not being prepared to face CV with manual drops either. This leads to really big issues at around Tier 6 and 7 where not only some CVs are really good and other really bad, but other ships are also really good or really bad at handling plane attacks.

 

2. Existence of manual AA captain skill is big hurdle in proper balancing of surface ships anti air. It forces that planes have to be balanced around massive AA, which leads to very polarized effect: you either downright delete incoming planes, or you do nothing at all.

 

3. Really poorly done UI does not offer properly visualized information about what is happening to your squadrons, which alongside with some input lag may cause problems especially for less experienced players, further reinforcig the skill gap.

 

4. Incapability to redo some of the controls, like rebinding Alt and Shift key ads to annoyances in operating the ship.

 

1 hour ago, KarmaQU_EU said:

Two is to gather personal ideas on what is the most definitive, representative, singular and final view of CV you hold. What is your version of the definitive CV experience

 

I honestly do not have any specific idea on how CV should operate. As long as its not downright over powered or completely pointles (like too situational). I am fine with whathever decisions will be made, if those decisions actually fix something instead breaking the class even further.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,623 posts
6,487 battles
31 minutes ago, BeauNidl3 said:

 

Of course there isn't, but as anyone who reads this forum is very aware the OP can't stop himself writing endless dull drivel while claiming he's quit the game. The fact I had him in the same team a couple of weeks ago being utterly useless in his Yamato while moaning constantly in the team chat that the game was rubbish means he's less than honest.

Yes the "poll" is a complete farce.

I am glad, that I am not the only person with that impression of him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
271 posts
3,326 battles
1 hour ago, principat121 said:

stupid biased poll and answers

 

Was there a need for another thread regarding that topic?

Considering how well formulated and constructive @KarmaQU_EUs post usually are I’d say yes, we need another post about it as we usually get something worthwhile out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[W-C]
Beta Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
2,208 posts
5,859 battles

Can you like....stop spamming your pointless threads?

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TENGO]
Players
1,451 posts
8,106 battles
1 hour ago, domen3 said:

Can you like....stop spamming your pointless threads?

What about a poll about that question? :Smile_hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WCWVE]
Players
664 posts
10,829 battles

The ability to set the attacking squadrons height of attack, at the moment all squadrons seem to operate at the same height whether they are torpedo bombers, dive bombers or fighters 

Also the ability to change the torpedo spread width so that if you come across a slow or stationary target you can adjust the torpedo width accordingly

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
6,644 posts
13,071 battles

Doesn't matter what we write here, WG ignores skilled CV players out of principle as they've told us to the face already.

You know, despite everything we've predicted coming to pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RONIN]
[RONIN]
Beta Tester
2,548 posts
5,481 battles
11 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Doesn't matter what we write here, WG ignores skilled CV players out of principle as they've told us to the face already.

You know, despite everything we've predicted coming to pass.

I actually expect the rework to be incredibly dumbed down, and not even RTS.

 

For reference look at how the paragon works in fractured space - the view is the same as other ships, you target lock enemy, and then you press 2 to launch bombers at them. The bombers go off and auto attack. Similar for fighters.

 

So im expecting that, with the "secondaries" being main guns for them to shoot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
289 posts
812 battles

if you're going to make your arguement credible at least make the poll unbiased.

 

otherwise it just looks like you are trying to set up your own echo chamber.

 

otherwise yes i guess CV's need a rework but im too new too comment as too how they should be reworked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
Players
2,001 posts
12 minutes ago, BrigadierRosen said:

if you're going to make your arguement credible at least make the poll unbiased.

 

otherwise it just looks like you are trying to set up your own echo chamber.

 

otherwise yes i guess CV's need a rework but im too new too comment as too how they should be reworked.

 

Spend a few minutes looking on the forum for the OP's endless billion word dribblings and you will realise an echo chamber is exactly what he wants. Endless essays of "improvements" to a game he claims not to play (which is a lie, I've seen him myself in a random, he was useless and contributed heavily to a loss) and yet he's unable to stop posting because he's obsessed with the sound of his own text.

Most forums have a poster like him, but he's a fairly extreme example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TENGO]
Players
1,451 posts
8,106 battles
2 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

Doesn't matter what we write here, WG ignores skilled CV players out of principle as they've told us to the face already.

WG ignores any skilled players, regardless of the discussion.

 

RPF. BB shooting HE. BB having better concealment than cruisers. There's probably a lot more where (very) skilled players have acted against, but WG does (and will keep doing) its best to dumb down this game to the level of its playerbase.

 

So I'm holding my heart for what else might follow, cause that "level" is an abyss where I don't dare to stare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SICK]
Weekend Tester
4,549 posts
9,070 battles
20 minutes ago, PzychoPanzer said:

WG ignores any skilled players, regardless of the discussion.

 

RPF. BB shooting HE. BB having better concealment than cruisers. There's probably a lot more where (very) skilled players have acted against, but WG does (and will keep doing) its best to dumb down this game to the level of its playerbase.

 

So I'm holding my heart for what else might follow, cause that "level" is an abyss where I don't dare to stare.

 

And to think they were live testing radars on them as well...

shudders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
6,644 posts
13,071 battles
25 minutes ago, PzychoPanzer said:

WG ignores any skilled players, regardless of the discussion.

 

Well, true, but it's particularly insulting to CVs as they've essentially told us to the face that they're discarding everything we say because we're too knowledgeable and experienced. Don't think that has happened to any other class.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TENGO]
Players
1,451 posts
8,106 battles
19 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

they've essentially told us to the face that they're discarding everything we say because we're too knowledgeable and experienced.

Link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
6,644 posts
13,071 battles
1 minute ago, PzychoPanzer said:

Link?

 

Official explanation as to why they chose to remove alt attacks for low tier CVs instead of doing anything else we've suggested. It's on the forums somewhere, though I wouldn't know what to search for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
324 posts
4,468 battles

tl;dr
Asashio is fine.
Not for everyone, but fine.
And very easy to counter.
Also if you get torped in your CV you shouldn`t play the CV in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HAERT]
Players
2,001 posts
1 hour ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Well, true, but it's particularly insulting to CVs as they've essentially told us to the face that they're discarding everything we say because we're too knowledgeable and experienced. Don't think that has happened to any other class.

 

That is pretty bizarre, surely polling opinion from the experienced players would make sense and ignoring it really doesn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RONIN]
[RONIN]
Beta Tester
2,548 posts
5,481 battles
27 minutes ago, BeauNidl3 said:

 

That is pretty bizarre, surely polling opinion from the experienced players would make sense and ignoring it really doesn't.

Because what they don't want is something like "increase langley fighter speed by +2, give hosho 4 more reserves."

 

What they instead want is what it will take to get average joe potato to play the class. Click on stuff appears to be the popular answer judging by tiee 4 frequently having 2 carrier per side games, and what came out of the GZ test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
760 posts
4,326 battles
6 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

Official explanation as to why they chose to remove alt attacks for low tier CVs instead of doing anything else we've suggested. It's on the forums somewhere, though I wouldn't know what to search for.

Actually it was mainly to prevent skilled CV players CV-sniping and sealclubbing at lower tiers.

 

Obviously it’s not a perfect and un-controversial move but they had their arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×