Jump to content


State of the Union (as far as I see it.)

CV Carrier Game Balance CV bias AA Bias Skill ceiling boots and pants

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
37 replies to this topic

WarJern #1 Posted 10 April 2017 - 09:34 PM

    Seaman

  • Beta Testers

  • 38
  • Member since:
    04-25-2015

I'm having an up and down week. I had a heart attack last week and then celebrated my birthday this week, so I feel like I've plumbed the depths of human existence as far as the emotional range goes. So while I'm in this kinda zen place I wanted to open a discussion about Aircraft Carriers and where I think they are.

 

Contextually I think it's important that I comment that I am not a CV player by choice. I play in the Supremacy League as one because of team needs. I dabble in 'Random' as a strike CV and I have a pretty functional brain. Tie my own shoes, have a drivers license, etc. These are all important caveats I suppose because my initial fear of putting this out there is the people who will decide the worth of this topic and my thoughts solely upon my 'stats.'

 

Let me do you a favor.

https://worldofwarsh...!/pvp/overview/

 

I have a pretty modest account. I like cruisers and I have more in common with the average player then anyone who might choose to use their stats as the reason they should be listened to. So just keep that in mind when you hit reply and feel the urge to type in something like "get good" or "if you don't like it leave" etc. I don't need to be super unicum with 6.0 kdr to be happy. I just need to feel like MY gaming experience is productive. I want to help my team, I'd like to score a kill, do some damage. But why do I have to work all the harder then the guy in the Kutazov who watched a let's play and simply fires from smoke?

 

Right now there are two CV lines that differ in flavor and texture based on the way you want to use them. When you think American CVs you think about their dangerous 1000 bombs and RNG ability murder you or give you a light spritzing. Imperial Japanese CVs bring to mind inevitable waves of overlapping airdropped torpedoes and fighter swarms that block out the sun. Within the context of the game though, any carrier is more or less adaptable to any task. Again, it's your choice of flavor. Now that I've acknowledged there are differences, I want to talk about some things that I feel affect -all- of my aviation brothers and sisters.

 

First, the skill floor and ceiling. They are both incredibly high, and it's that super high skill ceiling that is the reason Carriers are punished in match more and more with each patch. The best of us are still simply running the tables (I'd kill to see WG's metrics). So in return the rest of us aren't getting our 3% raise. Like any other ship, a bad or inexperienced CV will do little to affect the match. They will struggle to coordinate strikes, avoid AA concentrations, and perform well enough to simply have pulled their own weight. But again, that is any ship. However I posit this, in each match there are several of each other ship type. Several chances for each to be the experienced hand that makes up for the inexperienced greenhorn. As a carrier we do not have that luxury. And because we are so powerful individually (Again, I'd actually give a finger to see WG's metrics database.) the team composition will never include more then two of us. So a double edged sword. But in practice that means that the CV players that stick with it, suffer the grind, like ANY OTHER SHIP, will get better, and make the subsequent play look easy. But we live in a world where the relative AA strength in each tier is increasing.

 

By tier 8 The American DDs, CAs, and BB's are all capable of 80+ AA ratings with little effort. Defensive fire abounds and many are capable of 100 AA ratings. The German CA and BB line are equally equippable for self defense and in the same ballpark as the Russian CLs with several standouts in the British CL line (I'm looking at you Neptimore). The only ships that remain relatively good targets are the IJN BBs and CAs and the various DD lines. Our planes seem to be just up to the task as long as we do not play stupidly but the point remains that our fighters and launch vessels are some of the oldest in a game that has now had several years of power creep. It's impossible that we haven't lost something. This makes me wonder how WG will handle the inevitable British CV line without needing the kind of slapstick nerfs that came for the American and Japanese lines.

 

To date,

-The CV economy was introduced, nerfed, nerfed again, changed, buffed and is now finally (my opinion, empirical only) back to where it started. But within the context it's getting harder to introduce new people to this class.

-Lower tier CVs have had a -pretty important- skill removed completely with manual drop being taken away from tier 4-5. That now means new carriers will begin to learn at tier 6. About the same time they'll start meeting Clevelands and Atlantas.

-Before that tier 10 carriers had their postwar Jet aircraft removed because they were -too- good. I'm sure there was a more tempered reason but I keep looking at certain Russian cruisers built in the 1950s and wonder.

-Strafe was introduced. I consider this thing the epitome of a double edged sword, if playing as an AS build CV could -actually- grind you up a line, this ability is great. But instead it's another AA tool, and I feel you understand what I think of those at this point. From a game standpoint it's justifiable and even a useful mechanic but from a historical standpoint or even a physics standpoint it is highly suspect in the repeatable predictable incarnation it exists in. Overall I would call it a buff to CV play with the caveat it helps us not at all in the strike roll.

-We got some new abilities like evasive maneuver and the carrier flaming deck launch thingie I never take. While I consider evasive far deeper then the wording lets on AND useful, flaming deck take-off is situational at best. But what I'm 90% sure they both are are skills that WG can point to to say that they're working on us without committing to broader changes.

 

In the meantime we haven't received a single Carrier specific active ability and we were given defensive fire only because of the incredible uptick we saw in CV sniping. I wonder if it's because we were becoming the easiest targets? And beyond that we were denied an amazing ability in Radio direction finder because (fill in the official reason.)

 

I have the discussion pretty frequently about the merits of League play vs Pub queue play and this AA power creep comes up a lot in League where large teams build and work together. The complete antithesis of traditional random play. CV's are reduced to spotting roles, defending the fleet by spotting incoming torp waves early and attempting to achieve fleeting yet all important aerial dominance in areas where the fleet AA simply doesn't exist. Within the random play spaces a carrier can still breath as not everyone is cogent and prepared to repel a CV's advances. As an example, how many of you reading this now have or had a Lexington that you farmed the T8 demograph with? I'd wager quite a few of you. And equally as telling, how many of you play AS Shokaku in order to shut the other CV down? I'd wager even more that it's far fewer of you. Like every other ship type we adapt to fill a role that provides our abilities with the least resistance.

 

And the least resistance for filthy casuals like me is becoming too much. I'm going to take a huge leap of faith and ask you to trust me when I say, I'm not having fun. I'd like to actually turn this into a discussion, let me know, are YOU having fun? and why?

 

Regards,

WarJern

 



cometguy #2 Posted 10 April 2017 - 11:51 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 762
  • Member since:
    07-29-2016
Ya, I'm having fun. I play IJN CVs with the goal of team support. My favorite CV right now is the Hiryu, and it's well suited to do that. I think t7 also gets the most diverse play. Top tier vs a strike ranger is very different from top tier vs an AS Saipan, and then there's the bottom tier challenges.

Carrier_Lexington #3 Posted 11 April 2017 - 12:38 AM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,126
  • Member since:
    12-25-2014

..... No. Not really.

I'm a US CV Main. I am at Essex, and I feel like I can't get a match where I do very well and gain credits. I've had 130+k damage victories and still lost credits. I see IJN carriers that just overwhelm me with their sheer numbers of fighters, and with AS load-outs that can still reliably put-out damage.

 

The way I see it, in the future, I'll have three options:

  • A strike option which will have only 1 fighter squad for defence against 3-squad USN and IJN AS, and only 1 VT squad, so all of my damage is extremely unpredictable.
  • An AS option with 3 fighters and 2 squads of dive bombers. No reliable damage, unlike the IJN AS with 2, count them, 2 VT squads.
  • Stay "balanced" with my micro-AS: enough fighters to be capable against anything that's not AS, but very little damage output if I don't get perfect drops on both VBs and VTs.

 

Now, from what I've heard, Strike is definitely the best option, but, in my opinion, ALL USN strike needs better consistent, skill-based damage. There are a few ways of doing this:

  • Drastically nerf all AAA and reduce the availability of Defensive Fire at high tiers. Only fighters should be reliable against aircraft, not AAA. The USN Cruisers should, of course, retain the most utility in the AAA department, given that that's their "national flavour." Perhaps even make it a choice between taking either the Repair Party and Defensive Fire (damage recovery versus damage avoidance) consumables.
  • Mildly nerf all AAA and give the USN CVs one more torpedo squadron (with AAA so high at that tier, and our reloads so long, it's not like we get to get many torpedoes away)
  • Change the way that dive bombers, or at least USN dive bombers, work, so that they are much more predictable and skill-based, but much more punishing if you don't have the skill to use them well. That will make the USN competitive with the IJN.

 

 


"Heresy!"


Palladia #4 Posted 11 April 2017 - 03:44 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 726
  • Member since:
    08-16-2015

View PostCarrier_Lexington, on 11 April 2017 - 12:38 AM, said:

..... No. Not really.

I'm a US CV Main. I am at Essex, and I feel like I can't get a match where I do very well and gain credits. I've had 130+k damage victories and still lost credits. I see IJN carriers that just overwhelm me with their sheer numbers of fighters, and with AS load-outs that can still reliably put-out damage.

 

The way I see it, in the future, I'll have three options:

  • A strike option which will have only 1 fighter squad for defence against 3-squad USN and IJN AS, and only 1 VT squad, so all of my damage is extremely unpredictable.
  • An AS option with 3 fighters and 2 squads of dive bombers. No reliable damage, unlike the IJN AS with 2, count them, 2 VT squads.
  • Stay "balanced" with my micro-AS: enough fighters to be capable against anything that's not AS, but very little damage output if I don't get perfect drops on both VBs and VTs.

 

Now, from what I've heard, Strike is definitely the best option, but, in my opinion, ALL USN strike needs better consistent, skill-based damage. There are a few ways of doing this:

  • Drastically nerf all AAA and reduce the availability of Defensive Fire at high tiers. Only fighters should be reliable against aircraft, not AAA. The USN Cruisers should, of course, retain the most utility in the AAA department, given that that's their "national flavour." Perhaps even make it a choice between taking either the Repair Party and Defensive Fire (damage recovery versus damage avoidance) consumables.
  • Mildly nerf all AAA and give the USN CVs one more torpedo squadron (with AAA so high at that tier, and our reloads so long, it's not like we get to get many torpedoes away)
  • Change the way that dive bombers, or at least USN dive bombers, work, so that they are much more predictable and skill-based, but much more punishing if you don't have the skill to use them well. That will make the USN competitive with the IJN.

 

 

 

Giving all USN CV's the Saipan's dive bomber circle would go a long way towards that.  Dive bomber damage is already so random that suddenly being able to consistently hit wouldn't mean an immediate massive increase in damage.  We'd get more damage consistently and set more fires but it still wouldn't be the consistently high levels of damage that torpedo bombers are capable of.

Another possibility would be making the bombing circles accurate.  By that I mean not having any bombs fall outside the actual reticule.  It isn't as bad as it used to be but its still handled in such a way that a bombing circle that fully encompasses an enemy can and still will miss several of their bombs.

BigJohnsonLogan #5 Posted 11 April 2017 - 04:08 AM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 56
  • Member since:
    06-21-2013

View PostWarJern, on 10 April 2017 - 09:34 PM, said:

 

Contextually I think it's important that I comment that I am not a CV player by choice. I play in the Supremacy League as one because of team needs. I dabble in 'Random' as a strike CV and I have a pretty functional brain. Tie my own shoes, have a drivers license, etc. These are all important caveats I suppose because my initial fear of putting this out there is the people who will decide the worth of this topic and my thoughts solely upon my 'stats.'

 

And because we are so powerful individually (Again, I'd actually give a finger to see WG's metrics database.) the team composition will never include more then two of us. So a double edged sword. But in practice that means that the CV players that stick with it, suffer the grind, like ANY OTHER SHIP, will get better, and make the subsequent play look easy. But we live in a world where the relative AA strength in each tier is increasing.

 

This makes me wonder how WG will handle the inevitable British CV line without needing the kind of slapstick nerfs that came for the American and Japanese lines.

 

To date,

-Before that tier 10 carriers had their postwar Jet aircraft removed because they were -too- good. I'm sure there was a more tempered reason but I keep looking at certain Russian cruisers built in the 1950s and wonder.

 

In the meantime we haven't received a single Carrier specific active ability and we were given defensive fire only because of the incredible uptick we saw in CV sniping. I wonder if it's because we were becoming the easiest targets? And beyond that we were denied an amazing ability in Radio direction finder because (fill in the official reason.)

 

And the least resistance for filthy casuals like me is becoming too much. I'm going to take a huge leap of faith and ask you to trust me when I say, I'm not having fun. I'd like to actually turn this into a discussion, let me know, are YOU having fun? and why?

 

Regards,

WarJern

 

 

Let me shorted up that wall of text for you.

 

You play CV in World of Warships that many players play the SPG class in World Of Tanks, they can sit back out of danger and strike blow after blow watching ships or tanks get destroyed by their attack with no risk to their own vehicle. It's a cancer in World Of Tanks and a cancer in this game as well.

 

By your own admission the CV class is so overpowered they are limited to two per team. With 6-8 squadrons of attack planes, repeating their ship kills wave after wave, while their team helplessly get pummeled by the enemy CV we are forced to endure while you play long range sniper. I never ever see a full fighter loadout CV because you are the most selfish players in the game and desperately try for Kraken at the expense of every ship on your team then whine when you lose the match and credits.

 

Glad to see Wargaming removed the even more overpowered jet airplanes from Tier X before they completely pushed the player base out in disgust. Seriously, still having jet planes at Tier X would make me puke. 

 

I left World Of Tanks because I was so tired of trying to play strategically in Tier X tanks only to get one shot nuked by some pathetic camping SPG player. If World Of Warships ever makes CV as bad as SPG is in Tanks with overpowered strike loadouts that can one shot, I will NOT be having FUN and I will delete the game client from my computer. And I won't be spending any money with Wargaming ever again.

 

Understand ??


Edited by BigJohnsonLogan, 11 April 2017 - 04:12 AM.


Carrier_Lexington #6 Posted 11 April 2017 - 03:53 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,126
  • Member since:
    12-25-2014

View PostBigJohnsonLogan, on 10 April 2017 - 11:08 PM, said:

 

Let me shorted up that wall of text for you.

 

You play CV in World of Warships that many players play the SPG class in World Of Tanks, they can sit back out of danger and strike blow after blow watching ships or tanks get destroyed by their attack with no risk to their own vehicle. It's a cancer in World Of Tanks and a cancer in this game as well.

 

By your own admission the CV class is so overpowered they are limited to two per team. With 6-8 squadrons of attack planes, repeating their ship kills wave after wave, while their team helplessly get pummeled by the enemy CV we are forced to endure while you play long range sniper. I never ever see a full fighter loadout CV because you are the most selfish players in the game and desperately try for Kraken at the expense of every ship on your team then whine when you lose the match and credits.

 

Glad to see Wargaming removed the even more overpowered jet airplanes from Tier X before they completely pushed the player base out in disgust. Seriously, still having jet planes at Tier X would make me puke. 

 

I left World Of Tanks because I was so tired of trying to play strategically in Tier X tanks only to get one shot nuked by some pathetic camping SPG player. If World Of Warships ever makes CV as bad as SPG is in Tanks with overpowered strike loadouts that can one shot, I will NOT be having FUN and I will delete the game client from my computer. And I won't be spending any money with Wargaming ever again.

 

Understand ??

 

I'm not sure you really understand.

It is very true: In WoT, the Artillery class is broken, partially because the WoT devs don't know how to balance the indirect fire capabilities of artillery (hint: see Armored Warfare).

 

However, that does NOT translate to this game. People hate artillery because they are so unpredictable, especially at high tiers. You never know when artillery is aiming at you, and your mistakes are punished heavily. But carriers? You get great advance warning that a carrier is targeting you, unless, of course, you can't see the little planes marked by the giant icon.

You can't shoot down artillery shells, but planes? Totally, esp. with everything at T8-10 having AA levels up to and in excess of 100.

You can't make artillery miss, but with DF, you can make it extremely probable for planes to miss.

 

Now, taking all of that into account, which is more like being killed by artillery: being struck by a strike squadron and surviving after repairing some fires or flooding, or getting deleted by a battleship? Oh, wait, it's the latter.

 

And what he was saying was NOT that CVs are overpowered, only that they are incredibly powerful in the hands of an extremely good player. Which is, mind you, true for any ship class. Destroyers, Cruisers, Battleships... all of these are very powerful in the hands of super-unicums.

 

In essence, what I and everyone else on this forum thread are seeing is a BB player who likes to sail in straight lines railing at CVs because he thinks they are unbeatable.

 

In the words of Jingles: "It's not that carriers are overpowered, it's that your brain is underpowered."

 

Now, let me ask you one more question:

Is it more selfish to take a Strike configuration with which you can help win the game for other players, or to take an AS configuration which has very little overall match contribution and is basically handing your team a loss at the beginning of the match?


Edited by Carrier_Lexington, 11 April 2017 - 03:57 PM.

"Heresy!"


Dr_Tachyon #7 Posted 11 April 2017 - 04:44 PM

    Seaman

  • Members

  • 26
  • Member since:
    09-29-2015
I feel you. I also play my shokaku in the supremacy league due to team needs. It's a boring and thankless drudgery, mostly due to every ship being AA spec. It's better in randoms, but I still prefer lower tier CVs. If I drop a random in my shokaku and get a tier X match, I just want to disco and I usually just mail it in. TBH I think supremacy should dump carriers until WG does something about the absurd effectiveness of AA. Especially when concentrated like it is in organized play. To answer your question: SL is not fun at all, but I do enjoy ranfoms in my Saipan. It's good to know I'm not alone lol.

Dr_Tachyon #8 Posted 11 April 2017 - 04:49 PM

    Seaman

  • Members

  • 26
  • Member since:
    09-29-2015
After thought: Taking away manual drops was a crappy way to fix seal clubbing. Instead they should have focused on making high tier carrier play more fun. Then folks who like carriers would actually play the appropriate tiers for their skill level.

BigJohnsonLogan #9 Posted 12 April 2017 - 01:02 AM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 56
  • Member since:
    06-21-2013

View PostCarrier_Lexington, on 11 April 2017 - 03:53 PM, said:

 

I'm not sure you really understand.

It is very true: In WoT, the Artillery class is broken, partially because the WoT devs don't know how to balance the indirect fire capabilities of artillery (hint: see Armored Warfare).

 

Now, taking all of that into account, which is more like being killed by artillery: being struck by a strike squadron and surviving after repairing some fires or flooding, or getting deleted by a battleship? Oh, wait, it's the latter.

 

In essence, what I and everyone else on this forum thread are seeing is a BB player who likes to sail in straight lines railing at CVs because he thinks they are unbeatable.

 

In the words of Jingles: "It's not that carriers are overpowered, it's that your brain is underpowered."

 

Now, let me ask you one more question:

Is it more selfish to take a Strike configuration with which you can help win the game for other players, or to take an AS configuration which has very little overall match contribution and is basically handing your team a loss at the beginning of the match?

 

I understand when a CV players singles me out with every strike squadrons desperately trying for a First Blood, then hovering squadrons over me constantly making my 5.5 km concealment useless and I can't outrun the spotting planes or hide from the manually dropped bombs in my smoke. 

 

Being struck by up to 6 squadrons is nearly impossible to survive for any class.

 

I don't play much BB, too slow and boring for me mostly. I much prefer CA,CL,DD game play. But CV totally ruins my fun playing them.

 

Since my day job is Software Engineer, you may want to rethink that under-powered brain comment. I find Jingles rather slow, old and boring as far as YouTube commentators. Flamu and Noster are way more interesting to me. And CV is so overpowered they are limited to 2 per team.

 

CV class is selfish unless you are keeping the enemy CV attack squadrons off my [edited]. If you are busy farming damage that leads to a loss, you were completely worthless to the team.

 

Warships today says ...

  • Plays a mix of destroyers (good) and cruisers
  • Deals an above average amount of damage
  • Very often uses torpedoes (when in ships that have them)
  • Key vehicle - Yūgumo

 

Tell me again about how I am a simple BB player ...


Edited by BigJohnsonLogan, 12 April 2017 - 01:06 AM.


Palladia #10 Posted 12 April 2017 - 02:34 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 726
  • Member since:
    08-16-2015

View PostBigJohnsonLogan, on 12 April 2017 - 01:02 AM, said:

 

I understand when a CV players singles me out with every strike squadrons desperately trying for a First Blood, then hovering squadrons over me constantly making my 5.5 km concealment useless and I can't outrun the spotting planes or hide from the manually dropped bombs in my smoke. 

 

Being struck by up to 6 squadrons is nearly impossible to survive for any class.

 

I don't play much BB, too slow and boring for me mostly. I much prefer CA,CL,DD game play. But CV totally ruins my fun playing them.

 

Since my day job is Software Engineer, you may want to rethink that under-powered brain comment. I find Jingles rather slow, old and boring as far as YouTube commentators. Flamu and Noster are way more interesting to me. And CV is so overpowered they are limited to 2 per team.

 

CV class is selfish unless you are keeping the enemy CV attack squadrons off my [edited]. If you are busy farming damage that leads to a loss, you were completely worthless to the team.

 

Warships today says ...

  • Plays a mix of destroyers (good) and cruisers
  • Deals an above average amount of damage
  • Very often uses torpedoes (when in ships that have them)
  • Key vehicle - Yūgumo

 

Tell me again about how I am a simple BB player ...

 

Y'know what?  I am done playing nice about this.  You go out and bust your way up to at LEAST T7 in either USN or IJN CV's and THEN come back and talk.  In the mean time,  shut up.  I am absolutely sick of people who have zero or close to zero actual experience in a ship class walking around spouting off like they know what they are talking about.

phydaux42 #11 Posted 12 April 2017 - 03:45 AM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 94
  • Member since:
    05-07-2014

View PostBigJohnsonLogan, on 10 April 2017 - 11:08 PM, said:

 

You play CV... they can sit back out of danger and strike blow after blow watching ships or tanks get destroyed by their attack with no risk to their own vehicle. 

 

 

 

Spoken like someone who has never played a CV.  

 

CVs are fragile.  They pop like day-old party balloons.  If any enemy ship gets LOS on a CV, it is going to the bottom and that right quickly.  

 

THAT, IMO, makes up for our (quite ERRATIC) damage output.  

 

Frankly I am far less annoyed at the imbalance between CVs and other classes than I am annoyed at the imbalance between USN and IJN CVs.



BigJohnsonLogan #12 Posted 12 April 2017 - 05:51 AM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 56
  • Member since:
    06-21-2013

View Postphydaux42, on 12 April 2017 - 03:45 AM, said:

 

Spoken like someone who has never played a CV.  

 

CVs are fragile.  They pop like day-old party balloons.  If any enemy ship gets LOS on a CV, it is going to the bottom and that right quickly.  

 

THAT, IMO, makes up for our (quite ERRATIC) damage output.  

 

Frankly I am far less annoyed at the imbalance between CVs and other classes than I am annoyed at the imbalance between USN and IJN CVs.

 

 

 

I played just enough CV to know I didn't really like it and also see how ridiculously easy IJN torpedo bombers are to use in Tier 4 ...

 

IJN CV are so much better than USN CV it's an utter joke people even play the USN line. Only CV with a win rate above 50% shown.

 

 

In case you didn't notice, this game is World Of Battleships and other classes are second class.



Dr_Tachyon #13 Posted 12 April 2017 - 10:41 AM

    Seaman

  • Members

  • 26
  • Member since:
    09-29-2015
Tier 4 is nothing at all like tier 7+ for CV play. Not even close. You have not played CVs.

Carrier_Lexington #14 Posted 12 April 2017 - 03:58 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,126
  • Member since:
    12-25-2014

View PostBigJohnsonLogan, on 12 April 2017 - 12:51 AM, said:

 

 

 

I played just enough CV to know I didn't really like it and also see how ridiculously easy IJN torpedo bombers are to use in Tier 4 ...

Wow.... 11 battles. Much experience. Many wow.

I have 509, and I'm at tier 9 (after Free-XPing part of Lexington)...

 

But then again, if we're so powerful with zero risk, why didn't you like CV play? Hmmmmm.....


"Heresy!"


Carrier_Lexington #15 Posted 12 April 2017 - 04:00 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,126
  • Member since:
    12-25-2014

View PostBigJohnsonLogan, on 11 April 2017 - 08:02 PM, said:

CV class is selfish unless you are keeping the enemy CV attack squadrons off my [edited].

Translation: "You're selfish unless you devote all your time to making me successful."

 

EDIT: Removed flaming statement.


Edited by Carrier_Lexington, 12 April 2017 - 04:03 PM.

"Heresy!"


cometguy #16 Posted 12 April 2017 - 04:46 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 762
  • Member since:
    07-29-2016

View PostCarrier_Lexington, on 12 April 2017 - 03:58 PM, said:

Wow.... 11 battles. Much experience. Many wow.

I have 509, and I'm at tier 9 (after Free-XPing part of Lexington)...

 

But then again, if we're so powerful with zero risk, why didn't you like CV play? Hmmmmm.....

And how do you die 10 out of 11 times in the Langley and say they have no risk.



Carrier_Lexington #17 Posted 12 April 2017 - 05:53 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,126
  • Member since:
    12-25-2014

View Postcometguy, on 12 April 2017 - 11:46 AM, said:

And how do you die 10 out of 11 times in the Langley and say they have no risk.

 

I would give this an upvote, but I ran out of those for today.

Instead, have this gif.


"Heresy!"


locked_and_firing #18 Posted 12 April 2017 - 06:28 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 59
  • Member since:
    07-02-2013
I used to think CV's were useless then I grew up and started paying attention. But no seriously, every single game I have played with a CV on the team makes the game run so much smoother and is that much easier to play that I even started playing CV's. It is no lie that that I used to hate them and wanted them gone but then I started paying attention to what was going on around me and figured out how to counter them. As a CV I contribute so much time to assisting my team I hardly get a kill and often times tell my team who to finish off after i pegged them with bombs and torps; it's also not uncommon for me to run out of planes trying to defend and help ungrateful players, like BigJohnsonLogan. I couldn't image a game with more than 2 CV's, omg that would be so boring and just irritating, not because they are overpowered but because you would have to hunt them down and almost literally like a million lil mosquitoes buzzing around your head....so annoying. Probably crash the server due to all the torps, bombs, and planes flooding the map. 2 CV's a game is plenty. 

phydaux42 #19 Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:38 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 94
  • Member since:
    05-07-2014

View PostBigJohnsonLogan, on 12 April 2017 - 12:51 AM, said:

In case you didn't notice, this game is World Of Battleships and other classes are second class.

 

Every time I sink a battleship with my carrier aircraft, I type "Pearl Harbor" in the chat window.

 

From now on I'm gonna think of BigJohnsonLogan each time I do.

 



BigJohnsonLogan #20 Posted 13 April 2017 - 01:12 AM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 56
  • Member since:
    06-21-2013

View Postcometguy, on 12 April 2017 - 04:46 PM, said:

And how do you die 10 out of 11 times in the Langley and say they have no risk.

 

Because USA CV is garbage compared to IJN CV. It's not even close. If I were to actually play a CV line, it would only be the IJN because 4 Torpedo squadrons and focusing the ships with bad AA equals easy mode at every Tier.

 

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users