Jump to content


CV balance is sooo horrible in this game.


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

Warlike_Tendencies #1 Posted 09 May 2017 - 03:50 PM

    Seaman Recruit

  • Members

  • 2
  • Member since:
    08-10-2015

I have been playing CV for a while now finally got to tier 7, the difference in US CV  and JPN CV is ridiculous.  What the f man, even before hand I could see the load outs are insane.  Having more planes to throw at the problem does not help anything, up against a Hiryu  they have more fighters bomber and torpedo bombers in squadrons and I cant chase them all.  I get tied up fighting fighters so their attack planes can drop whatever, and they have more fighters squadrons to take out my fighter squadrons depending on the load out.  They just end up taking out my fighters squadrons at a time as long as they hang together.  And their attack load outs are just as ridiculous cause they get fighters with them.

 

If I have to be stuck playing with fighter squadrons while you give JPN squadrons more attack capabilities, US fighters should far outclass their fighter squadrons and be faster.  If you are going to stick US CV with a certain load out type which seems to be DB and fighter and no TB their has to be some benefit that makes sense cause more planes does not work. And the only US CV that happens to get 2 torpedo bomber and 2 fighters is the Saipan you have to pay money for?  How shady can you be.  You break the rules of load outs as long as they pay real money for it, but every other CV up and down the Tier list even the ones above the Saipan dont have that load out.  I see why so many people complain about the CV's now.  The balance is so bad, you would think someone brought their child to work and you let them put the numbers in, some fool created these load outs.



Estimated_Prophet #2 Posted 09 May 2017 - 03:58 PM

    Commander

  • Members

  • 3,847
  • Member since:
    09-16-2015

Because  'National Flavor' and 'Balance.'

 

Really not much to do right now about the imbalance between CV nationalities, though things might get better if they ever actually do the CV rework.

 

Only other options are the trite 'get gud,' get an IJN CV, or just go play your higher tier CVs in co-op, where the opponent is certain to be the same nationality.


Edited by Estimated_Prophet, 09 May 2017 - 03:59 PM.

                           Forget Ise! Give me Hyuuga!!!


pyantoryng #3 Posted 09 May 2017 - 04:26 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Alpha Tester

  • 1,853
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

It all began when Japanese carrier came into the picture...and the subsequent handling of the class.

 

Hell, I'm not sure if rework will be able to bring a semblance of balance at this point...



Amracil #4 Posted 09 May 2017 - 04:34 PM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 203
  • Member since:
    01-14-2016

View PostEstimated_Prophet, on 09 May 2017 - 07:58 AM, said:

...  just go play your higher tier CVs in co-op, where the opponent is certain to be the same nationality.

 

^ This is what I have been doing for a while now. I hope one day to see CV game-play get reworked, but for now I am saving myself the frustration. It's a good suggestion, imo. Maybe focus on other ship classes for a while.


Spoiler

ACEpickles #5 Posted 09 May 2017 - 04:42 PM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 272
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
Since CBT, cv play has been broken. I believe it is beyond WarGaming's  capability to fix the problem. Just play the other classes and have fun. My Midway lives in Coop.

Edited by ACEpickles, 09 May 2017 - 04:43 PM.

dark.png


Zero_Kelvin #6 Posted 09 May 2017 - 05:00 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 464
  • Member since:
    09-15-2016

Carriers across the board have never had it better than they do now. The only balance issue is that they all need to be nerfed.

 


This user has been DELETED


Chief_Runamuck #7 Posted 09 May 2017 - 05:11 PM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 210
  • Member since:
    10-18-2015
OP +1. IMO The recent changes made things worse too. My CV's are mostly parked for now. I hope the rework makes them work playing again.

Admiral_Thrawn_1 #8 Posted 09 May 2017 - 05:53 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Members

  • 1,613
  • Member since:
    02-27-2017

View Postpyantoryng, on 09 May 2017 - 04:26 PM, said:

It all began when Japanese carrier came into the picture...and the subsequent handling of the class.

 

Hell, I'm not sure if rework will be able to bring a semblance of balance at this point...

 

I bring balance by having good AA on my ships... :trollface:

SluggerJackson #9 Posted 09 May 2017 - 06:07 PM

    Master Chief Petty Officer

  • Beta Testers

  • 239
  • Member since:
    10-20-2013

I play US Strike because AS is boring.  Sure it might be more effective against IJN, but it is boring, and you don't get enough XP for taking out planes.  I don't think that IJN CVs should get fighters in their Strike builds.

 

I think WG assumed that if they reduced the number of planes in a squadron for IJN that it would balance itself, but that isn't the case.  Instead is means that you can be tagteamed by multiple fighters groups so that you can't go after IJN bombers.



WanderingGhost #10 Posted 09 May 2017 - 06:50 PM

    Lieutenant Junior Grade

  • Alpha Tester

  • 1,508
  • Member since:
    01-27-2014

Then I want to face you in my Hiryu because any other Ranger rips through my fighters. Any time I use USN with a fighter loadout (mix or AS) it burns through IJN planes. Both sides of the equation are screwed up, and Wargaming has neglected the real issues for almost 2 years at this point.

 

Lets assume we only get three CV lines because Wargaming decides that they don't want to bother with the other 4 partially, or in RU's case fully, paper lines.

 

IJN should have higher damage, lower ammo and health fighters

USN should have more ammo and HP, less damage

UK somewhere in between

 

IJN gets stealthier ships

USN gets better AA

UK gets better protection/armour

 

IJN is either a mixed set up or focuses on TB's (kinda like now) - meaning it hunts everything leaning toward capital ships or just more capital ships

USN gets better DB's (increase their accuracy a bit more to reflect it) - meaning that they can attack anything, as they do now, but are more geared to hunt DD's/light cruisers with DB's and in set ups with it the 1 TB they get.

UK gets TB focus (they developed more TB's than DB's, fighters usually acted as DB's or the TB's were somewhat multi-purpose) or they get the mixed balance, where either TB focus they are more capital ship hunters, and the other they just generally hunt everything well but not as well as the two geared more one way or the other

 

They get the same number of fighters per set up (I.E. AS for all of them is 2,x,x, mix is 1,x,x, strike is 0,x,x) or everything just gets 1 fighter and the difference is whatever other planes are launched, whatever, but end story being groups are reworked that air superiority is not guaranteed to one side given equal number of fighter groups, and neither side lacks strike capability. With overall numbers of squadrons remaining at least mostly the same as USN will have the sturdiest planes, as it does now, IJN's weaker planes relying on numbers to overwhelm AA and again, UK in the middle.

 

THAT is the kind of "National Flavour" they should have, because the fighters end up having their own strategies, strengths, weaknesses, the ships themselves are different, and all maintain an ability to strike enemy ships, while having something that sets them apart from the others in how they do it and what they are better at targeting. Not the joke they have as flavour right now.

 

And the ONLY nerf that CV's need is removal of manual TB drops, aside from a global nerf on torpedo damage, because if CV's were half as effective as a very small minority believe for some reason, they would not be early as rare as they are.



Palladia #11 Posted 09 May 2017 - 07:27 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 720
  • Member since:
    08-16-2015

View PostZero_Kelvin, on 09 May 2017 - 05:00 PM, said:

Carriers across the board have never had it better than they do now. The only balance issue is that they all need to be nerfed.

 

 

Nooo?  No.  I'll be nice because you haven't been around that long but no,  they are in the worst place they have ever been.  Note I am not saying that they are bad.  A well played carrier is a lethal force in and of itself,  but it is that level of lethal because of manual dropping torpedos.  In return CV's have a limited life span measured by every plane shot down and that is coupled with things like extreme AA boats and defensive fire.  No other ship in the game has what amounts to a CV's no fly zone.  None.  Now combine these ships with other ships and suddenly CV's are unable to affect the match much.

But that doesn't mean there isn't imbalance.  Playing as a ship with low AA means a CV captain can float his planes over you all day long while you do the equivalent of yelling at them.  At that point it is literally just a matter of time before they managed to land enough lucky torps or bombs to bring you down.  Flipside of that is the aforementioned no-fly zones,  with CV's having a decent number of targets they simply cannot assail.  Flip back to the other side,  manual drops are not fun for the person on the receiving end.  Having just really gotten a hang on them myself it makes it virtually impossible for a ship without decent AA or DF to do a thing about your torpedos.  Now back to CV's,  auto-drop is useless so you are forced into using manual drop just to be effective.  Which is a catch twenty two,  in order to be effective a CV captain has to play as cheaply as possible,  draining the fun out of it for people not playing the CV and forcing CV's to play a much more difficult game than anyone else.

Also,  one piece of advice.  Don't talk about a class you don't play.  Go work your way up to at least T6 and get a good number of games with a CV in at that rank and then come back.  Also go take a history lesson. Used to AA wasn't anywhere near as bad as it is now and USN actually had two torpedo bomber squadrons.  

pyantoryng #12 Posted 09 May 2017 - 07:59 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Alpha Tester

  • 1,853
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostAdmiral_Thrawn_1, on 09 May 2017 - 05:53 PM, said:

 

I bring balance by having good AA on my ships... :trollface:

 

...then you are up high and dry when you go tens of matches without a carrier in sight............

Carrier_Lexington #13 Posted 09 May 2017 - 08:39 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,061
  • Member since:
    12-25-2014

View PostZero_Kelvin, on 09 May 2017 - 12:00 PM, said:

Carriers across the board have never had it better than they do now. The only balance issue is that they all need to be nerfed.

 

 

WarshipsToday>>Ship Statistics>>Carriers>>Midway>>"Last Two Weeks">>Slowly weep as you realize that your argument is completely flawed

"Heresy!"


Palladia #14 Posted 09 May 2017 - 10:13 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Members

  • 720
  • Member since:
    08-16-2015

View PostCarrier_Lexington, on 09 May 2017 - 08:39 PM, said:

 

WarshipsToday>>Ship Statistics>>Carriers>>Midway>>"Last Two Weeks">>Slowly weep as you realize that your argument is completely flawed

 

Apparently the guys a pretty big troll.  Been seeing his posts elsewhere and he just goes around spouting nonsense.

BigJohnsonLogan #15 Posted 16 May 2017 - 11:32 PM

    Petty Officer

  • Members

  • 55
  • Member since:
    06-21-2013
Moderated by Volier_Zcit

Edited by Volier_Zcit, 17 May 2017 - 02:15 AM.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users