Jump to content


Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

113 Valued poster

About Land_Warrior

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Birthday 12/23/1988
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Battleships, ship modelling.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The Vermont is basically this design but with a fictional "modernization". Comparing this layout to the ship in-game, the superstructure aft of funnel 3 takes up about the same space as that extra turret. Maybe the logic was that if this ship existed into the 40s they wouldn't need the extra firepower. I agree with you though, I'd have much preferred this design. If you're going to make paper ships, present them as they looked on paper. Enough with the even more bizarre "modernizations".
  2. Land_Warrior

    California HYPE

    Every time this thread gets bumped I get excited...not too excited mind you, just trying to not let the flame of hope that she'll be released die on me Come on, WG, surely there's no better time to release a very anticipated ship then when lots of us are stuck at home with tons of free time to play her!
  3. Land_Warrior

    CVs are Still Overly Effective in 8.2

    How is this argument fair when you're only listening to the non CV players? Please start including the feedback of the CV players who want this class to be as fun and meaningful as every other class and include less of the ones complaining that CVs ruin the game.
  4. Land_Warrior

    Ship Model Updates

    While we’re at it, Lexington needs one too. Currently she’s Saratoga, and the model itself is much larger than she should be to the point where her sides clip into the dry dock in port.
  5. Don't feed the troll, mate. Just let him go.
  6. But in order to do any reasonable damage there are many moments where we've got to fly strike planes right through flak, sometimes from multiple ships. I'm lucky to get one strike off, I'd say more then 50 percent of the time my squad is either badly damaged or a total loss on the retreat, no matter the plane type. I'm supposed to be playing a naval combat game, not a flak dodging simulator. Now CVs as a spotting/support class, I'm down for. If our role were primarily spotting/dropping support and less focus on attack, the dodging argument would hold more water. But that's not what WG is doing with CVs, it feels more like they're trying to tell us to play them as a damage class yet constantly limiting our ability to do anything meaningful.
  7. Frankly, one group of players don't get to dictate how the game works for everyone else. Some of us like CVs and want them to be as fun and playable as any other ship. WG needs to balance fairly for all sides, not just listen to a specific group who doesn't like something. Let those of us who enjoy CVs have our voices heard.
  8. As a CV Enthusiast myself, I appreciate the OPs passion but maybe not as much the delivery. Do I agree that AA is too strong? Yes. Do I feel like the sledgehammer nerfs WG has delivered were totally unwarranted (except for things like the Hak and the F key spam)? Yep. However, I'll openly admit there were issues that needed fixing and we all need to stop reacting and just let it be fixed. It's frustrating that people on both sides spread false information about the rework because no one ends up winning, we just put the devs in the awkward position of trying to make everyone happy which they just cannot do. That's what led to the hotfixes; WG was overreacting to the community overreacting without looking closely at any constructive or factual feedback to base their balancing on. This isn't healthy for the game or the community as a whole. I want CVs to succeed and to do that WG needs be allowed to work on things without people freaking out and demanding changes. We don't need complaining or threads trying to prove one opinion as fact and disprove others. There will always be those who will dislike CVs on principal and that's fine, but saying "I don't like this" and demanding it be fixed without offering anything constructive gets us nowhere, as do threads trying to prove or disprove "misconceptions".
  9. Land_Warrior

    Never gonna stop playing Aircraft Carriers

    Plus 1 to the OP, as a fellow CV enthusiast I’m with you. As for stuff like this: Feel free to report him and others with this attitude as much as they report you.
  10. Land_Warrior

    A Plea to the Developers from a CV Enthusiast

    Most of the recent outcry has been from DD players from my reading, but it’s still the same problem. If WG can’t stop catering to the whims of a single player group then they have no business attempting to “balance” CVs any further, it’s only hurting their own game. We’re asking them to try listening to the CV population for once. It might stop the exodus of people leaving the game if they balanced fairly instead of for a single vocal part of the community. If a few streamers spread discontent or threaten to leave, oh well. WG doesn’t need people like that and neither do we as a community.
  11. Land_Warrior

    A Plea to the Developers from a CV Enthusiast

    To be clear, I meant my original post to include CV play of all tiers; I mentioned Midway as it's getting as nerf in the new hotfix and is one of the many problems these patches present, but the problem is getting worse at lower tiers too. The entire class is becoming difficult and not fun to play, and that's a major problem for a rework that was supposed to bring more people to carriers.
  12. Land_Warrior

    A Plea to the Developers from a CV Enthusiast

    The 500k games were extremely rare, and even then were done almost exclusively by CCs who were purposefully exploiting features to make a point. This did not and should never represent the average CV player. Of course, this had unfortunate affect of stoking the fire in that ever vocal "CVs are OP" crowd and caused the developers to respond with these constant "hotfixes" to appease that part of the playerbase. The biggest issue with all of this is that they're not balancing the class fairly. It's the nonconstructive salty ones who are the majority voice right now and that isn't OK for game balance. You can say "wait and see" all day long, but it's easy to see who the developers are listening to right now and it's not any of the CV community. We need to change that, and the developers must change this if this game is going to stay healthy. Letting a particular attitude dictate how the game works for everyone else is not ok.
  13. 8.0.3. The next nerf to a class already struggling. This is a plea to @Sub_Octavian @iKami and the rest of the development team: Don't do this to us. Since the rework went live there have been lots of arguments from all sides; people who enjoy CVs, people who don't play them but who would like to see them be successful, people who just outright despise CVs, and so on. I have no delusions about who the majority out of these various groups are, but it's that majority that's been causing the biggest problem for the rework. The developers have been constantly creating "hotfixes" for the class, which on one hand could (and should) be seen as a good thing as it shows that the developers are keeping an eye on things and listening to their players. However each of these hotfixes have seemingly been in hasty response to a very vocal majority of people who don't like, haven't and will never play CVs. That's absolutely their right, but some of the attitudes that have arisen from this group are toxic to the community and game and are not ones which should be dictating the class's development. It was said when this rework was announced that WG wanted to open CVs to more players, to make it simpler and more fun for a broader audience. 8.0 dropped and CVs started coming back into popularity, as intended. Were there issues? Of course. The Hak and her stealth torping absolutely needed a nerf. The Instant immunity for planes upon hitting the F key, yeah that was an issue. There were little things that were fixed that helped a lot after the rework went live. However, every hotfix also "fixed" things that didn't need fixing; making AA stronger so that entire squads could be wiped out in an instant, in some cases by a DD? Not ok. Nerfing the spotting distance so CVs can't see anything until they're right on top of a ship that's shredding it's planes? Was that needed? Why does Midway need a damage nerf when her torpedo systems were already worse off then her IJN counterpart? All of these fixes have, by appearance, been in response to that vocal majority I mentioned; those who feel that CV players ruin their game therefore anything that hurts CV players is a good thing. Developers, if you're going to fairly balance this class you need to start listening to those of us who play CVs and want to enjoy them. We're not out to ruin anyone's game, we just want to have as much fun as everyone else and we shouldn't be punished for that. There are tons of threads telling you 8.0.3 is a mistake, I implore you to listen. Don't go through with this patch. If you want CVs to be enjoyable and open to more players as you mentioned countless times, balance the class fairly or just don't touch them at all until you've thought of a way to do so. Don't go down the same path that killed the previous version of CVs.
  14. This is the most toxic comment ever. You’d rather be stuck in the same game then let it grow and change. WG has killed a great rework because they caved to people like you. Leave if you don’t like CVs. We don’t need or want you here. Same goes for those who share your attitude. The game will recover and maybe WG will actually be able to stand by the changes they make.
  15. Land_Warrior

    "AA has been nerfed to hell!"

    In the first few games I played of the rework, I feel like too strong. I know from the PT patch notes that AA was buffed due to "concerns" of it not doing enough damage to planes, but the buff they gave it feels like an overcompensation. AA being too powerful was one of the many issues that plagued the previous version of CVs, where they buffed it so much that you couldn't do anything unless you were a pro at that class. Now that's how they choose to launch the rework? It's the same problem, just under a different wrapping. I've been longing for CVs to come back into prominence and they're on the right path, but we shouldn't be punished just for getting aircraft off the deck. AA needs a solid nerf so that we can actually make attack runs with this new gameplay. "Dodging flak" doesn't work when the first few flak bursts you see wipe out your entire group or damage them to the point where you're discouraged to attack.