Jump to content

BillyBoBBizWorth

Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    1050

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

About BillyBoBBizWorth

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. BillyBoBBizWorth

    CV "rework" intel

    Has anyone by any chance got any intel on when this "rework" will be officially on the live server by any chance? I know for one i will be leaving once its been applied and am wondering how much possible time i have to enjoy CV gameplay as it is for before its gone.I have this funny feeling WG will get this rework live faster than what we all think for some reason, maybe its partly because how happy WG appear to be with this rework. I know that alot of people are happy about this happening and good for them, sadly im not one of them and i know theres many others as well.I have one proposition or suggestion to the original CV RTS players, this is something im considering doing myself as well.Once we know for a fact when the "rework" is meant to be applied to the live server, everyone thats planning on leaving once thats the case should submit their last CV RTS replay with a title along the lines of "My last CV game before i quit because of the rework" or something to make the point to WG that we werent joking around.Whether they care or not is irrelevant as they have already shown they basically dont, but it would still be a good way of making the point, something they will remember if enough people do it.Thats for sure. Lastly, i truly feel for the CV players that have invested time over the last 3 years or so getting superbly good at the format and becoming as good as you did skill wise.I only wish i personally had more time to learn how to get that good through me loosing to you guys and had i been playing for as long as i wanted i probably would be a pretty good CV player by now, but that wasnt the case. Nevertheless, i had some fun anyhow grinding 3/4's into the USN CV and BB lines and hopefully maybe this whole thing might inspire someone with game making abilities to maybe make a naval game in the future with a RTS format for CV's better than WG could ever achieve in less time, unlikely, but we never know. To all the original CV players, I SALUTE YOU!
  2. BillyBoBBizWorth

    CV Rework - Dislike.

    Why do the vast majority NEED to play or try CV gameplay? You have multiple classes for a reason, appealing to different play types and players, thats not exactly a bad thing.I came here to play because of the CV RTS style gameplay. Trying to encourage higher specific class population(forcing players) to play a class through the method of cloning World of Tanks and Warplanes style gameplay is one of the stupidest things they could even attempt. If the old RTS CV gameplay is out, then so is a portion of the playerbase. Way to alienate them, WG, good job.
  3. It wont stop diddly squat except from people playing this game. As others have mentioned, youve got all these ships that can spam HE/AP fire, torps, ariel bombs and you expect BB players to just rush in head first even with support and negate their range? No, dont think so. Clearly im not playing CV's anymore because of this stupid WOWP/WOT gameplay cloning and now i wont even be able to try and enjoy BB gameplay because not only DD's are going to pop up out of no where now but also subs will be, all in maps that are too small to properly use BB range effectively, your being forced to suicide rush into all sorts of spam.Im not here to play that forced kind of gameplay and i know alot of others arent either. As long as im here playing a BB, i will be camping near that island, i will be border hugging in order to attempt at using a BB's main advantage which WG is neglecting, RANGE.I dont care what you say ingame chat about camping BB's either, it wont change a thing.WG cant even get around to giving us a "disable chat" button, gives your a indicator of the sign of times with this game, even when they know how toxic ingame chat is towards CV/BB players alot of the time.Pathetic that you even force players like myself to endure toxicity in ingame chat and then wonder why we might finally come on the forums and explain our opinions, possibly toxically.
  4. BillyBoBBizWorth

    Save Old Carrier Gameplay

    Agreed, if the RTS gameplay is scrapped permanently it will be a huge mistake, i really think it will be and im not going to stay playing without it, its that simple. Im not here to play a WOWP or WOT's gameplay clone. Either they tread very carefully with the next couple of moves/changes they make or risk loosing alot of players that wont return.Its their choice. Its highly recommended you dont change the CV gameplay so drastically WG, you will loose this.I dont give a toss about or accept any absurd "business model" or population excuses regarding you forcing us to play a WOWP/WOT clone either.
  5. BillyBoBBizWorth

    CV Rework - Dislike.

    I like the RTS aspect of it, your wrong. I also dont want to be playing WOWP in WOWS, thats correct. What, was World of Warplanes so much of a flop that they are trying to get them players to play WOWS through this rework? Wouldn't surprise me...
  6. BillyBoBBizWorth

    CV Rework Feedback

    Alright, here we go, couple of things to clear up first before my actual feedback. Firstly, like many many others, i invested alot of time and real money into WOT's(WG games) only for it to "adapt" and "change" so much from the original gameplay that i stopped playing it entirely and im almost at this point in WOWS for reasons about to be mentioned.I have no intention in being "nice" about this feedback because this is something ive invested money into and im watching it be turnt into a turd exactly how it was done with WOT.You can call me toxic or whatever else you wish, but this is my honest feedback and i wont be coming back to to reply to anyone that responds to this anyhow, im not going to waste my time trying to help WG when they clearly have no idea what they are doing and dont seem to use feedback properly anyhow. I may look like a newish player, but i can assure you im not.I havnt been able to play highly graphical games for a while due to lack of a graphics card, but ive been around from the start basically. Im not interested in testing your new CV rework, ive seen some videos of the gameplay and thats enough for me to know that im not interested.Why the hell are you making a partial part of the WOWS gameplay into World of Warplanes/Tanks gameplay exactly? Are you seriously doing that? Your trying to bring console type gameplay into a PC copy of a game, what is honestly going through the game makers minds? Unbelievable. Not only do i intend on not being your hamster for this CV rework, if this CV gameplay remains i will be completely removing the game and have no desire to play it anymore, more your loss than mine when you start to realize the noticeable drop in population, eh WG? Less people, less money, right? Not like im stupid enough to throw any more money at your games anymore, youve got enough from me. I first played and wanted to play WOWS for the CV and BB gameplay, which was a better 3D version of a naval game i used to play called Navyfield i enjoyed playing many years ago.Well Navyfield 2 came out and they couldnt get that right and guess what game was more closer to a "Navyfield 2" game? You guessed it, it was WOWS's, you did a better remake of Navyfield with better 3D graphics than what the Navyfield makers could.Well done. Now we are getting the same kind of reworks that entirely killed Artillery gameplay in WOT's for me and others, but now in WOWS and in almost the exact kind of way.Your not even the same dev team, so how are you making the same darn mistakes so easily? Especially with many people ive read in this thread and many others stating that you shouldnt? Your introducing submarines basically before you even get BB/DD/CA/CL gameplay right.You havnt even given warships the ability to independently aim main turrets, not permanently linked like it currently is.Or the ability to properly manually aim and fire secondary turrents and AA turrets.That should of been done ages ago, that would of made warship gameplay more interesting and more of a challenge for players who want more control.Instead of challenging players to make them even better, your using this idiotic idea that everything should be dumb downed so more people play this or that, like your attempting with this CV rework.I find it insulting frankly that you think you can and should do that, i dont want you to dictate how dumb i should be to play each class.Let me figure that out as a player.If CV is more tactical and harder to play, GOOD, i want it that way.I want the challenge, but i dont want to feel like im playing bloody World of Warplanes/Tanks when im clearly playing World of Warships.You created these game title names, no one else, yet your making it harder and harder to distinguish between the titles when your making changes like this.If you want it this way, why dont you just make a bloody open world with all three types(tanks,ships,planes) engaging in the same map like War Thunder are heading towards? This was actually another reason why i even got into the World of Warships/Tanks/Planes game titles because i had this hope that eventually one day you would make a open map with all forces engaging at once on much larger maps. So, if your willing to basically say "screw you, youll like these changes whether you like it or not" to players that have came to this game specifically for the CV gameplay as it used to be(not the glitchy strafing part).You know what, Screw you to, and have fun loosing players with decisions like this.Yeah im annoyed, and ive got a bloody right to be too. Im done.
  7. BillyBoBBizWorth

    CV Rework Condensed Version

    I have this feeling this new CV gamemode will be worse and to be honest i dont even like the look of it either. Something that annoys me about how they have been working on this whole CV rework and they cant/havnt/wont do simple changes like giving us a option to disable the chat for starters. Secondly, this is a QOL issue for CV players that are using a smaller(non widescreen) monitor like myself, the "Quick Messages" text that you have on the right side of the proper CV topdown map view, the text overlaps right into the main map, and so does everything else and is just a cluttered mess.Why havnt i got a option to disable "Quick Messages" text (thats been there for years and really doesnt need to be permanently there like that anymore), or even anything else on the interface like the minimap itself, the chat section etc? I should be able to disable and enable almost everything in the interface, for standard and larger monitor users, CV and other ship players.Mostly affects my CV gameplay though in its current form. The maps are too small and/or the timer is too short for people that want to have a more enduring gamemode, especially noticeable as a CV and BB player.As a BB player you cant use range/caliber(your main advantages) to the fullest with the current map sizes, you find yourself hugging the map borders. I dont like being forced to push into DD's torps, CL's spam HE/AP fire, other BB's salvo's or CV strike aircraft to die when i have the range to fight with, but cant use it properly because of lack of the map size and then be scrutinized from other players because they are dead and im still alive.Just because my class has range as a advantage and im trying to use it. Not fun. Then as a CV player i get similar scrutiny because im not carrying/scouting in tier 6/7 CV matches with the kind of AA most ships have, this Ranger is a nightmare and shows how good the Independence/Bogue actually has it.Most of the time in tier CV 6/7 rounds im engaging DD's the most because of lack of AA for the most of them.Some of the ships you literally cant get even get close to for a large radius, larger than probably what it should be, everyone knows the AA ships im talking about. Also mention how more difficult the Ranger squad format is compared to the counterparts, on the Independence it is somewhat manageable with less squadrons, but with the Ranger is almost impossible to control the Japanese counterpart with 2/2/2 format, your either reduced totally to a defensive CV or so opportunistic that when you actually get a chance to strike, its rare and easily quashed. Maybe this new CV rework might address all these kinds of things somehow...i guess we will find out soon enough.
×