Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'cvs'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 100 results

  1. I've been playing CV's since Alpha, I've gone through the RTS, was there just before they changed out of RTS to the rework when there were very few of us still playing CV's due to all of the gimmicks and stripped abilities that were forced onto the class. I remember seeing players driven off of playing CV"s because of these simple "balances" that were tried, that drove people away, they were incremental, nothing all at once but by the time of the rework it had devastated the CV player base. Which I know is where some of the players anti-cv sentiment comes from back when the rework was first done. They were used to not seeing a CV but once in 10 games or so, then CV's were viable again. Player base got interested again, there were real changes like you weren't being reduced to a floating barge anymore barren of planes or any way to influence the match. So more people came back and played. The rebalancing started again because some folks weren't happy, so CV's started losing their damage potential, plane armor, added attack delays, spotting limits, the list continues on. Even here when you read about proposals for CV's there isn't anything positive for CV's it's more about limiting what CV's should be losing then what CV's should be gaining, to make them more fun and enjoyable, to keep their planes alive, better tricks and attacks for example. Why are we struck with our planes locked going straight ahead into enemy flak and losing a flight just because we dropped a torpedo attack? Letting us setup a sharp turn away would be a great thing. Things along this nature I hope wouldn't be that bad to code in? If the ability to manual fire comes in, can I get the ability to encircle the ship and drop from all angles, and all altitudes? There were always counters to counters, it was part of war to try to out think your enemy. Sadly some just want to have someone else punished for them to have fun without consequences. Instead of limiting on how fighters work as a consumable, they need to work better. Especially for trying to help our allies with the Dutch strikes, or helping screen the fleet. I say it's time to stop limiting what a CV can do and look for ways it can help the team as well. There are I'm sure many things we could think of that could be added to CV's or to the odd tier CV's that were supposed to be coming back? If they are still in the system, a bit of updating and addition for either support or just bring them back as limited CV's for a 2 cv game, 1 fleet and 1 CVL/CVE could be very viable. I mean if we can have 10 DD's per game, then 2 CV's shouldn't be an issue. Promote the teamwork for countering what is in the game, I've seen Hallands and Shimie's sailing together to cover each other in Randoms which is wonderful to see (sucks as a CV though ;) ) There is no reason why this couldn't be promoted and advantages given for sailing like this. As it is now, the over lapping flak is murder, it feels like there was a subtle tweak there. CV planes could use some love as well, they've been stripped of their armor on the USN side for their legendary and given bomb upgrades as long as they give up HP. Regen can be a achilleas heel, every CV skipper knows this, and no matter how many times some folks talk about unlimited planes, the regen cycle even maxed out, in a game with serious AAA in it. Will chew through planes like a herd of goats in a field. So let's bring back plane armor, Midway and FDR are supposed to have tough planes. I'm sure your numbers will tell you how many of x planes have been shot down by y. From this end though, since 10.3 it really seems that the planes have become a bit squishy. Which could be like I said the AA or the planes. If we are stuck with the 3 second delay in attack for some reason at least in that time allow the reticle to zoom in much faster then it does so there is some benefit for the CV as well. As I doubt (as much as I wish we could get our DMG back) that we will be able to get the damage reductions removed. Even though so much has been done to CV's since then. If we COULD get our damage reductions removed I would be thrilled to hear this. Though I could be just as happy not having another arbitrary gimmick added to my cv attacks. This is just a small list of everything that CV's have gone through. Most of it honestly for 1 class. So can we please start showing some serious love back for CV's before we run off the player base again with the incremental pile on that's been started on since the rework, and which has never been stopped being called for by a group of the same names ever since? It's easy at times to get caught up in the noise as it gets to loud to remember everything before that noise. So yeah CV's have been nerfed/balanced for YEARS, with very little that's been done to make them more fun. The KM line has recently been balanced, for example for damage ability. When's the last time a CV had serious damage buff? I would say this though. If all of these balances are needed, and are great, then apply them to all ships one month from now. Put it on the splash page of the log in screen! I'm sure no one would mind! That gut reaction and feeling that just ran through your mind and body is all the reason I'm saying it's time to stop please and start reversing this.
  2. As per the title a proposal. How about in order to gain access to Cv's one should have at least 2 complete lines with T 10's. Obviously other than Cv's. In the same way as for new players there is a path to "ascension", that should be applicable to Cv's. Especially given their powers and WeeGee's "failure" to properly balance them. I don't think that's unreasonable, because there are many flybois out there who are clueless about playing a surface ship. I mean learning something else then driving airbuses should be beneficial. So what you think?
  3. Slimeball91

    Cvs in Aegis.

    I'm late with the CV/ops discussion this week. I didn't get as much time to play this as I would have liked. I probably played this op 15 or so times this week. I find this op similar to Raptor Rescue in that you need to be fairly sharp with your CV skills to do well. AA levels are moderate overall, with the first and last waves with some heavier AA. Plane losses seem easily manageable in most cases, but enough to cut into your DPM. I think Ryujo is the winner of the tech tree CVs, and Lowenhardt is probably the best overall. For some reason I just didn't like the Ranger in this op. I think that's because its planes are generalized, and have no specialty. The CVs with a specialized squadron can focus on those planes and bang out more damage. Earlier in the week I was focusing on helping the team wear down the BBs in the first two spawns. This is good for the team but I found its a good way to lose out on XP. Later in the week I tried playing a bit more selfishly and found the XP increase to be worthwhile without any real risk of losing stars. I have to mention the proper way to start this op in a CV; and that is to not be the one to spot the first wave of ships. There are several ways to do that, I generally just waited to launch my planes. I know others like launch right away then fly out wide to delay the spotting. Its also important not to run torpedo bombers on the first attack since that can force the enemy bots to start to turn right away. That causes all sorts of problems. Also, watch for incoming torps if you move forward at the start. After, that you just shoot the bots as they come. The last wave I would usually focus on Fuso unless it seemed like the team was in position to take care of it, if so I'd go after the BBs farther to the west. As always feel free to leave your route, tips and comments. One last thing, @GandalfTehGray sent me a video in his Lowenhardt, he's got a bit of a different route than I've seen others use. I tried it tonight and it seemed to work reasonably well for me. I'll let him talk about and he can share the video if he wants.
  4. Slimeball91

    CVs in Raptor Rescue.

    Continuing with the discussions with CVs in operations, this time Raptor Rescue. This is not one of my favorite ops in surfaces or CVs. Unlike the other ops, Raptor Rescue has more routes, and enemy spawn locations. I don't play this enough to ever learn all of the routes/spawns, and that makes it a lot harder to do well. Half the time I think I know where the enemy ships will spawn next, and it turns out I'm wrong to some extent, sometimes way off. My final game last night, in the Perth, I just couldn't get anything right. That left me with one of the worst finishes I've have a very long time, just under 50k damage. My usual average damage in surface ships (cruisers) is probably 120k, not great, but solid. The issue with this op for me is that it can be hard to find a rhythm. As for CVs specifically, I find them to lose many of their primary strengths in this op. One of the biggest strengths for CVs in ops is the ability to go anywhere, and target those hard to get to ships. In this op the enemy CVs are tough with their almost content fighter screen. The other hard targets that you'd like to work on for your team have decent AA coverage wit h3-4 ships spawning together, making harder to get efficient attacks. Then there are the longish flight times per strike. It can be frustrating to make a longer flight and only manage one of two strikes. Also, this op can descend into a bit of chaos if your team isn't on its game. The CV doesn't have as much ability to keep things under control as in other ops. In Killer Whale for example, my normal route that prioritize hard to target ships tends to prevent things from ever unraveling. Even if there is some spot where trouble breaks out it isn't hard to go deal with that hotspot before it gets out of control. The windows you have to deal with ships before they attack Raptor in this op are fine when your team is on top of things. There are just too many ships that can spit out torps that the CVs can only do so much to prevent problems. With the other op when I'm in a CV I feel like I can have a fair amount of control over the outcome. In Raptor Rescue I feel more lie I'm just along for the ride. Not have some sense of control is a bit frustrating. Sometimes I feel like a chicken with its head cut off. That is partly down to not knowing the op well enough, and partly its just the nature of this op. I'm looking to get better, so, I have some questions for your guys that play CVs. Do you go after the enemy CVs, if so what is your strategy? What ships do you like to target in general? How close to do you stay with the group in your CV, do you stay really close, or stay back some amount? What CVs do you like to play in this op? This is the first time I've given CVs a real shot in this op. I'm still learning (and I don't consider myself a good CV player), what advice do you guys have for the CV newbies in this op? I'd really like to hear from you.
  5. Slimeball91

    CVs in Killer Whale

    Another CVs in operation discussion. I'm sort of curious about how you guys play in Killer Whale. I'm playing the Ranger, Weser, and Ryujo. I have some of my best games in Ryujo, but I find the Ranger to be the most consistent, but never any big games. I like the Weser too, but its bombs can be RNG trolls, and it doesn't take much for the bots to make your rockets a waste of time. I have no experience with the tech tree RN CVs. I tend to target the BBs since they can be both a threat to your teammates and a lot of HP to wear down. I'll go after cruisers and DDs, but mostly when they are being a more immediate threat to myself or teammates. I know damaging these smaller ships can earn more XP. I just don't feel comfortable trusting the BBs to my teammates to deal with. I'd also like to know where you guy position your CV during the match. Here are the routes I take. I'll leave a blank copy of the map if you want to draw your routes. The circles are where I'll make a stop, the red and orange are the routes for each of the two exits. I generally don't exit unless I'm needed for the win. If you guys have some advice or would like to offer your thoughts I'd love to hear from you.
  6. I like the idea of brawls being a 1v1 scenario where you rely on your skill to win rather than a PVE or a team game. That is not to say I hate teams, it's just that it's nice to test your skill against another player rather than relying on teammates. I love how it's flexible in that you can go afk if you have to attend to an emergency or a real life issue so that you won't spoil the game for 11 other of your teammates. Plus: This mode doesn't affect random game stats. You do not have to worry about losing too much because the battle is mostly your skill and enemy skill (with RNG of course), and most players do not like the idea of losing stars or being deranked in a rank type mode. Another thing I enjoy is that the mode is not only fun for the most part, but also friendly. Numerous times I compliment my adversary for a well fought battle and in return I get a comp as well. The rewards are identical to that of regular clan brawls. You win each game, and you progress through the rewards. I played all the ship types and found this mode enjoyable for the most part except for one thing named CV. First of all, CVs are OP and even more so when your plane reserves that are designed to fight a 12v12 will fight a 1v1. Thus making it 12 times harder for the lone enemy ship. The AA of the enemy ship is not enough to fend for itself against unlimited planes. I know planes are not unlimited and will even be careful with the term "unlimited" in a 12v12. The maps are smaller because it's a 1v1 rather than a 12v12 thus allowing ships to get to each other faster, but it also means planes can travel across the small map with ease. Now before some CV people come and say "Just dodge" or "Just adapt", you can mitigate damage from the first torpedo drop, but when you do the planes come around and catch you completely broadside. You cannot "Dodge" again because the planes are 10x (or even more) faster than you. Destroyers find it hard because most tier VIII DDs have bad AA (I would even say all tier VIII DDs do). The CV will just destroy you before you even reach the cap sometimes. You can turn in, or turn out to mitigate some rocket (or bomb) damage but eventually you'll die. You can smoke up, but that will just extend your life a little longer. Another sad thing is that most DDs do not have "Repair party" which means that once you lose that hp you're never going to get it back for the remainder of that match. Cruisers have similar problems, some tier VIII cruisers don't have heals (I know, there's Atago, Edinburgh, etc. etc.). The heals will only extend your life for some time, after that you're still dead because torpedo damage, AP damage are not healable for the most part. The HE rockets will set you on fire and cause damage that you can heal. A cruiser will not reach the enemy CV in time because the sheer number of planes. Only CV you can defeat is an afk CV or a incompetent one. Even a incompetent one can sometimes still defeat you. Battleships have heals, but can't heal AP damage or torpedo damage. I touched on this earlier, when a squadron of TBs attacks; you turn in or out mitigating some damage. Then after that wave of torps are done, the same squadron drops you again on a perfect broadside. You have "better" AA then the other classes, but your large size and slow speed handicaps you hard. The CV can easily destroy your AA mounts with HE rockets or HE bombs. AP bombs that hit your citadel is only 33% healable. The rest of the hp gone for the duration of the match. The only thing a CV can't do safely that a surface ship can is to cap the two caps. Surface ships usually can only win when they survive long enough to let the points reach 1000. The only instance where it's fair for a CV to be allowed is when there is another CV on enemy team. Earlier I mentioned AA is not a real threat and that is because AA is run by an automated system WG has put in place. You have to rely on a system that is the same exact system found on a ship commanded by a 30%er and found on the same ship that is commanded by a 70%er. You can increase AA damage by pressing a few keys on your keyboard, but after that you rely on how bad the CV captain is. Your AA takes no skill to shoot down planes. So back to what I was saying earlier, one change to make brawls a fun mode is to match CVs against CVs. Not CVs against ships that almost fend for themselves. Like always: My opinion, don't attack others with different viewpoints. It's just a game, and keep your discussions constructive within forum rules.
  7. SweetBabyRuth

    Russian Bias

    If wargaming wants to keep its Russian bias, the tech tree Russian ships need buffed ASAP! With the changes to the commander skill tree, and the game meta now being shifted to torp boats, A/J line BB sniping and FDRs, short range specialized ships that are can tank a lot of damage a straight up bad. The only viable ship from the Russian navy is well.... Slava, and maybe Slava, oh and Slava. Even Smolensk doesn't really make sense when everything is already outside of 19 kilometers. So WG, if you care so much about your Russian ships, then you probably should buff them, or else there will be no reason to play them... even on the RU servers.
  8. Diddy_Kongs_Quest

    How about a solution....

    Since you have CVs that have infinite planes nearly and British BBs that have no problem destroying your AA builds and secondary builds in mere 2 savlos how about allowing us to be able to fix our modules every "?" amount of seconds depending on the module and the item destroyed. There is no way that British bbs should be able to one salvo all your modules which this game is riddled with Thunderers and HE even at lower tiers. It is cancerous and tiring to basically only viable build is anti-fire duration and chance build. No other build works on bbs with CV spam and British bbs. It is ludicrous, how can it be even remotely ok that you can't specc for anything else without being worried about every single module on your ship being literally invalidated by 2 ships lines? The British BB line and the CV line....it really doesn't make any development balance sense at all. This has ultimately kept me from enjoying ranked battles and any kind of competitive matches because I can't build anything else but against fire and fire chance. My modules break everytime I am hit by something. No recourse, this is beyond frustrating spending time building specific captains for specific functions...I don't even understand how the state of the game is even remotely balanced, and people are seeing this. The player base can see this and are getting tired of it WG. I am pretty sure they are fed up with this foolishness.
  9. I'm definitely in the camp that CVs are wickedly OP and break the game mechanics of all other ships. The ability to zoom around the map (@ over 5 times the speed of anything else) - unfettered - and spot everything at will, and except for the rarest instances, attacks ships with impunity (what, you kill half my squadron? Press F and doing again) essentially renders all ship classes as mere targets for the CV players. This is especially so for the DD class - who's scout mission and stealth are essentially removed from the game, with no real counterplay (yes, yes, smoke up if you have it -- but you run out of those and the CV never dies, and staying tight with AA Cruisers is both largely ineffective - AA is a meme - and again, removes the gameplay of DDs). I appreciate WG doesn't care - that the game is now focused on whales and the Russian market -- but I'll offer this idea on the expectation that it won't even be read, nevermind considered (which I guess is deserved as, given that state of the game, I've refused to put any more money into it). Why not create a battle mode that simply doesn't have the CV class. Call it Random Classic Battle Mode. It will allow players to play the other classes as ship-to-ship combatants and allow a whole roster of ships to be played that cannot be played at all now. You like CV's? Great, play the regular random mode. Nothing taken away. I'm sure this has been suggested before -- and yeah, I'm suggesting it again. If WG won't fix the CV class, why not at least give us the option to play a mode where we can enjoy a number of ships with their unique playstyles that are essentially off-limits now. It's equal parts of sadness and anger when I think about the evolution of this game. Shame really.
  10. Background: I watched the video linked in this thread and got thru about 2.5 pages of the typical back and forth about aircraft carriers being part of the game. WG: You need to pay attention to this video - General Game Discussion - World of Warships official forum The video makes some good points about the evolution of the game, and the successes and failures of the CV rework. However, in spite of his claims to report just "the facts" the CC who made the video gets at least one concept about the AA mechanics wrong: both AA DPM and flak puffs remain at full strength when they overlap. WG considered diminishing the AA DPM as more ship's AA auras overlapped, but ultimately left them at full strength when they botched the implementation during one of the patches. I'd also argue that his assumption that it is easier to be a expert CV player vs any other class is also incorrect based on my own experience. I've found the easiest class to rack up big damage and experience numbers in is battleships, and it is not even close. The skill floor to be an effective high tier CV player is quite high. The skill floor for CVs is artificially low at tier 4, which is done in order to get players into the class. Currently, I think the MVR is more effective than the other T10 classes of carrier when you combine her AP bombs, AP rockets, each type of her aircraft having repair, and her stealthy fighter auras. I'm confident WG will eventually get her balanced correctly. I expect nerfs to MVR before the next clan battle season. Thesis: If you are going to have a naval combat FPS set in the early to middle 20th century, CVs must be in the game, and they should be an effective and powerful class for a skilled player. WG made the correct choice by including carriers in World of Warships. Players, especially players that have been around since before their inception, need to accept that they are not going away. I started playing in April of 2019, so how carriers played before the rework is not something I have experience with. I play all classes, and am looking forward to submarines when they come to the game as well. I enjoy playing my Midway (currently the only CV in my port) and I enjoy what carriers add to the game when I play all of my other ships as well. However, I have make deliberate choices in my ship selection, captain skills, and upgrades which greatly contribute to this enjoyment. Here are a few things you can do if you want to be more effective at countering air attacks during the game: 1.) Prioritize playing ships with powerful AA. The irony of making a video about how CVs are too powerful while highlighting play in a BB with one of the worst AA capabilities at her tier should not be lost on anyone. Play the Halland, Minotaur, Worchester, Texas, or any of the other ships who specialize in AA if you really hate being bombed. If you choose a ship or line who has weak AA, learn how to play around that weakness (e.g. play close to allied ships to stack your AA auras). You pay a price in some other aspect of gameplay to sail a powerful AA ship, so you should expect to pay a price in battle if you choose a ship with weak AA because you find some other feature of that class enjoyable (like having 9 x 18" rifles at T9). 2.) If you play a BB or heavy cruiser, always take AAM1 in slot 1. These are the classes whose main batteries do not contribute to AA. Also consider taking it for CLs and DDs whose main battery doesn't contribute to AA (French DDs come to mind, though I'm sure there are more). As the video correctly points out, you cannot repair damaged AA guns. Once they are knocked out, you lose the corresponding AA DPM output for the rest of the battle. Your main battery almost always is repairable if it gets knocked out (I'd estimate 90+% of the time). All things considered, buffing the survivability of AA is more important than your main battery. 2.1) Don't forget about AAM2 in slot 6 for high tier ships. While this is not as much of a no brainer as AAM1 and there may be other better choices for slot 6, this is a powerful upgrade you have at your disposal for boosting your AA. It is not just for secondary build German BBs. 2.2) AAGM1 in slot 3 isn't bad, but the other upgrades that compete with it in slot 3 make it hard to choose. WG should buff this if they want more players to take it, or move it to slot 2. 3.) Invest in AA captain skills. Even a ship with a strong base AA rating (like Des Moines) can benefit greatly from these. BFT is the best example, and I choose it on almost all ships where I don't take AAM2, or which don't have an effective AA consumable or some other method of escaping from concerted carrier attack (like smoke). 3.1) The captain skill changes WG is working on look promising, with one major exception. AFT used to allow you to increase the range of your AA auras. WG should bring back something similar as a 4 point cruiser only skill. To rule out stealth AA, however, it should only be effective out to the ship's spotting range from air. For example: Expert AA Gunner would include an increase of the range of all AA auras 10% with the outer aura expansion being limited to the ship's detection range by air. 4.) Take advantage of available AA consumables. Pick DFAA over speed boost (DFAA over hydro is admittedly a much a harder sell). Pick catapult fighters over spotting plane. Do this especially if you choose not to invest any captain skills in AA. 4.1) Catapult fighters need to be more effective, especially at higher tiers. I'd say it is possible to avoid a red ship's catapult fighters which I am attacking about 30 - 40% of the time when I play CV. There should not be any trick to using this consumable. If you attack a BB with 3 catapult fighters in the air before you drop your ordinance, you should lose 3 planes from your squadron every time. With the consumable lasting only 60 s, you should not have to get your planes in the air any earlier than ordinance being dropped on your ship. If you anticipate the air attack enough to get your fighters up 10 s or so before your ship is struck, they should shoot down the planes before the attack, not after. Whatever WG needs to do to simplify this consumable to make it more automatic (which I believe is the intent of the consumable in the first place), they should. 4.2) Any ship with a catapult should have the option of carrying fighters. WG recently started to make this choice available for some higher tier ships. They should make this a universal choice on every ship with catapult aircraft. 5.) The best way to learn to counter CV play is by learning to play a CV. Pick a line and grind it up to at least T8. Your play in every other class will benefit. Summary: CVs are here to stay. You can be effective in countering them if you choose to. If you choose not to, you should not be surprised when you are victimized by them. Moreover, if you choose not to, and then you complain about how game wrecking CVs are to the WoWs community, you have no credibility on the subject.
  11. ugafan56

    Wind over the deck

    Not sure where to post this. I don't mind CVs so much as the fact they don't have to ACT like CVs. They should not be able to be DIW and still launch. CVs have to have forward motion to create more wind over the deck to increase lift and be able to launch aircraft. There should not be any "hiding behind the rock".
  12. Anyone else here having trouble with the tier 4 CVs? Ive been having a lot of trouble with the slow grind so im wondering if anyone else is having a similar problem or if it is because i just suck. If people have any tips to help that would be wonderful too.
  14. harenasb


    Hola a todos, yo soy un jugador de varios años, empecé este tipo de juegos con el NAVYFIELD, siempre fuí un CV Driver y era uno de los buenos (modestia a parte). Cuando comencé a jugar WoWS me capturó todo, pero sobre todo los juegos con los CVs. Es realmente la forma como un CV atacaba, te enviaba todo!!... recuerdo los días en los que lo primero que hacía era buscar al CV enemigo y darle con todo, haciendo ataques coordinados e inteligentes... NO COMO LOS DE AHORA... que son FRANCAMENTE RIDÍCULOS... no se asemejan ni por asomo a un guiño de la realidad... NINGÚN ESCUADRÓN SE ESPERABA SU TURNO, EXPUESTOS A TODO EL FUEGO AA, PARA QUE TRES O CUATRO DE ELLOS ATAQUEN... es francamente ridícula esta modalidad de juego. Probablemente muchos de los nuevos jugadores de CVs no sepan de lo que estoy hablando, pero sí los antiguos, e por eso que reitero que esta modalidad de juego en los CVs es por demás ABSURDA. Considero que es importante que se analice eso o por último, ARREGLEN ESTA MODALIDAD, reduzcan los tamaños de los escuadrones de 12 a 4 ó 6 haciendo que todos los aviones ataquen al mismo tiempo en una sola pasada, porque eso también permitiría una mayor sobrevivencia de aviones. En fín es mi opinión. Si alguien contesta este mensaje, hágalo con respeto y ataquen el argumento.
  15. BB63Hawaii

    Im sick of it.

    Im sick and tired of it. Ive played WOWS for almost 4 years. Rank 1 is always a goal of mine, but tier 10 is just too much. Its the same stuff every season, the [edited] ships that are over powered are always played. A cv turns any good player into an average one. The system demotes players who do the right things but do not get damage. Ive ranked out multiple times, but tier 10 is just crazy now. I dont find it fun anymore, I only like the lower tiers without as much gimmicks. I also think that 1v1 and 3v3 rank is much more realistic for players who dont play in clans. It was a lot of fun with less ships, you have more influence over a game. I get that its a team game but they need to separate clan battles and rank for individual players. I dont care for being burned to death by two smolensks, a haragumo and two thunderers while i worry about slava ap angles from 20k. Then cv detonates. Nightmare fuel. I dont know if anyone else feels the same way, but its just so frustrating. I think im done with rank, too much stress. Time for a change...
  16. Alright, so it's been over a year now, perhaps a year and a half, since the CV rework, and I feel like there should be a lot of consideration about what went wrong. There were a lot of promises made about the CV rework and a lot of us, myself included, said for a long time that we should just wait and see. I think it's time that we stop waiting and seeing and start talking and discussing, because if we don't, no one will. And let's not fool ourselves, a LOT went wrong. I'm not going to sugarcoat any of this, because what little "good" that has resulted from the rework is inevitably mired in what is wrong with it and almost inevitably directly linked to things that are wrong with it. I also know that this post is likely not going to change anything as Wargaming seem like they've dug their heels in, but I think it's worth it to consider for anyone ever developing games in the future or any reworks that are considered of other classes in the future. Let's start with the old RTS system, which had its own problems. I'll list some of these here: Carriers, mostly being a few specific examples, were extremely powerful Carriers had a different playstyle from surface ships, meaning that there was a divide between the skills required for ships of all other classes and CVs There was an intense skill-gap in CVs, where experienced players could absolutely destroy inexperienced CV players or their teams There weren't that many CV-specific modules and skills to choose from There were also only two CV lines, and premium CVs tended to, on average, be better than tech tree counterparts, sometimes oppressively so, like with Saipan. And, there were some decent things that came to help some of those issues: Planes having hitpoints instead of RNG deciding if all your planes die at once/who gets a plane kill and who gets denied what would have been a hard-earned Clear Skies Surface Ships have some level of control over their AA sectors and can see and get rewarded for the damage they do to planes CVs have a lot of Captains skills and modules to choose from to tailor their way of playing Rocket aircraft are a strong addition to represent an important form of carrier-born aviation and warfare A lot of bugs surrounding CVs got fixed, like AA through islands and air-detection issues So how did this go so wrong? Namely, the systemic rework that removed the RTS-lite components in favor of what is in the game now. The ability to support your team is gone; you have one consumable for spawning a couple of fighters to oppress DDs or sit there oblivious while enemy aircraft go right past them. Aerial torpedoes do pathetic levels of damage, almost never cause flooding, and flooding itself is almost worthless as a damage source. Any CV that is not top tier is worthless to play when uptiered, because Tier 8 and Tier 6 ships have long AA ranges and massive AA damage compared to Tier 6 and Tier 4 planes. If you thought Wargaming was adding a German line this year, I am so very sorry for you. That's not a line, that's a worthless dead-end of experience and credits that you might as well not even bother with. Limiting CVs to one squadron at a time is hard, because to compensate the CV, their squadrons would have to scale to ludicrous strengths... except they didn't do that. And you can't enjoy these features because everything that surrounds them is just bad. The core mechanic is bad. What was accomplished in this? There is still a skill divide. There may be CVs more frequently in matches now, but that is probably more attributable to the steady influx of new CV lines than CVs being fun or interesting to play. There is still a heavy skill gap and now it's even worse; just watch a video by Yuro and try to emulate it. Chances are you won't. CVs are still annoying to play against in that they can spot you for long periods even if they aren't trying to attack you, and can still focus ships down "with impunity." (Arguably with even more impunity now because many CVs just won't run out of aircraft even though they theoretically have soft-caps on how many they can have) A lot of RTS Veterans, either of CVs or who played against CVs, left CVs and either went to other ship classes or left the game It is actually hard to look at the new CV lines because those lines would have probably been feasible and even decent in the RTS system. German paper aircraft would have meant something, because they would have been the quintessential glass cannon, and players would have had to manage their aircraft much more strictly than those of other nations. Now, though, they feel like a kick in the ribs every time you look at a match and see almost all Tier 8s in your Weser or, worse, the E. Loewenhardt you paid $25 for (if you were like me and thought you might treat yourself this paycheck.) If you bought the "Admiral Pack" for $50.... ohh boy am I sorry for you, and I can only hope you haven't played it yet and can still get a refund. Meanwhile, the British CVs would have been slower and tougher, making it harder to fight over disparate areas of the map but easier to focus on small areas to fight in. Instead, well... CVs are worse than worthless on your team in an uptier and difficult to play even when top-tier. This is why the Rework did not go well: Wargaming shifted everything around like they did in Artillery 2.0, but they reduced the CV to a damage farmer instead of a support ship and then reduced its damage farming capabilities to a mere token. They put in national flavors around this rework but didn't address the issues that made and still make certain nations somewhat strong and certain nations pathetically weak, and they didn't address the issue that, if CVs are somehow supposed to operate off of one squad at a time, that that squad is going to have to be ludicrously strong to make-up for it. The end result is that the class was thrown by the wayside and just outright ignored despite the promises of attention. I haven't done a dive into things like the atrociously bad CV economy or the desperately-wanting sense of accomplishment for a grind (grinding a ship over a month is infinitely more rewarding than grinding half a ship over a month because Wargaming decided there would be one ship every two tiers.) Don't get me wrong, these aren't new issues, but they are infinitely worse after the rework than before it.
  17. ...getting into carriers. So I finally started tooling around with the two KM carriers that were dumped into my port. All of my battles have been in a training room. Gotta be honest, I just don't see the appeal. However, I'm thinking that CVs could lift up my stats, so why not try it?. I played an old 1990s carrier game for many years (15+) where due to it being a turn-based game you had time to review reports on the state of your squadrons. For example, they would list starting number of planes (12 to 16), shot down planes, and those needing repairs before being operational again. To get maximum return on your strikes you would coordinate your strikes so that both dive and torpedo bombers arrived at the target at the same time. This meant launching the slower torpedo bombers 30 to 60 minutes earlier depending on the distance involved. If the target was close enough, you could also provide fighter escort. In addition every morning at 6 AM when the sun came up you had to look at your number of available fighters and decide how many would be allocated to cap. Here in WOWS, there's none of that. It's like a first shooter game. Pew pew pew! Or am I missing something?
  18. So, @6Xero9 had called out and claimed, they feel CVs are balanced (and feel having this many CVs would be fine). Okay. So, I'd like Wargaming to do a 2-3 week experiment on live. And what is this experiment? Let's have 2-5 CVs per game. To people and those in WG who feel CVs are fine and support their existence, it seems the concerns and points raised to CVs fall onto deaf ears. And time and again, it is touted that people who dislike CVs are in the minority. Let's once and for all prove what's what to the question: Is CV balanced, or not? Now, i'm sure people will backpedal. But I want you to realize... by admission, if a ship type is balanced in relation to power over the rest, then there should be zero reason to treat the class special over the others. Right? Everyone should be able to play their pixel boats without a care in the world, whether he/she sees 4-5 BBs, CA/CLs, DDs, or even CVs. The rest of the classes can have that many, why can't CVs? In the end, let's put your money where your mouth is both WG and supporters of CVs: Gather the numbers and playerbase feedback after this experiment, and let's see what population numbers look like. And it will be very curious for those who not only oppose this simple and straight logic, for those who don't... Please outline why is it that CVs must keep a limit of 1-2, but also are balanced in power as opposed to any other ship type in the game. And please explain why this limit exists if its not for balance reasons. No matter which side you stand on, and if you even fall into that last category... I'm sure what people have to say in defense of both why CVs are balanced or OP will be interesting should this idea get attention. Additional thoughts: How about we let just two CVs in all games? Or the divisioning of two CVs? The reality is, the feedback of the players I doubt would change much.
  19. 07Beast109

    French Cvs

    Has anyone heard any talk about French Carriers, coming in game anytime. Since the French did actually build some CVs
  20. Well you give it the best you can given the circumstances: We were down a few hundred points, three ships to one carrier. I ask two other ships to stay afloat. Meanwhile I'm whittling down the enemy carrier. We are getting so close to winning when I see in chat: "Duhmm" and see one of our team got sunk. This, after we fought and clawed our way back. It was about to be an epic comeback. Epic I tell you. I was less than 20 seconds, maybe 15 from sinking the carrier. Team mate was determine to sink the carrier. Folks - there's almost no other ship in the game that's as dangerous to your ship's help than a carrier alone at the end of a match, fighting to save it's win. I can't comp him now cause the time ran out for comps. But you played well GG and well done victory for your team.
  21. If you see me in your match, on your team, know that I see my carrier's role playing out like this... I play my match. Which is, I initially locate the majority of the red team. My main targets are cruisers then battleships then carrier. I put destroyers LAST on my target list. There is far too much time involved by carrier aircraft to locate, target and attack destroyers. At least for me. Oh, if an opportunity pops up smack in front of me, I might take it - but... Destroyers are not my job. Destroyers are the job of cruisers, failing then battleships. I prefer to spend time attacking destroyers only when there are no other available targets or they are too close to myself or supporting ships. If the ship type designed to hunt and kill destroyers cannot do it then there is a balance issue. If they choose not to do it, that is there (your) choice but it does not make them MY job, my responsibility, my targets. So, when you see Herr Reitz playing a carrier, you now know my target priorities. tia and have fun out there. How do fellow CV drivers see it?
  22. I've been playing the dogs out of Kaga for the past few weeks. Trying to get better. I have a good number of matches in her (148), 1502AD and avg DR of 2.0. Average, maybe slightly below. Damaged caused to reds at 8.1M. So so. But I can tell this morning, just starting today, the AAA(AA) is freaking insane. My average damage to ships is 54,777. In a Tier X (ix and x with a bismarck, nc and myself as the lone t8's) I earned a whopping 28K damage to ships. The Halland when built is exceedingly OP in the AA business. Exceedingly. Rockets and dive bombers? Forget them, vaporized. Torp bombers can approach for one drop, that's it. In contrast to normal Kaga business, I found I was losing planes during the TB run. Everywhere I went to attack my planes were obliterated. So... May I suggest you dive into your spreadsheet data to see just how OP the AA is on ships like Halland? They are almost untouchable by air. One would think attack planes, which can travel faster, would at least be able to reach the ship. Nope. Alternatively, I'm suggesting (again) you revise carrier tiers to play from the top down, so that T8 will see 8/7, T6 sees 6/5 and T4 sees 4/3. Cause T10 carriers are outrageously expensive to play (I have all of them) but hey, they are always top tier, right? Maybe just some buffs to Kaga's planes, otherwise? It's going to be very interesting to see how the German carriers play this game with AAA(AA) against ships like the Halland. tia
  23. Announcement! Italian Battleships! Yes, they are finally here! A whole new line of ships representing the Nation of Pasta Primavera! Italian battleships fire a unique kind of shell: Semi-armor piercing (SAP). This type of shell has a much greater chance of penetrating armor than a normal HE shell, but not quite as good as a true AP shell. However, the new SAP shells come with a 75% chance of starting a fire! Also, while Italian battleships are not as heavily armored as their contemporaries, they have a top speed of 38 knots, making them quite hard to hit while moving and allowing them to outrun most other battleships. We are proud to introduce Tier V Spaghetti, Tier VI Spaghetti and Meatballs, Tier VII Alfredo, and Tier VIII Alfredo con Pollo. Stay Tuned for More! GAME BALANCE CHANGES BATTLESHIPS AP shells are more skill-demanding for successful use than HE shells, but their efficiency is higher, if used correctly. The updated battleships constitute a relatively novel class in the game since they were almost exclusively used for shore bombardment and sea escort, and most players have been using them to delete other ships such as cruisers in a single salvo. Consequently, the overall damage dealt by this type of armament has become too high. We, therefore, decided to systematically lower the maximum damage of AP shells, but without lowering their penetration. All battleship AP shell damage will be lowered by 30%. We will watch independent performance of the ships and take additional action if needed.
  24. Herr_Reitz

    Bot carriers in PVE are stupid

    Today I rode along with a bot carrier in a PVE match. Which of course means I had already been splashed by the reds. Sort of on purpose. I wanted to see what the carrier did with its planes. Not much really. Flew past red BBs then dropped torps far too close to the target, not once, but three times. IMO, having such a ship playing is really worse than not having it play. Oh, I realize they are there for folks to get the shoot-down credits but seriously, put a little bite into those teeth. By the way... one of the reasons I enjoy playing CVs has to do with the battle view you get. There is not a lot of free-time with a carrier, but wow do you get to see a lot. Far too many players showing broadsides. Folks pushing when they (probably) know better. The clusters are interesting too... as if indecision were a tropical storm that has trapped three or four players together. But back to topic... I for one would like a little bit more "battle awareness" plugged into bot carriers please. What do you think? tia
  25. Privet komrad I bring you my honest ways on how to make this game more balanced and enjoyable for all classes(even bringing harmony between dds and cvs) 1: radar Radar can be changed in 2 ways: Real radar: radar/hydro can’t detect through islands. This will guarantee that cruisers can still detect smoked up dds but they can’t do it behind the safety of islands with absolutely no penalties and dds can spot and detect as long as they stay out of eye of sight of radar. Submarine like radar: What I mean by this is like the submarine pings. You get pings that cost battery. it can also recharge. I think this is more intuitive and much better. This can also be implemented with the first radar change I suggest as well as radar range change. Ships can change radar range. So if you choose to use a 12km radar, you can freely use it but it will cost a lot of battery. this will also make sure you don’t get so much Russian cruiser spam. Cvs: 1: universal AA range The 40mm bofors on the montana have a 6km range, on the gearing they have 5.8km. and the 40mm bofors on the montana have the same range as the 128mm l/61 on the gk. Just they like diversity radar change for cruisers, they should diversify AA range on each gun. But each gun doesn’t change the range on a different ship. Each AA mount has a range, be it on the ground, a battleship or a submarine. 2: manual fire control Im going to sum this with the third point to make this shorter if a cv deploys a fighter next to its torpedo bombers around a ship. The ship will do the exact same damage for both the fighter and the torpedo bobmers. It’s not hard to see you should and must prioritize the torpedo bomber. Use all available AA for that squadrum. With that, flak bursts should make a LOT more AA damage. A cv can just send a squadrum, ignore flaks and still release their torpedos/bombs. Just like battleships get punished for going in straight lines, airplane squadrums should get absolutely nuked if they keep going in astraight line ignoring flak.it shouldn’t happen just to heavily AA mounted ships like the haaland. DDs: There really is only one thing I want to see change regarding dds. Overpens. A yamato can’t do 6 overpens and the dd just 6khp but be happily sailing like nothing happened. There’s some astonishing dd survival stories like the hms Cossack but if you get 6 overpens from a 460mm shell you should get severely punished. Overpens of high caliber should still do monstrous damage. It shouldn’t take a battleship 3 salvos to kill a DD BBs: Bbs should have a fire control more like the Russian battleships. They should get more damage control parties but can use quicker. This will severely help them against he spam and torpedos as well as keepingthe he spammers happy as if they used all their damage cons they are still at the mercy of the he spammers. Cruisers: Armour: Just like bbs. There’s isn’t much to change (besides radar) and that’s the 50mm armour belt. no cruiser should be able to bow in a shikashima or even a montana. Make the 27mm more prevelant with other cruisers or even 30 or 32mm bows but 50mm armor belts shouldn’t be a thing with some special cases like the super heavy Kroonstad class Sap: You should not do 12k salvos to a bow in hindi unless you are sailing a battleship. Sap should kill dds but it shouldn’t kill cruisers and battleships that quickly either. In order to make sap viable I would suggest nerfing the damage and and severely nerfing the penetration angles. If you’re bow in in ashima you should get nuked, if you’re bow in in a dm, you shouldn’t get nuked every 20s seconds. These are changes I would love to see implemented and I think would make the game far more enjoyable for every class and keeping harmony with all players. What do you think? Please share your feedback because unlike waraming, I care to see other’s opinion.