Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
OnABoat

Now that we are addressing GZ why not the real elephant in the room

233 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

21
[NOOBS]
Members
79 posts
2,283 battles

This is World of WARSHIPS not planes, so why is there emphasis on plane mechanics attacking ships?

No other ship can direct their payloads the way a CV can, every other ship must rely on RNG.  1 CV player can win the battle.  You have a bad CV player your team is toast.  But if you have a bad player playing anything else you still have a chance to win.

Here is what should be done.

Refund every CV

Put Airfields on designated maps.

When you achieve a map objective and it could be for just about anything, you get the opportunity to direct an Air Strike, just like COD.

Your team takes a map area they control the airfield there, the player with the highest XP at the time gets a roll at the airstrike.  Your a BB and actually engage hey you get a chance too.

It would make the game so much more enjoyable.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,504
[HINON]
Supertester
18,948 posts
12,460 battles

Try telling anyone who served on a carrier that their ship is not a warship. Quickest way to the hospital.

  • Cool 45

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
211 posts
5,120 battles
1 minute ago, Lert said:

Try telling anyone who served on a carrier that their ship is not a warship. Quickest way to the hospital.

This :Smile_great: Its like insulting the entire CV force that WON us WW2. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,183
[NOVA]
Members
11,026 posts
15 minutes ago, Lert said:

Try telling anyone who served on a carrier that their ship is not a warship. Quickest way to the hospital.

 

But a plane clearly isn't a warship.

 

OPs suggestion is how CVs should have been implemented from the beginning. Not as a playable ship, but as perks you could call in for achieving goals in game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
582 posts
4,205 battles

Intrinsically, they shouldn't have been designed around max 1-2 per team. They're simply too powerful individually and CV mismatches are awful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,214
[-TAB-]
Alpha Tester
4,072 posts
7,519 battles

While I somewhat support the idea of calling land-based air support, removing CVs isn't a necessary step toward that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57
[ADOPT]
Members
188 posts
11,801 battles
19 minutes ago, Magyar5 said:

This :Smile_great: Its like insulting the entire CV force that WON us WW2. 

it helped us win... but I have yet to see a ship in any war actually take territory and hold it by itself.  Much respect, but a carrier is the epitome of a combat support ship.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
211 posts
5,120 battles
Just now, Ariokk said:

it helped us win... but I have yet to see a ship in any war actually take territory and hold it by itself.  Much respect, but a carrier is the epitome of a combat support ship.

Without the carriers at Midway, what do you think would have happened, plus navy ships never roam alone. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,504
[HINON]
Supertester
18,948 posts
12,460 battles
3 minutes ago, Ariokk said:

Much respect, but a carrier is the epitome of a combat support ship.

Funny, since it's the other ships - even the battleships - that were eventually designed specifically to support the carriers.

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
211 posts
5,120 battles
1 minute ago, Lert said:

Funny, since it's the other ships - even the battleships - that were eventually designed specifically to support the carriers.

This too, again, ideally,  naval capital ships sail in formations consisting of many combat and support ships, never alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
582 posts
4,205 battles
6 minutes ago, Magyar5 said:

Without the carriers at Midway, what do you think would have happened, plus navy ships never roam alone. 

 

I think the point is that Carriers didn't "win" WW2. It's a gross oversimplification of the strategic complexity of a global war.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
474 posts
8,404 battles

CV's arent as overpowered as you think.  I play them and I know they aren't easy there is so much to do with them.  You only think they are OP because they can hit you and you can't hit them back directly, which makes you think they are OP.  They punish those that break away from the group.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
211 posts
5,120 battles
Just now, vonluckner said:

 

I think the point is that Carriers didn't "win" WW2. It's a gross oversimplification of the strategic complexity of a global war.

Yes, I admit that it is oversimplified, many ships played prominent rolls in every battle, from BBs and CVS to transports and landing ships, but if we didn't have the carriers at midway, then it would have fallen.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,506 posts
1,138 battles
2 minutes ago, vonluckner said:

 

I think the point is that Carriers didn't "win" WW2. It's a gross oversimplification of the strategic complexity of a global war.

There are many things that led to the allied victory in WW2

In the Pacific Theater, particularly, Aircraft Carriers (and the planes they carried) influenced the outcome of that part of the war more than any other warship type 

They were the primary focus of nearly every single major naval action for both sides from Coral Sea until Leyte Gulf

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
211 posts
5,120 battles
1 minute ago, More_Witches said:

There are many things that led to the allied victory in WW2

In the Pacific Theater, particularly, Aircraft Carriers (and the planes they carried) influenced the outcome of that part of the war more than any other warship type 

They were the primary focus of nearly every single major naval action for both sides from Coral Sea until Leyte Gulf

Agreed. :Smile_great: +1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
262
[5IN]
Members
1,785 posts
8,109 battles

CVs are warships, like it or not.  As for gunships being subject to RNG and CVs aren't,  I would point to AA.  Your shells cannot be shot out of the air, and you have unlimited reload.  CVs have none of these.

 

 Given the low population, you just have to do the best you can.

 

Personally, I suck at CV play, though I would like to be better.  Maybe some day when (if) they ever improve the interface.

 

Gl;hf

 

B

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
107
[KNTI2]
[KNTI2]
Members
166 posts
8,141 battles

Carriers played a critical role during the war and saying that it's not a warship is next level of insult. There must be a reason why every ship used in World War II has AA... You're basically saying an Iowa's AA is just for show.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,708
[HINON]
WoWS Wiki Editor, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
6,498 posts
3,751 battles

Carriers did not win the war, so much as American industry did. We could put so much steel on the water, and planes in the air, that we just overwhelmed the enemy with sheer volume of firepower and presence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,014
[5D7]
Alpha Tester
2,716 posts
4,076 battles
45 minutes ago, Ariokk said:

it helped us win... but I have yet to see a ship in any war actually take territory and hold it by itself.  Much respect, but a carrier is the epitome of a combat support ship.

 

Then why are they warships... I have yet to see a warship take the last 500 meters of a battlefield and plant a flag on a territory.... By that logic, every ship is a support vessel to land forces

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
582 posts
4,205 battles
Just now, More_Witches said:

There are many things that led to the allied victory in WW2

In the Pacific Theater, particularly, Aircraft Carriers (and the planes they carried) influenced the outcome of that part of the war more than any other warship type 

They were the primary focus of nearly every single major naval action for both sides from Coral Sea until Leyte Gulf

 

I wouldn't even agree with that. The most influential ships of WW2 weren't carriers or battleships, but transports. Collectively the western Allies spent more resources on transports than any other type of ship (any other type of vehicle afaik).

 

Carriers were the most influential combat ship, but the war was won by the "unseen" strategic logistical leviathan, not the glamorous showpieces.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×