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

Clan Wars Ship Restrictions

84 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

813
[SALTY]
Members
1,291 posts
4,139 battles

Clan Wars has been previewed, and plenty of comments have been made regarding the ship restrictions and the absences of the Carriers. The competitive players of ships have waited months, years for the release of clan wars, about time we had a say in the format for Season 1, my proposal as follows.

 

1 x CV per team (Not Compulsory)

2 x BB per team

2 x CA per team (3 Per team if a clan chooses to not play a CV)

2 x DD per team

 

This structure is an all rounded setup for T10 matches, i'll explain;

 

CV - Normally a deciding factor in random battles due to the skill gap and unreliable teammates, this is somewhat less a factor in a 7v7 T10 format due to the increased AA bubble of a clan fleet. You're less likely to see rogue ships in a clan battle like you would otherwise see in random, and in these instances is where the CV and quality of the CV player shines (targeting lone ships)

 

I see no reason to punish skilled CV players by not allowing them to participate in clan battles, after all you are allowing players that currently don't have access to T10 ships to play, id say that action alone will have more influence on a battle than a CV.

 

BB - WGs plan to limit one Battleship per side is placing far too much responsibility on a single player, T10 cruisers are deadly and in most cases go unpunished unless a Battleship directly deals with them.

 

CA - 2 Cruisers per team and a third for clans that choose to ignore a CV add balance with AA and DPM. T10 cruisers are more than capable of holding their own in high tier games, the addition of a second battleships balance the power these cruisers have in game.

 

The following ships can easily combat a high tier CV, Des Monies, Mosvka, Hindenburg, Minotaur and are all valuable for clan wars.

 

DD - Limiting DD's to 2 ensures passive play is not rampant throughout clan wars (introducing more than 2 destroyers increases the torpedoes and increases the passivity of games, battleships hang back, cruisers hang back and it turns into a long drawn out game)

 

Feel free to discuss.

 

 

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,548
[SYN]
Members
15,395 posts
12,571 battles

yeah, a 2 ship type limit will weed out the stupidly OP setups

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27,638
[HINON]
Supertester
21,713 posts
15,437 battles

Isn't this what people have been wanting and asking for forever though? No CVs, a limit to BBs, more utility for cruisers?

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,019 posts
8,415 battles

The thing is that by knowing 100% you will not face a CV, everyone will ditch AA builds and/or modules, making it harder for DDs and cruisers to fight.

 

 With the chance to have a CV, maybe your build will not be ideal for the situation you will face, detection is also way different with the aid of planes, so yeah I vote for CV's in clan wars, to have different outcomes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[SALTY]
Members
1,291 posts
4,139 battles
5 minutes ago, Lert said:

Isn't this what people have been wanting and asking for forever though? No CVs, a limit to BBs, more utility for cruisers?

 

Flooding a game with cruisers is not the solution, a balance setup is.

 

1 minute ago, Pata1985 said:

The thing is that by knowing 100% you will not face a CV, everyone will ditch AA builds and/or modules, making it harder for DDs and cruisers to fight.

 

 With the chance to have a CV, maybe your build will not be ideal for the situation you will face, detection is also way different with the aid of planes, so yeah I vote for CV's in clan wars, to have different outcomes.

 

The beauty is, it is up to the clan to what ships they decide to bring and how they spec their ships.

If a clan wants to roll the dice and bring a composition of non-team orientated ships, that their decision.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27,638
[HINON]
Supertester
21,713 posts
15,437 battles
4 minutes ago, aAkula said:

Flooding a game with cruisers is not the solution, a balance setup is.

True. But that's not what all the "remove CVs" and "limit BBs" threads were asking for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23
[WOLF2]
Alpha Tester
144 posts
10,279 battles

i dont like fix setup, it limit strategy and limit player who only play 1 type of ship. It should allow to chose what type of ship and how many ship.

And i like WG setup more, atleast it allow to chose how many CA and DD.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,716
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,521 posts
12,810 battles
30 minutes ago, Lert said:

Isn't this what people have been wanting and asking for forever though? No CVs, a limit to BBs, more utility for cruisers?

For Randoms yes.  Clanwars is not the place to put the training wheels on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
32 posts

I'm really have same opinion, as the one of victim of this ban.

Carriers have been discriminated by repeated nerf and buff to AA ships, but carrier-main people are patient to those, because of past carrier's OP.

But, this ban denied and wasted our daily effort.

Because, the reason why I'm played random is, improvement my carrier-skills for the clan battle or other tournament.

This ban is insane, but if WG do it against our voice, please give back our money and time, seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,716
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,521 posts
12,810 battles

You know it's a bad idea when a CV hater like myself thinks it's dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
183
[TFLT]
[TFLT]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
740 posts
10,350 battles

I'd like to propose a truly radical and novel idea.  How bout we all just go a little crazy and set up our own teams and let the chips fall where they may?  You would have the responsibility of selecting your own teams' configuration and be responsible for the potential outcome.  But, I suppose that would set off all the whine threads about how it isn't fair and all that nonsense.  But, but, but, we're just a small clan and don't have as many players as everyone else.  Little Johnny's team doesn't have that ship, or maybe they don't have enough fully developed cdr's, or any other excuses one might come up with.  Bottom line is everyone has the same opportunity as anyone else.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27,638
[HINON]
Supertester
21,713 posts
15,437 battles
8 minutes ago, crzyhawk said:

For Randoms yes.  Clanwars is not the place to put the training wheels on.

Speaking as devil's advocate, why not?

To explain my position: I do not intend to seriously play clan wars, and I do not necessarily agree with the limits put on CW teams by WG. I would however still like someone to explain in easy to understand words what makes the difference between randoms and CW, why artificial limits are apparently alright in randoms, but not in CW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,660
[90TH]
[90TH]
Alpha Tester
8,275 posts
9,171 battles

As a CV fan and a serially bad CV Captain, I am upset at the absence of CVs from Clan Wars, but my clan mates are probably thankful.

I think this is the wrong way to go by WG, being led by the nose of the bad press CVs have gotten. CV game play needs to be encouraged, not banned.

Midway and Hak players are not criminals to be chased out of the game for their crimes and sadistic pleasures. 

We don't have enough CV players in the game, the way to increase CV population is to offer attractive examples of high tier game play,

(and to go release the long delayed badly overdue British line of Armoured Carriers.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,104
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,884 posts
8,440 battles
4 minutes ago, Lert said:

Speaking as devil's advocate, why not?

To explain my position: I do not intend to seriously play clan wars, and I do not necessarily agree with the limits put on CW teams by WG. I would however still like someone to explain in easy to understand words what makes the difference between randoms and CW, why artificial limits are apparently alright in randoms, but not in CW.

Limits are never appropriate, they are a bandaid fix to a larger issue that is not addressed. 

 

Also CW shouldnt be a place people run to in order to escape randoms. They are different game modes, with different goals, and should be treated differently. Saying something is fine for CW because of randoms is a highly illogical reach because organized teams are more capable of using tactics and so the game plays out very differently. Randoms is the base game mode of this game, its where the ships are ground, where the silver is ground, and where the captains are trained. CW is where teams compete and so are expecting to have the best possible setup which simply wont be the case if people instead turn to CW to grind things because it "fixed" the problems randoms has. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
74
[SYN]
Members
293 posts
11,283 battles
33 minutes ago, Lert said:

Isn't this what people have been wanting and asking for forever though? No CVs, a limit to BBs, more utility for cruisers?

Yep -

I also think let this thing drop as stated by WG,  its only a 1st run and we are in a constant state of evolv around here, lets see where it goes - interesting jumping off point for clan battles with strange caveats might just be fun and engaging?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,716
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,521 posts
12,810 battles

To be fair, while I detest the present implementation of CVs, I've never supported removing them.  My position is, and always has been I think they are not fun to fight against.  Even battleships that can delete my cruisers are fun to fight against.  While I disagree with their current power level, they can be fun to fight against.

CV's are soul-sucking pots of bad, which I won't get into right now, as why I hate CVs isn't the point of your question.

Why randoms and not CW?  Well, Randoms are....random.  They are the access point for everyone, good, bad or medium for PvP.  As the standard mode for all players, it should be accessible and fun for all players.  When a major part of your population draws the kind of negative emotion that CVs get, you should listen.

Ranked is a place where everyone can test themselves without being carried by a division; it's what YOU can accomplish, how YOU can fit into a team.  This is a place where pretty much everyone can play in a competitive environment, good, bad or indifferent.

Now, for the elites.  They should have a place to play, and unleash their very best as well.  While I dislike elitism, there's a place for it.  There should be a place for those players to create solid teams, practice and compete against other elite teams.  In my mind, that's always been clan wars.  The social clans can still do their thing in random, there's really no need for them to have a place to unleash their competitive side, because that's not why they are playing.  If clan wars are to be a place for the elite players (read not my 57% back side) to really get down and show what they've got, why are we putting the training wheels on?  Clan wars of all places imo, is NOT the place for training wheels.  Clan wars is the place for big egos and big plays.  Leave the training wheels for players in randoms, where they are more likely to have a good time.  Leave the clan wars for those guys who want to be pros.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
32 posts
9 minutes ago, nuttybiscuit said:

We don't have enough CV players in the game, the way to increase CV population is to offer attractive examples of high tier game play,

(and to go release the long delayed badly overdue British line of Armoured Carriers.)

Because, WG repeated nerf of carrier.

If you have any experience of carrier-playing, you can see how boring playing carrier in some kind of game.
DesMoines/Minotaur/Fletcher/Grozovoy make A2D2 area to any planes, and force to do nothing.
WG decreased players of high-tier carrier people, especially skilled one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,660
[90TH]
[90TH]
Alpha Tester
8,275 posts
9,171 battles
23 minutes ago, friche_runamihn said:

Because, WG repeated nerf of carrier.

 

Led by the nose, rather than leading by intelligent development and expansion of CV gameplay.

23 minutes ago, friche_runamihn said:

If you have any experience of carrier-playing, you can see how boring playing carrier in some kind of game.
DesMoines/Minotaur/Fletcher/Grozovoy make A2D2 area to any planes, and force to do nothing.

God, my first Essex match of the day, exactly this, a stand off, until someone blinks or gets bored. Felt like a Clint Eastwood movie, guns at dawn or something similar, who would draw first? Yet the suspense is not for 30 seconds, but 15 minutes, (yawn..)

24 minutes ago, crzyhawk said:

Now, for the elites.  They should have a place to play, and unleash their very best as well.  While I dislike elitism, there's a place for it.

Of course we need great players, any competitive environment does, as inspiration, spectacle and emulation. We also need terrible players, if only to hold the bar up in the local pub. We need them all/both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,716
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,521 posts
12,810 battles
4 minutes ago, nuttybiscuit said:

Of course we need great players, any competitive environment does, as inspiration, spectacle and emulation. We also need terrible players, if only to hold the bar up in the local pub. We need them all/both.

This is part of why carriers are bad for pubs.  A lot of people hate CVs and have quit because of them. They they won't put in an "opt out" option for randoms (which many people may not even use), then they turn around and straight out ban them from clan wars?  huh?  This choice just makes no sense to me.

Edited by crzyhawk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,660
[90TH]
[90TH]
Alpha Tester
8,275 posts
9,171 battles
2 minutes ago, crzyhawk said:

This is part of why carriers are bad for pubs.  A lot of people hate CVs and have quit because of them. They they won't put in an "opt out" option for randoms (which many people may not even use), then they turn around and straight out ban them from clan wars?  huh?  This choice just makes no sense to me.

You misunderstood me, I meant Pub as in place to go drink a beer...:Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,716
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,521 posts
12,810 battles
Just now, nuttybiscuit said:

You misunderstood me, I meant Pub as in place to go drink a beer...:Smile_teethhappy:

well played then!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
827
[VCRUZ]
Members
3,303 posts
8,136 battles

Limit the ships is bad because you limit the possible strategies the team can use. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[SALTY]
Members
1,291 posts
4,139 battles
8 minutes ago, Xlap said:

Limit the ships is bad because you limit the possible strategies the team can use. 

 

Also 100% agree. 

 

49 minutes ago, Viper069 said:

I'd like to propose a truly radical and novel idea.  How bout we all just go a little crazy and set up our own teams and let the chips fall where they may?  You would have the responsibility of selecting your own teams' configuration and be responsible for the potential outcome.  But, I suppose that would set off all the whine threads about how it isn't fair and all that nonsense.  But, but, but, we're just a small clan and don't have as many players as everyone else.  Little Johnny's team doesn't have that ship, or maybe they don't have enough fully developed cdr's, or any other excuses one might come up with.  Bottom line is everyone has the same opportunity as anyone else.

 

100% agree, it is up to the clan to bring what ships they think will have the best chance of winning. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×