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

Congrats WG on really pissing off your CV players.

30 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

312
Members
367 posts

I have never really seen a rant form her before, but this one is spot on. I fully agree with her. 

 

Edited by Venac
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
450
[LWA]
Members
777 posts
11,471 battles

Stupid, stupid, stupid.  Clan wars is going to owned by whatever clan has the most Khabs. The only weakness the Khab has is aircraft carriers....but those aren't allowed.  Way to go WG, you are not thinking about the cause and effect you are creating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
143
[AFW-]
Members
972 posts
7,537 battles
26 minutes ago, db4100 said:

Stupid, stupid, stupid.  Clan wars is going to owned by whatever clan has the most Khabs. The only weakness the Khab has is aircraft carriers....but those aren't allowed.  Way to go WG, you are not thinking about the cause and effect you are creating.

They are very dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
93
[RNJR]
Members
282 posts
4,837 battles

Good job WG you pissed off Femenelly.  And youre gonna fuel people's argument that see the full removal of CVs is not just good its great >_>  

 

So if theres no CV im loading up radar and hydro on every cruiser.  yeah make life terrible for every DD. Imagine 1 BB the food for a DD but the other five are Cruisers and one Shima cause people like to feel useful only every two minutes.  And all five cruisers have Radar and extended time radar.  *slow clapping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
781 posts
7,472 battles

while i hate games with sky cancer in them, WG shouldnt have made this choice for the players.

As long as they matchup Clan games correctly where both teams have a CV or don't (depending on how your team composition queues up), that was their choice to go into a game with a CV team mate.

 

If that went ahead, no one would complain to WG.... they would complain within their own team to not queue up with the CV's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,402
[CUTER]
Members
3,868 posts
19,914 battles
9 minutes ago, issm said:

Yeah, all 12 of them.

 

To make the game better for all the non-CV players.

 

I don't see a problem?

 

 You have a guide on "How to disagree" in your signature yet your arguments are weak af. Oh the irony.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,185
[DAM-U]
Members
11,026 posts
10 minutes ago, m373x said:

 

 You have a guide on "How to disagree" in your signature yet your arguments are weak af. Oh the irony.

 

Because I'm not arguing here.

 

More.... gloating.

 

WG's reasoning on why they aren't allowing CVs into clan battles echoes every single argument I've been making about them for the last year.

 

- Too much spotting

- Hard counters DDs

- Skill "Gradient" too steep

- The ability to, quote "overload and exhaust enemies" in addition to providing insane vision.

 

Oh, it's good to be right.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,402
[CUTER]
Members
3,868 posts
19,914 battles
8 minutes ago, issm said:

 

Because I'm not arguing here.

 

More.... gloating.

 

WG's reasoning on why they aren't allowing CVs into clan battles echoes every single argument I've been making about them for the last year.

 

- Too much spotting

- Hard counters DDs

- Skill "Gradient" too steep

- The ability to, quote "overload and exhaust enemies" in addition to providing insane vision.

 

Oh, it's good to be right.

 

WG's reasoning is weak and every point is covered in the video that you didn't watch.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
865
[SF-A]
Members
3,156 posts
6,815 battles
1 minute ago, m373x said:

 

WG's reasoning is weak and every point is covered in the video that you didn't watch.

Don't bother arguing with him. It's like hitting your head on a brick wall. His mind is closed and you're only going to frustrate yourself trying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24
[SSN]
Members
64 posts
13,571 battles

Every CV player SHOULD be up in arms over this. Why have the line of ships if they are banned from the most competitive level of play? I am NEW, and still learning, but even I can see this makes no sense. Similar opinions from people like IChase and others are visible from REDDIT, to Youtube ... and mounting. But there's more here than just NO CV's. WOW continues to NOT listen to their rank and file. I have yet to see a line of posts where people were begging for CLAN WARS at the T10 level. You know, the one tier they can never get enough players in, so they continually poach T8s to fill the ranks for battle. IF T10 was where CLANS WANTED to play, they certainly wouldn't need to rent ships to fill the ranks would they. WOW MGMT already knows that many clans will NOT have the members with T10s who can afford to  ... or really want to...  compete in a real "pay to play" environment. And here ... they cant grab T8s, so they have to pad the ranks as they can. So you can rent your ship... from Enterprise, or Alamo, or National... sad. Here's a thought WOW, PICK A TIER THAT YOUR RANK AND FILE REALLY WANT TO PLAY AT. You will probably find CV participation at that level will be more than acceptable. Oh.. and you might be able to have more than one of THE MOST PREVALENT ships in the game in the match up as well. Maybe ...  if there were more than 7 ships allowed per match as in other competitive leagues, this one bb per match wouldn't be a problem. Your "serious" rank and file members are desperately looking for more consistently competitive scenarios to play at... and do it WITH MORE OF THEIR TEAMMATES and FRIENDS than random (FOLLIES) battles provide. Again, I am new, but focusing on an Elite Tier level that literally costs to play each match, banning an entire ship class and limiting your most prevalent ship class to one slot in an initial effort to meet the "rank and file's want of a CW scenario... is not going to get you the results you expected I think..  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
669
[PVE]
Members
1,703 posts
7,550 battles

Hate to say it, but by WG not allowing CV's in Clan Wars, that in itself justifies every complaint that part of the player base has made against them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,585
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,477 posts
10,386 battles

So, I'm not going to watch the whole thing just because as it is a great many CV related things are getting to a point of possible concussions from facepalms, this basically screams of "we don't know how to balance CV's, the rework is nowhere in sight, but were putting out Clan Wars that will be tier x only and of course were banning CV's because we have no idea what we are doing". It's not bloody rocket science. Reverse the chance/second of IJN and SN planes to down one another, tweak the air modules to even out fighters, make USN DB's more accurate, remove manual drop, make strafe a debuff not a delete, balance out AA so that we can remove the extra HP for bombers module, merge secondary and AA range upgrades back together, reduce BFT to 10% again and make it a 2 point skill again or a 1 point skill, and nerf torpedo damage. And that's just the basic list of what I got memorized, pretty sure there's some more.

 

6 minutes ago, issm said:

 

- Too much spotting

- Hard counters DDs

- Skill "Gradient" too steep

- The ability to, quote "overload and exhaust enemies" in addition to providing insane vision.

 

- BB's are spotted forever away anyway, Cruisers again, spotted by DD's pretty far out, DD's have already had it made that generally you need to get a plane inside 2-3 km and they removed that if a DD fired it's guns or AA it was spotted in a smoke screen, and most tier X DD's can actually shoot planes down. Which, your team has a CV, it should be chasing fighters off you. That's a player issue, not a CV issue. People forget it seems that a DD will most likely spot them before planes do given they even have a delay from match start when they can launch. The only spotting edge a CV gets is if it does find a DD, it has slightly less risk than another DD trying to keep it spotted.

- If they can keep them spotted because they are so far away from their team they can't get AA support if they need it and are in range that the CV's team can pummel them, yes. I've seen DD's skate through IJN cross drops and perfect USN manual DB drops miss or cause 0 damage to a DD dead center. Only if they can actually hit a DD or keep them spotted long enough their team kills the DD are they a hard counter.

- The only thing I actually agree with, because manual drops need to go, strafing needs a rework, and the overall failure of Wargaming to properly balance CV's.

- Yes, overload and exhaust - that is why a Benson destroyed my entire Shokaku strike force before it really had the chance to attack, by itself, why my Essex loses planes to tier 9 ships as does my Taiho. If they pick the right singled out target not with his team, again, maybe they can overload an enemy. Making this say 1 BB, 1 CV, the rest cruisers and DD, 3 tier x cruisers are liable to decimate anything that gets near another ship even one of them is near, let alone the 3 of them. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,185
[DAM-U]
Members
11,026 posts
Just now, m373x said:

 

WG's reasoning is weak and every point is covered in the video that you didn't watch.

 

I'm watching it. Fem's arguments are just as weak.

 

"Whaaa, removing CVs will nerf DDs because cruisers will all take radar and hydro".

 

Seems like she's unaware that radar doesn't share a slot with any AA skills, and she seems to be under the impression that it's harder to deal with hydro than planes?

 

Laughable.

 

She also argues "all ships have a learning curve" in response to WG's reason of "not enough high tier CVs, etc".

 

This argument ignores completely ignores scale. A skilled CV is just much more influential than  a skilled BB, or CA, or DD. As a skilled CA, I might be able to do a ton of damage, and provide awareness of my immediate surroundings. As a skilled CV, I can do a ton of damage, provide vision over the entire map, as well as block a portion of the enemy team's damage.

 

Fem's argument that CVs will balance each other ("there's no perfect vision when 2 CVs fight") is garbage simply because perfect matchups just don't happen - ESPECIALLY not when you get to the extreme top end of the skill distribution.

 

Fem is just another CV player pretending that nerfs (or removal, unironically, good job WG) to their favorite seal club is a nerf to another class (it's not).

 

Whatever "nerf" the other classes receive from the absence of CV is outweighed by the buff from not having to deal with CVs.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,185
[DAM-U]
Members
11,026 posts
23 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

That's a player issue, not a CV issue

 

When a ton of players have the same issues (i.e., they want to focus on the part of CV play that pays their bills and earns them progress, and are thus unable to spare the effort to counter the enemy CV), then it is a CV issue.

 

23 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

If they can keep them spotted because they are so far away from their team they can't get AA support if they need it

 

And if they are in range of allied AA, they're too far away to be useful, especially in a competitive meta where groups stay clustered together, and typically far away from each other.

 

23 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

that is why a Benson destroyed my entire Shokaku strike force before it really had the chance to attack

 

Totally normal, I'm sure.

 

You couldn't possibly be bringing up an edge case example to show how much of a poor victim your CV is.

 

You also seem to have not read/understood the entire point. The quote said that CVs would provide vision, THEN overload and exhaust.

 

i.e., what a CV is SUPPOSED to do in an AA heavy matchup: Spot until the AA is degraded by HE spam, or sunk, THEN roflstomp what's left.

 

~~~~~~~

 

For more Fem lols:

 

"WG is giving out T10 surface ships, why can't they hand out CVs as well" Right. Let's hand someone who's never touched a T10 CV a T10 CV. That'll go well. But then, Fem would have gotten lots of nice easy seals to club, so hey, can't fault her for being as much of a selfish prick as I am.

 

"WG is removing CVs because they don't want me (the poor victim CV) to be exhausted". No, not you. They didn't want everyone else to be exhausted from dealing with a crap class.

 

Fem is selling her Hakuryu? (which, it's your favourite ship? Pronounce the name properly. It's not a damn kangaroo) The only thing I'm disappointed at is that my DM and Minotaur will have fewer planes to shoot down.

 

And given T10 CVs never come near my AA cruisers anyway, I'm more than happy to give that up.

Edited by issm
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,161 posts
6,363 battles
3 hours ago, Venac said:

I have never really seen a rant form her before, but this one is spot on. I fully agree with her. 

 

 

Yeah,

 

The 5 of them should really start a petition or something, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
3,666 posts
7,482 battles
1 hour ago, Spartias said:

Stupidest decision Wargaming has made yet. 

 

Period.

I don't know the Graf Zepplin is pretty close on the stupidity scale...that and fochgate.....Actually now that i think bout it, has anybody noticed that this seems to be the year for Wargaimg making [edited] decisions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
143
[AFW-]
Members
972 posts
7,537 battles
9 minutes ago, issm said:

 

When a ton of players have the same issues (i.e., they want to focus on the part of CV play that pays their bills and earns them progress, and are thus unable to spare the effort to counter the enemy CV), then it is a CV issue.

 

 

And if they are in range of allied AA, they're too far away to be useful, especially in a competitive meta where groups stay clustered together, and typically far away from each other.

 

 

Totally normal, I'm sure.

 

You couldn't possibly be bringing up an edge case example to show how much of a poor victim your CV is.

 

You also seem to have not read/understood the entire point. The qutoe said that CVs would provide vision, THEN overload and exhaust.

 

i.e., what a CV is SUPPOSED to do in an AA heavy matchup: Spot until the AA is degraded by HE spam, or sunk, THEN roflstomp what's left.

 

~~~~~~~

 

For more Fem lols:

 

"WG is giving out T10 surface ships, why can't they hand out CVs as well" Right. Let's hand someone who's never touched a T10 CV a T10 CV. That'll go well. But then, Fem would have gotten lots of nice easy seals to club, so hey, can't fault her for being as much of a selfish prick as I am.

 

"WG is removing CVs because they don't want me (the poor victim CV) to be exhausted. No, not you. They didn't want everyone else to be exhausted from dealing with a crap class.

 

Fem is selling her Hakuryu? (which, it's your favourite ship? Pronounce the name properly. It's not a damn kangaroo) The only thing I'm disappointed at is that my DM and Minotaur will have fewer planes to shoot down.

 

And given T10 CVs never come near my AA cruisers anyway, I'm more than happy to give that up.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
467
[NGAGE]
Members
1,403 posts
8,150 battles
2 minutes ago, Fog_Repair_Ship_Akashi said:

I don't know the Graf Zepplin is pretty close on the stupidity scale...that and fochgate.....Actually now that i think bout it, has anybody noticed that this seems to be the year for Wargaimg making [edited] decisions?

 

Yes... now that you mention it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×