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

Simple Solution to the CV-Clan Wars Issue

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

788
[OO7]
Supertester
2,179 posts
9,480 battles

You wanna be the scrub who brings a Lexington or Shokaku vs  tier X AA?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles
8 minutes ago, FireAndHEspam said:

You wanna be the scrub who brings a Lexington or Shokaku vs  tier X AA?

With the way MM works, pretty much every time you take out a t8 CV you're bottom tier anyway.

Edited by cometguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
788
[OO7]
Supertester
2,179 posts
9,480 battles
6 minutes ago, cometguy said:

With the way MM works, pretty much every time you take out a t8 CV you're bottom tier anyway.

The difference here is that this is actually a competitive environment and by bringing a tier VIII CV against tier X AA you're basically needlessly handicapping your team

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,027 posts
5,679 battles

That idea is as bad as "renting" t10 ships to people who have t7's or less in their ports ...

Edited by khorender_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles
19 minutes ago, FireAndHEspam said:

The difference here is that this is actually a competitive environment and by bringing a tier VIII CV against tier X AA you're basically needlessly handicapping your team

T9 then. If t10 is too OP, and t8 is too UP.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
467
[NGAGE]
Members
1,403 posts
8,150 battles

T10 CVs are balanced against t10 AA. You're used to seeing T10 CVs striking against teams with mostly t8 AA, or against non AA builds.

 

Putting t8 CVs in is a great suggestion if you've never actually played a t10 CV I guess.

 

But if you have... then you wouldn't make such a suggestion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,600
[SALVO]
Members
22,411 posts
22,855 battles
2 hours ago, FirstOfOne said:

Or make CW 12v12 and allow 1 CV.

 

Thats pretty simple too.(and better)

Ah, but clan BATTLES isn't clan WARS!!!  Or at least it doesn't sound like it.  It sounds more like WoT's Stronghold Battles.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
113
[B2P]
Beta Testers
787 posts
7,293 battles
7 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Ah, but clan BATTLES isn't clan WARS!!!  Or at least it doesn't sound like it.  It sounds more like WoT's Stronghold Battles.

 

And yet there is no class restriction in WoT's Stronghold Battles?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,600
[SALVO]
Members
22,411 posts
22,855 battles
1 minute ago, Bronco said:

And yet there is no class restriction in WoT's Stronghold Battles?!

I didn't make the SH battles comment in relation to CV's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
163
[AHOY_]
Members
1,021 posts
13,241 battles

The reason no CV is 7 groups of planes can recon the entire map. All the time. Thus making play poor.

   No sneaking about no using stealth builds etc..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
113
[B2P]
Beta Testers
787 posts
7,293 battles
59 minutes ago, Crucis said:

I didn't make the SH battles comment in relation to CV's.

You're right. I misread your comment given the intent of this thread. You were comparing battles vs wars and nothing more. My bad, sorry for that mate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,600
[SALVO]
Members
22,411 posts
22,855 battles
1 minute ago, Bronco said:

You're right. I misread your comment given the intent of this thread. You were comparing battles vs wars and nothing more. My bad, sorry for that mate.

no prob.

WG may not be ready for full-on clan wars in WoWS.  After all, this isn't like Tanks where you're fighting over actual real estate.  No body really cares about the middle of the ocean, unless perhaps there's some island in it. This is why I think that they may have gone for a stronghold battles-like clan battles before going to Clan Wars.  CW's are probably a lot more challenging to come up with a viable working premise.  CB's probably buys WG time to work on WoWS CWs while throwing clannies a bone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51
[TWFT2]
Beta Testers
337 posts
5,100 battles

Well, it's an idea, but the 12v12 and allow 1 CV idea that was pitched seems better, also I'll add saying perhaps up the Battleships to 2 in that situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,600
[SALVO]
Members
22,411 posts
22,855 battles
Just now, brym7 said:

Well, it's an idea, but the 12v12 and allow 1 CV idea that was pitched seems better, also I'll add saying perhaps up the Battleships to 2 in that situation.

I think that they may have wanted to keep CB's smaller, in part so that smaller clans are more able to form full CB teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
113
[B2P]
Beta Testers
787 posts
7,293 battles
1 minute ago, brym7 said:

Well, it's an idea, but the 12v12 and allow 1 CV idea that was pitched seems better, also I'll add saying perhaps up the Battleships to 2 in that situation.

12v12, 1CV max but perhaps a 3 BB max. With 9v9 in supremacy, you're allowed 3 BBs so why not with 12v12.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51
[TWFT2]
Beta Testers
337 posts
5,100 battles
Just now, Crucis said:

I think that they may have wanted to keep CB's smaller, in part so that smaller clans are more able to form full CB teams.

Which does make sense as well following the smaller clan sizes, but it's just an idea pitch to make CVs in their current state more to WG's liking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51
[TWFT2]
Beta Testers
337 posts
5,100 battles
2 minutes ago, Bronco said:

12v12, 1CV max but perhaps a 3 BB max. With 9v9 in supremacy, you're allowed 3 BBs so why not with 12v12.

3 works too

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.

×