Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Captain_Kyo

Stop the rework!

68 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
26 posts
2,151 battles

If anyone from wargaming sees this, please listen and stop the rework!  It's turning into a disaster!  This is not what we wanted!  I know there's already a lot of threads about this and I'm beating the dead horse, but

There's already a lot of threads about this

There's also tons of negative comments!  It's not about the bugs in the second test anymore, this rework is not working

I've heard a lot of lies about the true intentions of this rework.  It's not about balancing or making it easier to play carriers, it's about console play!  Please wargaming, stop this rework!  It's ruining carriers!

Please don't ruin carriers!  It'll kill even the small carrier population we at least still have!  PLEASE STOP!

  • Cool 9
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,523
[HINON]
Members
9,317 posts

Console play is more of a bonus, this rework has been coming after years of trying to make CVs more popular, useable and not so overly influential. The rework will make the ship type far more accessible and balanced. I like the more visceral and interactive attacks much like how the other ship types play.  Any change in the game will draw some negative comments from those accustomed to the way things are because change is hard. WG is betting that the pros will outweigh the cons if more players on the whole engage with and actually play CVs.

Edited by RipNuN2
  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,405
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
16,231 posts
9,570 battles
10 minutes ago, Captain_Kyo said:

If anyone from wargaming sees this, please listen and stop the rework!  It's turning into a disaster!  This is not what we wanted!  I know there's already a lot of threads about this and I'm beating the dead horse, but

There's already a lot of threads about this

There's also tons of negative comments!  It's not about the bugs in the second test anymore, this rework is not working

I've heard a lot of lies about the true intentions of this rework.  It's not about balancing or making it easier to play carriers, it's about console play!  Please wargaming, stop this rework!  It's ruining carriers!

Please don't ruin carriers!  It'll kill even the small carrier population we at least still have!  PLEASE STOP!

You have zero PvP experience with them. You are able to wreck face on the bots so see no need to change things but I think if you spent some time in them in PvP that you would realize how broken they are.

3 minutes ago, RipNuN2 said:

Console play is more of a bonus, this rework has been coming since years of trying to make CVs more popular, useable and not so overly influential. The rework will make the ship type far more accessible and balanced. I like the more visceral and interactive attacks much like how the other ship types play.  Any change in the game will draw some negative comments from those accustomed to the way things are because change is hard. WG is betting that the pros will outweigh the cons if more players on the whole engage with and actually play CVs.

This.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,998
[SALVO]
Members
17,651 posts
18,478 battles
21 minutes ago, Captain_Kyo said:

If anyone from wargaming sees this, please listen and stop the rework!  It's turning into a disaster!  This is not what we wanted!  I know there's already a lot of threads about this and I'm beating the dead horse, but

There's already a lot of threads about this

There's also tons of negative comments!  It's not about the bugs in the second test anymore, this rework is not working

I've heard a lot of lies about the true intentions of this rework.  It's not about balancing or making it easier to play carriers, it's about console play!  Please wargaming, stop this rework!  It's ruining carriers!

Please don't ruin carriers!  It'll kill even the small carrier population we at least still have!  PLEASE STOP!

And this is a bad thing?  :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
26 posts
2,151 battles

So wargaming doesn't care about people who currently play CVs, that's really sad.  What ya'll just said keeps affirming that.  And of course they're going to make money off of it...they aren't refunding anyone money, just bloons and free-xp.  This is such a disgrace.  All they had to do was just pay attention to the current system and they would've fixed a majority of the issues.  Imagine the horror if they changed destroyers, cruisers, or battleships as much as they are with carriers in this rework.  This rework is a nightmare for me and almost everyone that plays CVs.  And what does it matter if I play against bots?  It doesn't change the fact that this rework is going to ruin carriers for a great deal of players who currently play it.

  • Cool 5
  • Bad 4
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,998
[SALVO]
Members
17,651 posts
18,478 battles

Oh, boo hoo.

The CV rework is aimed at PVP, not coop.  When you play CVs in coop, you don't face the challenges that new CV players face in PVP.  You get the benefit of playing against the same braindead bot CV AI, time after time.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
750
[5D5]
Members
2,386 posts
14,950 battles

So you post a thread under the false pretense of the rework being due to console play which has nothing to do with this rework.

Additionally, you are clueless as to the current issues of PvP because you're exclusively a co-op player.

And yet you  reach the conclusion that WG doesn't care...lol.

This rework is due to  player complaints and long awaited as WG missed the original timeline they thought it would be done in so WG does care about it's PvP players where the majority of CV play occurs.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53
[USFTW]
Members
196 posts
1,997 battles
59 minutes ago, Captain_Kyo said:

it's about console play!

Bush did 9/11!!!!

The moon landings were faked!!!!

The earth is flat!!!!

Wake up sheeple

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
26 posts
2,151 battles

It's not a false pretense, easier console play is really what this is all about.  If they wanted to just simply fix balancing and increase player base, they absolutely could've with the RTS format.  But instead, they think they can kill 2 birds with one stone: fix carriers and get console players.  In the end tho, this whole mindset is killing carriers.

Tbh, they just haven't cared at all about carriers, all we've gotten are nerfs.  Ofc some were necessary but how did removing optional loadouts balance USN carriers with IJN ones?  And why is that NOW we get a British carrier line?  Why is that NOW we're getting tutorials on how to play the new-system?  Hell, to learn how to play carriers originally, I had to go watch YouTube videos.

And for anyone that says I don't know anything about the "real" problems with CVs because I don't play pvp, shame on you.  I'm not unaware of the issues with carriers.  Part of the reason I don't play in pvp is BECAUSE of the issues with carriers.  I can't strafe and I suck at manual drops.  And, worst still, I'm afraid of the berating I'll get because I'll suck.  I play the game for fun and that's it.  And with the current system, I have a LOT of fun playing in coop where I can be good and my team appreciates it.

So, I signed up for the rework beta and tried going into it with an open mind.  Maybe I'll have fun with the new system?  Maybe it'll fix all the issues with carriers and I'll be more willing to play random battles with my friends?  But all it did was make me more disappointed than how wargaming has handled carriers the whole time this game has been around.  I can't stand the new system, it's absolute overkill.  They not only killed the system I like, it actually doesn't even make logical sense.  Why do my planes aimlessly fly over the enemy while my other planes do their "strafe?"  Why can't I switch to my carrier to dodge torps or stop fires with damage control?  Why do the planes just fLy rEaLlY hIgH when they are done dropping their ordinance?  This is a stupid excuse for a rework.  And worst still, they're going to take it away from me even though I only play coop.  I'm not even a part of the carrier problems because I don't even play CVs in random battles.  That's like picking me up and tossing me in a dumpster.

I have the guts to come out and say "stop the rework."  And I respect everyone else who's saying what I'm saying.  This rework is NOT what a majority of people have wanted.  And I especially do not like it one bit.  Are we not allowed to voice that opinion?  Because, interestingly, it appears wargaming isn't listening to the opinions of players either.

Edited by Captain_Kyo
  • Cool 3
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
141
[VVV]
Members
371 posts
2,351 battles
1 minute ago, Captain_Kyo said:

It's not a false pretense, easier console play is really what this is all about.  If they wanted to just simply fix balancing and increase player base, they absolutely could've with the RTS format.

You try balancing the RTS format and see how that goes. I do think that console play is a factor in the rework, but the RTS format kinda needed to go for balance.

There's a difference between "balancing" the RTS format and making a balanced system.

 

3 minutes ago, Captain_Kyo said:

And for anyone that says I don't know anything about the "real" problems with CVs because I don't play pvp, shame on you.  I'm not unaware of the issues with carriers.

Except that you've just heard of and are aware of. Look, I'm mainly a Co-op player. Does that make me qualified to comment fully on the current meta? No. It gives me a space to share what the meta looks like from my standpoint somewhat outside, but you need cold hard data and experience to back claims. What you're doing is saying "stop the changes, their going to kill the game" instead of "here's my viewpoint on the new carriers from what I've played". I don't think any player who is trying to share their viewpoint should be shut out, but you're making it hard to listen to your viewpoint.

 

9 minutes ago, Captain_Kyo said:

I can't stand the new system, it's absolute overkill.  They not only killed the system I like, it's actually even worse.  And worst still, they're going to take it away from me even though I only play coop.

Alright, you not liking the new system is your opinion, and I respect that, but to say the game is ruined now is kinda overkill, don'tya think?

And also that Co-op statement is the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while. Think that through. You would want them to deny the majority of the game changes that will positively affect gameplay because Co-op isn't where the obviously malfunctioning system is malfunctioning.

14 minutes ago, Captain_Kyo said:

This rework is NOT what a majority of people have wanted.  And I especially do not like it one bit.  Are we not allowed to voice that opinion?  Because, interestingly, it appears wargaming isn't listening to the opinions of players either.

OK, so that's a baseless claim. How do you know what the majority wants? Did you take a poll of most of the playerbase? I'd like to see those results.

Nobody's infringing on your right to voicing your opinion. We're voicing ours back. Free speech goes both ways.

Wargaming is doing what Wargaming is doing. They can change the game if they want to. Where does it say that WG is a democracy? They're probably listening to carrier feedback much more intently than other things. They probably hear what we're saying. It's just if they want to listen.

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
26 posts
2,151 battles

Read the comments on this thread and see if that answers your question about how i know what the majority wants. 

In addition, you're right about wargaming is going to do what they want.  However, that doesn't change the fact that a LOT of people are extremely upset.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
141
[VVV]
Members
371 posts
2,351 battles
3 minutes ago, Captain_Kyo said:

Read the comments on this thread and see if that answers your question about how i know what the majority wants.

Took a look at em'. Saw what I thought I was going to see. Yes, there's about 10 pages of rage. Most of those people are unhappy with the rework, but you've got to remember- this is the fraction of the playerbase that A) Posts on the forums, B) Has played or analyzed the changes in carriers and C) Is unhappy with those changes. That fraction is unhappy, certainly, but you have to remember that the majority of players don't fit into one or more of those catagories. I honestly will never know what the majority of the playerbase wants, but that also means you never will either.

In short, you're taking your info from a skewed source and thus can't claim it's the "will of the majority". No one will ever truly know what the majority of the playerbase wants. I don't, you don't, nobody does.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,523
[HINON]
Members
9,317 posts
1 hour ago, AtlanticRim said:

Took a look at em'. Saw what I thought I was going to see. Yes, there's about 10 pages of rage. Most of those people are unhappy with the rework, but you've got to remember- this is the fraction of the playerbase that A) Posts on the forums, B) Has played or analyzed the changes in carriers and C) Is unhappy with those changes. That fraction is unhappy, certainly, but you have to remember that the majority of players don't fit into one or more of those catagories. I honestly will never know what the majority of the playerbase wants, but that also means you never will either.

In short, you're taking your info from a skewed source and thus can't claim it's the "will of the majority". No one will ever truly know what the majority of the playerbase wants. I don't, you don't, nobody does.

 

Yep and most of the complaints are about the removal of the odd tier CVs but that was before it was clarified on the development blog that they will merely be moved to separate lines so we will not be losing those ships.

Edited by RipNuN2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,998
[SALVO]
Members
17,651 posts
18,478 battles
2 hours ago, Captain_Kyo said:

This rework is NOT what a majority of people have wanted.  And I especially do not like it one bit.  Are we not allowed to voice that opinion?  Because, interestingly, it appears wargaming isn't listening to the opinions of players either.

This is absolute bull-puckey.  This is a totally baseless claim.  Voice your opinion, but don't make baseless claims that you CANNOT prove.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
60
[FTH]
[FTH]
Members
301 posts
11,544 battles

There are some that do actually like the looks of the re-work still...it has potential in some aspects...most of the issues balance wise will have to be worked out still, but heck they've even said that themselves.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,563
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
5,962 posts
18,838 battles

I think the rework appeals to a large number of players who are currently NOT a carrier player. It appeals to those players who hate carriers and those who do not like the RTS look of current cv play. Then there are those who like the first person perspective of using the planes and not the ship. I can understand all this, makes sense.

IMHO the rework does not appeal to current carrier players. I can only speak for myself but I think it looks of crap but am glad I will get all my doubloons back for owning all the premium carriers but Graf Zep and some sort of compensation for my tech tree perm camos I bought. BTW Wargaming, I want compensation for all my cv tech tree camos, not just the odds or evens or whatever mess you are peddling. 

In the end we probably lose many of our current carrier players in return for about the same amount of new carrier players. At first there will be an uptick in how many play as everyone messes with them but eventually the numbers will level out. Some people just want to play them, some people just prefer the more shootie ships...  The rework should have focused on keeping our current carrier players AND making it easier for newbies to play them. Anyways hardly matters, what is done is being done and the "majority" have spoken. Course like any time there is the rule of the unwashed masses you can end up with "Reign of Terror" and just like in real life, heads will roll. Personally I don't care that much as I am more a cruiser player but just kind of sad to see my carriers gone for good and replaced with airplane play... On the upside maybe the rework will attract the huge player base from WoWP............. 

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,405
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
16,231 posts
9,570 battles
On 11/23/2018 at 9:31 PM, Captain_Kyo said:

This rework is NOT what a majority of people have wanted.  And I especially do not like it one bit.  Are we not allowed to voice that opinion?  Because, interestingly, it appears wargaming isn't listening to the opinions of players either.

 

21 hours ago, Crucis said:

This is absolute bull-puckey.  This is a totally baseless claim.  Voice your opinion, but don't make baseless claims that you CANNOT prove.

Apparently the approximately 5% of the player base that plays CV is a majority.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
305
[CVA16]
Members
2,437 posts
10,080 battles
1 hour ago, Taylor3006 said:

On the upside maybe the rework will attract the huge player base from WoWP............. 

All six of them?

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,998
[SALVO]
Members
17,651 posts
18,478 battles
2 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

 

Apparently the approximately 5% of the player base that plays CV is a majority.

Yeah, no kidding, Brush.

 

 

1 hour ago, Taylor3006 said:

I think the rework appeals to a large number of players who are currently NOT a carrier player. It appeals to those players who hate carriers and those who do not like the RTS look of current cv play. Then there are those who like the first person perspective of using the planes and not the ship. I can understand all this, makes sense.

IMHO the rework does not appeal to current carrier players. I can only speak for myself but I think it looks of crap but am glad I will get all my doubloons back for owning all the premium carriers but Graf Zep and some sort of compensation for my tech tree perm camos I bought. BTW Wargaming, I want compensation for all my cv tech tree camos, not just the odds or evens or whatever mess you are peddling. 

In the end we probably lose many of our current carrier players in return for about the same amount of new carrier players. At first there will be an uptick in how many play as everyone messes with them but eventually the numbers will level out. Some people just want to play them, some people just prefer the more shootie ships...  The rework should have focused on keeping our current carrier players AND making it easier for newbies to play them. Anyways hardly matters, what is done is being done and the "majority" have spoken. Course like any time there is the rule of the unwashed masses you can end up with "Reign of Terror" and just like in real life, heads will roll. Personally I don't care that much as I am more a cruiser player but just kind of sad to see my carriers gone for good and replaced with airplane play... On the upside maybe the rework will attract the huge player base from WoWP............. 

I have not participated in the rework beta, because I'm just not interested in downloading another instance of the game, as well as giving up on playing my regular account.  However, I have watched some of the CC's CV rework videos, and there are things I see that I like, and some that I don't.

Likes:  I like that you have to make attack runs.  No more magical helicopter torpedo bomber runs.  TBs actually have to make a relatively realistic feeling torp bomber run at wave top level, for example.

Dislikes: 

1. I don't like that it appears that you can't jump back into your carrier to properly set a course, or even manually control the ship, say, to try to avoid inbound torpedoes.

2. I don't like that it appears that you can't plot a course and waypoints for the single squadron, so that you can let it go on autopilot towards the vicinity of where you will want to make your attack, so that you are able to jump into your carrier.  (See point 1.)

 

It seems to me that it really should be possible to plot the course of your squadron so that it can run on autopilot for a little while so that you can manage your carrier.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,696
[-Y-]
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
5,272 posts
7,571 battles

I thought the point of the rework was to bring the community together and make a better game for all, instead, the CV rework is dividing the community, and makng the game a worse experience for all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
26 posts
2,151 battles
4 minutes ago, LoveBote said:

I thought the point of the rework was to bring the community together and make a better game for all, instead, the CV rework is dividing the community, and makng the game a worse experience for all.

It's really bad on the EU and RU forums especially, so much drama going on.  I'm really disappointed in how everything has turned out really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,696
[-Y-]
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
5,272 posts
7,571 battles
1 minute ago, Captain_Kyo said:

It's really bad on the EU and RU forums especially, so much drama going on.  I'm really disappointed in how everything has turned out really.

I am following the EU forum, passions are inflamed, language is blunt, people are angry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
26 posts
2,151 battles

I really hope they come to their senses and cancel this rework.  Then, they can reevaluate the RTS gameplay and introduce fixes to that, which they honestly haven't even tried to do in three years.  Here's a couple examples to name a few:

1) remove strafing (strafing benefits who has the better connection and is way too punishing to newer players

2) introduce new manual drops as taking control of the plane, such as seen in the rework itself (this will both make it more engaging and make cross dropping more difficult as your other squadrons will just drop like normal)

3) introduce a captain skill that greatly reduces the detection of destroyers by aircraft

4) shrink the amount of squadrons in the IJN loadouts to the same amount as USN loadouts, but also reintroduce optional loadouts for USN

5) restrict matchmaking of opposing carriers to only that of the same tier (tired of the V-VI combination, its stupid)

Of course, my gut says wargaming isn't going to stop the rework from coming because they refuse to accept how much of a negative response they've gotten from it, which is really sad actually.  I really wish they cancel this so much, this whole "easier to play on console" attitude is just destructive.  And it doesn't only extend to carriers, why is the AA system being changed to this "pick your side" instead of "point and click on the target?"  It's cuz you can't point and click on a target on consoles, that's the reason they're pushing this new stupid AA system that makes me think my ship isn't even at action stations.  Next up will be our secondaries.

I just don't understand why they are making PC players accept the same gameplay as console players.  I also don't understand how people don't know about this.  This isn't some conspiracy theory, this is ACTUALLY the real reason they came up with this rework.  They of course want you to believe its for the sake of "balancing" and "making it easier to play carriers."  It's not, if they wanted that they honestly could've gotten that with the RTS format.  If they love this rework so much, then introduce it for consoles!  Don't slaughter us PC CV players please.

And, also, to all the people who say "welp they've removed half the carriers, all they got left is the other half!"  If you don't like carriers and you love this rework simply because it's running all the current CV players off the game, that is totally not constructive at all.  How would you feel if your gameplay was ruined and Yamato and Iowa were removed to "come back at a later date?"  It would be horrific!

Oh yeah...Essex and Taiho will have fire-fighting planes and planes that can land on water

What an absolute disgrace.  If their end goal is to kill off CVs, then they are nailing it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×