What does the playerbase think of having a seperate game mode with no aircraft carriers?

[Gnomestroy]

I am really curious as to the popularity of this opinion among the playerbase. I think I am quite thorough and this poll covers every possible opinion on the subject. If you support other changes to matchmaking and CVs, leave a comment below.

[Prothall]

The problem is population. The separate cues would mean longer waits. Let's assume 1/3 to 1/2 the players want no cvs, you will triple cue times I think and I don't even want to think about off peak hours.

 

[Battlecruiser_Repulse]

Eh, might as well go with the extremist choice: kill the type. It's been two years, they still can't get it even close to right. Just nuke carriers.

[ArmouredCarriers]

Only if I can have modes without destroyers, cruisers, battleships, radar, hydroacoustic, smoke, spotter planes, torpedoes... etc

 

[Flashtirade]

I'll drop this game if they remove carriers or make a dedicated non-CV game mode. Not because I'm a carrier main (though I have some good numbers, I rarely play them now), I will just have lost any bit of faith I have in the direction or development of the game. And it's not like I have no other skinner boxes to go to. Fortuna calls to me...

[Gasboy]

No, it will split the community into even smaller chunks, and make getting matches more difficult.

[Highlord]

Get rid of the entire class, reimburse players for XP, creds and gold.

[Captain_Slattery]

33 minutes ago, HMS_Formidable said:

Only if I can have modes without destroyers, cruisers, battleships, radar, hydroacoustic, smoke, spotter planes, torpedoes... etc

 

Lol!  Here you go!

 

[KelesK]

37 minutes ago, HMS_Formidable said:

Only if I can have modes without destroyers, cruisers, battleships, radar, hydroacoustic, smoke, spotter planes, torpedoes... etc

I'd settle for destroyers and light cruisers being removed. Let the tears begin!

[Gnomestroy]

8 hours ago, Captain_Slattery said:

Lol!  Here you go!

 

That game probably has a community that is even more toxic than WoWS

[TheDreadnought]

They ought to leave them as-is or just get rid of them entirely.   Just focus on making the most interesting surface action game they possibly can.

[Altwar]

1 hour ago, Highlord said:

Get rid of the entire class, reimburse players for XP, creds and gold.

XP, credits and gold is not a suitable reimbursement for those who've played the CVs or any other class.  And getting rid of the CVs in effect dumbs down this game IMO which is not an acceptable solution.

[Gnomestroy]

35 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

They ought to leave them as-is or just get rid of them entirely.   Just focus on making the most interesting surface action game they possibly can.

At this point, I'm not sure how WG can make the surface action any more interesting than it already is, besides adding more tech trees and more ships.

[JohnBlackJackGeary]

I think its a terrible idea. You start giving people the choice to exclude the ship from games they don’t like to play against you won’t find full games ever. I have no idea why this idea keeps coming up because it’s so far from any kind of logical solution to CVs. They should remove them before they try something as ridiculous as no CV game option. 

[Camo68]

It's never going to happen, if they introduce it and 80% of the player base decide they don't want CVs in their game the entire class is dead. With all the time and money they have invested in CVs  - down the drain. 

Just ban them altogether or better yet make a sub game for purely CVs

[Shannon_Lindsey]

This is going to be harsh.

Yes, a separate mode with no CVs should be created. Here's the thing, NOCV mode can't be used to complete mission objectives. If you want to earn good stuff, you have to put your big boy pants on.

[Captain_Slattery]

2 hours ago, Gnomestroy said:

That game probably has a community that is even more toxic than WoWS

Oh, yeah!  The Hello Kitty crowd is INCREDIBLY SALTY!!!

 

[MaliceA4Thought]

can we have a mode to select people we dont want to either play with or against as well?

[Xanshin]

Can you even call it an arcadey ww2 naval not-quite-sim without cvs? Subs are coming in all likelihood. CVs were a pretty damn important factor in ww2 naval combat if memory serves... 

[monpetitloup]

ib4l

[Palladia]

4 hours ago, Flashtirade said:

I'll drop this game if they remove carriers or make a dedicated non-CV game mode. Not because I'm a carrier main (though I have some good numbers, I rarely play them now), I will just have lost any bit of faith I have in the direction or development of the game. And it's not like I have no other skinner boxes to go to. Fortuna calls to me...

Well said,  and thats how I feel about it.  I actually have another version of THIS GAME that I can go play that still has RTS versions of carriers that I actually enjoy that are decently balanced,  both against each other and surface ships.  I am sticking to WoWS now out of some sense of loyalty but if they prove to me that they are that incapable of development,  I'll spend my money elsewhere.

[l1nv5]

I have already quit playing WOWS for 2 months now and 0.8.0 does not seem to give me any reason to get back playing with the ultra nerfed AA and fking easy CV game play. Just before completely uninstall the game, I hope WG realized why CV was such a bad ship class and why CV has such influence on the outcome of the game. The reason is just one

DD, CA, CL, BB game play is player vs player. The damage done back and forth are achieved largely (>95%) by human controlled means, sailing, pointing your nose, aiming, watching for boardside

CV vs other classes is player vs computer. The damage CV do to other ships is by human controlled means but the damage from other ship back to the CV planes is done by computer. If a CV strike you, there is no skill that can save you from that. You can try to sail to beat torps but the level of control you have over your ship to defend against planes is nothing better than an AI. CV players in current game design see other ships as no more than bots, really.

[Chobittsu]

Segregating certain populations of players never works   

Why must people constantly complain about carriers? The rework will be here in a matter of weeks or less. Play the new carriers, provide (logical and well-worded) feedback to Wargaming, then decide as a community if its good or not.
No one user ever came up with the magic-bullet solution to any of the game's problems, if you've thought of it, I guarantee that Wargaming has, and thought about it in-depth

[RyuuohD_NA]

1 hour ago, Chobittsu said:

Segregating certain populations of players never works   

Why must people constantly complain about carriers? The rework will be here in a matter of weeks or less. Play the new carriers, provide (logical and well-worded) feedback to Wargaming, then decide as a community if its good or not.
No one user ever came up with the magic-bullet solution to any of the game's problems, if you've thought of it, I guarantee that Wargaming has, and thought about it in-depth

B-But the loud majority says that the new CVs are horribly broken!! I refuse to play the game again because I believe in the opinions of the masses, because the loud majority is always correct!! WG doesn't know how to balance their own game,and the playerbase should be the ones doing the balancing work!!!1!

[LunchCutter]

I started playing again last week after a 4 month break. Haven't seen a single CV, it's been great =)