Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
RenamedUser_1001178780

Why not have Random w/CV and a Random wo/CV game modes?

55 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
1,053 posts
6,278 battles

We have random, ranked, co-op and arms race game modes. Why not just have a game mode that doesn't allow CVs and a gamemode that does allow CVs?

 

I don't know how that would work (or even it would) on the game development side so just a suggestion

  • Funny 2
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
181
[WOLFB]
Members
747 posts
24,349 battles

I've heard that somewhere. Oh! that;s right I suggested it YESTERDAY..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
526
[CUTIE]
Members
1,528 posts
6,541 battles

This has been suggested numerous times, and the answer remains the same: the size of the player base wouldn't support yet another division (it barely supports the various queues available already, particularly during off-peak hours).  You also have to ask yourself how many people would voluntarily play non-carriers in a game mode which guarantees facing them?  Regardless of how well WarGaming might eventually balance them, playing against one or more carriers will always be more difficult than not facing any.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
377 posts

The same reason you won't have a random without BBs or a random without DDs - fragmenting the player pool just to appease us when we demand the game be the way we want it and no one else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
111
[GT99]
Members
398 posts
6,386 battles
Just now, Harv72b said:

This has been suggested numerous times, and the answer remains the same: the size of the player base wouldn't support yet another division (it barely supports the various queues available already, particularly during off-peak hours).  You also have to ask yourself how many people would voluntarily play non-carriers in a game mode which guarantees facing them?  Regardless of how well WarGaming might eventually balance them, playing against one or more carriers will always be more difficult than not facing any.

Thank you for the intelligent answer everyone should be paying attention to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,053 posts
6,278 battles
5 minutes ago, SeigeTank2010 said:

The same reason you won't have a random without BBs or a random without DDs - fragmenting the player pool just to appease us when we demand the game be the way we want it and no one else.

 

Except there are far more BB players and DD players than CV players.

 

I say we just remove CVs. Problem solved :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
377 posts
Just now, Schindlers_Stink_Fist said:

 

Except there are far more BB players and DD players than CV players.

Doesn't matter - to not allow people to play with everyone else and wait who knows how long for a game if they refuse to stop using a certain ship is silly at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,352
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
7,272 posts
10,438 battles

Having all of the classes balance out and be available in all modes is a core concept. 

Core gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
100 posts
16 minutes ago, Schindlers_Stink_Fist said:

We have random, ranked, co-op and arms race game modes. Why not just have a game mode that doesn't allow CVs and a gamemode that does allow CVs?

 

I don't know how that would work (or even it would) on the game development side so just a suggestion

awesome and right after they make that game mode they can give people who don't want to play with DD's a game mode with no DD's, or wait how about a game mode with no battleships just cruisers and DD's.. or how about it buttercup just cowboy up and deal with it.

Edited by Pappy_0311

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,053 posts
6,278 battles
2 minutes ago, SeigeTank2010 said:

Doesn't matter - to not allow people to play with everyone else and wait who knows how long for a game if they refuse to stop using a certain ship is silly at best.

 

Silly yet awesome at the same time :)

 

I actually didn't really have an issue with CVs before this rework. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,053 posts
6,278 battles
1 minute ago, Pappy_0311 said:

awesome and right after they make that game mode they can give people who don't want to play with DD's a game mode with no DD's, or wait how about a game mode with no battleships just cruisers and DD's.. or how about it buttercup just cowboy up and deal with it.

 

You are assuming my post was because I can't deal with CVs in 8.0. Actually, i was just suggesting an alternative for CV gameplay. I said it before, I didn't have an issue with CVs before the rework.

Next time, buttercup, don't assume. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,153
[SBS]
Members
3,257 posts
2,408 battles
15 minutes ago, StoneRhino said:

Why not have randoms with DDs or without?

Because DDs play an important role in the game, CVs, we can and have done just fine without them.  In fact we could make a pretty strong argument the game has been hurt with CV in every match...  Also, any time you get tired of the lol pen from BBs when playing your cruisers you can play DDs or BBs.  Feed up with HE spam/fire in your BBs, no problem play cruisers and be the spam.  And the same when you get bored with your DDs, play another ship.  However, there's no getting away from aircraft buzzing all around no matter what ship you play.

Edited by Slimeball91
  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
100 posts
1 minute ago, Schindlers_Stink_Fist said:

 

You are assuming my post was because I can't deal with CVs in 8.0. Actually, i was just suggesting an alternative for CV gameplay. I said it before, I didn't have an issue with CVs before the rework.

Next time, buttercup, don't assume. 

I was only giving you an answer for an overly idiotic post

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
635
[SYJ]
[SYJ]
Members
1,598 posts
2,617 battles
10 minutes ago, Schindlers_Stink_Fist said:

 

Except there are far more BB players and DD players than CV players.

 

I say we just remove CVs. Problem solved :D

So now it's okay to be against minorities:Smile_veryhappy:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,053 posts
6,278 battles
1 minute ago, Pappy_0311 said:

I was only giving you an answer for an overly idiotic post

 

 

No, you provided an idiotic response to a question quite a few people have asked (same with artillery in WoT).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55
[MEOW]
[MEOW]
Beta Testers
186 posts
4,219 battles

I agree, those who pick with CV will face enemy CV, and those without will have CV on their team, or reverse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
147
[LEGIT]
Beta Testers
324 posts
16,926 battles

I want two WOWS Forum websites,  the one where people complain about CV and the other people don't.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,053 posts
6,278 battles
1 minute ago, SoftAndCute said:

I want two WOWS Forum websites,  the one where people complain about CV and the other people don't.

 

You could have that...but better.....if CVs were removed.  Just sayin. hahah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,037
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
2,457 posts
9,395 battles

Because nobody besides the CVs would want to play the CV mode?

Spoiler

Or maybe nobody at all at that point...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
848
[OPRAH]
Beta Testers
4,473 posts
14,393 battles

That has been suggested many times, not just today nor just yesterday but almost from the beginning and certainly from the time a few players became very good with CV! 

There is an opt out to all of us that requires no coding at all! Play WoWs or Do Not Play WoWs! There problem solved!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×