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

Can You Please Stop with the 2 T10 CVs per side.

21 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

36
[WB]
Members
143 posts
12,431 battles

Im not even getting a volley off, being attacked by both CVs.  I just barely made it to the 17 min mark started on the north side of the map didnt even make it to the D line, even with two CAs by my DD.  Really guys?  T10 Gearing with a Salem and Henry as escort.  Seriously what do you want me to do... Why not just have 4-6 CVs per side.  Call it World of CVs.

 

 

Edited by DQCraze
  • Cool 6
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,622
[DOTM]
Beta Testers
1,481 posts
9,127 battles

Only if we cap tier 10 DDs to one per team, too.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,387
[SOV]
Members
3,276 posts

Cab we cap 1 dd per side?

In fact when I am playing my Sipan I want no DD and no cruisers. I want only t6 BB.

Also on the wish list is a free Graff Zep and Enterprise. WG can you got on this please because everyone knows how importaint I am. :)

 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
680
[CVLOV]
Beta Testers
3,640 posts
2,633 battles

The original WG plan of the rework was that CVs would not have any special rules.  So if you can have 4 of one class (say BBs) with 3 in a division, CVs would have the same treatment.

I don't think WG is going to "stop with the 2" but rather would expand to 3 or 4.  Some ppl already started reporting 3 carrier matches...
I do agree that 4 carriers on each side will be completely insane once it kicks in (unless WG changes their mind).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,289 posts
2,399 battles
2 minutes ago, Francois424 said:

The original WG plan of the rework was that CVs would not have any special rules.  So if you can have 4 of one class (say BBs) with 3 in a division, CVs would have the same treatment.

I don't think WG is going to "stop with the 2" but rather would expand to 3 or 4.  Some ppl already started reporting 3 carrier matches...
I do agree that 4 carriers on each side will be completely insane once it kicks in (unless WG changes their mind).

I'd say three is a safe bet if WoT is anything to go by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
324
[NSEW]
Members
1,602 posts
10,017 battles
26 minutes ago, Francois424 said:

The original WG plan of the rework was that CVs would not have any special rules.  So if you can have 4 of one class (say BBs) with 3 in a division, CVs would have the same treatment.

I don't think WG is going to "stop with the 2" but rather would expand to 3 or 4.  Some ppl already started reporting 3 carrier matches...
I do agree that 4 carriers on each side will be completely insane once it kicks in (unless WG changes their mind).

Ya know...for poops and giggles. I'd like to see 4 CV per side. Just once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,617
[SYN]
Members
15,525 posts
12,778 battles

hey, if WG thinks they can balance 2CV, then there should be no reason they can't balance 4CV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
496
[-NOS-]
Members
1,175 posts
19,752 battles
34 minutes ago, Francois424 said:

The original WG plan of the rework was that CVs would not have any special rules.  So if you can have 4 of one class (say BBs) with 3 in a division, CVs would have the same treatment.

I don't think WG is going to "stop with the 2" but rather would expand to 3 or 4.  Some ppl already started reporting 3 carrier matches...
I do agree that 4 carriers on each side will be completely insane once it kicks in (unless WG changes their mind).

I would like it very much to see 3 CV per side to keep things balance and to thin out the DD herd, they are out of control again since hotfix.  :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
800
[INTEL]
Members
2,616 posts
13,815 battles
7 minutes ago, MrDeaf said:

hey, if WG thinks they can balance 2CV, then there should be no reason they can't balance 4CV

CVs will be more and more balanced the closer they get to 12 CVs per side.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
18 posts
1,008 battles
1 hour ago, DQCraze said:

Im not even getting a volley off, being attacked by both CVs.  I just barely made it to the 17 min mark started on the north side of the map didnt even make it to the D line, even with two CAs by my DD.  Really guys?  T10 Gearing with a Salem and Henry as escort.  Seriously what do you want me to do... Why not just have 4-6 CVs per side.  Call it World of CVs.

 

 

I think you understand how the IJN felt in 1944-1945.

Any resemblance to reality would be DD-heavy.  Between Sept 1939 and Sept 1945 the USA commissioned one destroyer / WEEK.  In that same time frame we commissioned less than half a dozen battleships.  All DD battles would be more like what really happened than anything else WG does.  Call it "DD-Day".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
885
[-BUI-]
Members
1,453 posts
4,627 battles

If WG was smart, they would limit it to 1 CV per side right now, and then balance around that concept.

Balance is achieved with LESS variance and variable, not more.   Whats balanced for 1v1 CV isn't balanced at all for 2v2 CV and vice versa.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
800
[INTEL]
Members
2,616 posts
13,815 battles
29 minutes ago, Xcalib3r said:

I would like it very much to see 3 CV per side to keep things balance and to thin out the DD herd, they are out of control again since hotfix.  :D 

2086117464_OutofControl.gif.159cbaa8ff624eff170dc93ae1a155d6.gif

Edited by ClassicLib

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,736
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
24,119 posts
13,281 battles

In the tier 10 matches I see, I am not seeing that many CV's let alone two tier 10 CV's per team. I think you are taking a short string of double CV's as the norm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,153
[RLGN]
Members
12,597 posts
22,418 battles
58 minutes ago, Battleship_Elisabeth said:

IMO, it's even worse in the low tiers where the ships have no AA.

Play DFAA Nicholas, modules and skills. 

T6 can be annoying, but get a T4 game? The carriers either learn fast to leave you alone, or their planes die in droves. 71 kills last game, 65 before that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,083
[KNMSU]
Members
7,086 posts
7,668 battles
45 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

Play DFAA Nicholas, modules and skills. 

T6 can be annoying, but get a T4 game? The carriers either learn fast to leave you alone, or their planes die in droves. 71 kills last game, 65 before that.

But... I don't play destroyers :P.

You used to be able to do that with PEF (in the narrow window before the CV patch), but her AA doesn't seem to be quite as good anymore.

Edited by Battleship_Elisabeth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
116 posts
2 hours ago, DQCraze said:

Im not even getting a volley off, being attacked by both CVs.  I just barely made it to the 17 min mark started on the north side of the map didnt even make it to the D line, even with two CAs by my DD.  Really guys?  T10 Gearing with a Salem and Henry as escort.  Seriously what do you want me to do... Why not just have 4-6 CVs per side.  Call it World of CVs.

 

 

1989544445_tenor-2019-03-11T132808_650.gif.ce478cf1d7c722eade8f02cc3f77ad4f.gif

What I think for when DD player's cry about CV's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,500 posts
13,949 battles

Sure, lets have 3-4 CVs per side. There will no longer be DDs and BBs. It will be CVs and 8-9 CAs per side and the CVs will be crying again. They opened a Pandora's Box with the rework. The complaints will never end and WG only has themselves to blame.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
694
[SYN]
[SYN]
Beta Testers
2,050 posts
11,104 battles

Adding more CV limit in MM will be admitting defeat on CV rework. Like claiming automatic team kill penalty system works but dare not re-release Kitakami,.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×