Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
400_WTR_Poitato

CV's are ruining the experience for many people!

77 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
26 posts
333 battles

So I just got out of a game where myself and another player carried our team so hard, bringing a 2v5 down to just us two (and our CV) hunting down their CV. We played our butts off even making it to that point.

So here is where the "balanced gameplay" starts.  

I was chasing down the CV (an Audacious) and I had almost two minutes to shoot at him, and I hardly did ANY damage because he just turned away from me and ran. EVERY fire I lit only lasted 5 seconds, and of course I couldn't penetrate his armor with AP, so we ended up losing the game on points because WG thinks it was a good idea to cater to glue suckers who are apparently incapable to pressing the "R" key once or twice a game, something that most of the rest of us (DD's CA/CL's and BB's) seem to have managed to figure out.

How is this fair to anyone? We understand the game and its mechanics enough to be able to majorly contribute to the team and yet we still lose because the CV can simply run and be almost invincible? HOW is that balanced??? What other ship class can simply sit in spawn, not risk his ships health AT ALL, and then at the end of the game when his team has been defeated and completely outplayed by two skilled players, he can still win by simply turning around and running? In many ways this problem is significantly worse than the artillery problem in WoT because while the arty can be quite stealthy and hard to find sometimes, its very easy to kill them once you find them. The rare time and artillery player manages to win the game for his team he HAS to either A: predict where the enemy player is and fire a blind shot that gives away his position; or B: wait for the enemy player to get close enough to spot him and risk a "shotgun" shot in order to kill him. Both options leave the arty player very exposed after taking the shot and an easy kill, which in my opinion, makes up for his ability to damage players without risking his tank.

Now imagine that that same artillery player had a tank that had the same speed as the average medium tank, say 40-50kph (around 30-35mph I believe), AND had armor that made doing damage to him impossible if he angled it right, AND still had the ability to attack you while running away at a similar speed to your tank. Could you imagine the sh*t storm that the player base would make if such a tank existed? Well ladies and gentlemen, that is EXACTLY what CV's are in WoWS. They CAN be killed, even when angled, however it takes a very long time for only one ship, time that the CV has to continue to strike the player regardless of his angling. I have had even worse examples of this when encountering the CV's that have armored decks, where HE does NOTHING because it shatters, and AP does NOTHING because they can simply angle, bounce the shells and become damn near invulnerable.

I've been saying it for years and I'll continue to say it as long as WG proves that they cannot balance this ship class: "TAKE CV'S OUT OF THE GAME OR GIVE US A WAY TO OPT OUT OF CV GAMES!!"

NOBODY (and I do mean NOBODY) I have talked to is EVER happy when they see a CV in their game. It detracts from the fun and the overall experience. Yet conversely people rejoice when game modes like Ranked and Clan Battles and Space Battles come out because CV's aren't allowed, and they provide a refuge from the "sky-cancer" as they are so affectionately named.

If WG wont listen to the community, the CC's and the Super Testers who TELL THEM THESE THINGS, then what as a community are we supposed to expect from the company in the future? The whole point of the beta was to TEST AND IMPROVE the changes they were implementing. ALL the CC's and testers I know of were saying that some of the things that I have mentioned and that WG has implemented were bad ideas and they still went ahead and did it. MAKING CV'S EXTREMELY RESISTANT TO DAMAGE IS NOT THE WAY TO BALANCE THEM. 

If WG can't listen to the community and balance a ship class properly that has been in the game for as long as CV's have been (what 3, 4 years now?), how can we trust that they will be able to properly balance something like submarines, which they have been for years saying they will never put into the game BECUASE they will be so hard to balance? Are we going to see something like World of Tanks, where the game dies because of poor choices made by the dev team? I LOVE World of Warships. I've spent waaaay too much money on this game because I enjoy it so much, so I really, really do not want to see it and its player base wane away and die because of something like CV and SS (submarine) balance issues when they have THOUSANDS of community members to ask and take ideas from.

Now I know I don't have all the answers, and I know some people genuinely enjoy playing CV's both the RTS style and the 3rd person style. But the number of people in that group are so small it seems quite ridiculous to me that WG would attempt to please them instead of the vast majority of players who would rather see CV's out of the game altogether. 

If balancing the CV's isn't possible and we know from the beta tests that CV only game are NOT fun even for those who enjoy playing CV's normally, then what can WG do? What can we as a community do, or suggest to WG? I would really like to avoid a "flame war" in the comments, but would like to encourage constructive criticism, and solutions to this problem that WG can hopefully take notice of and consider implementing in the future.

I know everyone who reads this, and everyone at WG wants what is best for the future of this game, but I do not feel like CV's in their current form should be a part of that future.

  • Cool 15
  • Boring 4
  • Meh 19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
886 posts
14,046 battles

I wish your topic were true and EVERYONE hated CVs. I would love to see them gone. Many agree,  Sadly many others like the CVs and don't agree, and Wargaming themselves are in that camp. You have to either accept them, move to co-op, move to tiers 1 and 2, or quit.

I chose the  last one until they announce a hard cap of 1 CV per match any tier.

Edited by Prothall
  • Cool 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
488 posts
17 minutes ago, 400_WTR_Poitato said:

EVERY fire I lit only lasted 5 seconds

There's a cooldown to damage control.  It's far more than 5 seconds. Yet another anti-CV liar.

  • Cool 4
  • Meh 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,539
[KSE]
Beta Testers
1,716 posts
16,325 battles

So ... 165 battles + spent tons of money on this game = hidden stats or troll second account for ship posting.

Your argument would be augmented if you were more upfront about either what your main account name was, or what your actual experience in the game is by showing your unhidden stats. 

Your writing style is eerily reminiscent of quite a few other forum trolls that have cycled through lately, so forgive me if I am mischaracterizing you as a Zarth clone.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,359
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
25,361 posts
13,880 battles
3 minutes ago, SeigeTank2010 said:

There's a cooldown to damage control.  It's far more than 5 seconds. Yet another anti-CV liar.

Either that or he only got a couple of fires with the second one after the cool down was over.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
488 posts
Just now, BrushWolf said:

Either that or he only got a couple of fires with the second one after the cool down was over.

He said he fired at him for "almost 2 minutes" along with "EVERY fire I lit lasted only 2 seconds".  So how many fires can you light in under 2 minutes and have them all go out in "under 5 seconds" with that cooldown of damage control?  He makes it sound like he lit 6-10 fires. How many could he really have lit?  As I said, he's just another anti-CV liar.

  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
803 posts
4,855 battles
1 minute ago, SeigeTank2010 said:

There's a cooldown to damage control.  It's far more than 5 seconds. Yet another anti-CV liar.


Fires on CVs only last like 5 seconds but do more damage believe, at least that's what i notice when my CV burns


Audacious is actually the squishiest CV. Its armored deck is garbage and unlike Hak or Midway aren't immune to HE bombs., actually pretty good at eating pens, bombs and Cits

instead of the deck bouncing. I think they need to remodel midways and Haks armored decks to be more "historical" if they made audacious like it is. its not fair honestly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,359
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
25,361 posts
13,880 battles
1 minute ago, SeigeTank2010 said:

He said he fired at him for "almost 2 minutes" along with "EVERY fire I lit lasted only 2 seconds".  So how many fires can you light in under 2 minutes and have them all go out in "under 5 seconds" with that cooldown of damage control?  He makes it sound like he lit 6-10 fires. How many could he really have lit?  As I said, he's just another anti-CV liar.

Good point, the post was not exactly easy to read even with paragraphs and I missed that. With that it is more likely that he got any additional fires during the immunity period. You still get credit for the fire but it does nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,440
[KWF]
Members
4,040 posts
6,190 battles
3 minutes ago, Carrier_Graf_Zeppelin said:


Fires on CVs only last like 5 seconds but do more damage believe, at least that's what i notice when my CV burns


Audacious is actually the squishiest CV. Its armored deck is garbage and unlike Hak or Midway aren't immune to HE bombs., actually pretty good at eating pens, bombs and Cits

instead of the deck bouncing. I think they need to remodel midways and Haks armored decks to be more "historical" if they made audacious like it is. its not fair honestly.

The biggest irony is that RN was the first to use armoured decks, then the rest of the nations followed. Seems like the opposite ingame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
26 posts
333 battles
4 minutes ago, SeigeTank2010 said:

There's a cooldown to damage control.  It's far more than 5 seconds. Yet another anti-CV liar.

nope. CV fires only last 5 seconds. Its in the patch notes. 

https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/public-test/bulletin-080/

right in there.

 

 

7 minutes ago, BiggieD61 said:

So ... 165 battles + spent tons of money on this game = hidden stats or troll second account for ship posting.

Your argument would be augmented if you were more upfront about either what your main account name was, or what your actual experience in the game is by showing your unhidden stats. 

Your writing style is eerily reminiscent of quite a few other forum trolls that have cycled through lately, so forgive me if I am mischaracterizing you as a Zarth clone.

main account is caboose970. feel free to check it out. I've been playing since closed beta, back when mogami was tier 7.
second account is for enjoying the "grind" again, and maybe joining another clan to learn how to play DD for clan battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,146
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,904 posts
8,457 battles

OP you seriously think you deserve to damage superior CVs in your surface ship? Plus CVs dont ruin the experience for everyone, CV players are enjoying taking all the fun out of the game for anyone that does not play CVs.

8 minutes ago, SeigeTank2010 said:

He said he fired at him for "almost 2 minutes" along with "EVERY fire I lit lasted only 2 seconds".  So how many fires can you light in under 2 minutes and have them all go out in "under 5 seconds" with that cooldown of damage control?  He makes it sound like he lit 6-10 fires. How many could he really have lit?  As I said, he's just another anti-CV liar.

CV fires only last 5 seconds.

Source: http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Fire

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
26 posts
333 battles
5 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Good point, the post was not exactly easy to read even with paragraphs and I missed that. With that it is more likely that he got any additional fires during the immunity period. You still get credit for the fire but it does nothing.

Feel free to watch the replay. I actually know the game mechanics and how fires work thanks! :D

20190411_121841_PJSC038-Atago-1944_18_NE_ice_islands.wowsreplay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,299
[VCRUZ]
Members
4,049 posts
9,180 battles

For everyone i would say its a exaggeration from you OP, there are many players that enjoy the rework. But its safe to say that a large portion of the player base doesnt like CVs, not in their current state at least. 

 

Personally i agree with you, IMO CVs take the fun out of the game. They force a passive/slow playstyle that i dont like to play, you need to join blobs/lemming trains just to survive, this is boring. And if you dont do that, CVs can kill you. CVs are just frustrating to play against, you cant run, you cant hide becaus eplanes can reach you anywhere on the map, you cant fight back because the CV is sitting across the map, and you cant defend yourself because AA is ineffective outside of a blob. 

 

Im giving some time to see what WG is going to do, but if things stay this way im going to leave the game, no point in playing a game if its not fun. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,736
[TDRB]
Members
4,436 posts
12,602 battles
6 minutes ago, SeigeTank2010 said:

He said he fired at him for "almost 2 minutes" along with "EVERY fire I lit lasted only 2 seconds".  So how many fires can you light in under 2 minutes and have them all go out in "under 5 seconds" with that cooldown of damage control?  He makes it sound like he lit 6-10 fires. How many could he really have lit?  As I said, he's just another anti-CV liar.

More like a frustrated player exaggerating what happened, not a liar. Give the OP a break, there is no justifiable reason to call him a liar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,146
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,904 posts
8,457 battles
Just now, kgh52 said:

More like a frustrated player exaggerating what happened, not a liar. Give the OP a break, there is no justifiable reason to call him a liar.

OP is actually correct, not exaggerating.

3 minutes ago, 1nv4d3rZ1m said:

CV fires only last 5 seconds.

Source: http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Fire

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,536
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
5,090 posts
18,064 battles

CV fires have a base duration of 5s. You can't burn them. This is mostly to prevent CVs from sniping each other, but does suck for everybody else too.

You didn't specify what ship you were in, but your replay says Atago. Audacious has a flight deck that you CAN pen with 203mm HE. Midway and Hak have solid 70mm+ flat sheets of bullcrap, but Audacious is vulnerable as long as you aren't hitting the center of the deck. All T10 carriers are also vulnerable if you can land HE on the hulls rather than the deck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
26 posts
333 battles
11 minutes ago, SeigeTank2010 said:

He said he fired at him for "almost 2 minutes" along with "EVERY fire I lit lasted only 2 seconds".

Actually if you go back and reread my post I said "EVERY fire lasted only 5 seconds." As CV fires only last 5 seconds. 

https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/public-test/bulletin-080/

Its in there if you don't believe me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
488 posts
1 minute ago, 400_WTR_Poitato said:

nope. CV fires only last 5 seconds. Its in the patch notes. 

https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/public-test/bulletin-080/

right in there.

Thank you for proving my point of how clueless anti-CV whiners are.  The CONSUMABLE is activated automatically after 5 seconds.  Then it has a cooldown timer and won't be able to be activated automatically again until after the cooldown, which is why they also said (and you ignored):

However, the ship will still be in danger in this situation if under intense gunfire

If they light more fires, it cannot be activated again until the cooldown finishes. 

So after a fire goes out, another fire that's lit will not be extinguished until the cooldown for damage control hits.

You'd know this if you actually played carriers.  But only people who hate carriers seem to be clueless about carriers, whine and outright lie trying to get them gimped or removed from the game.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
26 posts
333 battles
1 minute ago, Edgecase said:

CV fires have a base duration of 5s. You can't burn them. This is mostly to prevent CVs from sniping each other, but does suck for everybody else too.

You didn't specify what ship you were in, but your replay says Atago. Audacious has a flight deck that you CAN pen with 203mm HE. Midway and Hak have solid 70mm+ flat sheets of bullcrap, but Audacious is vulnerable as long as you aren't hitting the center of the deck. All T10 carriers are also vulnerable if you can land HE on the hulls rather than the deck.

true, and I was shooting HE (our own CV was even dropping him) and we still couldn't kill him. A bit ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,736
[TDRB]
Members
4,436 posts
12,602 battles
Quote

I was chasing down the CV (an Audacious)

What type & tier of ship were you on? Just wondering.

Quote

OP is actually correct, not exaggerating.

Yes, I see that now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
26 posts
333 battles
2 minutes ago, SeigeTank2010 said:

Thank you for proving my point of how clueless anti-CV whiners are.  The CONSUMABLE is activated automatically after 5 seconds.  Then it has a cooldown timer and won't be able to be activated automatically again until after the cooldown, which is why they also said (and you ignored):

However, the ship will still be in danger in this situation if under intense gunfire

If they light more fires, it cannot be activated again until the cooldown finishes. 

So after a fire goes out, another fire that's lit will not be extinguished until the cooldown for damage control hits.

You'd know this if you actually played carriers.  But only people who hate carriers seem to be clueless about carriers, whine and outright lie trying to get them gimped or removed from the game.

ok then go ahead and watch the replay and tell me how all the fires I set after the first one go out after 5 seconds. perhaps the CV player was hacking? doubtful. the only thing I can think of is the exact words of WarGaming, which are as follows: Fire extinguishing time on the new aircraft carriers is now only 5 seconds, and recovery from flooding—30 seconds.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,146
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
11,904 posts
8,457 battles
1 minute ago, SeigeTank2010 said:

After 5 seconds damage control is engaged. Get set on fire again and it won't be put out until cooldown is over.

Wrong, fires have a maximum duration of 5 seconds on CVs compared to 60 on BBs and 30 on cruisers. No fire on a CV will last more than 5 seconds.

image.png.6b7846ea51f5be7b344a12e01eac6d03.png

Source: http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Fire

 

With how insulting you are to the OP you could at least try and understand what you are talking about.

  • Cool 4
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,536
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
5,090 posts
18,064 battles
Just now, SeigeTank2010 said:

After 5 seconds damage control is engaged. Get set on fire again and it won't be put out until cooldown is over.

Totally wrong. CVs have a base fire duration of 5 seconds. Battleships have 60, cruisers and destroyers 30, CVs 5.

Damage control party is a separate consumable that kicks in automatically when the FIRST fire or flood starts, putting it out and providing immunity to fires and floods for 1 minute. DCP goes on cooldown after that, letting fires burn to their full duration... of five seconds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
803 posts
4,855 battles
Just now, SeigeTank2010 said:

After 5 seconds damage control is engaged. Get set on fire again and it won't be put out until cooldown is over.



Dude Fires on CVs only last 5 seconds regardless. You have to start quite a few fires to burn down a CV. It does do increased damage though. I don't see why people are having trouble understanding OP. I will say Audacious is the easiest of the 3 tier 10 Cvs to kill. if it was a midway or hak itd be even harder as there decks are 100% immune to HE bombs and BB shells unlike Audacious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×