Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Turbotush

Why CV's suck, and why I do not trust WG

65 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,811
[TWFT]
Members
1,503 posts
41,300 battles

This above all else is why I hate CV's in the game.

Now I am not going to shame these guy's, their stats do not matter, what matters is the difference in stats between the two CV's.  

The enemy CV had 5545 battles and by the looks of it had learned all the fundamentals of running a CV.

Our CV had.......wait for it.......45 battles!

45

Battles.

Let that sink in for a moment (pun not intended).  I will give you 1 guess on how much fun I thought the battle was on a scale of 1 to OMG WHY CANT WG FIX THIS CRAP.

 

shot-20_06.21_18_43.14-0324.thumb.jpg.9a1d152fdf6d6b78d9746342aff5df75.jpg

 

It gets better........if you are a masochist

 

Here is a match latter.  Enemy CV has 502 battles in CV's with 3293 battles over all and a good WR (I don't want to say so I am not shamming him, he is average but better then me)

Our CV............

77 battles in a CV with an over all battle count of a MASIVE 122.

shot-20_06.23_13_36.25-0363.thumb.jpg.0978c7929059ff59e3b272eea572bdff.jpg

 

 

We, and I mean a lot of us players, BEGGED, PLEADED and dam near offered to throw large amounts of cash at you to change the way CV's where matched.  You...WG...told us that you had us covered and would help out the situation with the CV RW.

Welp, you failed.

You failed so bad that now no matter what you say we just keep our wallets closed and move on, your "word" means squat to some of us.  It's sad really, you decided to go the "Lets get more CV's into the game so we can cash in quick" instead of looking at the situation and coming up with a real plan to not only help the surface ship player base out, but to also help the CV's in a way that could have at least made it so some of us still spent money in the game.  But no, you decided to piss on the players so you could score a few more bucks.....

congrats, you truly are a capitalist now......

I cant wait for when Sub's get put in the game,  cant wait to see the crap you will feed the player base to placate them as you charge $100+ bucks for the new 30 knot submerged 100,000HP Russian battleshipsub (Construction was started but was terminated by Stalin, he did not want to embarrass the United States at that time....it's true....trust us at WG).

I have waited for this game to come out since the 80's when me and a large group of navel enthusiast's would get together and play Seekrieg for days (Dungeons and Dragons was for girls). 

WoWS's has so much going for it, the visuals are awesome, the sounds are nice and the game play is fun at times (less fun now then at the start, but still fun at times), some of the artwork you all do is worthy of some of the James Flood pictures I have.  I have to say in some respects you guys rock, to bad I don't trust you anymore, but really what do you care, you have 3 more players in the wings with big wallets to replace me and that's what matters to you in the end.

You do not want good players or good match making or real ships

You want addicts.

 

 

 

  • Cool 13
  • Thanks 5
  • Haha 1
  • Boring 11
  • Meh 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,074
Members
5,723 posts
11,145 battles

Understand there is no real way to define a "good" player in WoWs.  Plenty of players have thousands of games and don't know the fundamentals of the game.  As a F2P game - yea - they need people to be playing all of the time - it is the business  model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,299
[-BUI-]
Members
2,703 posts
7,030 battles

Enemy CV didn't really do that well in either game though, that Ark Royal sucked from the looks of it, Lexington at least did something, but not that much.   

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,837
[SIDE]
Members
4,939 posts

Thumbs up. I don't see why there can't be a battle count criteria for moving up tiers. I also dislike free xp skipping.

  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,156
[BONKS]
Banned
957 posts
5,381 battles
27 minutes ago, Turbotush said:

-snip-

I'm not saying your wrong. But your examples are poor. In both games it's clear the the CV's had minimal impact. The fact your teams got stomped is not the fault of the CV's. In fact both CV's are heavily up tiered. So putting the blame on them is not a factor. Yes, CV interaction is not in an overall good place. But games like the ones you've shown are not due to the CV but the overall team as a whole. 

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
82
[ARA-I]
Members
127 posts
2,285 battles

Anyone can have a good/bad game on any ship regardless of class, regardless of battle metrics.

I'm not sure why this is somehow pinned on CVs in particular.

Edited by SeaShadowAR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,837
[SIDE]
Members
4,939 posts
1 hour ago, SeaShadowAR said:

Anyone can have a good/bad game on any ship regardless of class.

I'm not sure why this is somehow pinned on CVs in particular.

It's an example. As a "cv-defender" I don't see it as so much CV=evil as I see it as a MM issue. Horrible DD drivers cripple teams just as badly. Horrible BB drivers are a dime a dozen. Cruisers, well hard to tell because they get nailed from all angles 

Edited by thebigblue
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
812
[META_]
Members
1,829 posts
18,960 battles

First off, in the first photo the first game the red cv did 1297 xp, and was 1 slot higher than your green cv on the xp board. if a red cv gets 1297 xp in a winning game that is not high. You had 793 xp, you had a higher impact on the game than him after him getting a higher winning multiplier than you for winning. Second game both cvs were at the bottom 2 slots on xp….what are you talking about. If those cv scores scare you disconnect when you see me on the red team, lol …..pic more lopsided games if you want to prove a point.....check out my meta_man2002 cv videos on youtube, they will make you feel more warm and fuzzy about cvs :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
812
[META_]
Members
1,829 posts
18,960 battles
7 minutes ago, Toss_a_plus_1_to_your_CV said:

I'm not saying your wrong. But your examples are poor. In both games it's clear the the CV's had minimal impact. The fact your teams got stomped is not the fault of the CV's. In fact both CV's are heavily up tiered. So putting the blame on them is not a factor. Yes, CV interaction is not in an overall good place. But games like the ones you've shown are not due to the CV but the overall team as a whole. 

For once we both agree about something, lol . this is a horrible example of cv running anyone over. Neither game the cvs dominated and were actually lower than average if you ask me.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
898 posts
14,522 battles

The simplest solution to your lack of trust is to buy a console and play that version.

No CVs.

Or you could do like many of us and uninstall. I also see no CVs.

I also never complain about MM, power creep and potato players immediately after a blowout loss.

  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,656
[CNO]
Members
6,585 posts
19,771 battles

T8 CV scored above average for a T8 ship in that distribution of ships.  As for the other match, T6 CVs in a heavy T8 matches are very difficult to play well.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,936
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,326 posts
14,923 battles
53 minutes ago, SeaShadowAR said:

Anyone can have a good/bad game on any ship regardless of class, regardless of battle metrics.

I'm not sure why this is somehow pinned on CVs in particular.

Yeo' even the best unicums have bad days. Maybe not as often as lesser players but it does happen even to them.

51 minutes ago, thebigblue said:

It's an example. As a "cv-defender" I don't see it as so much CV=evil as I see it as a MM issue. Horrible DD drivers cripple teams just as badly. Horibble BB drivers are a dime a dozen. Cruisers, well hard to tell because they get nailed from all angles 

When you mostly see single CV's per team even the much asked for skill balancing wouldn't help. At least with two per team there is a chance that the other CV will counter balance the bad CV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
812
[META_]
Members
1,829 posts
18,960 battles
11 minutes ago, Soshi_Sone said:

T8 CV scored above average for a T8 ship in that distribution of ships.  As for the other match, T6 CVs in a heavy T8 matches are very difficult to play well.  

 

Well if 1297 xp is good for that distribution to you, I do not agree , He was middle of the pack, I am not dogging him, I am saying you have no gripe, he did not dominate. And the second game you just said it is tough playing uptiered,so which is it? Did they crush your soul the second game or not? Was adding your stats to the last message to show your winrate, if you are afraid of these cvs that winrate will not help you sir,lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,811
[TWFT]
Members
1,503 posts
41,300 battles
1 hour ago, Zenn3k said:

Enemy CV didn't really do that well in either game though, that Ark Royal sucked from the looks of it, Lexington at least did something, but not that much.   

 

49 minutes ago, Toss_a_plus_1_to_your_CV said:

I'm not saying your wrong. But your examples are poor. In both games it's clear the the CV's had minimal impact. The fact your teams got stomped is not the fault of the CV's. In fact both CV's are heavily up tiered. So putting the blame on them is not a factor. Yes, CV interaction is not in an overall good place. But games like the ones you've shown are not due to the CV but the overall team as a whole. 

 

47 minutes ago, SeaShadowAR said:

Anyone can have a good/bad game on any ship regardless of class, regardless of battle metrics.

I'm not sure why this is somehow pinned on CVs in particular.

 

43 minutes ago, Meta_Man said:

First off, in the first photo the first game the red cv did 1297 xp, and was 1 slot higher than your green cv on the xp board. if a red cv gets 1297 xp in a winning game that is not high. You had 793 xp, you had a higher impact on the game than him after him getting a higher winning multiplier than you for winning. Second game both cvs were at the bottom 2 slots on xp….what are you talking about. If those cv scores scare you disconnect when you see me on the red team, lol …..pic more lopsided games if you want to prove a point.....check out my meta_man2002 cv videos on youtube, they will make you feel more warm and fuzzy about cvs :-)

40 minutes ago, Meta_Man said:

For once we both agree about something, lol . this is a horrible example of cv running anyone over. Neither game the cvs dominated and were actually lower than average if you ask me.

You guys really don't get it.  The score of the CV dose not measure there spotting ability and the general pain in the rear they can be.  In both matches the enemy CV had all of us pegged and we never relay saw him, whereas our CV's in both games tried to CV snipe and then proceeded to fly there planes to the least important enemy ship to try and do some damage.

IT SUCKED!

CV's out spot, out conceal and out live every other class in the game, add to that having one player that is just starting out and pit him against another player that has WAAAAAAAAAY more time in that class and it wont matter what your DD's, BB's or your CA"S do, if you have the turd CV your screwed....end of story.

55 minutes ago, thebigblue said:

It's an example. As a "cv-defender" I don't see it as so much CV=evil as I see it as a MM issue. Horrible DD drivers cripple teams just as badly. Horibble BB drivers are a dime a dozen. Cruisers, well hard to tell because they get nailed from all angles 

This guy was the only one that gets it.  Its not about the CV as much as its about the MM.  If you have turd DD's you can overcome it, it will be hard, but your team can in a pinch come back from losing your DD's.  Same with losing a BB force or A CA contingent, it happens.  Losing parity in CV's is a different story, CV's can do way more then any other ship class, there is no argument, so losing an effective CV or having a CV that is a noob vs a CV that at least knows how to spot is a fun killer.

I don't mind losing, it just pisses me off when I lose because of MM and not because of the team I have.  I was there, in both matches we would have had an even chance if there where no CV's or if WG did the right thing and did CV parity MM.

But as I said, WG could care less, they want addicts, not good players or good matches.

  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,811
[TWFT]
Members
1,503 posts
41,300 battles
15 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Yeo' even the best unicums have bad days. Maybe not as often as lesser players but it does happen even to them.

When you mostly see single CV's per team even the much asked for skill balancing wouldn't help. At least with two per team there is a chance that the other CV will counter balance the bad CV.

Love ya Brush, but 2 CV matches suck no matter what.  That's just an opinion and not a statement on how that crap storm makes the game suck for some of us.  I want to play World of Warships, not World of Warplanes.....with a few ships in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,936
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,326 posts
14,923 battles
4 minutes ago, Turbotush said:

Love ya Brush, but 2 CV matches suck no matter what.  That's just an opinion and not a statement on how that crap storm makes the game suck for some of us.  I want to play World of Warships, not World of Warplanes.....with a few ships in it.

I was just pointing out the catch-22 and I disagree about two CV matches, it is the three CV matches where it was impossible to be where the planes are not that sucked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
812
[META_]
Members
1,829 posts
18,960 battles

Also I would like to point out you were in an Atago, (I love my Atago) not an aa boat , so you did fine in a cv match in a non aa boat, the examples you gave were poor , neither game cvs had a big impact.  They really did not do  anything above average.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,652
[WPORT]
Members
9,821 posts
14,329 battles

Has anyone else noticed the Indomitable (Tier-8 Premium CV) can be purchased outright without grinding up the tech-tree?

The complaint shouldn't be about CV's.  It should be about the behavior of buying-in to a high-tier game environment and not having the experience and skills to run with the proverbial "big dogs", perhaps?

Ranger, at least was a Tier-6 tech-tree CV, and everyone is a noob at some point.  Gotta start somewhere.  I don't know if they Free-XP'd their way to getting Ranger without playing Langley, though.

Ark Royal is a British Premium Tier-6 CV, but since it was credited with playing competently, I don't see a problem worth mentioning.  

Anything else, @Turbotush?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,837
[SIDE]
Members
4,939 posts
59 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Yeo' even the best unicums have bad days. Maybe not as often as lesser players but it does happen even to them.

When you mostly see single CV's per team even the much asked for skill balancing wouldn't help. At least with two per team there is a chance that the other CV will counter balance the bad CV.

Good points. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,396
[INTEL]
Members
13,459 posts
39,026 battles
2 hours ago, Toss_a_plus_1_to_your_CV said:

I'm not saying your wrong. But your examples are poor. In both games it's clear the the CV's had minimal impact. The fact your teams got stomped is not the fault of the CV's. In fact both CV's are heavily up tiered. So putting the blame on them is not a factor. Yes, CV interaction is not in an overall good place. But games like the ones you've shown are not due to the CV but the overall team as a whole. 

I dont think he blamed them so much as was pointing out the devs catastrophic failure to provide any kind of balance in the MM or threshold for access to the game's most important and influential type of ship. 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,060
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,613 posts
13,182 battles
37 minutes ago, Turbotush said:

You guys really don't get it.  The score of the CV dose not measure there spotting ability and the general pain in the rear they can be.  In both matches the enemy CV had all of us pegged and we never relay saw him, whereas our CV's in both games tried to CV snipe and then proceeded to fly there planes to the least important enemy ship to try and do some damage.

IT SUCKED!

CV's out spot, out conceal and out live every other class in the game, add to that having one player that is just starting out and pit him against another player that has WAAAAAAAAAY more time in that class and it wont matter what your DD's, BB's or your CA"S do, if you have the turd CV your screwed....end of story.

This guy was the only one that gets it.  Its not about the CV as much as its about the MM.  If you have turd DD's you can overcome it, it will be hard, but your team can in a pinch come back from losing your DD's.  Same with losing a BB force or A CA contingent, it happens.  Losing parity in CV's is a different story, CV's can do way more then any other ship class, there is no argument, so losing an effective CV or having a CV that is a noob vs a CV that at least knows how to spot is a fun killer.

I don't mind losing, it just pisses me off when I lose because of MM and not because of the team I have.  I was there, in both matches we would have had an even chance if there where no CV's or if WG did the right thing and did CV parity MM.

But as I said, WG could care less, they want addicts, not good players or good matches.

Unless you somehow post the detailed results screens for the CV's in question, or provide replays where someone can watch and try and guess how much of an effect each CV had, there's no way that anything you've posted can prove or disprove anything. The CV's scores certainly don't prove anything, other than the Ranger in the second game was a really slow loader/AFK until right before he died, or he exploded from some lucky early spotting.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,811
[TWFT]
Members
1,503 posts
41,300 battles
19 minutes ago, Meta_Man said:

Also I would like to point out you were in an Atago, (I love my Atago) not an aa boat , so you did fine in a cv match in a non aa boat, the examples you gave were poor , neither game cvs had a big impact.  They really did not do  anything above average.

Except the enemy CV was able to spot the crap out of us while our CV was trying to torp a CA and failing.  Again, what a CV can accomplish damage wise in a match means diddly squat to what a CV driver can do in spotting and covering your DD's.

Now read what I wrote and you will get that all I and a few other players have asked for is MM that would be better in matching up CV's, that's it. 

I am not asking for CV's to be nerfted

I'm not asking for CV's to be removed from a Gun vs Gun game (would be nice)

I am not pissed off at the noob CV driver.

I'm calling out WG for pissing on the player base when it comes to MM and CV's.  WG had a chance to fix this but instead went for the easy fast quick buck with the CV RW.

p.s. I get so many CV matches in my Atago that I AA speck this beach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,811
[TWFT]
Members
1,503 posts
41,300 battles
8 minutes ago, Taichunger said:

I dont think he blamed them so much as was pointing out the devs catastrophic failure to provide any kind of balance in the MM or threshold for access to the game's most important and influential type of ship. 

 

Another guy that gets it.  +1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
812
[META_]
Members
1,829 posts
18,960 battles
2 minutes ago, Turbotush said:

Except the enemy CV was able to spot the crap out of us while our CV was trying to torp a CA and failing.  Again, what a CV can accomplish damage wise in a match means diddly squat to what a CV driver can do in spotting and covering your DD's.

Now read what I wrote and you will get that all I and a few other players have asked for is MM that would be better in matching up CV's, that's it. 

I am not asking for CV's to be nerfted

I'm not asking for CV's to be removed from a Gun vs Gun game (would be nice)

I am not pissed off at the noob CV driver.

I'm calling out WG for pissing on the player base when it comes to MM and CV's.  WG had a chance to fix this but instead went for the easy fast quick buck with the CV RW.

p.s. I get so many CV matches in my Atago that I AA speck this beach.

CVs get spotting damage, you had no dominating cvs in those games,  1 game they were at the bottom. The other they were mid with a 1297 xp ( not high). You did fine in both matches. I play the Le terrible with no AA with a 64% winrate with those same matches and cvs always hunt me. I am not complaining . I love the cat and mouse. The meta is always changing,either adjust or complain. My dds are still at higher than average winrates,  my cvs are the same. I adjust, I see weakness in another part and attack that way(Meta_Man)lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
484
[1IF]
Banned
436 posts
1,892 battles

CVs suck and don't suck so you are half right (or half wrong) there.

Don't trust WG. 100% correct.

Edited by Antean
correction
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×