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

Concealment is useless with two CVs per side so why do we have it?

94 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,995
[-TKS-]
Members
3,354 posts
18,321 battles

Let's face it, low and mid tiers are 99% two CVs per side which is ridiculous. I mean seriously, concealment has been made totally obsolete with so many (unlimited) planes in the air at any one time. I had assumed that WG by now understood how unplayable this game is to many players. For example, being a DD in a tier 5 battle with two enemy CVs is pretty much a game of hide from the planes because once you are spotted (and you will be) you will be rocketed to death or perhaps an enemy ship will finish your remaining 20% HP before the planes have a chance to return and do it themselves. 

I'm not how many have DDs with camo and concealment skill mounted before the CV rework nightmare but as you know it's completely obsolete. Why doesn't WG offer us some hyper AA guns to give DDs a fighting chance? In fact, other ships concealment are also obsolete. How far do you think a BB can get undetected with that many planes hovering around?  Not to mention tier 4 ships that are barely equiped with any AA at all.

The easy solution is to limit one CV per side but that's too easy. Or perhaps have an opt out of battles with CVs altogether option. Many would agree that CVs and the rework has made the game far less enjoyable for the majority. 

  • Cool 7
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Boring 23
  • Meh 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
265
[RAIN]
Members
284 posts
9,649 battles

how many times are you going to repeat a bias solution that only works for one side and screws the rest

image.jpeg.e53866cbdb13d1f2eb50c02431cddcf4.jpeg

 

 

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 4
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,301
[-BUI-]
Members
2,703 posts
7,030 battles

Oh boy, another CV complaint thread!

Starting out, I will say one thing:  I support a limit of 1 CV in randoms.   2 CVs is actually bad for everyone.   The ships on the surface are as you said, all spotted the majority of the game AND the CVs themselves get screwed because games like these tend to end quickly and therefore they don't actually get to do that much before the game ends.    I think the the game SHOULD be balanced around the idea of 1 CV per side maximum.

On to concealment:   Its not useless, its just not the GOD TIER stat that it is when CVs aren't in the game.   Flat out, without CVs in the game, concealment is TOO powerful, its the end all be all, its all that matters.  

The rework made CVs SIGNIFICANTLY weaker than they were previously, so calling it the "rework nightmare" is rather dumb.   The rework made them playable and vastly more balanced then they were before the rework.  

  • Cool 8
  • Boring 5
  • Meh 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,943
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,332 posts
14,924 battles
4 minutes ago, Zenn3k said:

Oh boy, another CV complaint thread!

Starting out, I will say one thing:  I support a limit of 1 CV in randoms.   2 CVs is actually bad for everyone.   The ships on the surface are as you said, all spotted the majority of the game AND the CVs themselves get screwed because games like these tend to end quickly and therefore they don't actually get to do that much before the game ends.    I think the the game SHOULD be balanced around the idea of 1 CV per side maximum.

On to concealment:   Its not useless, its just not the GOD TIER stat that it is when CVs aren't in the game.   Flat out, without CVs in the game, concealment is TOO powerful, its the end all be all, its all that matters.  

The rework made CVs SIGNIFICANTLY weaker than they were previously, so calling it the "rework nightmare" is rather dumb.   The rework made them playable and vastly more balanced then they were before the rework.  

A limit of one would probably not cause much trouble with the tier 6 - 10 CV's but would create an environment of constant queue dumps with the tier 4's. For the tier 4's every ship that they see should have sufficient AA to make them consider the losses which they only have to do for most tier 5's and Katori, Yubari, and the Iwaki Alpha.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,301
[-BUI-]
Members
2,703 posts
7,030 battles
Just now, BrushWolf said:

A limit of one would probably not cause much trouble with the tier 6 - 10 CV's but would create an environment of constant queue dumps with the tier 4's. For the tier 4's every ship that they see should have sufficient AA to make them consider the losses which they only have to do for most tier 5's and Katori, Yubari, and the Iwaki Alpha.

Can't really agree or disagree with you, I very very rarely play T5 or lower.   I don't touch the T4 CVs, not because I think its unfair for the ships with no AA...they are just boring, no fighters, very anemic weapons.    

Its like, yeah, you have no AA to stop the planes...but the planes tickle at best...so does it even matter that much?  I dunno, as I said, I don't spend any time there.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
74
[JHF]
[JHF]
Members
318 posts
5,198 battles

  I would probably agree is it was the old CV before the rework.  Now not so much.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
139 posts
2,618 battles
21 minutes ago, Zenn3k said:

Oh boy, another CV complaint thread!

Starting out, I will say one thing:  I support a limit of 1 CV in randoms.   2 CVs is actually bad for everyone.   The ships on the surface are as you said, all spotted the majority of the game AND the CVs themselves get screwed because games like these tend to end quickly and therefore they don't actually get to do that much before the game ends.    I think the the game SHOULD be balanced around the idea of 1 CV per side maximum.

On to concealment:   Its not useless, its just not the GOD TIER stat that it is when CVs aren't in the game.   Flat out, without CVs in the game, concealment is TOO powerful, its the end all be all, its all that matters.  

The rework made CVs SIGNIFICANTLY weaker than they were previously, so calling it the "rework nightmare" is rather dumb.   The rework made them playable and vastly more balanced then they were before the rework.  

If there are all these complaints, doesn't it stand to reason that it's an issue that need to be adressed?

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,301
[-BUI-]
Members
2,703 posts
7,030 battles
10 minutes ago, Bereavement said:

If there are all these complaints, doesn't it stand to reason that it's an issue that need to be adressed?

Not really, its mostly the same people over and over or people with 200 games played that don't understand anything anyway.

The "need" is "I got attacked by planes when I didn't wanna be attacked by planes, PLS NERF!", or "CV ruined my super stealthy hug the map border until I get behind everyone strategy"

Edited by Zenn3k
  • Cool 3
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
74
[ICEY]
Members
190 posts
6,705 battles
11 minutes ago, Zenn3k said:

Its like, yeah, you have no AA to stop the planes...but the planes tickle at best...so does it even matter that much?  I dunno, as I said, I don't spend any time there.

Hosho would like a word. But yeah, I feel guilty playing it because the torpedoes are so ridiculous even after the nerfs and there nothing outside of fighters that ships can do to stop you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,943
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,332 posts
14,924 battles
9 minutes ago, Zenn3k said:

Not really, its mostly the same people over and over or people with 200 games played that don't understand anything anyway.

The "need" is "I got attacked by planes when I didn't wanna be attacked by planes, PLS NERF!", or "CV ruined my super stealthy hug the map border until I get behind everyone strategy"

Not to mention that few of the CV complainers have any time in them.

  • Cool 2
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,066
[SHOOT]
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
4,326 posts
12,989 battles
26 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

A limit of one would probably not cause much trouble with the tier 6 - 10 CV's but would create an environment of constant queue dumps with the tier 4's. For the tier 4's every ship that they see should have sufficient AA to make them consider the losses which they only have to do for most tier 5's and Katori, Yubari, and the Iwaki Alpha.

Not to mention t4 CVs do little damage and planes so slow, having only one per game would be detrimental to the team. Especially against dreadnaughts that care little for HE bombs and less for rockets.

Low tier CVs are best suited for going after ships still clinging to the surface instead of nuking ships; like they used to do in RTS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,943
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,332 posts
14,924 battles
9 minutes ago, Crokodone said:

Not to mention t4 CVs do little damage and planes so slow, having only one per game would be detrimental to the team. Especially against dreadnaughts that care little for HE bombs and less for rockets.

Low tier CVs are best suited for going after ships still clinging to the surface instead of nuking ships; like they used to do in RTS.

The really good CV players can nuke DD's and tear up CL's pretty easy but the BB's can shrug off a lot of hits.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,066
[SHOOT]
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
4,326 posts
12,989 battles
8 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

The really good CV players can nuke DD's and tear up CL's pretty easy but the BB's can shrug off a lot of hits.

Which really good players in any ship is supposed to do. It's the exact same for DDs, CLs and BBs. Personally i found t4-6 CVs to require way too much more work than contemporary ships to derive the usual form of satisfaction you'd expect with surface combatants. It's nice WG made the 3rd person RTS squadron view functionable. But the lack of leqd assist lf any kind stands out too much.

All in all, it would be nice if the panic bloom from DFAA came back, and catapult fighters reverted to their origional form to spot torpedoes and harass squadrons would be epic.

All in all, i like CVs amd respect CV players. Because those players give AA combatant drivers like me a job to do; I do it proudly...

Edited by Crokodone
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,650 posts
8 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

The really good CV players can nuke DD's and tear up CL's pretty easy but the BB's can shrug off a lot of hits.

true now, before patch 8.0 many T10 BB were rushing to get close to the Wooster or Mino and their no-fly zones...not anymore, that is AA was more nerfed on CL than on BB, sad...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,943
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,332 posts
14,924 battles
2 minutes ago, Crokodone said:

Which really good players in any ship is supposed to do. It's the exact same for DDs, CLs and BBs. Personally i found t4-6 CVs to require way too much more work than contemporary ships to derive the usual form of satisfaction you'd expect with surface combatants. It's nice WG made the 3rd person RTS squadron view functionable. But the lack of leqd assist lf any kind stands out too much.

All in all, it would be nice if the panic bloom from DFAA came back, and catapult fighters reverted to their origional form to spot torpedoes and harass squadrons would be epic.

All in all, i like CVs amd respect CV players. Because those players give AA combatant drivers like me a job to do; I do it proudly...

That is why my Texas and the October Revolution have become my go to ships for tier 5, come at me bro.

 

1 minute ago, loco_max said:

true now, before patch 8.0 many T10 BB were rushing to get close to the Wooster or Mino and their no-fly zones...not anymore, that is AA was more nerfed on CL than on BB, sad...

It is still expensive for CV planes to get near those ships.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
202 posts
9,301 battles
15 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

 

 

It is still expensive for CV planes to get near those ships.

Smoke another bowl, you are a fool if you think wooster is a threat to a CV anymore

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,834 posts
94 battles

Here's a hot take:

The playerbase has made concealment their crutch for so long they no longer know how to play without it. 

  • Cool 7
  • Funny 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,650 posts
17 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

It is still expensive for CV planes to get near those ships.

right, and before patch 8.0 it was suicidal...as I said big nerf on CL AA...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,553
[WKY04]
Members
4,079 posts
25,835 battles
1 hour ago, Zenn3k said:

Oh boy, another CV complaint thread!

Yes, because they are still broken. 

54 minutes ago, Admiral_Bingo said:

Hosho would like a word. But yeah, I feel guilty playing it because the torpedoes are so ridiculous even after the nerfs and there nothing outside of fighters that ships can do to stop you.

Broken, broken, broken. 

45 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Not to mention that few of the CV complainers have any time in them.

The "complainers" who produce the most lengthy and detailed posts with links to replays and stats from the server reporting site showing that CVs are still broken are unicum players in CVs.

Don't you just hate that its so bad that they have broken ranks?

They are saying the same thing that the complainers who dont play CVs "enough", or indeed, AT ALL, have been saying, showing that a man does not have to be a mahout to recognize an elephant. 

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 3
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,301
[-BUI-]
Members
2,703 posts
7,030 battles
5 minutes ago, RyuuohD_NA said:

Here's a hot take:

The playerbase has made concealment their crutch for so long they no longer know how to play without it. 

:cap_horn::cap_horn::cap_horn::cap_horn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,943
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,332 posts
14,924 battles
16 minutes ago, Wicked_Little_Witch said:

Smoke another bowl, you are a fool if you think wooster is a threat to a CV anymore

Maybe you should play CV's against them.

14 minutes ago, Pugilistic said:

Yes, because they are still broken. 

Broken, broken, broken. 

The "complainers" who produce the most lengthy and detailed posts with links to replays and stats from the server reporting site showing that CVs are still broken are unicum players in CVs.

Don't you just hate that its so bad that they have broken ranks?

They are saying the same thing that the complainers who dont play CVs "enough", or indeed, AT ALL, have been saying, showing that a man does not have to be a mahout to recognize an elephant. 


The reason I tell them to play them is that they make claims that people that do play CV's are not seeing such as the one above that is saying the Wooster is not a threat to CV's anymore who has no matches in the rework CV's. AA had to be reworked with the CV's and while it doesn't act the same it can still be effective, lose too many planes too fast and the CV player loses their dentures.

 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
531
Members
558 posts
5,048 battles
1 hour ago, BrushWolf said:

constant queue dumps with the tier 4's.

Who cares? WG is now filling T4 matches with bots. Let new CV players farm bots to their hearts content at T4-T5. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×