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

4 CV Battle rant

99 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

37
[SOUTH]
Members
28 posts
13,743 battles

I just feel the need to rant. Why does WG think it is more palatable to have 4 CV battles at lower tiers. 

4 CV battles should be banned at ALL tiers, not just top tiers.

Until that happens, I will NEVER reset a line for research bureau again

It is utterly stupid and aggravating to do so right now.

  • Cool 14
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 3
  • Boring 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,295
[WOLFG]
Members
31,970 posts
9,887 battles
5 minutes ago, SkaerKrow said:

I'd rather face two CVs on the enemy team than four or five DDs.

Unless I'm driving a DD myself lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
398 posts
7,284 battles
4 minutes ago, VanZutphen said:

I just feel the need to rant. Why does WG think it is more palatable to have 4 CV battles at lower tiers. 

4 CV battles should be banned at ALL tiers, not just top tiers.

Until that happens, I will NEVER reset a line for research bureau again

It is utterly stupid and aggravating to do so right now.

Why you should reset a line anyways? I understand how you feel since i think you put a lot of investment to this game...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[SOUTH]
Members
28 posts
13,743 battles

The lower tiers have just degraded to CVs harvesting other ships, and there are 4 CVs literally at EVERY battle, 12 battles in a row now at tier IV for me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,624
[-DF-]
Beta Testers
3,497 posts
6,268 battles
10 minutes ago, VanZutphen said:

I just feel the need to rant. Why does WG think it is more palatable to have 4 CV battles at lower tiers. 

CVs "encourage" you to FXP past those tiers.  This is how they are doing the Lord's work.

  • Cool 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,150
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
14,156 posts

I played a 4 CV game this morning. Both enemy CVs attacked my Massachusetts for much of the game. They were barely a minor annoyance.

 

  • Cool 4
  • Boring 5
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
579
[GOOF]
Members
801 posts
6,675 battles

Deep breath.

    There's nothing wrong with CV you need to stop whining you noob go back to co-op, learn to adapt dodge ( if you can dodge a wrench you can dodge a CV) and use your superior AA that is op against planes. CV are fair and balanced.

     I think that's what the CV mafia says.

Edited by grorg
  • Funny 2
  • Haha 2
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
737
[META_]
Members
1,667 posts
17,490 battles
16 minutes ago, CommodoreKang said:

CVs "encourage" you to FXP past those tiers.  This is how they are doing the Lord's work.

love it,lolololol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
984
[PT]
Members
1,018 posts
3,036 battles

Unless the CV captain is very good (rare) I don't really see CVs as a big threat. They can be a irritation in BBs if you have no help and you need to be wary of them in a DD but if I'm in a DD I find radar cruisers much more dangerous.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,073
[CO-OP]
Members
2,647 posts
27,757 battles
19 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

I played a 4 CV game this morning. Both enemy CVs attacked my Massachusetts for much of the game. They were barely a minor annoyance.

 

At the lower tiers many ships don't have the AA to discourage CV attacks.  

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
527
[BINGO]
Members
144 posts
9,199 battles

You would think that when this forum topic comes up every other day it seems for a year, that some rational and "new subscriber" saving changes would be made.  Sure the game has a global market, but what percentage lose interest in the CV & Warplane spam that dominates a Warships game paradigm? Not the best way to entice new players by totally betraying them to start by dominating them with Warplanes.  New player loss should be the first red alert for change in any game.  Bots appearing in randoms is never a good sign of game design and again it is low tier quality of play that has been downgraded by lack of quality gameplay design.  

Now that low tiers are saturated with CV's, we will only see more high tier quad CV matches and just watch the subs plummet.  This saturation will induce a serious burn out in the entire community once quad CV matches are the norm at tier 8.  The writing was on the wall I have rued this day of CV overpopulation that is coming upon us fast.   

Perhaps someday the sleepers will awaken at WG.

Edited by Willawaw
  • Cool 3
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,248
[PVE]
Members
7,576 posts
23,591 battles
56 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

I played a 4 CV game this morning. Both enemy CVs attacked my Massachusetts for much of the game. They were barely a minor annoyance.

 

Maybe you can let OP borrow it for his T4 grinding through the RB...I'm sure that would solve all of his problems.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,021
[APEZ]
Members
2,516 posts
8,937 battles
Just now, IfYouSeeKhaos said:

Maybe you can let OP borrow it for his T4 grinding through the RB...I'm sure that would solve all of his problems.

Who resets a line and doesnt FXP to at least tier 5

  • Haha 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,152
[BONKS]
Members
957 posts
4,460 battles
1 hour ago, Snargfargle said:

I played a 4 CV game this morning. Both enemy CVs attacked my Massachusetts for much of the game. They were barely a minor annoyance.

 

"I played the toughest T8 BB which is practically a T9 BB with best AA suit in it's tier and best heal and my one anecdotical piece of evidence therefore makes everyone else's opinions null and void"

 

There, fixed it for you. 

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[SOUTH]
Members
28 posts
13,743 battles
34 minutes ago, Willawaw said:

You would think that when this forum topic comes up every other day it seems for a year, that some rational and new subscriber saving changes would be made.  Sure the game has a global market, but what percentage lose interest in the CV & Warplane spam that dominates a Warships game paradigm?  That should be the first red alert for change in any game.  Bots appearing in randoms is never a good sign of game design and again it is low tier quality of play that has been downgraded by lack of quality product design.  

Perhaps someday the sleepers will awaken at WG.

When the CVs were redone, 4 CV battles happened constantly at tier 10, I play cruisers and found myself detected by air 30 seconds into battle until I was sunk.

In response I quit WoWS for I think close to a year. When I peeked back in I saw no more 4 CV battles at tier 10, so started playing again.

I reset a line to get into Research Bureau, but the tier IV to tier VII are just to awful to play with 4 CVs almost every battle.

One response here was that it encourages to FXP through those tiers, yet WG states that they implemented RB so players will get the experience of handling the lower tiers ships again.

Kind of a contradiction if you ask me. Making those tiers so aggravating sure galls me on Research Bureau.

I have never seen any explanation from WG why a ban on 4 CV battles in high tiers but not in the lower tiers.

Considering that some ships in lower tiers have actually zero AA would sure make it preferable to ban 4 CV battles in lower tiers as opposed to higher tiers.

Edited by VanZutphen
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[SOUTH]
Members
28 posts
13,743 battles
12 minutes ago, why_u_heff_to_be_mad said:

Who resets a line and doesnt FXP to at least tier 5

This comment is literally an admission that something is wrong with low tiers,

Thank you for agreeing with me.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,683
[46856]
Members
1,899 posts

WG says this is all working as intended and we have to adjust our game play. You will need to come to terms with your insignificance in the bigger scheme of game balance.

 

not-important-office-note-white-backgrou

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
677
[-TRM-]
[-TRM-]
Members
2,268 posts

Thats why I don't reset RB lines. Some of which took 5 years to complete.

The Carriers are a problem but not too much of a problem unless you learn that you are spotted asap 30 seconds into game start and then hunted until you are destroyed. Once your team loses all DD's then your team loses. End of battle.

If I was a CV person I would be totally all fighters. Clear the air and allow our DD's to do Lord's Work among our defanged flattops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,457
[TSG4]
[TSG4]
Volunteer Moderator
3,330 posts
16,913 battles
25 minutes ago, why_u_heff_to_be_mad said:

Who resets a line and doesnt FXP to at least tier 5

you are looking at 1 right now  :cap_old:, I don't used FXP at low tier at all

 

low tier do not need to waste any FXP, I can get it fully research and up to the next tier with 5 good games. t5 would be 10 good games or 15 if bad games just to be sure (I like my ship fully upgrade and take my time). 10 good games wont take that long at t5 to all the way to t7. t7 and above would be around 24 to 29 good games mark.

 

If I am super lazy, I would stack signals to make it faster, but signal used up, so I save it for high tier grind.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,282
[RBMK]
Members
2,187 posts
34,476 battles
40 minutes ago, Willawaw said:

You would think that when this forum topic comes up every other day it seems for a year, that some rational and "new subscriber" saving changes would be made.  Sure the game has a global market, but what percentage lose interest in the CV & Warplane spam that dominates a Warships game paradigm? Not the best way to entice new players by totally betraying them to start by dominating them with Warplanes.  New player loss should be the first red alert for change in any game.  Bots appearing in randoms is never a good sign of game design and again it is low tier quality of play that has been downgraded by lack of quality gameplay design.  

Now that low tiers are saturated with CV's, we will only see more high tier quad CV matches and just watch the subs plummet.  This saturation will induce a serious burn out in the entire community once quad CV matches are the norm at tier 8.  The writing was on the wall I have rued this day of CV overpopulation that is coming upon us fast.   

Perhaps someday the sleepers will awaken at WG.

Agreed. Start CVs at T6 similar to other line splits. At least at T6, surface ships have some semblance of AA though not as robust as it should be.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,373
[SALVO]
Members
26,051 posts
28,782 battles
49 minutes ago, Willawaw said:

You would think that when this forum topic comes up every other day it seems for a year, that some rational and "new subscriber" saving changes would be made.  Sure the game has a global market, but what percentage lose interest in the CV & Warplane spam that dominates a Warships game paradigm? Not the best way to entice new players by totally betraying them to start by dominating them with Warplanes.  New player loss should be the first red alert for change in any game.  Bots appearing in randoms is never a good sign of game design and again it is low tier quality of play that has been downgraded by lack of quality gameplay design.  

Now that low tiers are saturated with CV's, we will only see more high tier quad CV matches and just watch the subs plummet.  This saturation will induce a serious burn out in the entire community once quad CV matches are the norm at tier 8.  The writing was on the wall I have rued this day of CV overpopulation that is coming upon us fast.   

Perhaps someday the sleepers will awaken at WG.

Time to recite the Litany against Fear, oh sleeper.

Quote

I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.

 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,106
[FOXEH]
Banned
14,364 posts
20,557 battles
1 hour ago, Snargfargle said:

I played a 4 CV game this morning. Both enemy CVs attacked my Massachusetts for much of the game. They were barely a minor annoyance.

And exactly what does that have to do with low tier play? Mass has AA; tier 4 does not, and you know it, so go troll somewhere else.

2 hours ago, SkaerKrow said:

I'd rather face two CVs on the enemy team than four or five DDs.

That's because you play CVs and CVs don't attack other CVs.

46 minutes ago, xHeavy said:

If I was a CV person I would be totally all fighters. Clear the air and allow our DD's to do Lord's Work among our defanged flattops.

That used to be a thing in the old RTS days; CV players would cry and wail about how unfair it was. But it was rare because WG didn't reward shooting down planes but amply rewarded sinking ships. Even then they didn't want carriers fighting carriers.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,113
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
2,965 battles
2 hours ago, grorg said:

Deep breath.

    There's nothing wrong with CV you need to stop whining you noob go back to co-op, learn to adapt dodge ( if you can dodge a wrench you can dodge a CV) and use your superior AA that is op against planes. CV are fair and balanced.

     I think that's what the CV mafia says.

Dude, you are doing the RB grind. Spend the freexp...or stop complaining.

14 minutes ago, Umikami said:

That used to be a thing in the old RTS days; CV players would cry and wail about how unfair it was. But it was rare because WG didn't reward shooting down planes but amply rewarded sinking ships. Even then they didn't want carriers fighting carriers.

I could argue that the rework was green lit by WGs inability to stop the RTS meta shifting from strike to pure AS loadouts...

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×