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

Opinions on the CVs?

360 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

44
[EURUS]
Members
31 posts
2,252 battles

The point of this topic is that I see that some people advocate the end of CVs, others basically want them to be nerfed more and more and so on. We know they won't leave the game. So I would like the opinion of players who don't like CVs or who just don't like each other. Give us your opinions on what to do with them. What's your idea for the CV?

  • Cool 1
  • Haha 1
  • Meh 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
462 posts

Split the game into two.

If the CV game flops, so be it. If not, all good.

The non-CV game will happily carry on.

  • Thanks 4
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,519
[--K--]
[--K--]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
2,896 posts
10,568 battles

You can ask and present the facts any way you like OP, as well as others who want to feign CVs are okay:  They are mostly hated, and what they do to the game players of all skill levels are against.  There is *no* data to support anything else minus the same loud and vocal CV apologists that exist here on the forums (which are in the minority as is but clearly congregate here), and they're mocked by pretty much the vast majority of the skilled playerbase.  All forms of public feedback with the exception of the cesspool known as these forums have shown this opinion very strongly, and there has yet to be data to prove anything else despite the feverous claims that it can be easily manipulated:  Which to that I say, "well if its that easy then wouldn't have the huge swaths of CV supporters influenced the polls somewhere else to be largely positive?"

That is the truth, and there is no escaping it.  The sources for what people think about CVs can be found with a few easy searches, the burden of proof at this point falls upon the apologists who want to oppose said truth.

Deal with it.  :Smile_glasses:

Post addendum:  For people who want to "downvote" this post, I'll be eagerly awaiting that data to prove me wrong.  Or else enjoy throwing  salt here with no recourse, I savor it.  CV player tears are as tasty as fresh Maine lobster :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 10
  • Thanks 12
  • Boring 3
  • Meh 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,292
[BWC]
Beta Testers
2,212 posts
8,470 battles

Hmmm. You only want the opinions of players who don't like CVs or who don't like other players? Guess my opinion isn't wanted here then.

 

 

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,012
[WOLFG]
Members
13,270 posts
12,537 battles

CVs have superior spotting, have initiative advantage over their opponents, pay for their mistakes less than any other ship type, don't detonate, are hard to get fire damage off of, and are the only type to not regularly counter their red side equal.

Which (and how many) of those should they give up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44
[EURUS]
Members
31 posts
2,252 battles
3 minutes ago, Jakob_Knight said:

Hmmm. Você quer apenas as opiniões de jogadores que não gostam de currículos ou que não gostam de outros jogadores? Acho que minha opinião não é desejada aqui.

 

 

Just about the CVs in the game... what's your opinion about them and etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,519
[--K--]
[--K--]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
2,896 posts
10,568 battles
1 minute ago, DrHolmes52 said:

CVs have superior spotting, have initiative advantage over their opponents, pay for their mistakes less than any other ship type, don't detonate, are hard to get fire damage off of, and are the only type to not regularly counter their red side equal.

Which (and how many) of those should they give up?

You forgot but is not limited to:  Can almost entirely ignore map features aka positioning, have influence on an entire match instead of the flank they choose, has the best armor scheme in the game that makes even battleships jealous, and their primary opponent is a PVE automated system.  

Just thought i'd be a good Samaritan and help you :Smile_trollface:

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,012
[WOLFG]
Members
13,270 posts
12,537 battles
Just now, CaliburxZero said:

You forgot but is not limited to:  Can almost entirely ignore map features aka positioning, have influence on an entire match instead of the flank they choose, has the best armor scheme in the game that makes even battleships jealous, and their primary opponent is a PVE automated system.  

Just thought i'd be a good Samaritan and help you :Smile_trollface:

I was covering the first two in initiative, and must of been thinking of the Ranger when I thought about armor. 

And I just didn't want to think about AA.  In mean it does work well. IN PVE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
99
[X-M-S]
Members
290 posts
4,538 battles
26 minutes ago, CaliburxZero said:

You can ask and present the facts any way you like OP, as well as others who want to feign CVs are okay:  They are mostly hated, and what they do to the game players of all skill levels are against.  There is *no* data to support anything else minus the same loud and vocal CV apologists that exist here on the forums (which are in the minority as is here), and they're mocked by pretty much the vast majority of the skilled playerbase.  All forms of public feedback with the exception of the cesspool known as these forums have shown this opinion very strongly, and there has yet to be data to prove anything else despite the feverous claims that it can be easily manipulated:  Which to that I say, "well if its that easy then wouldn't have the huge swaths of CV supporters influenced the polls somewhere else to be largely positive?"

That is the truth, and there is no escaping it.  The sources for what people think about CVs can be found with a few easy searches, the burden of proof at this point falls upon the apologists who want to oppose said truth.

Deal with it.  :Smile_glasses:

I think you're forgetting about perhaps the most important form of player feedback - money.  It appears that people are playing CV's and they are buying them from the store.  Newly released ships being bought probably gets much more weight in making decisions than polls or survey results (as it probably should).

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
284
[CLUMP]
Members
397 posts
32 minutes ago, CaliburxZero said:

You can ask and present the facts any way you like OP, as well as others who want to feign CVs are okay:  They are mostly hated, and what they do to the game players of all skill levels are against.  There is *no* data to support anything else minus the same loud and vocal CV apologists that exist here on the forums (which are in the minority as is here), and they're mocked by pretty much the vast majority of the skilled playerbase.  All forms of public feedback with the exception of the cesspool known as these forums have shown this opinion very strongly, and there has yet to be data to prove anything else despite the feverous claims that it can be easily manipulated:  Which to that I say, "well if its that easy then wouldn't have the huge swaths of CV supporters influenced the polls somewhere else to be largely positive?"

That is the truth, and there is no escaping it.  The sources for what people think about CVs can be found with a few easy searches, the burden of proof at this point falls upon the apologists who want to oppose said truth.

Deal with it.  :Smile_glasses:

We got to see the data once. That will NEVER happen again. It showed CVs were light years ahead of any other class as far as game influence. Here are the last charts we will probably ever publicly see. 

Capture00.thumb.PNG.350da80f4eba4d9c4ec2126046a7e362.PNG

 

Capture01.thumb.PNG.760e6a0c9ae5f9235ff20416a20cb88c.PNG

What is really interesting about this data:

  • DD's have the second highest influence in the game (second to CVs) while having the lowest relative damage per game.
    • This shows balance as it sits 2nd in one category and last in another. 
  • BB's have low relative game influence while having second highest relative damage output. 
    • Which shows some balance being 2nd in one category and last in another. 
  • CV's have the highest influence per game, and the highest relative damage output per game across all classes (every other class balances around the board).

 

CVs are the only class that do not show balance characteristics in the data. However, I would be shocked if they ever let data like this go public again. CVs Also:

  • Cannot detonate (only class in the game)
  • Can attack targets across the entire map (only class in game)
  • Get 60 second DCP (more than double any other class)
  • Can self spot safely from behind an island AND hit their target without a consumable (planes are armament not consumables). 
Edited by USMC_FMF
  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,519
[--K--]
[--K--]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
2,896 posts
10,568 battles
1 minute ago, Bomont said:

I think you're forgetting about perhaps the most important form of player feedback - money.  It appears that people are playing CV's and they are buying them from the store.  Newly released ships being bought probably gets much more weight in making decisions than polls or survey results (as it probably should).

Oh, I've not forgotten that at all.  I stopped buying premium and almost all premium ships since the rebork, and I know many others have.  To argue that as a point for OR against CVs is merely trying to fulfill an agenda, as nobody but WG can provide the data to back either.

3 minutes ago, DrHolmes52 said:

I was covering the first two in initiative, and must of been thinking of the Ranger when I thought about armor. 

And I just didn't want to think about AA.  In mean it does work well. IN PVE.

Fair enough 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,519
[--K--]
[--K--]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
2,896 posts
10,568 battles
1 minute ago, USMC_FMF said:

We got to see the data once. That will NEVER happen again. It showed CVs were light years ahead of any other class as far as game influence. Here are the last charts we will probably ever publicly see. 

Capture00.thumb.PNG.350da80f4eba4d9c4ec2126046a7e362.PNG

 

Capture01.thumb.PNG.760e6a0c9ae5f9235ff20416a20cb88c.PNG

What is really interesting about this data:

  • DD's have the second highest influence in the game (second to CVs) while having the lowest relative damage per game.
    • This shows balance as it sits 2nd in one category and last in another. 
  • BB's have low relative game influence while having second highest relative damage output. 
    • Which shows some balance being 2nd in one category and last in another. 
  • CV's have the highest influence per game, and the highest relative damage output per game across all classes (every other class balances around the board).

 

CVs are the only class that do not show balance characteristics in the data. However, I would be shocked if they ever let data like this go public again. 

Oh, I have seen the CC summit's entirety from where that data comes from but thank you for posting it here.:Smile_Default:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,941
[SALVO]
Members
9,013 posts
6,716 battles

I'm happier about CVs now than I was when I came back to the game.

Damage wise I think currently it is almost balanced but for some specific cases

The AA system remains as failed as ever but I think it would fit better under the new RU CV scheme of 1 squadron/1 attack, which will also help a lot with the spotting issue. I'm hopeful the RU CV induction if successful would help to shift all CVs to 1 squadron/1 attack model. 

All accounted I've high expectations for the new RU CV system, lets see how that works.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
394
[--K--]
Supertester
1,624 posts
16,055 battles

I'd rather them and the Subs be thrown into what basically amounts to a permanent operation side of the game. Hitting convoys, attacking formations, other CVs. 

Just like WoT they try to force in a different class that takes away from the core game which is what people came to enjoy. 

 

I've bought one premium CV directly (RTS Saipan) which I refunded when the rework hit. Since that I won Loewenhardt and Saipan in twitch giveaways and got the Enterprise and Ark Royal in Christmas crates. So technically WG is in the negative for my CV purchases since rework :p

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
162
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Members
323 posts
4,459 battles

In my opinion, CVs - and subs - should be a part of the game. 

But....there's a reason CVs are called the Fun Police™.

Just because they're a part of the game, doesn't mean they shouldn't be subject to ruthless balance requirements, as all classes must be, and I often feel like the class is immune to the nerf bat, despite objective things you could point to that show WG is willing to make changes to CV gameplay. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
99
[X-M-S]
Members
290 posts
4,538 battles
29 minutes ago, USMC_FMF said:

We got to see the data once. That will NEVER happen again. It showed CVs were light years ahead of any other class as far as game influence. Here are the last charts we will probably ever publicly see. 

Capture00.thumb.PNG.350da80f4eba4d9c4ec2126046a7e362.PNG

 

Capture01.thumb.PNG.760e6a0c9ae5f9235ff20416a20cb88c.PNG

What is really interesting about this data:

  • DD's have the second highest influence in the game (second to CVs) while having the lowest relative damage per game.
    • This shows balance as it sits 2nd in one category and last in another. 
  • BB's have low relative game influence while having second highest relative damage output. 
    • Which shows some balance being 2nd in one category and last in another. 
  • CV's have the highest influence per game, and the highest relative damage output per game across all classes (every other class balances around the board).

 

CVs are the only class that do not show balance characteristics in the data. However, I would be shocked if they ever let data like this go public again. CVs Also:

  • Cannot detonate (only class in the game)
  • Can attack targets across the entire map (only class in game)
  • Get 60 second DCP (more than double any other class)
  • Can self spot safely from behind an island AND hit their target without a consumable (planes are armament not consumables). 

Interesting, thanks for posting that.  What is "combat effectiveness"?  It's graphed, so it must be quantified in some way.  Do we know how it's defined?

Edited by Bomont
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,364
Members
2,686 posts
4,301 battles
4 minutes ago, Dunnik said:

In my opinion, CVs - and subs - should be a part of the game. 

But....there's a reason CVs are called the Fun Police™.

Just because they're a part of the game, doesn't mean they shouldn't be subject to ruthless balance requirements, as all classes must be, and I often feel like the class is immune to the nerf bat, despite objective things you could point to that show WG is willing to make changes to CV gameplay. 

Immune to the nerf bat?  IMMUNE TO THE NERF BAT?  Sir,  have you been paying attention at ALL to CV's?  Since the rerelease ALL THEY'VE GOTTEN IS THE NERF BAT.  The only class I've seen not only immune to the nerf bat but that other ship classes get nerfed in order to PROTECT are DD's.  

  • Cool 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 5
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,364
Members
2,686 posts
4,301 battles
1 minute ago, Bomont said:

Interesting, thanks for posting that.  What is "combat effectiveness?  It's graphed, so it must be quantified in some way.  Do we know how it's defined?

Take that with a MASSIVE grain of salt,  dude.  Check the date.  CV's have had two and a half years of nerfs.

  • Cool 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,002
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,448 posts
14,968 battles
38 minutes ago, USMC_FMF said:



Capture00.thumb.PNG.350da80f4eba4d9c4ec2126046a7e362.PNG

 

 

Old CV's were better balanced? In what alternate universe was that true? The team that their CV won the air battle had something on the order of a 70% WR. CV influence pre rework was off the charts.

38 minutes ago, USMC_FMF said:

CVs are the only class that do not show balance characteristics in the data. However, I would be shocked if they ever let data like this go public again. CVs Also:

  • Cannot detonate (only class in the game)
  • Can attack targets across the entire map (only class in game)
  • Get 60 second DCP (more than double any other class)
  • Can self spot safely from behind an island AND hit their target without a consumable (planes are armament not consumables). 

DD's cannot be citadeled either. it is a design/balance decision.

How long does it take for that attack? An attack that will do minimal damage compared to a full volley of guns or torpedoes no matter which type of plane is doing the attacking. The only CV that has an alpha attack also has a very long cool down between passes and takes a top player to do well with which it tends to have because of the currency that is used to get it.

I don't understand the decisions on DCP and fire/flooding length either.

CV's always could self spot.

Edited by BrushWolf
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,634
[ARS]
Beta Testers
6,703 posts
6,746 battles
1 hour ago, Did_I_hurt_U said:

Well the only public poll that WG ever put out that we got to see it was overwhelmingly against.

 

I never saw that.  Can you provide a link?  The only polls I ever saw were the highly unscientific forum polls and Flamu's equally unscientific poll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
290
[D4DDY]
Members
115 posts
6,235 battles
43 minutes ago, DrHolmes52 said:

CVs have superior spotting, have initiative advantage over their opponents, pay for their mistakes less than any other ship type, don't detonate, are hard to get fire damage off of, and are the only type to not regularly counter their red side equal.

Which (and how many) of those should they give up?

I would say

40+ sec radar ships are superior.

Constant spotting despite smoking.

 

  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,364
Members
2,686 posts
4,301 battles
1 minute ago, BrushWolf said:

Old CV's were better balanced? In what alternate universe was that true? The team that their CV won the air battle had something on the order of a 70% WR. CV influence pre rework was off the charts.

DD's cannot be citadeled either. it is a design/balance decision.

How long does it take for that attack? An attack that will do minimal damage compared to a full volley of guns or torpedoes no matter which type of plane is doing the attacking. The only CV that has an alpha attack also has a very long cool down between passes and takes a top player to do well with which it tends to have because of the currency that is used to get it.

I don't understand the decisions on DCP either and fire/flooding length either.

CV's always could self spot.

To be fair I think the post he was quoting was saying that the original CV's WEREN'T better balanced and that chart was trying to prove it.  But it just feels...off to me,  for some reason.  I feel like those were cherry picked numbers,  like separating into specific ships and then skill categories but its impossible to tell from just that picture.  That being said,  original release rework CV's DID overperform,  mostly due to the underperformance of most AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,064
[TIMT]
Members
1,780 posts
7 minutes ago, Bomont said:

Interesting, thanks for posting that.  What is "combat effectiveness"?  It's graphed, so it must be quantified in some way.  Do we know how it's defined?

They were rather vague about this, I'd speculate they probably compare the expected outcome for a player in a specific ship with the actual outcome of the game. In other words how well past WR of lets say the DDs or BBs predicts the outcome of the match. Pure speculation though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,012
[WOLFG]
Members
13,270 posts
12,537 battles
3 minutes ago, I_Know_Putin said:

I would say

40+ sec radar ships are superior.

Constant spotting despite smoking.

 

In a single ship vs. ship, yes.

But a CV can spot the entire map if he chooses.

People take CV's to complete spotting missions for a reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×