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

If you could change anything in this game, what would you change?

40 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

9,406
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
29,165 posts
15,765 battles

This might surprise some people since I was an alpha tester and my posting history on them but I would remove CV's. They never fit the game's scale and shouldn't have been in the game at all even though other games had them, the like subs are the proverbially square peg in a round hole.

Now since they are going no where I wish that the anti-CV crowd would spend some time with them and a hand full of matches doesn't do it.

Edited by BrushWolf
  • Cool 3
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,743
[RLGN]
Members
19,117 posts
35,137 battles
28 minutes ago, Burakkuauto said:

I would change CVs back to RTS.

This.

20 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Now since they are going no where I wish that the anti-CV crowd would spend some time with them and a hand full of matches doesn't do it.

Not generally surprising that many complainers often have few, if any games, in the class that frustrates them so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,096 posts

dds have been over buffed ..need nerfed..

would change ranked battles back to ranked sprints and let them run...

would bring back the dead eye skill..

would bring back achievement award signals....

for a start 

Edited by arch4random
no reason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,406
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
29,165 posts
15,765 battles
7 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

Not generally surprising that many complainers often have few, if any games, in the class that frustrates them so.

Almost as irritating are the couple unicum level CV players that think everything is super easy such as dodging flak when you haven't even seen any yet and may not even see the ship yet.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
203
[NWO-1]
Volunteer Moderator
438 posts
7,566 battles

A mixed mode between coop and randoms where no less then half the ships on each side are bots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
140 posts
7,049 battles

I would change the culture within WG HQ or their design philosophy, both are good options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,123
[WOLFG]
Members
17,089 posts
20,381 battles
1 hour ago, BrushWolf said:

This might surprise some people since I was an alpha tester and my posting history on them but I would remove CV's. They never fit the game's scale and shouldn't have been in the game at all even though other games had them, the like subs are the proverbially square peg in a round hole.

Now since they are going no where I wish that the anti-CV crowd would spend some time with them and a hand full of matches doesn't do it.

I would agree.  RTS is a dead end (not enough people were going to grind/buy them to suit WG), and the new ones are dying off.  

Subs might work, but a) they won't really be subs and b) I don't think WG is going to figure out how to make them work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,555
[GWG]
Members
8,018 posts
15,871 battles
6 minutes ago, Turbotush said:

The ownership.

With the current 'problem' in the security world, there WILL BE repercussions.

I foresee a new Internet 'Iron Curtain' coming down.  This game will be disconnected.  These foreign owned servers will be shut off.

Not pointing at who, or what politics...   It may very well be happening people.

Hope you all have alternate hobbies lined up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,396
[SALVO]
Members
28,044 posts
41,537 battles
2 hours ago, Burakkuauto said:

I would change CVs back to RTS.

I wouldn't.  I utterly loathe the entire concept of RTS in gaming, no matter the game.  RTS should be relegated to the ash heap of gaming history, never to return and forever forgotten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23
[X-PN]
Members
35 posts
10,449 battles

Yeah I think if they changed CV back to RTS with a few tweaks I think they would be fine in the game. I would also stop development of subs for obvious reasons.

I would also start focusing on adding more real and unique ships to the game before adding any more paper ships, not that I don't like paper ships, but I dislike when they take precedence over real ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,135
[MELON]
Members
1,081 posts
3,022 battles

I'd remove all the water because you guys don't deserve nice things:Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,123
[NMKJT]
Members
4,272 posts
9,133 battles
2 hours ago, BrushWolf said:

This might surprise some people since I was an alpha tester and my posting history on them but I would remove CV's. They never fit the game's scale and shouldn't have been in the game at all even though other games had them, the like subs are the proverbially square peg in a round hole.

You'll run into that with pretty much any class WG tries to add that plays by sufficiently different rules from the others. CVs and Subs, DDs are pretty borderline thanks to the distortions WG had to make for them to be playable. Something like DDs are as far as this game should go on that.

Though I preferred RTS for CVs, it was at least an interesting system that could've been balanced way better and de-bugged.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,137
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
6,534 posts
29,622 battles

Make this game the World of Surface Combatants. That means no CV and no sub - only BB, CA/CL, and DD. That should solve a lot of problems...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,406
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
29,165 posts
15,765 battles
2 minutes ago, MnemonScarlet said:

You'll run into that with pretty much any class WG tries to add that plays by sufficiently different rules from the others. CVs and Subs, DDs are pretty borderline thanks to the distortions WG had to make for them to be playable. Something like DDs are as far as this game should go on that.

Though I preferred RTS for CVs, it was at least an interesting system that could've been balanced way better and de-bugged.

RTS was broken too but in different ways such as strafe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23
[X-PN]
Members
35 posts
10,449 battles
2 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

RTS was broken too but in different ways such as strafe.

So if they nerfed things like strafing and one-shotting ships, it would be a fine concept, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,123
[NMKJT]
Members
4,272 posts
9,133 battles
7 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

RTS was broken too but in different ways such as strafe.

It was broken in its own way, but I feel like if they'd actually bothered to fix it and try balancing it better, it would've been a better system than action-CV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,406
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
29,165 posts
15,765 battles
40 minutes ago, AYYYYYYMD said:

So if they nerfed things like strafing and one-shotting ships, it would be a fine concept, right?

 

35 minutes ago, MnemonScarlet said:

It was broken in its own way, but I feel like if they'd actually bothered to fix it and try balancing it better, it would've been a better system than action-CV.

The problem with RTS was that the team whose CV won the air battle had a WR around 70% so even without strafe that would still have been a factor. Strafe just made it worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,123
[NMKJT]
Members
4,272 posts
9,133 battles
32 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

The problem with RTS was that the team whose CV won the air battle had a WR around 70% so even without strafe that would still have been a factor. Strafe just made it worse.

Because WG didn't bother to balance it much to reduce the CV's impact more. They just finally abandoned the system for action-CV. The bugs with the interface sure didn't help new players picking it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,406
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
29,165 posts
15,765 battles
8 minutes ago, MnemonScarlet said:

Because WG didn't bother to balance it much to reduce the CV's impact more. They just finally abandoned the system for action-CV. The bugs with the interface sure didn't help new players picking it up.

How do you balance fighter/bomber interaction other than with something like the rework did taking away the ability of fighters to kill bombers under player control?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
12 posts

We have CV's , BB's, CL's, DD's and Subs. So why not implement something that would bring more new ships in play. Being able to deploy mines and while your at it also bring on some guided anti ship missiles. The Germans had and deployed them in WW2. They were to late to change the outcome of the war but worked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
457
[SIM]
Members
1,744 posts

Bring back the RTS CV,    Give Flint the same firing range and reload as Atlanta ,  Restore the Thunderer range back to initial 28.1km 

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.

×