Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Max_Battle

Instead of swearing at CV players...

9 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
183 posts
5,937 battles

in my experience most CV drivers don't monitor chat ... too frantically trying to control the many micro management aspects to notice it ... so I don't bother wasting my time communicating too them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
911
[CLAY]
Member
1,496 posts
9,301 battles
37 minutes ago, Max_Battle said:

...I might try asking questions...

cover.jpg

And that is why CV gameplay is bad at the moment, surface ships have too much dependency on CVs to fight off attacks. And most CV players cant protect and attack at the same time.

12 minutes ago, chicony56 said:

in my experience most CV drivers don't monitor chat ... too frantically trying to control the many micro management aspects to notice it ... so I don't bother wasting my time communicating too them

And that is why WG are pushing this rework the way it is... while at the same time all but removing CV's abilities to protect allies...

So... soon CVs will have little to no ability to protect team from enemy aircraft. Ok, that's not going to be that much difference from now, except now you don't expect to see CV's that often so its all right.

Except soon, we will be expecting to have CVs in all matches (which is WG's goal).

Meaning I hope that the surface ship AA has been revamped so we have a chance, and that CVs truly are no longer the alpha striking, omni spotting, unescapable, bait & dot monsters they were.

Of it they are, I hope that WG realises this and balances them quickly.

*crosses fingers legs, arms, eyes etc...*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,342
Member
2,902 posts
6,691 battles
45 minutes ago, Grygus_Triss said:

CVs truly are no longer the alpha striking, omni spotting, unescapable, bait & dot monsters they were.

All those can be avoided by lowering damage of aircraft weapons, decreasing the number of planes per strike squadron and removal of Manual attack mode.

Did WG even say they considered any of those, esp. the last one? Nope. Gotta change the entire thing and kill a ship type's identity.

 

I understand the need of a change, I might have accepted it (albeit quite reluctantly) but then the change comes with a whole bunch of questionable features. Unless WG give me 50k doubloon and 500 mil credit for this account in Live server.

Edited by Paladinum
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,082
[MRI]
Member
2,223 posts
11,861 battles
1 hour ago, Max_Battle said:

...I might try asking questions...

cover.jpg

Get used to having no air cover. Because when the rework comes, you will be getting none. :cap_rambo:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,445
[CLAY]
Beta Tester
2,702 posts
13,904 battles
7 minutes ago, Thyaliad said:

Get used to having no air cover. Because when the rework comes, you will be getting none. :cap_rambo:

I'm heavily invested in US lines.

I am hoping this helps me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
911
[CLAY]
Member
1,496 posts
9,301 battles
47 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

All those can be avoided by lowering damage of aircraft weapons, decreasing the number of planes per strike squadron and removal of Manual attack mode.

Did WG even say they considered any of those, esp. the last one? Nope. Gotta change the entire thing and kill a ship type's identity.

 

I understand the need of a change, I might have accepted it (albeit quite reluctantly) but then the change comes with a whole bunch of questionable features. Unless WG give me 50k doubloon and 500 mil credit for this account in Live server.

This is what I worry about, while the changes are partially about making CVs less dominant against (certain) surface ships,  WG have made no secret that the primary reason is to make CVs more accessible to players, and lessen the skill gap. As chicony56 says above, CV players are frantically trying to micro manage their squadrons (although I think that even inexperienced players would still be able to control 1 squadron plus the ship itself...)

My fear is that they focus too much on making CVs more accessible, while still making them the monsters they were to surface ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,342
Member
2,902 posts
6,691 battles
26 minutes ago, Grygus_Triss said:

My fear is that they focus too much on making CVs more accessible, while still making them the monsters they were to surface ships.

I have been trying CVs in PT 0.8.0, and it was less than enjoyable so far.

My opinions: (there are parts of the mechanics I still don't know yet, so take these with a grain of sea salt)

T4 and 6 CVs are just... bad.

Japanese CVs are surprisingly hard to deal damage with, with AP bombs and awfully long arming time torpedoes that would require many, many hours to be good at.

Bomb drop is surprisingly hard to aim and drop time is probably too short. 

Rockets deal an abysmal amount of damage when hit and rarely cause fire, except the 5-inch FFAR on Midway. Rocket aiming reticule seems to be off.

 

Probably the best part from PT 0.8.0 is that CV line branches off the DD line, aka Isokaze to Hosho. WTF???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
911
[CLAY]
Member
1,496 posts
9,301 battles
5 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

Probably the best part from PT 0.8.0 is that CV line branches off the DD line, aka Isokaze to Hosho. WTF???

Ok, that is weird.

What they really should do is have it go off the cruiser line, like everything else.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×