Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ruthless4u

Do you plan on playing CV's if/when they are added?

Carriers  

25 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you want carriers added to the game

    • Yes
      17
    • No
      4
    • Don't know
      3
    • Don't care
      0
    • Other
      1
  2. 2. Do you plan on using carriers if/when added?

    • Yes
      15
    • No
      6
    • Don't know
      3
    • Don't care
      1
    • Other
      0
  3. 3. Do you want to see the Graf Zepplin ( German carrier, never finished construction) added to the game?

    • Yes
      15
    • No
      5
    • Don't know
      1
    • Don't care
      2
    • Other
      2


Recommended Posts

I'm looking forward to CV's being added to the game, although I hope it's a few months after launch to give us something to look forwards to.

Does anyone else look forward to carriers being part of the game( assuming they still plan to add them?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i want to see them added but the implementation in PC is already highly questionable. 

the veteran CV players say, that especially the lower tiers are not really interesting to play while offering seal clubbing gameplay. 

CV vs CV fights are basically bs, because of the auto use of defensive fighters for CVs. You need surface ships to battle CVs. On the other hand, CVs are still the last ones to be spotted and shot at.

some ship lines deal far better with planes than others. US cruisers will cement tier roles as top dogs, while other lines become more and more useless. same for battleships.

DDs in general will have a very hard time, because their AA is 💩. Notser just uploaded a video, where he was sailing a full AA built gearing and despite using all charges of def-AA, he did not shoot down a single plain. he said that you basically need your smoke to do your jobs. Other lines except Russians and Americans will have even higher problems, because they don't even have def-AA to panic enemy fighters, while having crap-AA. 

he was basically harassed and worn down by endless fighter waves, without being able to defend against them. Overall very frustrating (they dealt only chip damage but very often) gameplay. Not necessarily OP in regards of damage done by the CV but because he simply was helpless.

this needs to be looked at. He had far less problems in his BBs (other videos) against the planes and he is not going to have problems in his AA cruisers either but the rework seems to have missed its purpose.

it was meant to enhance the CV gameplay and to take pressure off DDs, while making BBs have to worry about planes again. If you follow farrazela and notser(and other players), it looks like they failed. While high tier becomes interesting again from a CV perspective, it becomes extremely frustrating for DDs. 

if they come to the console, i will off course play CVs - at least to test and understand them but i am very skeptical about the implementation. It needs a lot of fine tuning.

the graf zeppelin should off course be added to the game. Its already playable on PC. Btw it was basically a finished ship bit they could not decide what planes they should use. However - they first need to balance carrier gameplay and reach their goals. Fun gameplay for CV players, threat to BBs, take pressure off DDs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Ruthless4u said:

I'm looking forward to CV's being added to the game, although I hope it's a few months after launch to give us something to look forwards to.

Does anyone else look forward to carriers being part of the game( assuming they still plan to add them?)

1. Yes, carriers should be added for historical realism. Strong AA is also a pretty defining trait for American ships and some others. I do hope everything gets balanced on PC. Infinite planes is stupid though; a carrier player should have to think and prioritize target selection, not just be able to throw wave after wave of planes at a ship until it's sunk. At some point, you'll burn through your consumables defending yourself, and they will eventually sink you, costing you a hefty consumable resupply fee.

2. I'll give them a try at least.

3. As long as it's balanced, don't care.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah.

Carriers get more powerful, the longer the game lasts. It's the other way around for all the other classes. While their self defense fighters do have a cool down, they don't have charges. that makes a carrier very tough to fight for other CVs. 

even after the rework, its first and foremost a fight CV vs CV and the other ships are targets. 

the catapult fighter consumable for BBs is total BS - especially of on ships, who already have strong AA.

US ships traditionally had very strong AA - that's a historical thing based on the pacific theatre and its carrier based gameplay. But US ships also have super heavy AP strong HE, radar, good concealment, usable armor, good maneuverability, high rate of fire strong dpm … its a bit much and not healthy for balancing.

they need balancing before CVs can ne unleashed on console. in their current state, they should not be introduced on consoles. They should wait at least half a year after PC release to capitalize on their experiences and balancing decisions. I say that they are ready at best in July this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the maps feel to small for CV's, I just don't see them surviving long. I know new maps will be added , but I just can't escape that feeling. I did not get far on PC with carriers, but while I intend to use them here I do have my concerns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

well … CVs on PC have by far the highest rates of survival.

the relatively small maps (they are not smaller just use other tiers on PC) and faster engagements could be a balancing factor on consoles. 

i still see heavy balancing problems with DDs and some ship lines.

they need time and experiences from PC before they should add CVs to consoles. good thing is, that they are not in a hurry.

what they should do in any case:

if CVs are added to the game the player limit needs to go up to 10 per side and CVs should be limited to one per side.

Edited by KaLeuWillenbrock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming they arrive balanced CV’s will be a great boost to interest in the game when they do arrive. Do you think they’ll start from teir 3?

You guys have mentioned PC a lot (for good reason) but I’m wondering if it will be as easy to sneak up on a CV in a DD as it is in Blitz given the close starting positions...

Looking forward to sinking them :Smile_izmena:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vor 7 Stunden, NoZephyr sagte:

Assuming they arrive balanced CV’s will be a great boost to interest in the game when they do arrive. Do you think they’ll start from teir 3?

You guys have mentioned PC a lot (for good reason) but I’m wondering if it will be as easy to sneak up on a CV in a DD as it is in Blitz given the close starting positions...

Looking forward to sinking them :Smile_izmena:

iirc, blitz has the old rts style gameplay for CVs.

With the old playstyle, you could sneak up on CVs on lower tiers, because inexperienced players used to park behind islands. it was fairly easy to follow the returning planes back to their carrier.

the new CV gameplay looks different though and nobody really can tell how its going to work. People have to learn to play with CVs again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carriers feel too much like Arty in WOT. 

And if you’ve watched any decent players of WOWS on pc, you’d see they have issues upon issues with carriers and their ever changing balance. 

 

Not only that but just like arty, they actively discourage aggressive play. You don’t want to get caught out in the open in a BB against a carrier with a vendetta. So they camp and lob shells from the blue line. I like that there’s no carriers, feels like a real, proper gunnery duel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In warships, CVs actually prevent passive play, because a moving target is harder to hit, than one camping behind an island.

CVs are bad on a different plane.

btw … it was announced on reddit today, that they are going to buff AA in general l. This at least makes the carrier lose planes again.

however, it does not change the situation for DDs, who will be nerfed again - by carriers being able to harass them (because most DDs have crap AA) and the fact that cruisers (US cruisers in particular) will become a more played class. This adds more radar to the mix.

with buffed AA, only the Russians and the Americans will have viable DDs. Both have access to def-AA. Russians are very fast and can speed tank CVs, while Americans have excellent smoke to hide in. The british might be able to use their short cooldowns on smoke as well but they don't have def-AA. German, japanese and pan-asian DDs will not have a good time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jonot6 said:

Carriers feel too much like Arty in WOT. 

And if you’ve watched any decent players of WOWS on pc, you’d see they have issues upon issues with carriers and their ever changing balance. 

 

Not only that but just like arty, they actively discourage aggressive play. You don’t want to get caught out in the open in a BB against a carrier with a vendetta. So they camp and lob shells from the blue line. I like that there’s no carriers, feels like a real, proper gunnery duel. 

Not to start an argument, but I never believed carriers( or arty ) discourage aggressive play. There are a lot of other things that contribute to camping behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I don't like playing CV's just not my type of playing BUT they should be in the game!  Adds more to the game play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/2/2019 at 11:38 PM, Ruthless4u said:

Not to start an argument, but I never believed carriers( or arty ) discourage aggressive play. There are a lot of other things that contribute to camping behavior.

Nah it’s cool bro, marketplace of ideas 🙂

That’s the point dude, they “discourage” aggressive play. Good players work around it, bad to mediocre players will camp because they can’t figure out a workaround.

Im Unicum in WOT console, and we play with and against unnerfed arty, so you either adapt or get wrecked. But some people, with No negative connotentions intended, don’t have that level of competence, so adapt in a different way. Eg: camping out of fear. 

Admittedly it is indeed to a lesser extent in WOWS, but my main point was that they’re having copious amounts of issues balancing the damn things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For security reasons, please do not provide your personal data or the personal data of a third party here because we might be unable to protect such data in accordance with the Wargaming Privacy Policy.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×