World of Warships – CV Rework SoonishTM

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (776 votes, average: 4.72 out of 5)

RQL’s Shipstorm Saturday

September 8th, 4:00 PM Eastern

1st Place: 9000 doubloons per player
2nd Place: 4150 doubloons per player
3rd Place: 1920 doubloons per player

Wargaming recently answered some questions at Gamescom about future CV rework plans, they revealed some interesting information. Hope you have a wonderful day and I’ll catch you next time!

Tier IX American Missouri Replay – Warships Friend Invite – Discord Server


  1. So british CV as well?But I also wish WG could just fix the bot abuse in Asia server,they’re just ruining the game

    • The Budgie Admiral

      Could we please not go down racism creek? Because I could not bother to bring my paddle and that way only lies annoyance and ridicule.

      On British CVs I hope we get single drop torpedo bombers. Low damage torpedoes with high speed and flood chance. Few squadrons, bombers with a low hit damage. The goal for these ships would be to stack DOTs and get damage this way. Counterplay would be to predict an attack pattern and use repair party cautiously. I see way too many BBs extinguish one fire and get away with it, and I see too many BBs extinguish three fires and get two new ones ten seconds later. A CV with a predictable one-two-punch would fix that.

    • Risheen Mukherjee

      +The Budgie Admiral well, little Franz there started it anyway. I was just defending my… uh, continent.

      Single drop torpedo bombers? I get it but that honestly feels like change for change’s sake. Single torp bombers would also get shredded by AA far quicker than others, and this is considering that AA mechanics remain the same. A new CV line would be nice, though. No more gimmicks, just good, balanced ships.

    • Asian gamers invented farming bots and selling powered up game accounts, so cry me a river. Many Asian accounts left the NA server when stealth fire was removed, which was not coincidence. It allowed for some insanely high scores with certain ships which could fully exploit that ability.

    • +Jochen Heiden dude 1 vs 1 me!

    • British CV? 10% HP/s per Fire on board due to structural damage (fly deck is also tension deck…), jokes aside problem with British CV is that they aren’t really Fleet carriers like US or Jap Carriers, they have smaller air group, worse recovery/launch times, while gaining protection (albeit questionable IRL at last) and additional armament.

  2. The rework it’s the only reason why I kept my tier 6 IJN CV. I just can’t play it

  3. This CV Rework is like Kaiser Soze……you here about him but nobody’s seen him. CV’s were not “A” dominent force, they were “The” dominent force of WW2…..and signalled the end of BB’s….Free respecc hahahaha too funny, this is WG after all they will find a way to pork us with this CV rework…thanks for your fine work Notser my man…..

  4. Only hearing that CVs will feel like other ships makes me extremely worried about the rework…

    • Iyou will have Cv’s everywhere and none of them will be able to effectively use their planes or have decent control like in current form and the anti aircraft guns will be upgrade to nuclear status because none of the strike aircraft will be killed by friendly Fighters. You can’t have action first person point of view you will have to much power on ships because the fighters will not be able to kill multiple waves. Then what’s gonna happen everyone’s got a bitch and complain about how easy it is to drop on ships and so the AA and then we gonna be just the same place as we are now

    • maybe we should see what wargaming is doing with the rework before we call it bad. i am neither optimistic nor pessimistic about the rework. I assume some player may not like the rework because they can no longer be as dominant as they used to be while other players with love ti because they feel that they can have more of an effect on the battle, thats for cvs and everyone else. So lets just cool our heels and wait to see what they do.

    • PJ, WoWs is a Third person game, not first person, unless you are the king of all scrub noobs and stay glued in sniper view the whole match….

    • Well they pretty much said that they are ditching the RTS aspect… Since that is what I enjoy about CVs the most, I can call it bad. Or at least feel worried about it.

    • @Michael Grondahl: When you press Shift to go into Binoc mode and shoot other ships, that’s a First Person Shooter budy. The rest of the time, when Free Looking, that’s 3rd Person.

  5. 8:35 when the CV bounces 4 Missouri shells, wow.

  6. I’m interested to see how it changes. I play CVs and enjoy them now, but there is quite a few things about CVs now that I don’t like. I’ve been reluctant to push hard to finish the grind on USN and IJN CVs as I’ve just been playing for fun and not seriously grinding. Both are at T8 right now.

  7. started recently to play CVs…and I’m up to T9 Essex now.
    From that experience I can say:
    CV Play is very very tough right now…it takes so much micro and map awareness to be somewhat successful…
    On the other hand, if you manage to do that, you impact is deciding on win or loss of the whole Team…
    So actually right now I’m kind of OK with the Meta having only a few CVs because of their huuuge impact on the game.
    If they change the CVs to have more players being able to play them….they will need to drastically reduce the impact of a CV…otherwise this will hurt the gameplay of all the other classes and furthermore will make some of the ships nearly unplayable.
    I’m very excited though

    • I personally use CVs as a break from all of the other ships so, changing how they play that much will be a hit-or-miss for me.

    • If it becomes auto-drop hell.. Not exactly the best solution, right?

    • i played till i got both T10 CVs, but now i dont play those much…though i sometimes play ryujo or kaga just to relax.
      i consider myself one of the best CV players but at high tiers it can be really exausting.

    • Plenty of AA around

    • you couldn’t have said it better, as tier 9 CV player i 100% agree on this. You have to work hard af for the game’s you play, but, if you’r smart and have good map awareness you can carry hard. iv gotten 100k+ dmg games in my LEX with AP bombs in a tier 10 so the hole “cant do anything in a tier 10 game with a tier 8 CV” is bull shit.

  8. RQL…consider hosting the event for the other servers.. not just NA

  9. honestly i would like to start playing cv’s but with the ui being so damn broken i researched and bought the t6 ijn cv but i have yet to even attempt to play it

  10. I havent been crazy involved with the WoWs community until fairly recently, but what I’ve seen so far is that the Devs in charge of WoWs are doing a lot better job overall when compared to WoT. I was one of the biggest defenders of a lot of what WoT was doing in part because the foundation of the game is awesome IMO. Unfortunately they just keep on making failure after failure in announcements and posts, and have a bad habit of twisting information in attempts to trick the fanbase or just straight out lie to them. It finally got me to sever my interest in WoT and I wont spend another penny on it.

    WoWs is my replacement, but I’m taking it easy until i get a good feel for how the devs handle the game. It’s looking good so far.

  11. well… they ignore submarines though they were a dominant force also…

    • Why would you compromise on sub speed when the current surface ships in game have historical speeds? Find a good sub game and enjoy.

    • aviaxis In WWII subs were ambush hunters. They did sink warships but didn’t operate with fleets. Subs played almost no role in squadron vs squadron encounters which WoWS deals with. They just didn’t have the speed to keep up with battle groups at cruising speed let alone at action speeds.

    • you dont attack continuosly… you sometimes defend… also subs were following bbs and save crew from the sinking ships… actually they put lots underwatter mines against them… since they were very dangerous

    • Depends on whose navy and tactical doctrine. They were too slow to keep up with the fast battleships and carriers of the late 1930s to wartime and were best employed as commerce raiders, sinking merchant tonnage. The Germans hold the all time record for tonnage sunk by submarine, followed by the Allies. Japan attempted to use its subs to directly attack warships instead of cutting off supply lines, with a lopsided number of subs lost as a result.

    • WWII subs could make about 12 knots on the surface while Battle groups made 24 to 30 depending on the composition. At T8 to 10 they would never get into the fight. At Jutland a bunch of German subs were sent out a week before to ambush the Battlecruiser squadron in the Firth of Forth as it sailed. They got there they sighted the British ships and didn’t even get within firing range because the British ships were moving too fast. That British squadron included Warspite. Subs weren’t used in fleet actions until 20 years after this game.

  12. Eww.. I don’t want CVs in every match…

    • you will see them in a very much after the rework then everybody is gonna realise civvies are way too powerful even more than it is now and then we can start again from scratch

    • Agreed… I want them gone under the current meta, as they only ruin the matches they are in. I’m interested in seeing the rework… I might start playing them again.

  13. Doubt they can really do anything to ‘balance’ CV’s in the game. CV’s basically turned the majority of surface combat ships into ‘support’ roles. They made BB’s obsolete. Cruisers were relegated to escort duty. DD’s were used to hunt subs and protect the CV’s and their support ships. No way to ‘balance’ them in this game unless you totally rework the entire game. If CV’s become more common, I hope they give players a way to opt out of CV games. There are a LOT of ships in game that have practically zero AA.
    But WoWS won’t be the first game company that cannot balance air power in a surface combat game. I stopped playing WT due to all the plane spam in “Ground Forces” mode.

    • Cruisers running with bb`s is how we used to play a few years ago . Even the cv would have a cruiser handy but things seem to have changed in that department .

    • ChannelCreatedToAllowMeToComment

      What a pathetic, stale, cliche of a reply! All it shows is that you like to spout the jargon in an attempt to appear “cool”. What do you want? A game only played by a small number of “good/very good” people? Well, if you do then YOU may be the one at the bottom of the food chain unless you are one of the unicums at the top.

    • Luckeley enough for WG this is a Arcade game so you can fuck with the stats the way you want. Battleships should be way More inaccurate wich would be frustrating as hell, cruisers would fuck up DD’S even More, battleships accelerate like shit, dd’s have 1 set of torps as reload at most… So they SHOULD rework CV’s. I liked playing the Midway one day. Now nobody plays it anymore and it’s aa Hell and the CV players you face are such die hards u litterly get fucked from the sky…

    • I’ve also noticed that CV’s are common and popular at the lower tiers where AA defence is very low or even non existent.
      Seems like CV players love it when surface ships can’t fight back but whine when they run into strong AA fire.

      Maybe the best thing to do is withdraw CV’s from the game and make a new game “Carrier wars” for those who love this ship type, with robot ships to escort them.

    • I’ve seen several CV mains state the way to ‘fix’ CV’s is to nerf AA. As it is now, if a CV wants you dead, you’ll be dead. But my biggest gripe about CV’s is they are playing a different game, with a totally different UI. It’s like one group of players are playing soccer, but a few are in the same game but playing gridiron (NFL) football. With such a bifurcated game, it’s no wonder CV’s are so hated. If they become more common in games, I’ll likely cut WAY back on WoWS play.

  14. Will they change the cost of CV’s?

    I’m a CV main but I haven’t played a single match in 2 months as CV game play is just annoying so I uninstalled the game.

    This new CV rework had better change the game play experience so currently I’m going to wait and see.

    • Kid, if you aren’t gud(tm) at the class

      What makes you a main of that class

    • The Gaming Python

      A change of game play style won’t make you a better player lol

    • I have a level 18 captain on my Shokaku and i just unlock the next tier but the problem is the Cruisers are the most used on the Asia Server which results in a massive amount of Def AA consumables. Not only that but there has been an increase in USSN Ships since the release of the new cruiser line, making every game in the CV class a loss in credits due to lossing planes at a rapid rate which = loss in damage potential = less $

      Edit: The other class ships don’t connect with me that well as i prefer the top down style of game play

  15. I agree Notser, better they show it when it’s ready that give it to us unfinished. In the word’s of another gaming company called Id Software:

    “It’s done when it’s done.”

  16. I’ve stuck with CVs since 2015 and have reached Essex and Shokaku. I have Kaga and Enterprise; didn’t get GZ when it was available since I was short on cash at the time (regrettably). I love the history of the class and acknowledge its impact on naval history.

    I really hope this CV rework reinvigorates the line. High tier CV play is extremely stressful for me as a casual gamer.

  17. I am tired of walking into a game and being reported because i am there. I see dd and bb rush in and die and that ok. But if a cv gets out played its report time. The community is so toxic to cv and i dont care why. It madding to be in a t8 cv in a t10 there is nothing you can do. If you took a Clemison into a t10 fight you could do somthing but not ccv 2 teirs lower.
    I am looking forward to the aa change and making cv played agian. I am hoping that every ship like t10 british which is a fleet to its selve will be looked at as well.

    • +James Bigglesworth I have no idea what my win rate is I dont care or look at states.
      Bottom line is. Smoke last for 2 min and cover you for the whole map. Radar is only short range and. Duration.
      I just had a game where my Fletcher in smoke and I burned and torpedo everything in sight and there was nithing anyone could do.
      That is not balanced.

    • James Bigglesworth

      Smoke duration varies with Destroyer nation and upgrades.
      People could not go after you because of your team support.
      You could fire from smoke because your team spotted for some of the time.
      If you are a bad CV player and get owned by the other CV Player, your team loses because of that ONE person.

    • All wg games have toxic losers in it

    • Ser Garlan Tyrell

      Because no other class of ship in the game has as much impact on the match as a carrier. And if you’ve got a decent captain, then good, but the majority seem to be rubbish or unicum, so there is often a huge skill gap and an imbalance between the teams. Imagine a team has an afk ship, if it’s a top tier battleship, your team is going to struggle, but you can overcome it. But if it’s an afk carrier, even a bottom tier one, I have never seen a team come back from that (out of maybe 20 or so games with an afk carrier).

      Couple that with how carriers are like the old atomic bomb arty from wot, that can nuke almost any ship in the match if they focus all their assets on them. You can anticipate where destoyers will be, and zig zag to avoid them, and that is usually (though not always enough), but you can take steps to avoid them, but planes can drop torpedos like 300m away, or against smaller ships, they can drop in a cross pattern so they’re impossible to avoid. The only counter to a carrier is another carrier, or aa crusiers (but even they can get overwhelmed). And sailing together makes you a juicy target for destroyers. Or you can be the last man (or woman) alive on a flank, and try to retreat, but you can’t run away from a carrier.

      Next most frustrating thing (for both sides) is the disparity in aa/carrier power between the different tiers. I understand that tier 8 carriers have it tough as everything has good aa, and you usually find yourself in tier 10 matches (though that’s the same with every tier 8 cruiser and bb, and to a lesser extrent, destroyers (torpedoes and cloaking devices are the great equalizer))… But that’s not nearly the case at lower tiers… at tiers 5-7, where there arent many aa cruisers, and even the best aa is kind of mediocre, carriers are especially powerful, as there isnt really a counter other than another carrier.

      This is one that carrier players could do to help themselves, BRING FIGHTERS! Especially at mid tier when no one has aa, and the carrier has specced for strike, and so the enemy carrier freely runs amok, are really frustrating, as it’s a good part of the carriers job to defend other players from the enemy carrier, just as its an aa cruiser’s job to protect the ships around them, a destroyers job to spot, a battleship’s job to tank damage for his (or her) team. But so many times, the friendly carrier is concentrating on the far side of the map, tunnel-visioning on some poor ship, and completely ignoring his (or her) team on the other side, getting hammered by the enemy carrier.

      And lastly, aa durability. It’s all very well complaining that all these ships have really good AA, and that might be true at the start of the game, but after a salvo of HE from a bb, or an HE bomb drop later, their aa could be halved. So in late game, people are especially vulnerable. I have no problem with AA mounts being knocked out, but they should either repair themselves over time, or be significantly more durable in the first place. Because if aa is not consistient, even through the duration of a battle, how can you expect the devs to balance it? It’s either going to be balanced at the start or the end, but it cant be balanced throughout atm.

    • You can not prevent me to play if I want, as I sadly can’t prevent you to ruin others game in a CV, crossdropping torp volleys form 100 m or so. I am not angry on a ship or class, I hate people like you, who are using this tool to make others gaming experience – my gaming experience – inferior. But I have to thank you the idea again: now I just report CV players regularly – if I can annoy, or help to ban one of one hundred, it totally worth the effort.

  18. Aircraft carriers in WWII were not a dominant factor, they were THE dominant factor without doubt. The scarcity of CV’s in WOW is a serious oversight to the reality of WWII. Surface ships were relegated to a secondary role once the power aircraft became apparent. WG must incorporate CV’s into game play even at the expense of surface ships. Yamato and Musashi, the two largest battleships ever built, were both destroyed by air power alone. The goal in the Pacific war boiled down to eliminating the enemies CV’s. Everything else was secondary.

    • And HMS Ark Royal was sunk by a single submarine. Carriers didn’t really matter much in Europe, submarines were far more important.

    • After RN CVs crippled the Bismarck and a fair portion of the Italian Navy at Toronto? Even Tirpitz was sunk by aircraft, if land-based ones.

  19. For me, the most important thing to fix with CVs is the weight of their role in a team. The impact of a CV in a victory is way too important. You can have a good CV player versus a bad CV player, and it does not matter how bad his team is, he is going to get a victory for his team. It took Notser’s whole team in his clan battle to stay together and shoot down the planes to prevent the CV from pulling a victory for his team. If the good CV player’s team was nearly as good as Notser’s team, they would have won. In a random battle, this is never going to happen. The higher the tier, the more impact the CV has on the chance of victory. Especially, if a CV is bottom tier, it can have difficulties attacking higher tier targeted ships. But if it is tier 9 or 10, the planes are OP against most AA defenses. A Montana that has god tier AA will be dead if it is focused by a Midway. What needs to happen is that a good CV player should not have more chance to bring a victory to his team than a good BB player or a good DD player.

    • that’s incorrect sir i have games with 6 and 7 kills on midway and hakury yet my team loses even if i capped with the dem CV , stop blaming CVs

    • at Fabian, Perez The difference is that if you are an excellent BB player, DD player or an excellent Cruiser player, there are more than one player that can counteract you. If you are a good CV player and the CV player on the opposite team is bad, nobody is going to counteract you. If you put a fighter on top of a DD to spot him and the opposite bad CV player is not going to kill your fighter, nobody from the BB team or cruiser team is going to run to the DD to kill the spotting plane. Being a good CV player is not only about how many kills you have. It is also about what you can do to help with the dynamics of your team. Killing the right targets is as important as how many targets you can kill.

    • i know yet its not only the CV’s fault to lose a game , there’s 11 more guys

    • at Ptah An average ship can keep changing direction and he will never eat a torp from a DD. There is nothing he can do against a CV 2 tiers above, especially when the CV has AP bombs. One AP bomb drop from a higher tier CV on a Tirpitz or a KGV will remove at least half of its HP and there is nothing he can do. And it is an utopia to say that a BB can sit under 5 km from a cruiser for the entire game.

    • u know how difficult is to actually hot those bombs??? even with a very well manual made attack? they are way too RNG bro

  20. New CV rework being alike other ships in game = expect a shit tone of gimmicks first up and also anticipate 100% neglect on older ships (introduced in the game years ago) to “balance” gameplay – Conquerer please respond…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *