Hiding Carriers

[iron650]

Its the blatant squad spamming that gets me
(Image removed from quote.)

Actually seen one from BnZ's "fanbase" don't have a screenshot but the path spelled out his name on its way to a base. 

[RealDeal]

Good strategy, Broken Game Mechanic, or Both?  Imo if a Carrier does not engage in combat after its corresponding port has been captured for a reasonable period of time it should switch to other side.  Or another carrier should spawn all together for the other side.  This is dumb right here though.

(Image removed from quote.)
Discuss.

I disagree. This would just be one more thing to take away from a game this is already decreasing in gameplay. Just my two cents.

~BPARKER

[Belial]

speaking of hiding cv's....I logged in the other day to see this >.>

(Image removed from quote.)

 

[grizz441]

I disagree. This would just be one more thing to take away from a game this is already decreasing in gameplay. Just my two cents.

~BPARKER

You trollin' dawg?

[RealDeal]

You trollin' dawg?

Trolling? Negative! You asked for a discussion and put my two cents in. Sure it's dweeby to run the carrier to some corner of the map but isn't necessarly contrary to the spirit of the game. My point is that the gameplay is\has already been narrowing for the last 3 or 4 years. Why remove another possible gameplay option?

~BPARKER

[Guppy35]

Trolling? Negative! You asked for a discussion and put my two cents in. Sure it's dweeby to run the carrier to some corner of the map but isn't necessarly contrary to the spirit of the game. My point is that the gameplay is has already been narrowing for the last 3 or 4 years. Why remove another possible gameplay option?

~BPARKER

Just asking, but how is taking a carrier out of the game, a 'game play option"    Seems like it's more of an avoid game play option?

[Assi29]

Just asking, but how is taking a carrier out of the game, a 'game play option"    Seems like it's more of an avoid game play option?

Oldies just don't get tha warz.

[RealDeal]

Just asking, but how is taking a carrier out of the game, a 'game play option"    Seems like it's more of an avoid game play option?

Just one less option for a defending/retreating force to use and just one less possibility for an advancing force to consider. Currently advancing forces need to keep track of enemy CV activity. This is usually done by stumbling upon enemy CVs or pro actively sending out scouts to find CVs in likely locations. What seems to be being proposed here is to due away with all that and just allow the the CV to respawn after an elapsed period of time thereby negating the need to keep track of them. I believe this to be a narrowing of the game-play and reduces and minimizes game-play strategy.

~BPARKER

[Guppy35]

Just one less option for a defending/retreating force to use and just one less possibility for an advancing force to consider. Currently advancing forces need to keep track of enemy CV activity. This is usually done by accentally stumbling upon enemy CVs or pro actively sending out scouts to find CVs in likely locations. What seems to be being proposed here is to due away with all that and just allow the the CV to respawn after an elapsed period of time thereby negating the need to keep track of them. I believe this to be a narrowing of the game-play and reduces and minimizes game-play strategy.

~BPARKER

So in your thinking is the hidden friendly or enemy to the country it belongs to?

[Assi29]

Hiding it in a glitch location is awesome. woo hoo.  win de warz.

Putting it in a position to die?  That is the suxx.

vICTA BOELCKE needs some CV rules added.

[RealDeal]

So in your thinking is the hidden friendly or enemy to the country it belongs to?

In my thinking the CV is friendly to the country that currently controls the CV not the Port.

[muzik]

What is with the time limit idea? Yea it is slightly lame to hide a cv EVER! But the LAMEST form of cv hide and seek is not keeping it away from the country who took the port. That is a valid effort to keep control of it. When they hide it even when control of the port is not even in jeopardy and refuse to let others put it on the offensive is the highest form of timidity and retardedness.

If you want to resolve this, dont take the cv from them, give the new port owners another cv. One more cv is not going to change the balance of power especially if it's being hidden. And now all the carrier battle guys have an excuse if not a obligation to find and engage then enemy cv.

[Bruv119]

was that jockym drawing willies with the CV again?   

I think the attractiveness for the war winners is that It counts as 2 fields,  remove the % for the CV and then hiding it won't be any advantage unless used as an offensive force.

[des506]

stop hiding our rook cvs pls!

[Citabria]

I think HTC has watched the gnashing of teeth and lamentations of women on this topic for a decade.

The fury you can invoke by hiding the enemies carrier is the only strategic mechanism in this game that will motivate people to fly across the map and bomb to get back and defend with constant air patrols to keep.

It's too bad we don't have somthing in our HQ/city/factory strat as compelling to people that will unleash such fury to make the effort worthwhile for strat targets the way they feel it is for hidden cv's.

personally I avoid all carrier fights. The puffy 3k alt+ constant ack is so mind numbing and badly coded it ruins the whole area for any type of flying for me.

the ww1 flak model that is deadly in a small  circle around the carrier at all altitudes would be a massive improvement.