Pawndemonium

Well, maybe it's possible to have an exception when it comes to retraining (having it work at 50% aswell), this stuff is meant to get feedback.

Those 2 skillpoints for manual drops are not a big deal at all, most guys who play CV will get the account level for commanders unlocked, and I'm pretty sure you can play some games without this ability (and if you're that desperate, you shell out gold for those 3 skillpoints)... you know, just to even the field a bit, because open beta will mostly be about new players, so basically... stop crying about every crap. .p

Well, camo should be permanent for gold (without any bonus, this should be scrapped completely, BBs have enough RNG already, and CL/CA don't care about those 4%, it's a gimmick which just hurts BBs), and temporary for credits imo. Pretty much just cosmetic stuff. The DD speed buff shouldn't have charges imo. The sonar is totally reasonable and actually necessary, although I think cruisers bring enough utility already, sacrificing the AA ability for it, makes it a solid idea. What I really love about it, is that it mostly screws DDs which hide in cap spots (which resulted in some lame gameplay). But again, cruisers were awesome already, this makes them just more viable, but I guess it's better to wait and see what other classes get in the following months. Also worth noting, apparently it's possible to fit every single module on the Arkansas (including high tier ones), I'm not sure if that's intended.

Camouflage should solely be cosmetic, the detection system is complex enough, what makes it even worse though is the increased dispersion for you opponents. No I don't have to test this first, I know already how bad of an idea that is... .p Negating a DDs ability completely with a consumable is a close second, but I'm curious about other factors so I won't judge that yet... that camo "bonus" stuff however is totally terrible, please throw those plans overboard asap. Just keep that consumable bonus stuff at a low level, flags were a good start, but all this additional stuff totally adds up, and screws up people who don't swim in credits (and that's coming from someone who commits himself to only a few ships, which basically means I'll swim in credits). I know what I'm talking about, I'm awesome! edit: just noticed a thread for game mechanics, i'll post into that one when I can give proper feedback, but seriously, it's a bad idea.

Apparently the difference between a CBT client and a CBT test client isn't large enough aswell. Seems like there needs to be another layer for stupid CV captains.

If we were supertesters we'd have access to the Bismarck

Wow, cruisers get even more utility, I'm not sure if we should get comfortable with that, is HE getting nerfed or something?

Yeah, go make your own Warship game, with Blackjack and [edited]

You make it sound as if you smash your head on your keyboard to deploy those TBs without even bothering what your victim is doing. Juicy targets have like 20+s rudder shift times, I'd even go as far and say it's easy to predict. AA is a different story, but those balancing attempts don't have anything to do with forum crying, it's mostly statistics (and I guess AA will take a hit soon, at least on some BBs). CVs are meant to have a high skill ceiling. In the right hands they will wreck stuff, most people will just be dragged into a support b*tch role though, and that's a good thing. .p

Can't be that long for the Bismarck, maybe it will be used to advertise the open beta. I'm pretty sure it plays a role in that regard. I'm so looking forward to those Krauts who think they had superior technology compared to anyone else, and lack the ability to just wreck everything, whining over stats which aren't historical and all that... good stuff.

I'm not sure if it's the best idea to unlock the account levels and to receive 2 commanders with skill points (probably 3-5 max, but still...), both are significant tools to utterly wreck the majority of players in the open beta. I mean it's a great gift, along with a free ship, but the last thing the game needs is new players who get frustrated and bring up this pay to win crap (because of pre-order stuff blabla).

Yeah, well ridiculous amounts of torps are an issue which hasn't been looked at at all so far, I'd even suggest to have dud chances on torps, or an increased spotting distance dependant on how many eels are flocked together, but that's more of a ship dropped issue (although you could easily buff the Kitakami torp range that way). I guess the devs want to force grouping up in random battles, where many AA spheres just wreck TBs (which is still too binary for CVs), not sure if that works though (ofc it's reasonable to do, but some people are just terrible, mostly CV players with anime avatars .p), but I don't really see an issue with the new values (although I have to admit I didn't expect noteworthy rudder time changes aswell), they totally expect a BB to take torpedo hits, and/or rely on other classes aswell.

In the last patch scrub CVs with anime avatars cried about a totally reasonable change, now it's BBs turn... how was this even being overdone? Apart from being a standard beta procedure to play around with extreme values to work towards something reasonable over time, I don't even see that being an issue with the new turning circle values. How did that even change those point blank drops, you make it sound as if the circle got changed from 10m to 900m. While those 70-100m obviously do change the ability to evade torps, you're still in a better spot than some months ago (in short CVs got the shaft, while still being useful, this class deserves to bleed), their spread still requires to completely focus on you to deal noteworthy damage. DD torps are only an issue if they don't get spotted through planes or other ships, and if they don't the little bugger deserves a piece of the cake, although with some proper perception you still prevent a good deal of hurt, just don't tunnel vision. Again, we're talking about 70-100m, not 300-500m, how is that being overdone, I'm pretty sure you'd even complain if it had been increased by 30m.

wtf where did I mention 1 on 1... good lord I'm out of here. edit: I meant the matchmaking limitation. But seems I have a completely different view on that matter here, and that's totally fine for me (although when reading the quote again it reads misleading, with superior role I meant pretty much having a Queen while only Rooks and Bishops are around), I'm not expecting to make any rules here, I just think it's ridiculous when random stuff gets made up (was more of an issue from your "friends" though). Currently there are 4 classes, and each should have their own limitations, I don't want homogenized crap, but clear limits for every single class (regardless of any class limit). edit2: tbh I didn't even read it, as I grew tired of this pointless discussion. Now I did, and I wasn't disappointed, you still throw accusations at me which I never came up with. Just because I don't own high tier BBs or CVs it doesn't mean I don't experience my good share of information about them. Of course this is a teamgame, I never stated anything else, what's wrong with you (although I'm not sure how experienced you are with random battles). And yes, there are occasions where BBs and CLs/CAs team up to deal with CV threats (I'm f*ck*n* playing the same game as you do), but that hasn't even in the slightest anything to do with my point. AA is a whole different story which needs to be rebalanced accordingly aswell, dependant what CVs are supposed to be (GOD FORBID, A CV NEEDS TEAM SUPPORT ASWELL, OH NO, THANKS FOR SHARING YOUR EXPERIENCE I GOT EDUCATED NOW THANKS TO YOU, seriously and you wonder why I don't reply to your stuff), thing is, this balancing has to start somewhere, atm WoWs is too binary in many ways. So either you don't want to understand me, because of random trash-talk (which would be awesome), or you think you're one of the best CV players ever (which would be ridiculous).

Seriously why do you even quote me, where did I state that? I have had enough of this useless crap here, apparently I make the mistake in expecting too much from people like you. Long story short, it's a beta, where parameters are subject to change, and I like that. What seems to differ me from you guys, I expect additonal changes instead of commiting myself to a single patch.

Limiting a class doesn't give the player the right to have a superior role over others, the game wouldn't be enjoyable with too many carriers around aswell. AA is a whole different story, and highly likely subject to change aswell. More so I find it mildly amusing how you come up with those arguments instead of just stating that I might have a point. Seriously, occasionaly I actually think you can be reasoned with, but just for the protocol, I'm mostly playing a class which wipes the skies clean of aircraft. So, while I don't experience the loss of aircraft, I experience the explosions around me as they are dealt with. If you want my objective view on that matter... yes AA is as dull as fighter cover, but that wasn't part of this thread at all.

You probably don't see the issue with CVs then. A skilled player in a CV could carry the game more than in any other class. It's not about preventing skilled players from wrecking everything, it's just that CVs bring tools to the field which make it too consistent to fire off. I didn't forget IJN TBs at all, while at earlier tiers it utterly sucks, at higher tiers you just need to devote your whole bunch of squadrons to the cause, instead of wrecking 2-3 ships at once. This game is in a beta state, nothing you see now is set in stone, that was my point from the start. And I'm not derailing this thread now with USN BB balance, but those don't really like close range DDs. Just because something beats CV stuff it doesn't mean it's op.

I said it shouldn't be their role to oneshot a single BB every TB cycle. While it should happen occasionaly (dependant how experienced your target is) it shouldn't be taken for granted... IJN CVs with 3 squadrons+ were just able to destroy everything constantly every cycle, without having any solution to prevent it (if the CV had some experience). While this might be enjoyable for the player who initiates this, along with his team, the guy on the receiving end doesn't. I'm not even playing BBs, I just have an objective look on what utterly sucks, and makes the game not enjoyable. Apart from that a CV offers something which most seem to totally ignore... which is scouting. Let alone the ability to utterly wreck destroyer ambush tactics. The support role was just my opinion how it would fit into the concept, I never said it's what the devs want (ironically CVs still fill that niche, while not engaging or rewarding, they excell in scouting). What the devs want however, is a different approach on what CVs should be capable of, it's just not fully implemented, as fighters and DBs are still in a bad spot, not only because of damage values, more because of the lack of gameplay (related to fighters).

Oh yes, it makes so much sense to come up with the WW2 argument, my bad that I overestimated you, won't happen again. I didn't read the rest of your post, as it's feasible to assume, that you apparently still don't understand what I wrote. I guess it's still this experience blabber which doesn't make any sense with the points I made. edit: To make it clear, I never said CVs are fine now, they're just part of a testing process... but feel free to quote me again, and come up with assumptions which are utter garbage.

I don't need to get more experience to tell people like you that it sucks to be taken out after 2 minutes in a battle, regardless what you do. CVs in WoWs never were jacks of all trades... Cruisers are (ignoring the HE issue), CVs started as a hard counter to BBs as you said, and the role you described was part of them before IJN got implemented. The latter showed that too many TBs utterly wreck their design philosophy, as too many squadrons can make it impossible for any class to evade the eels. If you think CVs should be a high cooldown wtfpwn unit, which has an answer to everything, than that's your opinion, not a fact. Just because they are useless now, it doesn't mean that's what they are intended to be, I just said it's only part of a plan, and it's probably wiser to just wait and see how it unfolds. But yeah... apparently I need to get more experience to know that.

Reasonable to test. Considering that IJN CVs have more squadrons it promotes focusing a single target, this is nowhere near final, the devs just try options to reduce the gap between the nations, while still having diversity. Some weeks ago US CV players cried that they lack more TB squadrons. There is a lot of stuff which needs to be worked on, like DBs and fighters in general, but seeing some sort of progression to not make people think the IJN has superior TB action is a good start. Quite late at this stage of the "beta", but yeah... let's just see how the whole picture looks, they have to have a plan at this stage. While this obviously is just my opinion a CV shouldn't have the power to take out a BB with one cycle of TBs in most cases, while it should happen occasionaly (mostly dependant if your victim reacts), it shouldn't be part of their role. CVs should be more of a support vessel, to wear down the opposition slowly, instead of blowing the fun out instantly for the targeted guy. And that guy who spams useless crap images to promote his own opinion, and comes up with real-life statistics, don't even start... thx .p

Your logic sucks.

Might be reasonable to cover this issue with gold paints. I'd camo my Atlanta anyway, she's too rusty aswell .p

No more concealment, add more torp range (15km+), but make those walls of torps easier to detect (a single spread should be harder to notice than a huge wall), giving the Kitakami the area denial role she deserves. The problem with that concept of fully torpedo reliant damage, doesn't really work at that Tier. While it's fine for low tier destroyers, it's utter garbage at tier 8. So give her more range, but only screw those who tunnel vision... the spread at 12km+ should be wide enough to allow evasive manoeuvres, also adding tactical possibilities for the Kita... but yeah... damage is probably not a strong point, regardless how you turn it, otherwise the game would fail.