Pikkozoikum

I'm not talking nonsense. The base detection doesn't matter. We are not talking about best case scenario, the topic was concealment and outspotting. (...) Going with T8 the USN Sub has 5.9 km concealment surfaced. Ther are many DDs that outspot that sub German T8 has 5.6 km, Asashio and Kagero at least out spot So no, they don't outspot everyone. Also there will come even larger submarines like IJN. Russian subs are also quite large. So the majority of subs are actually not outspotting stealthy DDs. Only german subs are stealth If you remove submarines, you will have DDs, that outspot everyone. So how does it matter? There will be always someone, who can outspot everyone. When submarines submerge, the concealment of surface ships will be better as well  This was clearly about the spotting "issue". No, my opinion on something doesn't matter about the mentioned facts. Also weakness are downsides. But the word quibbling doesn't matter. But even going with your wording. you say that there are strength and weaknesses - so how can it be a opinion, if there are strength and weakeness? I mean, technically in some cases it can be an opinion, that something is weak and strong, but if something is bad by facts, then it's not an opinion. Going with one example: Homing Torps can be countered with DCP. That alone is a disadvantage of homing torpedos. Normal torpedos can't be DCP'ed and damage reduced by ~50%. So this is a disadvanatage on homing torpedos. Please don't tell me, it's an advantage... ^^ Or it was a writing issue, no offence. ASW also doesn't counter by it's own. It needs spotting. And Radar "needs" damage. Both are counters, that rely on a second parameter. Of course, you can compare everything with anything, but there is no relevance given. AA has it's own completly difference mechanics, which is not comparable with anything. AA is generally spoken a counter, but not a counter like ASW, and not a counter like Radar. Maneuvering can be also a counter, but yet I wouldn't compare it with radar or AA. That really depends on your definition. Extending the spotting is a counter against stealthy classes or ships, that rely on staying hidden. Radar extends spotting against subs, Hydro does. Submarine Hydro does. RPF works also. Submarine Hydro even works against subs on maxium depth, and yes, Radar, Hydro and RPF doesn't work there, but that makes sense. Submarines are not fast Don't have much HP Have not much Vision (submerged) Have no Armor They have these downsides and need something, to play around that. Battleships have also slow speed, but then they get tons of HP and armor. Then you have DDs with low hp, but they have fast speed. SS have the downsides of DDs and BBs, so they need something to compensate that -> Submerging and Maxium depth There are coal rewards

I haven't tested cruiser, I think they have the most issues with dodging. But I could probably show ~5 or more screenshots, where other BBs do that. It's something, that has to be figure out, but as far I noticed it, the best way is to move diagonal away, and then turn in the right moment. I also posted earlier in this thread 2 screenshots, where BBs do that. But you need also to consider, that it's not a 100% garant, that you always dodge. I mean subs need to do sometimes also at least some dmg.

Then block me. I'm fine with that

I had also once a match, where I almost one 1vs4. Killed CA and SS, then torps on a low hp DD, but had to dive to avoide gun damage, before torps hit, I accidently rammed the other enemy SS xD

I have taken out 2 SS as BB in a double strike. Or a BB and a sub in a double Strike xD

You quote the whole section but refering to a single word? It was about the concealment, and that they are not outspotting everyone. That's wrong and I showed why. And even if they outspot ships, I also expalined that case. (german subs) That's not an opinion. They have downsides, that is a fact, everything has downsides. They can be dodged easily (compared with other ships) in a BB, also a fact. They can be DCP'ed. Also a fact. So no idea, why you say, that is an opinion. No idea what you mean, but AA is nothing compareable with consumables or secondary armaments (torpedos) AA is an own mechanic, it's not a manual armament or a consumable. Though there is DefAA, which also not all ships have, tada. You comparing it with AA? And yes, you can compare it with consuambles, because the only difference is, that consumables have a limited number of charge,s even though some prems have infinite number of charges. Radar and ASW helps you to counter a specific ship / scenario. Against a DD you need the spotting, so you can attack Against a SS you need the attacking, while you spot it (subs are not fast, also they reveal their direction with pinging) In both cases you need a counter "consumable" They can't make it right anyways. If they would release them only in randoms, people would also complain. Somehow they need to test them more. I mean, I don't mind, if they would have released them fully now^^ But I also don't mind testing

You don't know, how to avoide? I mean, it's up to you, if you don't want read the full context, but why then even quoting me, if you are not interested in a discussion? Also quite weird, because the explanation to "ships with now ASW" is following I can show you some examples, where torpedos just miss.

Avoide the torpedos. Not always possible, but it also won't happen, that they always hit. Depends also on the ship, BB can dodge them quite easily. Also the difference for a BB vs DD or SS is. Well lets say: The result is the same, the approach different. BB vs DD - DD is fast and invisible, torps the BB. "Counterplay" for BB is to run away BB vs SS - SS is slow and good concealed. BB could even spot, but not attack. "Counterplay" for BB is to run away. (Without ASW of course) in both cases the BB will rely on another Teammate with the counter possibility. Vs DDs it is spotting. Vs subs it is DCs (often no spotting needed unlike against DDs)

I had so many 0 Sub games in BB or 1 sub game per side. Which is sad, Kii is quite good against subs :3

I doubt that. Going with T8 the USN Sub has 5.9 km concealment surfaced. Ther are many DDs that outspot that sub German T8 has 5.6 km, Asashio and Kagero at least out spot So no, they don't outspot everyone. Also there will come even larger submarines like IJN. Russian subs are also quite large. So the majority of subs are actually not outspotting stealthy DDs. Only german subs are stealth If you remove submarines, you will have DDs, that outspot everyone. So how does it matter? There will be always someone, who can outspot everyone. When submarines submerge, the concealment of surface ships will be better as well They actually have larger "penalties", than a stealth firing DD. Torpedos do only little damage Only with double ping and only when hitting the citadel, it does larger damage Doing so reveals the position of the submarine by pinging (Ping diretion) No issue, they come with downsides. They can be dodged pretty easily with BBs. Can be countered with DCP. There are also ships without Torpedos, Radar or similar counter weapons/measurements Should now every ship get Torpedos, Radar, Hydro, spotter plane etc? The only thing, that every ship has are main guns and DCP. Except submarines, they have no main gun, what I also dislike. They should get the deck gun as main gun. That's how balancing is way easier. Having bottom and top tier makes balancing quite difficult.

Sounds like a misinterpretation. It's not like you uploaded videos, that disprove that. One shotting BB groups etc xD Imagine a BB with 30s reload misses a shot completly. Tell him the joke xD Who said, that I do that? Why trying to argue with that fallacy? I even said, if I TAKE that damage from a carrier xD I mean at that point I just know, that you don't understand me, what I'm writing. No idea if it's intentional or bad communication. But that makes a discussion just pointless. Also I'm pretty sure, that is around the average damage, that CVs do per attack. Though I know, you do only 20k hits xD And all the other players are just to incompetent to beat the RNG :3 If a CV misses his attack 0 dmg. If he hits 20k. Average 10k. It makes zero sense to go with the maximum hits, when I talk about the whole and general case. Otherwise I could alos say, BBs do 60k every 30s. Does that make any sense? Please.... They excelled, when the CV player was good and the surface ship player bad. But that counts for almost every ship. I played 1vs1 against unicum CVs in the brawls, it was pretty easy. Eh yes, keep trying to discredit me, or just try to understand first.

Yes, I think many "top stats" are done, when the rework was just released

No one should suffer. And that's the case with the rework. Taking damage from an enemy is not "suffering" btw. Suffering would be for me, if a BB gets sunk with the very first strike, while grouped with other ships and that alone by a carrier. Or having a single DB squad, of ~5 total active squads, that can chase a DD for 5 to 15 minutes and spotting all their torpedos. What we have is not really a suffering, many ways to play around it. I think also many people don't understand, how it is for a CV. if they miss a shot completly, then they might have a 40-60s reload. If people keep that in mind, then it's a big difference. If I take a 5k-10k of a carrier every minute on a BB, then it takes quite a while to sink a BB. We actually saw that in the 1vs1 brawl, that they are not able to sink a single BB. And I don't call that suffering.

And the rework would perma spot your or just one shot you with a cross drop. My last match in a BB was, that I got focsed from the beginning to end by the carrier. I destroyed 2 ships and then I retreated and survived with 40% hp the match. The exact same scenario would be impossible with RTS: Even if the CV would go with auto-drop, I would be dead. If you take damage from a CV, it's probably not fun for you. But it's also not fun to take torpedo damage from a DD, HE dmg from cruisers, or AP dmg from BBs.

Every mission shows you the mission conditions it shows In which mode you have to play Which Tier Which Nation Which Ship type

You quoted me, I answered. Don't know, what you mean with that question Guess fun is subjective. It's way more fun now than against an RTS CV. Especially when you play other ships than Minotaur (compare ships like Nagato) But well, it's subjective.

You mean, to show how broken RTS was? I think only the WR was worse, but the overall stat for WR are misleading in RTS times. I mean, what WR will you get, when Midway fights Midway? ;) And now you have only Midway or Haku as possible enemies

Yes, a surfaced submarine can collide with an island. It's not about the island (horizontal plane), it's about the ground (vertical level). I don't know, I think you don't know the issue xD Automation doesn't solve the issue. As submarine there is no information to the ground, until he dives into it. That's like you close your eyes when moving a ship against an island and you open them, when you hit it or passed it

that stat, that fits with the arguments best :3

Oh, mine, too?

Eh, but you still get the warning? There is no difference, if you ram the island above the water line or below. That can happen to a submarine as well, you know? But additionally a submarine can not see, if diving is possible or not

Ships get stuck, but they can see why and that often before, they got stuck. A submarine doesn't know, what is below.

That are also only assumptions. My assumptions are supported by logic. Something that is Easy to play and learn Has higher potential damage Has no counterplay Can't be extremly worse. The thing is, you will always find a "difference" in the statistics. According to this, it would be impossible to make any argument and would only discuss with claims and assumptions. Actually that is the assumption of the others. Not mine. I just try to get logical explanation behind it. Quoting myself A common argument here is, that new CV is easy to play, so "if a bad player can now perform better" Another statement was, that the new CV has more potential damage, so "also more potential damage" "No counterplay" was also not mine statement. So I was questioning, "the result of doing less? " My statement about this: It's not logical, even if there is a difference in playerbase. Which we always will have. But I would rather say, the influence of the player base would lead into 60% different damage. Even if it's with different ships, but if you compare the effect of different player bases, you mostly see a huge difference in winrate, but less in damage. The damage might by 10%, maybe 20% higher, which depends also on the ship itself If you compare Midway, Haku with smaller player base Carriers like Immelmann and Audacious, the damage numbers are quite similar. Even FDR is maybe only 20% more, though I think that is more because of the damage, less because of the skill, which is actually the whole point.

Don't see the logical here. Having DCP as one DCP makes it a tactical tool, that you have to decide, if you want use it or not. But the flat grounds are mostly arounds islands. You won't be able to know, if the ground is flat, because you will get a island collision warning. For a comparison it would be like giving DCP a 50% chance, to remove an effect, when ship is moving. You won't know, if it will work or not.

I posted examples of the lasts month, years after rework. It's rather logical, that the skill of players increase over time, rather than decrease. Also people with no experience, that are extremly bad, tryed out the RTS CV. That's only an assumption, that the CV RTS playerbase was more skilled than the Rework. Also people claim all the time, that the Rework become easier, that would mean, that even bad player perform better. So if a bad player can now perform better than with RTS. Gets now also more potential damage, but also no counterplay and that has the result of doing less? Not very logically. 2015-Q3 - Game was very new Midway - 127109 Hakuryu - 102376 People at that time should be very new to the RTS CV 2017-Q3 Midway - 109682 Hakuryu - 119976 2017-Q4 Midway - 127884 Hakuryu - 124731 2 years later, still higher. Just to make it clear: If the RTS has "less potential dmg" AND "counterplay" than it should be way more less, not way more. For example, if you have 100,000 with Rework, than I would expect like 90,000 with RTS minus Counterplay -> 80,000 or even worse. But we see the opposite. Even not mentioning the impact of one-hitting BBs , while Rework struggles to sink a BB on it's own. Numbers of the last 2 month for comparison Going with one of the most extreme examples, the Midway had 68% more damage in average (compared with 2017 Q4) It sounds to me, that the "skill difference" is the default argument, if the numbers don't fit or there is no other explanation working. Especially there can't be shown any evidence against or for it. I could also claim, that the skill level is higher of average players (over time) and I actually think that is the case. Over time even the worst player will increase in his skill. He might be still bad, but less bad. You could say, that directly after the rework was a "skill reset", but all the players, good and new, still had experience with the total game. It's not similar to a complete new player or when the game got released. After 2 years, I don't think there is much of the learning curve left. Same for RTS, after years, I don't think, there is very much to learn for a CV main.