Kenliero

OP Are you new with internet? It almost sounds like you have played only single player games and now assume that you always survive in multiplayer games.... Guy with 67% winrate whining about bad games... That is just funny... Your results are way above average... You need to stop expecting to be some kind of demigod... You know there are other good players in the world...

Kenliero Ship Reviews - Minekaze/Fujin/Kamikaze Review Stats, Tier 5 Destroyer Comparison + Gameplay (Almost identical video as above only with different title):

BY..... reducing the damage, we can increase fleets, which brings more options and variety to decks.... but by bringing more fleets, we should reduce spotting ranges... and THAT would make it much more interesting for everyone.

Yes, but bringing balance for carriers is actually very very easy. I have no idea why WG has not balanced them yet. It is such a trivial task. I suspect that they just have not played them enough to know the difference. I have played all carrier till tier 8 and I can easily tell what is needed to balance carrier tiers 4-8,. The model I suggested here, actually does bring balance, if you also decrease their damage.... Decreasing bomb damage has been always the way to go, I have no idea why WG tried to make carriers impossible to play, by introducing akward plane behavior and horrible torpedo cones and everything, just to ruin it for carrier players, when all you ever needed was to decrease damage to bring them in line with other classes and very minor changes to carriers themselves to bring them level with each other... stuff like buffing Langley and Ranger... one divebomber for each would do the trick, it doesn't need anything else than that... insteadthey go and ruin the whole game mechanics and make it really really complex and difficult, and ruin it for everybody

Finding balance is very easy task. That should not be the point. The point should be to make carriers fun to play, in a way that there is depth in them and variety, instead of making them fun by just increasing damage. Having opportunity to use completely different tactics, doing more bombruns WHILE not making crazy amount of damage and ruining the game for others, is the way to go in my opinion. Let's say one side takes fighter deck... in that case there should be enough bombers to overcome it partially, so that bombers still work and fighters don't cancel out the bombergame, like it does now. Also, by choosing fighter deck, it should not be only about fighters, you should have option to make bombing runs as well, but with decreased damage, where you give up some torpedoes.. It is just stupid way of thinking, if you say "USN is suppose to do this and that and IJN can not do this and that". That is just BS. Both of them should have a lot of options to choose from, instead of limiting for example IJN to never use divebombers. If IJN Divebombers are weaker, then they should have more of them in comparison, so that even that tactic is useable and balanced.

I think there is plenty of room in tier 8. I think the problem here is that you are just used to snipe from max range, and the max range is more in high tiers?

Yeah, I agree that those are the worst. Specially that original Bogue 2-0-1 doesn't make any sense at all. I gave Zuiho fighter deck to compensate it, but it might be even better to not have fighter deck in that tier. In general the idea here is to reduce pure fighterdecks a little and give more options. I also agree that the carriers would be too powerful, simply by increasing bombers, which is why I suggested decreasing damage and spottingranges.

Which is why I increased the number of divebombers in the deck, to make them more attractive. In the current state no one uses them. I think it should be an option, and it would bring variety to games, making it more interesting.

My premiums: BY FAR Best price for money: Murmansk Favorites for credits: Nikolai(62% wins), Blyska(59% wins), Murmansk(63% wins) Tirpitz(29% wins, but only 7 games, potential is huge) Good premium: Fujin(67% wins) Average premium: Warspite(40% wins, but only 5 games) Bad premium deals that I regret: Atlanta(42% and LOT of games!!!??? wtf!) Ones I don't have(but have some idea): Great: Gremmy. Good deal: Atago Bad deals(way overpriced): Kutuzov

First 2 was easy, but setting fires seems to take a lot of time, lol

There you have proper citadel sound @ 32m 23s

Atlanta is pretty much tier 6, by performance...

Atlanta OP and BB UP... HAHAHAHAHA.... this topic is just.... priceless

Minimap? What's that?

What would work for everyone, is decreasing air detections by 50%, drop servicing time to half, allowing attacks more often, increase survivability of planes and decreasing torpedodamage. This way carrier players could attack and HIT ships more often, making it fun, but also reducing torpedodamage would lower overall damage and give better chance to survive the torpedostrikes...

Nice webpage & good post Kenliero on European server High level overview Mostly plays aircraft carriers, especially medium-tier and is excellent in them Deals a very large amount of damage Extremely rarely uses torpedoes Key vehicle - Murmansk

Dispersions in 15km: Fuso has 165.82m, Nagato 169.02m, Warspite 201.53m, New Mexico 210.4m.... All these with last hulls, without accuracy modules. Fuso is more accurate than Nagato and Warspite is nowhere near in accuracy. What comes to dpm, I have been talking about damage per salvo, which does make a huge difference AND makes sense. I only put dpm in parenthesis, just to show that it ALSO loses in dpm, for both ships. Fuso does over 70k more theoretical damage per minute compared to Warspite, if we now talk about dpm. Penetration matter against higher tier battleships and NM, not so much against same or low tiers, and even less against cruisers. Also, you are comparing Fuso and Nagato there, which is completely different issue. Difference in caliber is massive between Fuso and Nagato(54mm), unlike between Warspite and Fuso(only 25mm).

This is why you take advanced firing training for those battleships in tier 7+

I am pretty sure that Warspite's 72 second traverse is the worst turret traverse in the whole game... so yeah, it is bad, very bad... But I also understand what you mean with "steer to aim"(locking guns in specific angle in advance)... that is what I always do with other battleships as well. That said it doesn't help you in situations, where you actually need the turret traverse, like enemy coming from the other side, behind island, when you need to turn the guns.

This game has the same dumb problem as Star Trek Online... .. and it's called [edited] PS: Sorry, could not resist...

Higher caliber won't compensate much anything against New Mexico, when damage per salvo is still 30k less (90k vs 120k) and New Mexico has stronger citadel armor. Difference between dispersions is not much in 15km and Fuso has way superior accuracy against both of them. Warspite loses in having 4 less guns, bad gun arc and horrible turret traverse. Having good AA and secondaries isn't enough to bring it to same level with the other two.

Warspite is actually quite a bit worse than the other two. The damage is only 71% of what New Mexico does with salvo(and dpm), which is very poor. Full stats comparison of those tier 6 battleships in my Warspite review:

Fuso is good ship, but I prefer New Mexico for tier 6

I didn't believe in discounts anymore, or even their promises of discounts. I don't remember ever seeing them in WoWs.. I've seen only bundles where they sorta make believe that by getting all the extra junk, we "kinda get something cheaper", which is just BS, not a discount.

I agree that premium camo with -4% hit is just stupid. I used concealmant one always... what comes to other buffs, all it needs is a little bit better gun arc...