El2aZeR

Lets take a most common situation. A DD is constantly harassed and eventually gets killed by the reworked CV. During such time he is constantly spotted, thus has to stay back and be completely useless. Meanwhile during RTS a DD had time to do whatever they liked before being spotted and getting oneshot. So, which of these two options sounds more enjoyable?

Except due to the increased RoF you still die just as quickly. And if you did survive that one strike during RTS you actually survive for far longer. In fact if we were to assume that time to kill is the same you have far more freedom during RTS as you were able to fully influence the battle then got oneshot rather than having to cover behind the entire time yet still die via constant harassment. As such it is hilarious nonsense to assume that death by a thousand cuts is automatically better than dying to a single strike. No wonder you subscribe to it.

Some basic reading ability certainly helps, you know? But if you want to argue about skill, it's not like I recently saw you on a stream getting rushed down by a low AA DD or sth. Now ask yourself, how do you solve this issue? One would think the logical way would simply be enhancing base AA and make AA skills and upgrades not mandatory to deny CV strikes. It certainly is not solved by making all AA powerless to stop strikes as the rework has done.

Let me guess, @DFens_666 will now simply tell you that he wasn't full AA spec, which makes your laughable argument moot and even defeats your point even further.

AA is automated, plane losses have little to do with skill. Beyond pressing a few buttons there is nothing to be done to shoot down more planes, one of which will typically even make you shoot down less planes when used against RFs. Besides, what IS "enough" DPS? It certainly seems to exceed the values of several high AA ships. You do realize a successful bait inherently implies a misplay by the player who got baited? Not that it made AP bombs any better as a mechanic ofc, but neither does it support your point. Also DFAA cd was buffed pretty heavily if you don't remember. In fact it hasn't changed compared to now with a base cd of 2 mins for the base version. The only difference compared to before is that DFAA is now completely useless regardless of RNG. Sure sounds a lot better, eh? You do realize most CVs only have two effective strikes, which implies that CVs with more strikes available will inherently get more strikes done as well? So in your own words AA is useless and incapable of denying any amount of effective strikes even in small groups, which is far more ineffective compared to previously. And "kill all planes"? With the new immunity altitude, long periods of attack immunity, accel bailout and flak no longer spawning at close range that too is pure fantasy. In fact I recently attacked a full 3x Izmail div who all stuck close together with Shokaku TBs. Izmail actually has comparable AA to the ships you mentioned because Russian Bias does not exist and cannot hurt you. According to you that should cost me all my planes despite their weaker AA and allow me to only execute a single successful strike. Man, looks like a lot more strikes to me. And it looks like a couple of planes will even make it back. Heck, I even mismanaged my heal because I accidentally fatfingered it. Any other stories you wanna tell us? Worse players have also gotten worse, so moot point there?

Once again ignoring the actual relevant part, I see. But it's nice that you're disproving one of your own points, namely: Oh, what is this in one of the threads you posted? https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/101386-ap-bombers-op/?page=2&tab=comments#comment-2467971 One really has to wonder what other things you're willing to lie about?

Again, that is not possible. It's not an opinion if it is a fact. "Evading" CV ordinance is inherently impossible, it is only possible for the CV to miss either due to bad aim or RNG.

Shouldn't be uncommon tbh? If there is obvious match fixing going on though you can actually report that to support. It will be dealt with accordingly.

This is funny because I have yet to achieve that on the CN server. In fact the last time I was forced to attack a DM who knew how to use DFAA I got deplaned. Likewise I was oneshot exactly twice by RTS AP bombs in my entire EU career. Both times because I mismanaged DFAA usage. Besides, this would imply that AP bombs were (or are for the matter) a balanced mechanic. They weren't. WG was heavily criticized for even testing them on the Enterprise, yet they moved forward with implementing them anyway. Sounds familiar, no? Except the biggest critics of CVs themselves used to be their own skilled playerbase. Never did we say that CVs were fine as they were. Something that is apparently no longer acceptable as according to you that just makes us hypocrites and thus dismissable.

I did? Honestly I don't even remember, but if I did it was either RNG or error on my part. Imo talking strategies is only of value if they actually work. As it is now you're practically just praying that the enemy CV is terrible or RNG saves you.

Pretty much all same tier cruisers and a couple of DDs and BBs could do it if specialized for AA, not to mention any plane that does manage to drop its ordinance would be wildly inaccurate and easy to dodge. Nowadays such countermeasures are no longer effective, whether a strike is successful or not depends solely on the skill of the CV player.

Frankly so can a CV player to the point where it negates your skill in a surface ship, leading to an inherently unbalanced system that isn't compensated for in any way.

Helping the team via spotting, relying on them to deal with high AA ships and taking out key isolated targets? You know, teamplay in a team game? Is it really that horrible? Something that can still be easily done in the same timespan a Midway needed to fly and recover that attack. And unlike back then the DM now stands no chance whatsoever to defend itself. You've just proven that the rework is far worse in this regard.

At which point one has to question why that is relevant anyway? Balancing around incompetency has already lead to disaster.

Even if that were true (which I personally doubt, having only two depths means to me that they can only dive at two depths, not that they're permanently submerged), rockets were capable of hitting subs at periscope depth last I checked. Pretty sure it's randoms only, but then again random population is supposed to be higher than coop or ops.

Nothing about how you can earn it despite not even being in the general vicinity tho, which was the original point. Earning the ribbon after you're dead is pointless anyway.

I play CVs as well and aircraft can adjust faster than you can turn.

If you were actually interested in telling the truth you would do such research yourself, but fine. Lets just take the top 100 Midway players shall we? This is a almost 1 in 5 ratio for the top 100 RTS Midway players alone. Which is why ships like Musashi can wipe out half my strike before it can drop over on the Chinese server while struggling to take out a single plane here in EU. This obvious lie has been disproven over and over already. Strong AA ships are now weaker, weak AA ships are even weaker still.

Anyone with half a brain could have told you that this would happen. PTS CVs weren't exactly balanced unlike according to some and WG clearly operated on deadlines rather than balance. Reworked CVs did see an extreme buff in 0.8.7 though, something that hasn't happened in RTS. What you need for a viable comparison is an active CV player at the end of the RTS vs an active CV player from 0.8.7 forward. Yes, that includes me, although obviously that doesn't mean they needed to have played both iterations as RTS and reworked CVs are fundamentally different. Expecting a player to successfully transition from one to another to the same skill level is rather unlikely. Last I checked my Enterprise WR is rising since 0.8.7. With every other stat remaining the same I wouldn't be too sure about that. Midway has remained the same, the differences are minuscule, well within the calculated randomness factor and as such dismissable. Meanwhile Saipan shows a pretty severe trend despite a low number of battles played. Shokaku is easily representative at 150 battles and so is Hakuryu. And again, if you want someone who has simply adapted to a different playstyle which inherently yields far more damage, Mashinori provides an excellent example of that.

Perhaps because you have yet to prove why stats from some dude who played RTS Midway in the later removed full strike loadout 3 years ago is supposed to be usable in a comparison?

They are if they're misrepresented. Just like you're doing here: Because comparing the RTS iteration which had a total lifespan of 3 years and thus some rather extreme changes made to them to a rework which hasn't even been out for 1 year and hasn't suffered nearly as many isn't somehow being intellectually dishonest? Have you even tried to check how many players on the RTS leaderboards haven't been active for years now? Yet you're telling us that their stats are supposed to be usable in a comparison?

She's been sitting at <50k battles played for months. Hardly the height of popularity. And as it stands Indomitable will likely share the same fate given how terrible she is. Regular CVs already murder subs.

Have you ever tried reading?

Have you ever considered that they're irrelevant precisely because they have a lot of matches played? After all you'd be implying that the rework hasn't changed at all over such a long timespan. Meanwhile Saipan and Shokaku were picked up after 0.8.7 which would make my stats in them representative of the current situation. Also what do you believe is a representative amount of matches played? Because if 150 aren't enough then quite a big chunk of my RTS stats actually become irrelevant, making this whole comparison pointless. Although if you do want someone who has in fact managed the harsh increase in damage over the entirety of the rework you're looking for, I can point you towards my clanmate who simply uses a fundamentally different playstyle. https://wows-numbers.com/player/503737119,Mashinori/ Somehow I am not surprised that you're supporting an argument based on lies.

- CVs are generally unpopular - No work whatsoever is being done on the alt CV branch as per official statement - CV changes seem to be in a lull despite being desperately needed - first premium CV ever released after rework has very likely been a commercial failure At this point I wouldn't be surprised at all if WG cancels alt CV lines.