El2aZeR

Considering even mediocre players can make it into the top 100 it can be assumed that the impact of such players on global stats is negligible. Also in terms of playing style they are objectively no better than bots. Just go watch some streams of bad/mediocre CV players. The actual claim was that the majority of plane losses from bad CV players is due to flak. That does not mean DPS isn't effective against bad CV players. That is something you inferred from it. Unlike you I have claimed nothing without being able to back it up with indisputable facts. Yet for some reason you remain resistant to them. Also you just told us statistics are irrelevant when it comes to balance. Now you suddenly believe in them wholeheartedly. And you want people to stop calling out your dishonesty LOL.

2 months ago: Bad player loses all planes to AA. Now: Bad player loses all planes to AA. Just because AA got buffed/nerfed doesn't mean CVs suddenly grow more planes to lose. Use some basic logic before posting such nonsense, please. Assuming what you say is true: 1. Yahagi has one of the better AA suites on her tier. 2. Bad players loiter inside AA longer than skilled ones, automatically resulting in more kills. 3. Plane kills can be leeched. As such you've done nothing but proven that bad CV players lose all their planes regardless of whether it is to flak or DPS and, unless ridiculously weak, regardless of strength of such. Which disproves your claim above ironically. Way to shoot yourself in the foot. Such stats do not exist because AA strength never was adequate to begin with. And I'm merely stating the objective truth. If you don't like it, how about you just stop telling veiled lies?

Here is another good question: Why is the global average relevant? Flak is supposed to punish bad CV players. The great majority of CV players is bad as with all classes. As such global flak damage is bound to be pretty high, but it's also supposed to be that way. Otherwise it'd make no sense for flak mechanics to exist in the first place. Meanwhile documentation proves flak has severe limitations and as such can be avoided pretty much entirely. There is plenty of evidence to back it up as well. Which proves AA is too weak because it was already too weak 2 months ago, no? *slow clap* Another great attempt at being intellectually dishonest.

Which automatically assumes players are actually smart enough to use them to their fullest potential. As such bad player performance is irrelevant, while the performance of the most skilled players is what you balance around. And if we apply that to CVs they are blatantly overpowered. Thank you for making our point. Compare hard and soft ship stats, ingame performance of top players, sample size of said players, counterplay options and viability of such along with my own experience in the ships in question. And it seems you've missed one. No sweat, I can just repeat it:

I'm sure you can source that. Otherwise that'd just be a pathetic attempt to undermine our credibility, wouldn't it? Here's a good question for you though: Why is the average player relevant when it comes to balance? And if so, isn't any blatantly overpowered ship perfectly fine since the average player fails in them as usual anyway? And how come Enterprise ended up being so overpowered despite her performance having been adjusted according to average stats? I'm sure you have plenty of arguments to back up your claim, so lets hear them. Otherwise you'd just be rambling irrelevant nonsense, no?

Of course. None of us do I'm sure. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° )

I reckon this has a lot to do with it:

Spotting in the rework is the most boring thing ever. It outright fails as a game mechanic and thus cannot be made a core aspect of reworked CV play.

Precisely why the reworked concept is an inherent failure and can never be balanced. Considering how fragile subs are they represent a minimal time investment for a frag. There is no choice, only an easy kill.

"Only" 492mm pen at 21km. Truly unplayable now. Seriously tho, Kremlin adjustment is a joke.

To put it simply: - CVs are focused entirely on taking out surface ships. Hurting that capability defeats the point of having CVs - Subs rely on flanking, stealth, etc. more so than DDs to be successful, something that can move across the map at extremely high speeds, can strike regardless of opposition and whose sole purpose is to kill subs defeats the point of having subs The latter already applies to aircraft to some degree, but having a dedicated ASW plane would just cement it further.

As far as I can count pretty much all of them are still adhered to when it comes to fundamental mechanics.

Don't forget the 7 to 10+k rocket salvos.

How ironic that there is a thread right next to this one attempting to explain why WoWs creates toxicity. Because this one basically sums it up in a short and concise manner.

A complete no-go as far as both the CV rework and the sub concept are designed.

No need currently. If test players are to be believed CVs are the best sub killers right now anyway.

It's fresh from the Chinese server. They're still on 0.7.3. I just played that match. The vid you posted is from 2017. Again. If I were to list the nerfs WG hammered CVs with (for good reason) since 2017 I'd be sitting here all day doing nothing else. Because 2017 was a year where quite literally every major and the majority of minor patches included some nerf to CVs. It became a meme called "Year of the CV". You'll find one DD that's significantly faster in the T10 bracket in the relevant versions. Not to mention that Shima heavily misplayed. If you want to set up a true cross drop you're gonna need more time than that. And no SE ofc. Even if it were possible tho, a reworked CV can do the same thing.

First match with my new Saipan on the CN server. Ah, how I've missed this.

Alrighty, here we have my Saipan. Saipan is the only RTS USN CV left that has T9 TBs which do 155kn. They also service way faster at 15 seconds and there are only two which cuts down on launch time. The match I got was on which I believe is the outright smallest map this ship can see in terms of spawns (Trident). The enemy team only had a single DD, a Shinonome without SE. Gamemode was Epicenter which practically eliminates the need to search for the enemy DD. Enemy CV was also afk eliminating the need to watch for fighters which could've easily denied my strike. Result? So in a RTS CV which possesses among the fastest launch times and fastest plane speeds on the smallest possible map and a favorable gamemode it STILL took me 1:30 mins to get a first strike. Given that T10 RTS CVs - face bigger maps - need far more launching time - have only marginally higher speed in case of the Haku or significantly lower speed in case of the Midway - face DDs that can actually survive up to 3 or so torp hits AND become no-fly-zones I think it's pretty safe to say that T10 RTS CVs needed more time than 1:30 mins to get a first strike on a DD. Also I could've probably gotten this kill way faster in a reworked Enterprise or Shokaku.

Question is if it is even worth it to create such premium ships given how sales for Ark Royal are turning out. She's still below 3.5k total battles and there was even a chance to obtain her for free or from loot boxes SURPRISE MEKANIKS. While the most expensive part of premium ship creation is out of the way with these ships, they'd still require a new concept, gimmick along with balancing. Even that may not be worth it anymore with such low potential revenue.

Better yet, I can play a match right now if you wish. Just gimme up to 20 mins and I'll report back.

Indeed, so tell me this: How OLD are those vids? Because if you had actually done your research you'd know those are not representative of the last days of the RTS iteration.

And I chose the smallest map in the game to do so. A map that a T8 CV would never see. Despite that I still needed 1 3/4 minutes for a first strike. If I were to fly across a normal high tier map or, god forbid, one of the older iterations of Islands of Ice as it still exists in the CN client it'd take minutes. And reworked CVs are even faster. RTS Haku TBs: 164kn RTS Haku DBs: 161kn RTS Midway TBs: 136kn RTS Midway DBs: 156kn So ironically RTS T10 bombers are comparable or way slower when stacked up against reworked Enterprise planes. And reworked Enterprise planes are on the slower side of the spectrum. While this does shorten the flight distance, it still doesn't grant a kill in the timeframe you seek. To put this into perspective, a Haku needs about a minute to service and launch her TBs to begin with. And that's if you start out with them. It's simply not possible to hit all torps on any target with RTS Enterprise TBs. The spread is bigger than a GK.

1 minute and 30 seconds is an impossible time for an RTS CV to strike based off of initial service and flight time alone. A reworked CV on the other hand can actually kill you within a minute and 30 seconds of the match starting depending on how lucky he is. In fact depending on map size it can happen faster. You seem under the misconception that RTS CVs have higher damage output than reworked CVs. This is untrue. While RTS CVs delivered more alpha strike, reworked CVs more than make up for it based on sheer RoF alone. You can read a very basic comparison here: https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/122388-comparison-rts-vs-reworked-cvs/