El2aZeR

I'd have no reason to hate the playerbase then, no? Basically - retain the RTS system, it's the only playstyle that makes sense if you want multi squadron gameplay - make a ton of changes to increase accessibility, adjust spotting/damage and remove the need to pick specialized AA builds I would retain all in one. Reason is simple, making both balanced enough that one isn't more powerful over the other would be stupidly difficult, if not straight up impossible. As such the team with one type of CV would most likely have a severe advantage over the opposing one. It's already difficult as it is with the current "damage dealing" CV lines, e.g. getting a skilled player in an Enterprise rather than a skilled player in an Implacable can easily win you the match by default.

Well, yes, on a basic level its the same. I suppose I'm just one of the people who spout a load of semantics then. On a different note, been watching "Uchi no Musume no Tame naraba, Ore wa Moshikashitara Maou mo Taoseru kamo Shirenai" ("If It's For My Daughter, I'd Even Defeat a Demon Lord"), or basically Daughteru The Anime. Even with only 2 eps released it has some glorious headpat moments, not gonna lie.

TB heal kinda still works even against DPS. It basically makes you immune to damage for a short time which imo offers pretty good utility unless the DPS outpaces the heal. Maybe they should up the "tickrate" of it just like they're doing with AA but that's about all it needs tbh. As for AR, well, tbh it was never that useful of a skill to begin with. I wouldn't exactly mind if they just straight up remove its effect on aircraft. However if it is to be retained.... Maybe make it regen planes faster when you're low on reserves instead of adjusting squadron speed? I honestly don't see the speed implementation work out anymore after 0.8.5, so imo we need to take the skill in another direction entirely.

True, however most other classes have their influence elsewhere rather than direct damage dealing. Cruisers have utility, DDs get cap contesting and spotting. BBs are the sole other class whose focus is mostly damage dealing and, tbh, they're actually already overpowered in a sense and do deserve to get nerfed to an extend. Which ofc will never happen because it's supposed to be the proof class. A CV meanwhile only deals damage to other classes and nothing else. And it's understandable why, if you had to be relegated to spotting while playing the "third-person action" concept it'd be incredibly boring. However that also means if it is too easy to deal damage they become overpowered. And if they deal too little damage or damage is too difficult to deal, they become unfun. Personally I don't see any way out of this. It's a fundamental design flaw. Well, here's what I learned when it comes to the CV rework: And trust me, I'm having a blast. On a more serious note, I'd be perfectly fine with giving up on the RTS iteration if the rework had actually managed to improved something beyond popularity. However it hasn't, most if not all of the previous issues are still there while it has added its own on top. As such the RTS iteration is objectively the superior system despite being in need of some major overhaul as well. Uh, yeah. I've never exactly made a secret out of that, no? I'm sure everyone here knows. Quite a few far better than you. In their fully AA spec AA DD. In AA divs. They either die fast and horribly or they spend their time worthlessly hugging their friends. Only to see them die. See above. If the rework was actually better than the RTS iteration I'd be more than happy to embrace it. As it stands it's way worse. Yes, I have noticed, but does ST status give you extensive reworked CV experience? That'd be news to me. I'm sorry, but most of your statements about how CVs and their supposed limitations are horribly uninformed. You come across as extremely inexperienced and your ST status only makes it worse as it casts serious doubts on the whole program's effectiveness. Although to be fair it was already in question to begin with ever since it was revealed how WG behaves with feedback. Funny thing about that, I'm actually the one who made counter strafing public shortly after strafing out was introduced. And it still took me several months to see someone use it against me. Inherent issue is ofc that only a fraction of the playerbase uses the forums and even fewer will find their way to the CV section. It should be WG's job to teach how to play the game, not ours. As for now, I just no longer care. Seeing people burn down their own ship they built upon a lake of napalm is extremely amusing and I'm happy to fan the flames. Also if you haven't noticed I tend to let my own teammates die rather than give them air cover/spotting/support even when my position enables me to if it suits me. The great thing about post rework CVs is that few will notice that you're also griefing your own team in additon to the enemy, so the fun factor of letting someone know that you're leaving them to die when they're screaming for e.g. air cover is much higher.

Just ruin a few more hundred high tier matches in your Tirpitz and you'll eventually have enough money again.

And what do you base this belief on if I may ask? That actually depends on the attack angle and the plane. Which I suppose would make sense if, you know, we weren't playing and enjoying all classes. Also who's to say that you guys just don't want to keep CVs op? The argument goes both ways. 1. The amount of AA required is disproportionate to the damage a CV can deal. Currently you need several ships with good AA to fully deny a strike. 2. Jesus Christ, do you even play CVs? BBs firing at you is the least of your issues. In fact in 99% of cases you can actually just laugh in their faces for wasting a salvo. Because guess what, unless you up you either have hard cover between you and enemy BBs or you're sitting at extreme range where taking severe damage from BB AP becomes extremely unlikely at best. At T10 you even gain near full immunity to long range AP fire. 3. Yeah, no. BBs are the great winners of this rework. Even the Musashi is one of the best AA ships around due to the glorious catapult fighter which is far more valuable when used correctly than DFAA. CVs punish DDs and cruisers far more effectively. 4. Should it really be like that? 5. There are ways around good AA. I'm sure the Minotaur I struck and killed in my Enterprise with just 11 bomb hits recently and only 9 DBs lost didn't appreciate his "good" AA. Ironically these things don't work against catapult fighters. 6. Skilled DDs can also be killed or taken out of the match pretty easily. The issue is ofc that not every CV player knows this. In fact average CV skill is down the drain and far worse when compared to the RTS iteration. 7. Just wat. It's fairly easy to discern a DDs position. If you haven't noticed, aircraft nowadays get a warning that they're detected. Combine that with the minimap and some basic map awareness along with DD experience and you should be able to find a DD within seconds in 90% of all cases. Also the minimum required distance for an effective attack with most high tier RFs is about 3km, shorter if you have enough boost available. Not to mention DD concealment can be cheesed via fighter. The issue is very simple. If you make reworked CVs too easy to play so that even mediocre players can use them effectively, they inevitably become immensely overpowered when a skilled player uses them. If you nerf them to the point where a skilled player cannot just dominate matches, they'll inevitably become impossible to play for the majority of the population. This is because the CV rework is purely centered around damage dealing and nothing else, one of the reasons why it was doomed from the outset. Which is what I've been telling people for months even before the rework got released but ofc no one believed me, so excuse me for my lack of sympathy. "What do you know lol?", "You just want to keep your op toy!", "WG will surely make this right!", "They'll only need to make a few tweaks!", etc. etc. etc. But hey, maybe now players like @NoobySkooby will appreciate the feeling of losing something fun to play. Just like we RTS CV players did.

A bit hard to tell, but it looks to me like she still has her triple 155mm wing turrets which afaik would make her period accurate actually. I'm definitely no expert on the subject tho so I might be wrong.

Which is true. Hence why I would rather nerf BBs as a whole rather than buff KM BBs.

Which is honestly more down to tons of s playing them. I've played my fair share of KM BBs and survivability certainly isn't their issue. Which is ofc the problem. The entire line is designed as a crutch for noobs. They pay for it by having the most inconsistent weapons which isn't exactly something you want to sacrifice on a higher skill level, thus making them incapable of reaching the heights other lines can strive for. That also makes them incredibly difficult to buff. Even if you wanted to, if you just increase main battery accuracy or otherwise compensate it they suddenly become ludicrously good. As it stands it is the one thing that is actually holding them back. Now you could just go for a complete redesign ofc to make them less proof but more skill demanding. However that kinda defeats the purpose WG created them for. (And, well, after the CV rework do you honestly want to see WG up something else via complete redesign?)

Which is my personal stance as well, however it isn't what WG believes. And to a certain extend I can understand that as a pure skill based game tends to kill variety. The best PvP games ofc manage to combine both but those are usually ones with a very high skill floor to begin with. As such the skill - effort scale should apply.

No it isn't. It is natural in balancing that the weapon requiring the least skill is also the least effective. A 20% loss compared to other ships which require more skill would honestly be about right in my book. The general issue is ofc that BBs don't require much skill to begin with nowadays. WG seems to believe that even getting something as basic as "a vulnerable broadside" is grounds for massive buffs for this class.

Which is honestly by design. It also has to do with their popularity. KM BBs are by far the most proof line of the most proof class. That inevitably also means they have the lowest skill ceiling. Combine that with the mythical status of "German technological superiority" and you also get masses of s playing them. Turtleback ensures broadsiding KM BBs can rarely be punished hard for their mistakes (although that trait, which was massive powercreep in itself when introduced, has ironically been powercreeped), main gun dispersion practically ensures hits despite bad aim, secondaries are a braindead source of damage (what applies to turtleback also applies to their secondaries), their armor makes them extremely sturdy to HE spam and hydro partially negated their vulnerability to torpedoes. Their only true weakness was vulnerability to air and KM AA never was all that bad until the rework. In fact some of them were pretty amazing AA ships for their tier. This all used to be massive powercreep when KM BBs were introduced as the third BB line in the game and it only went more downhill from there. They are the reason why BBs are as braindead as they are now, inevitably that meant they'd eventually be powercreeped as well.

Cartoons and anime are two entirely different things believe it or not.

Finally managed to catch one instance on footage. For those that do not know, the flak animation is completely independent of the actual damage zone. I assume this is due to the damage zone being server side, but flak is actually rendered client side. That means if e.g. there is a small lag spike, flak will not spawn but the damage zone will. Likewise if you break LoS to a ship firing at you, a flak wall that just spawned will not continue to render flak, but the damage zone will still exist for the full duration making it invisible. Or in the case above it's just a render delay that lasts so long the damage zone disappears before flak actually renders. On the other hand it also allows you to fly through flak without harm if you know your timings precisely because flak is subject to render delay while the damage zone is not. Aka in the last half a second or so of the flak animation the damage zone has actually already disappeared. Good job WG. You have managed to create a UI that is even worse than the one in RTS CVs. I did not think this was possible but you ofc never cease to amaze in your failures. And I've already reported this. Several months ago. In testing.

If you don't know what this is about, watch this: Now to my actual issue at hand. In the video it is explained and proven that the reduction is in fact 50%. This applies only to the attacking wing. I get that, but the 50% number felt a bit off to me. So I did some digging through the patchnotes. All I could find was this: Source: https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/game-updates/0801-hot-fix/ It says 30% and that it applies to all bombers. In no subsequent patchnotes could I find anything about a change in this mechanic. Thus one of the following is true: - this is an unnoticed bug - WG stealth changed this mechanic - WG lied to us the entire time - The patchnote collection on the wiki is incomplete and I therefore missed a patch where this mechanic was changed - I'm blind or can't read Personally I can't remember ever reading about any change about AA damage reduction when attacking either. If anyone does, please forward me the version number of that patch. Note to mods: This is not about the CV rework in particular. This is about WG potentially lying or doing undocumented changes to a mechanic.

@Saiyko and I did some training room tests with the Ark Royal. Results are as expected. - Practically any T8 cruiser/BB will deplane you before you can shave off a significant amount of HP. - Texas will deplane you before you can shave off a significant amount of HP. Texas also outturns you faster than you can adjust your attack angle. - Floatplane fighters are gonna be the stuff of your nightmares. - Same tier cruisers take quite a bit of damage from bombs and rockets. They're far too nimble to reliably hit with torps tho (assuming WASD) and you can't crossdrop either because Ark practically only gets one drop and her plane maneuverability is poor. - Torps do pretty good alpha but are fairly difficult to get all on target if said target uses WASD - Bombs deal absolutely no damage to T8 BBs. Literally no damage. - Snipes by Enterprise players could become an issue on smaller maps. Ark Royal AA is sub-par against higher tier planes, her CAP is pitiful and, most importantly, she takes citadels from Enterprise AP DBs. An Enterprise can theoretically kill you with a single AB DB squad, I reckon its gonna take her two in most scenarios. So unless you want a port queen, don't care about getting ed by MM or just want to get her for her historical significance, do not buy her in her current state. (She's obviously still subject to change btw, no need to turn on your salt makers just yet.)

Meh, at this point I'll believe anything. I'll add it to the list.

Well, kinda. The last Space Battles event had such gamemodes where one side had to attack objectives while the other side defended them. Have no idea how they worked out since I didn't participate. Since such events are usually testbeds to try new things we could see such a gamemode being implemented in the future. No guarantees tho.

On a more serious note: Yes, slingshotting becomes not only vital but necessary at T8+ if you like doing damage and/or having enough reserves to last you throughout the match.

Just thought I'd give my opinion on these for those that are interested. Captain skills Upgrades: Please keep in mind that these are still subject to change. EDIT: This is outdated, see below for updated list instead.

Yeah, read that on LWM's Ark Royal preview already. Is glorious implementation camrade.

Yes, however it is based on current LoS, not predicted LoS. Which basically means this: Note that this is also one of the ways invis flak can spawn. Because the damage zone of a flak wall will still be active but the flak animation will stop after you break LoS. And since the flak animation has render delay in a good chunk of cases it won't render at all as you broke LoS before the game could render flak.

Which is ofc grounds to insinuate that I just suck and have to git gud. If he doesn't know he should've not said anything at all. Heck even after directing him towards S_O's official article he insists on his lies and picks something completely out of context to prove it. I see no reason to sympathize with or respect someone who does this, WG employee or not.

The issue is that WG doesn't believe they need to. As such making flak behavior in regards to island cover consistent is about the only thing you can even remotely hope for to improve CV play.