El2aZeR

Just like using WASD to dodge torps or angle, right? And yet here we are.

200% agreed. WG pls buff.

It's hardly clear. Cruising speed is usually understood as base speed and it is worded as a buff ("increased by 35 knots"). When I first read it I thought for a minute that they're going to increase base speed which would've been hilarious.

The question is rather whether you get more bomb hits if you have better sigma but won't get many perfect drop angles by virtue of the DD maneuvering, OR if you get more bomb hits with less sigma but you can pretty much always get a perfect drop angle via new maneuverability. My bet is on the latter and PTS testing hasn't made me believe otherwise.

The only reason why StarCraft has such a high APM ceiling is because the game actually allows you to use this much APM. 300-400 APM can be used because the game can not only handle it but because you need it to play the game at the highest level. RTS CVs meanwhile had an effective APM ceiling of ~60. This is not hard, it's actually less than playing surface ships. And not only that, attempts to utilize high APM in RTS CVs would inevitably end in failure because the bad UI that only recognized one out of five commands at such a rate would make you play worse than someone who doesn't spam commands. The hilarious myth about needing high APM in RTS CV play is entirely bull. Which is funny because even WG bought into it. Shows how much they actually know their game.

I guess I'll miss not needing dirty surface peasants with a fairly competent CV on my team tho.

More kills for me. Where's the caveat?

Hopefully it becomes a hard cap. I don't want to rely on my teammate being skilled after all.

Clearly your fault. You didn't kill 2/3rds of the enemy team on your own.

Compensating an incompetent DD, CA or BB is infinitely easier than compensating an incompetent CV. Been there, done that.

Aside from her AA (which has become utterly worthless) I don't particularly see why Hinden would need such tremendous buffs tbh? Maybe give that one second of reload they took from her back but other than that imo she's fine.

While true, it still makes such "AA ships" extremely vulnerable to air strikes as they typically don't deal with having big chunks of their HP removed in a single attack very well. Minos, DMs and Woosters all die rather quickly to air attack even if they're full AA assuming the CV player is competent.

Sector reinforcement does not actually increase damage values. And just because 1400 true DPS is listed doesn't mean you'll lose a plane every second even if your individual aircraft have less HP than that. Because AA continuous damage isn't applied as damage per second.

According to wiki Saratoga, Iowa and Intrepid are all confirmed to drop at E5 easy.

Not exactly untrue but still wrong. Even 900 listed true DPS doesn't necessarily get applied as 900 damage per second.

Your failure to understand AA mechanics is amazing to behold as always. Hint: 1000 continuous AA damage listed in port actually doesn't mean your planes take 1000 damage per second.

On the bright side, at least they're finally limiting high tier CVs to one per team (even if it is only a soft cap). I'm sick and tired of losing just because my CV teammate is incompetent.

Yeah, it's not like the official dev post actually contradicts your narrative or sth. And even that is only a somewhat accurate approximation of how AA DPS actually works as admitted by WG themselves.

Your laughable explanation of continuous AA damage is just as wrong as the OP above.

"Working as intended" according to WG lol.

Generally speaking the entire AA system needs an overhaul, but then again the same can be said about the rework itself.

Lenin dies to E's AP DBs so fast it isn't even funny. 4-6 hits aren't a rarity. Tech tree wise T8 still takes citadels but you have to drop at high altitude. T9/10 are immune.

You do realize reports do literally nothing, right?