El2aZeR

No it isn't. You will inevitably get at least one strike through even if fighter cover is available. That means in the time the enemy carrier has attacked once, you haven't dealt any damage putting you behind. And 30 seconds later the enemy will attack your teammate again anyway. If you are there again to provide fighter cover, the enemy has attacked twice with you doing jack Lets pick your example above. The enemy CV attacks your DD, you're there to pop a fighter. The enemy CV deals 10k damage to your DD regardless. Because you cannot go anywhere before the enemy CV returns you have to stay around to continue providing cover. The enemy CV attacks your DD again, deals 10k damage and kills him. So that's a DD lost with nothing to show for it on your part. There is no benefit to providing fighter cover. Your teammate is going to die anyway while you are letting the enemy CV gain the lead in the damage race over you. You. Can't. Save. Anyone. As such only bad CV players will attempt to constantly protect their teammates.

Most skilled CV players don't. The reason is very simple. Going out of your way to attempt to protect a teammate is a guaranteed recipe for failure. You're hurting yourself and your team with that, lowering your overall chances to win as you fall far behind in the damage race against the enemy CV. So don't rely on your CV for air defense. If he's not coincidentally right where the enemy CV wants to strike, no air cover should be expected and rightly so, because otherwise your chances of winning plummet.

WG: "We're happy with Atlanta AA performance." Enterprise:

This should help.

Because clearly when using that my planes remain immune the entire time.

So you met potatoes who decide to play catch the flak. That is supposed to be representative of a potential counterplay option?

Fastest game I had was around 3-4 minutes as far as I remember. Enemy team just abandoned their cap in standard so one of my DD teammates took it without contest.

Really? You're doing this? Alright, what exactly do my planes have to fear when 5 ships, including one with stronger base AA than your full AA Haguro, can only kill one plane?

There is no need to dodge when you misdirect AA. See above. What exactly do I have to fear?

Or to put this into perspective: - fly into Scharn, Gneis, Atlanta, Maass and Saint-Louis AA - hit Scharn for topkek 24k citadel (read: almost unrecoverable) damage - 5 planes out of 6 survive - I don't even run HP upgrade for DBs lol #balans And wanna know why that Atlanta is so low HP? Because I expended a paltry 7 rocket planes to make it so. AA below T9 is dead. In fact even a lot of T9 ships have insufficient AA to deny a second strike.

US cruisers and BBs tend to get ed due to low health pools and no torp protection worth mentioning. NC is among my favorite targets nowadays. Same applies to UK BBs (that have AA actually worth mentioning). Cleve and Balti get murdered by rockets, torps or god forbid AP bombs. Alabama/Massachussetts are perhaps the best AA ships at their tier due to that but it is still insufficient to deny second and sometimes even third strikes depending on build. The biggest joke of them all are Atlanta and Flint. Those die so fast for negligible losses it's not even funny. RU cruiser AA isn't even remotely worth mentioning. Chapayev e.g. has comparable AA to a Pensacola. Same with Kutuzov. Belfast too. They're fundamentally incapable of even denying a 4th rocket strike from an Enterprise. RU BBs have less AA than IJN ones. AA builds don't matter due to the tiers general lack of sufficient base AA.

Tons of screenshots can be found here: Have to admit, that new UI looks really good.

Apparently an AL anniversary stream happened. Totally missed it. Oh boy. And it's finally official: And Helena is apparently getting a refit. Anniversary PV here:

- implying there are strong AA ships at those tiers

Why you do this to me commissar? Am I not proud loyal citizen of the glorious Union? T_T

My hate for the playerbase. There is no greater joy than ruining as many matches as possible with reworked CVs.

Out of those 63 aircraft, how many were fighters? Because losing those doesn't have any impact on CV reserves whatsoever. Besides, Enterprise and Kaga have the highest effective plane reserves out of all CVs in the game. In fact the amount of planes your team shot down is less than the total amount of planes that Enterprise can bring to the field alone (in a realistic scenario Enterprise brings ~190 planes to bare in a 20 min match of which 90 are fighters).

Doesn't exactly make sense considering aircraft in this game fly far below clouds. You'd have to increase flying altitude to the point where it becomes untenable. Besides, I guess ships won't be able to spot aircraft inside clouds either? I can think of several scenarios to abuse this, none of them are to the benefit of surface ships.

Except surface ships have other things to do to keep them engaged while they're not in combat. A reworked CV meanwhile can practically go afk while he has no targets to strike, as such this concept fails even the most simple and crucial requirement to even be a game. If interaction isn't given and doesn't keep the player engaged, it's no longer a game. See above. As for compensation, funnily enough that is the way game design works. Reworked CVs are designed to farm damage and only farm damage. Hinder that ability and you must compensate it with even higher potential because it is the only role they have left. A spotting nerf would have been fine for RTS CVs without compensation because they still had other roles to play, the same thing does not apply to reworked CVs. One of the reasons why this rework is fundamentally flawed. Imagine if you take a torp DD line and make their torps the worst in the entire game. Unless compensated that makes them pointless, no? (Oh wait, I just described the IJN torp DD line ) Considering your concept fails even the basic requirements of being a game I doubt that to say the least. And I'm not actually thinking from the perspective of a CV player, I'm just thinking about whether this would be fun to play. If I were thinking from a CV perspective I'd just say "LOL YOU CAN'T NERF CV SPOTTING OMG" or sth along those lines. Believe it or not, I probably hate reworked CVs just as much as you do. I just hate this playerbase more.

Well, because you'd be waiting. Quite a lot in fact. You'd be practically non-existent in the first ~4 or so minutes of the match. And you'd lack the flexibility to switch flanks quickly, potentially risking that your window of opportunity closes or reacting to a different one opening up on the flank you were previously on. To just name a few things. This would make for a potentially very boring and often frustrating gameplay experience unless compensated in some equally big way (which is probably not what we want to see either). It's incompatible because reworked CV play is focused on non-stop action, having extended lulls in it is not acceptable as is evident in many of the core mechanics (to the detriment of other classes). I doubt to the extreme that it'd be well received by any potential player. You're clearly thinking of this from the perspective of a surface ship player (which is fine btw) for whom this would undoubtedly be an improvement of the situation, but having to actually play this on the other hand won't go over too well. Don't think there'll be too many players willing to play this. Which is probably fine too from your perspective but then outright removal of CVs would be much preferable instead in that situation.

It actually isn't because it'd be far too unintuitive. The great majority of players wouldn't find this kind of gameplay particularly fun, thus such an implementation would fail to retain the CV popularity WG desires. It's also incompatible with reworked CV play. Funnily enough it wouldn't necessarily be at odds with the RTS iteration however, but that has already proven unpopular. Making it more unpopular is probably not on the table. On the bright side, I can actually imagine it to be quite fun from a teamplay perspective with a proper implementation into the RTS gameplay. But then again "proper implementation" and "RTS CV play" are two things WG will never combine.

And people ask why I hate this playerbase lol.

Doesn't prevent them from getting shot down now, doesn't it? I can see you have thought this proposal through very carefully.

Kek.

I can think of several fairly often occuring situations where even brief spotting would be incredibly useful.