El2aZeR

Again, PoW and Atago will both get added to regular construction eventually. I'd start saving cubes now. Washington has an excellent statline (among the highest firepower and survivability, highest AA along with her sister + SoDaks) and the barrage will tear apart when it procs at the right time (do note that you should put her as flagship to maximize the target area like Hood). She's a must have imo. NoCar has the same stats but more situational skills (decrease air damage for backline, buff own FP with AA stat). Not bad either tho, she's worth using if you have a free slot or need that extra survivability against aircraft.

- make some tutorials to help the community - test literally ends soon after Are you guys trolling me? :D By the way, may I ask why the test servers needed to be restarted so often? I've been wondering about that. And thank you for providing me the opportunity to participate. The issue with replay-ability is something that ties into the fundamentals of the rework and thus cannot really be changed. I believe it was the goal to make CV play more simple anyway? In that you've definitely succeeded at the cost of depth and complexity. Not a bad thing necessarily but that also means it can get repetitive quickly. I'd say it's a necessary evil. Personally I was eager to play CVs pretty much every day but couldn't sustain more than a few games unlike with the current RTS CVs which I can play dozens of games consecutively without getting bored, though that may be partially because I didn't want to grind surface ships just for the credits. Still, the rework was enjoyable to play and that's what counts I believe. As for CV vs CV interaction, a few ideas: Make a soft and a hard cap for aircraft. For example your CV will "regenerate" reserves up to 6, but returning aircraft can increase your reserves to 12. This will punish plane losses harder and make fighters more valuable, but at the same time prevent a CV from being deplaned completely. CVs themselves should have a permanent CAP to prevent sniping. Said CAP should consist at most of 6 fighters which will need to rearm for, say one and a half minutes once all ammo has been expended. This will make CV sniping more difficult but not impossible. The fighter consumable should be removed from the planes and be given to the CV instead. The CV will be able to tell fighters where to go on the minimap or on the tactical map like in the current RTS mode, once arriving at said location the fighters will project a bubble (which should be visible on the minimap) in which all enemy planes will be engaged like in the current iteration of the rework. To make it so that you have to place fighters based on prediction instead of reaction, fighters should need around 10 seconds to become "active" after arriving. Current rules for shooting down planes are fine but perhaps squad size should be increased to 5 or 6 as well on T10. This ofc means that you'll need manual control of the hull while flying, which you have hopefully already noticed is a much requested and desired feature.

Still, they are more or less designed to be more effective against cruisers and BBs, why shouldn't they be less effective against DDs as a trade off? I can see where you are coming from tho. I can only hope that STs and QA do a competent job at testing this change so the right call can be made. In my mind though the only ship that gets directly, undoubtedly shafted is Graf Spee. I don't think Kron, Alaska and Stalingrad will be affected too much but I could ofc be wrong.

I meant Kron, Stalingrad and Alaska. Not GS. Sorry for the confusion.

No it doesn't. You're merely using one mechanic to react to another. Using AP shells doesn't suddenly nullify the damage or DoT from HE shells themselves. And this is why you approach areas carefully when there are radar ships in the game. You are given the information that one or more radar cruisers exist at the beginning of a match, so you need to adapt to it. That means no head-on rushing anything until they've been spotted. Likewise you need to adapt when you see a CV in the game. 90% of the playerbase is abysmal. It's one of the reasons why CVs do so well. And actually yes, I can be very aware. The minimap exists and you can count the number of enemy ships on it as well as predict where they're going based on where your own team has positioned itself. It's why I've been deleted only a single time in over 100 games in my Worcester and that was on the TST server in which I exclusively yolo anyway. Weird, just a few posts ago you said something about desperately holding on to something? Yes, if you misplay so horribly that you smoke up in front of a radar cruiser, you often die. And again, the power vs ease of counter scale applies. If you see a radar cruiser and smoke, you've obviously committed a mistake of such magnitude that you deserve to die. Likewise when you know a CV is in the match but still go off on your own, the same thing applies. Misplays do not always happen at such magnitude however. A simple misplay could e.g. be that you simply dodged the wrong way and eat a normal penetration as a result. A misplay, but a small one. Doesn't mean you instantly return to port. That was my point all along. A CV on the other hand can literally do everything right but still get nothing done. A CV needs the enemy to misplay, if he doesn't the CV is out of options. And if you give me the same RoF as other ships to compesnate I'd be happy to play. The thing is, if planes only represented offensive power, that'd be true. However they do not, because aircraft are far more limited and a CV is completely helpless without them. It is far easier to lose all planes than to lose literally all your main and secondary armament along with every single one of your utility consumables. Thus planes represent weapons and HP at the same time. Yes, you still cannot delete a CV in one go, but on the other hand a CV has to risk losses every time he attacks. If you wanted a chance that you lose HP every time you fire your main battery dependent on RNG, would you play that? Most of my non-AA spec BBs laugh in the face of air attack. I'll keep that in mind when I once again wipe out almost the entire strike on approach and sail away with a bit of scratch damage, most of which I can heal anyway. So I guess snipers should never exist in shooters? Healers in RPGs? Literally any other successful attempt at asymmetrical balancing? Your fundamental basis is flawed to the core and has been proven wrong in game design time and time again.

Dive bombing 101 as promised. Do note that Haku has an entirely different (and in my opinion far inferior) drop pattern. Using DBs is also extremely safe as mid and long range AA both won't fire at close range. Bonus clip: How to cross drop BBs

Oh, that's true I suppose. I think Fallen Wings is next on the schedule of reruns anyway. We just had Return of the War God, the only thing between that and Fallen Wings was the Christmas Mini Event.

Not sure what exactly you mean but slowing down makes you turn on a dime. That's enough of an advantage imo.

And here is where the power vs ease of counter scale applies. If you just take a closer look you will realize that weapons in this game are balanced individually and not against each other. Cruiser HE has a fast rate of fire, mediocre to high range, no real counterplay and decent accuracy, thus they get little alpha strike. BB AP shells have a slow rate of fire, high range, are somewhat easily countered, have horrible accuracy and therefore have high alpha strike. Aircraft have the slowest rate of fire by far (with a few exceptions such as Saipan and GZ, both of which are quite frankly broken, but then again BBs with a fast rof exist too because gimmick comrade), they have by far the easiest counter requiring an enemy only exist, they theoretically have indefinite range but that automatically lengthens their already huge reload and thus they get the highest accuracy and decent alpha strike. As for getting hit, tell me, when you see a radar ship approaching in a DD, do you not turn tail and run? When you see an enemy flanking your island cover, do you not go into concealment and reposition? In such cases the enemy is actively counterplaying you, but you're not dying. Heck, you may even get out without a single scratch of damage but the enemy now has the upper hand. A CV has no such options, thus a CV gets to try again after suffering through a harsh penalty. Practically speaking it's like taking 2 citadel hits because you've broadsided. You've committed a mistake, you have been punished for it but you're still alive and get to try again. The chance to instantly "delete" a CV doesn't exist, that's true. Such an advantage is however traded off by being the easiest class to counter along with being literally incapable of playing the objective, getting high reload penalties when committing a mistake and having little staying power among other things. I wasn't aware losing 24 planes out of ~70 is only 1 or 2%. If I could break pretty much all weaponry and utility on a ship within two strikes, yeah, I'd actually be fine with it whether you believe it or not. I mean, it's not like we told WG over and over that AP bombs are a horrible idea or anything. But hey, they needed to cater to the average playerbase because SOME people whined about CVs. Tell me, how often do I have to state that AP bombs are universally acknowledged as broken?

Is it? The argument was that anything that can attack you without you being able to fight back is bad. By that logic, a DD being able to throw torpedoes from stealth is pretty much equivalent to CVs and needs to be removed. Aircraft are spotted from 8km unless you're in smoke. Granted, 8km is a bit too small imo, I'd make them visible from 9 or even 10. Then again we also have AA that goes beyond 8km, that'd need a very slight nerf, too. Also by observing aircraft travel paths and some basic game knowledge you can easily deduce where the enemy CV is hiding. By deplaning the enemy CV you can destroy a CV without ever needing to engage the hull. Neither do you need to spend salvos or even hunt down a CV, he has to come to you to do deal damage. Again, that is the ultimate luxury in terms of counterplay. The enemy can't make a move without you being able to deny it. Yes, if you're dumb enough to use DFAA immediately and give the enemy CV time to pull out. If you don't and activate DFAA at ~3km distance you give him no chance at all. The CV has no counterplay options, he WILL lose all aircraft if you use DFAA correctly. The next attack will then be 3-5 minutes out depending on how close the enemy CV is and which nation he plays. That's way after DFAA cd has passed. If you use DFAA too early it's a severe misplay that should be punished by instant unrewarding death, because being incapable of pressing a button at the right time is stupidity of the highest order. See above. Ah, yes, because being unable to do anything for 3-5 minutes in a 20 minute game is surely not punishing. Okay then. Also as described in previous examples counterplay doesn't automatically involve sending ships to the bottom of the virtual sea. You can easily counterplay enemies without ever needing to fire a single salvo. If you get murdered through DFAA you deserve it. Even BBs can easily navigate the huge gaps that DFAA creates. Exception is AP bombs which are universally acknowledged as broken. We certainly didn't ask for those. And having an AA cruiser or some teammates nearby is different to having other teammates spot or use consumables for you how exactly? If the idea of e.g. flushing out an island camping cruiser is to have a teammate spot for you or get killed, why shouldn't you have to rely on a teammate to provide AA cover for you? And again, counterplay to CV doesn't solely involve shooting down planes. Imagine if you could project a forcefield over 17km in diameter in which enemy ships, which only have 2km range max, literally cannot shoot you, forcing them to sit back and do nothing. That's AA ships in a nutshell against CVs. Sure, they survive but they are rendered ineffective. You can essentially remove a CV from the match without even a single plane kill as skilled CVs will know which targets he can attack and which he cannot. The CV on the other hand has no options but to trust his teammates to break up such formations or snipe enemy AA ships. And if the CV is stupid and does dive on you, he'll simply lose all aircraft with little damage done, if any. Ironically by advocating counterplay you're actually asking for CV buffs as they are the sole class that cannot deal damage if the enemy team displays any intelligence. Or in simple pictures: As someone who actually played NF in a competitive setting, I can say that this is full of . CVs were loathed by the unskilled who had no idea how to use AA and that's pretty much it.

Meh, in my eyes it's a BB crammed into a cruiser slot anyway. Same with Alaska. GS, again, ofc suffers but she maybe she'll get some needed buffs for it.

Weird, I found rockets and DBs to be far more reliable and easy as TBs need an incredible amount of lead. The thing about DBs is that you need to start your attack when your reticle is behind your target. Depending on how fast or big your target is this distance is either further or closer to it. This gives you enough time to adjust to whatever changes in direction your target might make to throw you off. The last few seconds also makes your reticle go forward at an increased pace. Contrary to the current iteration it is also best to approach your target from behind as your reticle moves forward. In addition you need to save your boost in case he accelerates or slows down to make necessary adjustments. Also keep in mind that bombs need time to travel down, but the longer you wait the shorter their travel time is. Considering how low you can dive you can almost make bombs hit instantly if you wait until the last millisecond. This is especially important when attacking DDs. I may upload a gif of an ideal DB attack later when I have the time. With rockets it's easy. Just start your attack run as early as possible (I usually use the mid range AA as an indicator, as soon as mid range puffs appear I start my attack run. Allows me to dodge the puffs as well by diving below them) then adjust with taps on A+D and mouse. Don't hold your direction keys as that'll make your reticle increase. You may not get the optimal attack vector you wish for if your target is attentive, but I use rockets only to finish off low HP targets anyway. For everything else I almost exclusively use DBs with TBs usage only against BBs and CVs.

A little bit on the controls: The mouse controls only the rudder and is used to yaw, A and D controls the ailerons and is used to turn via rolling. The former has low impact on aiming (it will either still narrow but at a slower rate or it will stick to the current accuracy depending on how much you yaw) while the latter will decrease accuracy tremendously. You can use right click to look around without rudder movement. I actually found this control scheme to be pretty good after a dozen games or so of getting used to it. Even hitting DDs with DBs (with catastrophic results for the DD might I add) is rather easy for me now. There is still a feeling of sluggishness there but I don't believe it is due to the controls. Could just be general responsiveness of the UI. I can definitely see why others may not like it. It's not the most intuitive thing to say the least, but it works fine if you learn how to use it.

You need to upgrade your hull and aircraft. Stock Ranger is T5 material as is likely intended.

Not a hockey fan, never heard of him. Not a big fan of any "real life" sport to begin with so that's to be expected.

Maybe it's the same but now the normal Sunray is easier? I mean we've had plenty of complaints about some current operations being too difficult for the average player, so the easiest way to introduce hard mode is to simply use the current iterations as that and make the normal ones easier.

So, getting torpedoed from stealth by a DD isn't getting killed by something you cannot see? I'm sorry, did I misunderstand you?

Well, time to give every ship the ability to radar from concealment? In fact, concealment in itself seems to be the problem here, why not remove it entirely? What you're saying is hilarious at best. I'll keep that in mind the next time my Wooster/Mino/DM/Hinden/etc. wipes out the entire strike complement of a CV without a scratch.

In other classes you actually have to up. A CV can do everything right and still won't be able to do anything if the enemy counterplays them. Literally all of the damage dealing capabilities of a CV is in direct correlation to enemy action, something no other class has to deal with either. CVs have significant drawbacks to their advantages. Doesn't matter whether you acknowledge them or not, it doesn't make them any less real. So basically "people are too stupid to understand that winning is everything". A truthful statement I suppose. Still, it doesn't matter, because the human factor is the one thing you NEVER factor into balancing. Besides, a lot of the mechanics of the game can be applied to this "logic", I guess we need to remove 1. Islands 2. Smoke 3. Torpedoes 4. Concealment 5. Range differences Among other things. So... ad hominems, huh?

No, I haven't. Will try that next time tho, ty. It'd be a lot easier to try tho if, you know, I could actually access my hull while I'm flying a squad. ¬_¬

If a ship no longer has any main and secondary guns along with no utility such as consumables, it doesn't pose a threat to me anymore. Thus I'd actually be very happy with it. I'm not an idiotic kill hungry after all. So? Service costs are the same whether you are sunk or not. In fact having to stay for the entire match duration is often much more painful. Besides, say that the losing side gets all their ships detonated at the end of the match (because with fixed service costs that's essentially what happens), including the CV. According to you that'd solve all CV balance problems? Also when I cannot approach a cap in a DD due to radar, I am automatically sunk? When I cannot approach the frontline in a BB because my teammates are being camping , I am sunk? When I have to give up my position as a cruiser because I see the enemy is moving to flush me out, I am sunk? Survival is insignificant to counterplay, because by counterplaying the enemy you will take a superior position regardless of whether the enemy survives. What matters is that you win, not that you kill the enemy. Ironic, I could say the same about yours. That a CV "does not get sunk" is laughable from a gameplay point of view. And in extension the developer will look at why whiners like you want CVs to be removed (skill gap, scouting, whatever) and take these under scrutiny. For example CVs are too difficult to play, resulting in a massive skill gap? Give potato CV AP bombs so they can always kill stuff, problem solved! Don't try to wiggle out of taking responsibility now. This is your fault, deal with it.

Rather the question is "should they not?" Because making BBs incapable of getting penetrations on DDs is a good thing. There are only a few cruisers involved so you can sort them out individually. Kron, Stalingrad and Alaska are very strong ships, perhaps even too strong. Nerfing them in this manner can and perhaps even should be done as they will remain very powerful even afterwards. Graf Spee is the only cruiser that gets the short end of the stick, but she always could've used a small buff anyway so this nerf may open up the door for that. Also BB pens on DDs is actually not a bug, it is simply how penetration mechanics currently work in the game. And so is double damage penetrations on a single hit. You could thus argue that BB AP pens on DDs is a feature, too. Whether something is a feature or not is ultimately decided by the developer however.