El2aZeR

So when you have failed basic map awareness and don't have your main guns lined up, you think you should still get to come out on top despite egregiously misplaying?

You do realize that those screenshots show you being carried to a default win, with your "contribution" of going for a CV snipe actually hurting that due to reasons already mentioned previously? Yeah, nevermind, you probably don't.

I'm sure he had fun: Halland AA is overrated. How about clan div vs clan div, one with a skilled CV player and one without? You know, create a situation where all external factors play no part anymore, thus allowing you to arrive to a definite conclusion? Who do you think is going to win then?

Except it clearly was a problem given that you lost. The objective of the game is not "kill the CV", it is to win. Your laughable example thus disproves your point ironically.

Given that this player is incompetent in all CVs I fail to see how this proves anything. And since you're diverting from the subject at hand that tells us everything we need to know how the match ended. Congrats on the throw.

Your hilarious refusal to show us the match end screen for one. Your screenshot proving you're about to lose for another. As for the FDR, whatever he did must have been more influential than you given that he is winning. Even better, your most recent screenshot unfortunately makes the mistake of showing his name too. You just spent the entire match being useless just to snipe a potato CV player, making your throw even more egregious. Your play is thus a complete and utter failure.

Fify.

If they give up on sniping you then you can play normally too.

Turn and head towards the map border immediately at the start of the match. You're essentially pulling 3 of the most influential enemy ships out of the game alone, terrible strike efficiency is a small price to pay for that.

Which completely misses the point. By also giving your team a T8 CV and two T9 BBs. Also 899 is easily countered on most maps. If you die to 899, you deserve it.

So if you fail to adequately support your DDs you somehow deserve to still be at an advantage? So if the enemy CV just removes your DDs from play one way or another, that doesn't unbalance the game even more as you are reliant on just a single rather than multiple players to be good? So if both the enemy DDs and the enemy CV are good players, that doesn't create an insurmountable disadvantage? Your "logic" is truly incredible. Incredibly disingenuous as always that is. "This situation is unfair, so this mechanic which creates even more lopsided situations makes it balanced" LOL. And to top it all off you claim balance is a matter of perspective. Hilarious.

Lex has almost the same alpha strike as Kaga on 3 torpedoes with a much better spread. For you to gain any real value out of Kaga torps compared to US ones you need to hit all 4 which against a target that isn't completely braindead is extremely unlikely. Usually you will hit 2, maybe even just 1. As such comparatively Kaga TBs are at best roughly equal, at worst mediocre. To be fair this isn't a particularly fair comparison since US T8 torps are among the best, if not overall the best in the game when all aspects are considered. Lex has superior rockets and DBs period. This gives Lexington superior flexibility and in practice at least equal to much better damage output overall. The only thing at which Kaga trumps Lex (and every other CV) is sustain, which however in the current AA environment doesn't mean much.

Perhaps, but EL is inferior to Ryujo. Kaga is a shafted Lexington. Nothing the ship does Lexington cannot do better unless you're taking excessive losses at which point you should probably learn how to evade flak first.

US. No. Available premium CVs are all inferior to tech tree ones.

Indeed. TH:LW generally seems fairly generous with resources. Even premium currency regularly appears in limited expeditions. Would explain why they're so stingy with rolls and map drops. Only got 20 rolls once, all 10 otherwise.

This somehow implies that such a class with this level of immunity exists in other games. To compare snipers and artillery with CVs is beyond disingenuous.

Well, guess what WG wants you to do now?

What can one say if people actually believe these are effective anti CV tactics?

Because not every match includes a CV and not every CV player they meet is competent enough to do that. In fact the majority of CV players aren't. Not that it is much of a condolence when it does actually happen though. That is actually a hallmark of a terribly implemented and broken mechanic. Only terrible CV players get taken out by that. Still blatantly lying I see.

Or perhaps you are simply not as good as you think you are. Do tell when you find a player in a high tier surface ship with a random solo WR of 80% or higher while having a representative amount of matches played though.

So basically you lack the ability to read the minimap and WASD slightly every half a minute or so and instead of improving you proceed to whine about it. Rather ironic for someone who constantly tells others to improve their play against CVs, no? CV torpedoes also deal damage on a much more reliable basis, as such are the superior weapon.

This change was not made to make your gameplay experience better.

Why? In many online games it is common practice to abuse broken mechanics, even more so if it is sanctioned by the developer. Acknowledging CVs as broken doesn't prevent anyone from playing them. In fact for the majority, if not all of top CV players it serves as the primary incentive to play them instead.

Top clans with top CV players in them overwhelmingly support a ban of the class. This includes top CV players as they recognize the class as broken and would prefer to have a better game. You are lying as usual.

Seemingly increased maneuverability, significantly faster reticle closing as well as complete removal of accuracy penalty when maneuvering. This makes compensating for maneuvers a DD may make fairly easy.