El2aZeR

You could also, you know, just lower the damage low tier aircraft do? Right now a Hosho has the same TB alpha strike as a Shokaku. That's like giving a Wyoming the guns of a NC. How can that possibly go wrong?

Nah, I can't. My Shokaku doesn't talk to me in my waifu's wonderful voice. Weeb Kongo op, pls nerf? On a more serious note, I can give you dozens of reasons why I win so many battles despite being bottom tier in most of my games, none of them have anything to do with CVs and can in fact be easily fixed by WG. Then again I already posted most, if not all of them already. But lets get into why CVs have such good stats in general, shall we? Stats in general are nothing without proper interpretation. For example Clemson is among the worst performing DDs at her tier, yet you can hardly tell me that she's not hilariously overpowered in the right hands. To only point towards CV stats and yell around that they're op is horrendously stupid at best.

Ah, well, I'm playing on a 24" monitor so my minimap is more than big enough. As I said before, use what works for you.

Looks like the pizza has finally arrived at my naval base as well. Got her during my last run in the TP phase. EDIT: And here's pizza number two. Dropped during a successful boss run.

And you need that why? Are you playing on a tiny resolution maybe? I've seen how Fara plays. I've also played against him only once I believe (which I won by virtue of him being in a GZ). Still, pulling up the tactical map isn't necessary imo. The minimap provides you all the information and utility you'll ever need. But if you believe you can work better with the tac map, by all means use it. Far be it from me to tell you how to play. However in the rework with manual piloting of a single squad pulling up the tac map just to move your CV is a hassle I'd rather not deal with, especially when there is an easy solution readily available. In pressure situations that can easily cost you time you cannot afford.

Which imo is extremely inefficient considering the minimap does the same thing and doesn't need to be specifically accessed. And while going for the tactical map may be an option in an RTS interface, the last thing you want to do when manually piloting a plane is to go pull up an extra overlay that obstructs your entire view.

@Crysantos, your colleagues were talking you after you left! Don't worry tho, I taught them a lesson in your honor. :D Does this count as naming and shaming btw?

The same way the other guy totally wasn't camping I suppose.

Haku and Midway have the worst global WR of all T10 ships on EU server. Not that that matters ofc considering there is mirror MM and the long list of patches not being taken into account.

It's kinda pointless to argue with Mr. "Here's a screenshot of me camping, but I totally didn't camp". In his eyes everything is the fault of CVs. Can't be his own fault that he lost those games after all despite only getting little more than the participation award. Nah, CVs op.

Btw, poll is giving us some interesting results imo. I honestly expected more people to like the rework rather than dislike it regardless of what little info there is right now.

Good riddance I'd say.

Like BB AP on DDs? At best it's a reduction, one that will still be felt because it's extremely likely that the 22 other guys in the match are potatoes that can't play against CVs. At worst it just makes CVs broken in another direction entirely. Again, balancing will determine the outcome.

You are putting an awful lot of trust into WG, a company that has given us a long, long list of balancing ups they haven't resolved to this day even if you take CVs out of the equation. You brought up something that is completely irrelevant. I explained that the skill gap will exist even before the rework has been released and it will always be noticeable, that's all.

Because one of the GOALS that WG listed is to make CVs focus entirely on DoT stacking. If you take that away, what else are CVs supposed to do? Their scouting is massively diminished, their alpha strike is likely going to be pitiful and their team utility practically nonexistent. It's not overpowered. After all we know that pure damage farming doesn't win games. What it is however, is broken. What do you not understand about me referring to his post about how the skill gap would be eliminated, explaining that this will not be the case? It has nothing to do with the skill gap being a problem or not.

And AA can be dodged. Laughably easy too as far as I've seen. Besides, if they make AA too powerful, that runs contrary to their design goals. You assume things will be balanced when the very goals of the rework stand against it. They want more players to play CVs and them to focus on DoT stacking, thus CVs have to be easy to be successful in and possess a reasonably high flooding and fire chance. Besides, we've also seen a Zao take 21k damage from a single flight. The values are not final, but the design goals are. Which was predictable considering he flew in a straight line for quite a while. From my observations the first two barrages can be thoroughly ignored while the third and subsequent ones will be pretty much dead on. A change in direction will restart the cycle over again. Except you have a far lower rate of fire in current CVs. Assuming that the rework is going to be more fair is laughable at best. Wat. Do you even read? I was referring to the part where he stated that the rework will eliminate the skill gap and start every player anew. This is thoroughly impossible with any kind of prior information released that allows someone to study and learn about the new mechanics, giving them an edge over the vast majority who will not do so. When I started playing CVs I instantly hit 60% WR due to knowing about the various mechanics beforehand and how other ships play. You think in the CV rework that's going to be any less of an advantage?

That is thoroughly untrue. There will be those who will know how to apply lessons from current CV play, who have studied the video along any following ones and adjusted tactics accordingly. "If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles." Preparation is key when going into something new. Thus from the very beginning we will likely see a stark contrast between the minority who have prepared and the majority who haven't. Except now they can't even oppose each other and are just locked in a flat out damage race, making any skill difference just as pronounced as it is now.

No, a single squad is ineffective against any kind of serious AA opposition that almost all ships at high tiers carry. Likewise the flooding chance isn't high enough to guarantee one even if you hit with all 12 torps with hits on bow and stern. On the other hand reworked CVs have to have high flooding and fire chance, because that is now what they're designed to do. Not having that would literally break the class unless compensated with high alpha strike. Yes, by the guy deliberately flying into AA clouds and not dodging. As S_O already stated, the player was very bad actually. Even most WG employees can do better, one can only imagine what an expert might pull off. Besides, even then that was only 4 planes lost in an attack that will doom the Zao. Except it does. In current CV play you tend to get "best scenarios" more often than not. Ships exposing themselves with no real need, then inevitably getting struck, heavily damaged or outright sunk by aircraft. This is where a large part of the power of a skilled CV player nowadays is coming from. We can thoroughly assume that this isn't going to change with the rework, because the average player will remain . Thus due to the stupidity of the average player we must also assume that a CV will get all of his strikes through in 9 out of 10 times. We can wait and see but I'm not very optimistic.

Assuming flooding mechanics don't change, in one strike you can cause over 100k damage by setting two perma floods on two ships. If it's a cruiser, you've pretty much killed them with that. If it's a BB, the next strike or any kind of assistance from your teammates will finish them off. Such a strike will take you around three minutes (1 min flight time, 2 mins striking) if the targets are within close proximity to each other. Thus if the enemy has 4 cruisers you can kill them all within 6-7 minutes. Alternatively you could doom all 5 BBs within ~10 minutes, farming over 500k damage in the process. As I stated previously, it all depends on balance. And considering the goal of WG is to make CVs stack DoT damage and farm it until no tomorrow, yes, it can and likely will turn out much, MUCH worse. Alternatively if WG decides to nerf flooding and fire damage in response every other class except BBs is getting nerfed hard. There is literally no good solution that they can take here.

People who have no idea understanding on CVs whatsoever claim that CVs are op and need to be changed. Where have I seen that before? This is incredibly hilarious, considering after the rework CVs will be capable of doing the same thing except more efficient. Have you even watched the reveal yet? Unless they change flooding and fire damage, at which point DDs and cruisers will also be nerfed hard, farming 500k damage within 15 mins or so is a very real possibility, limited only by the amount of targets

Tactical map is a nuisance that isn't needed if you could just set waypoints on the minimap. It's inconvenient to the extreme even in current CV play.

Basic gameplay looks fun. Now it all depends on the balance. And I have no confidence whatsoever in WG being able to pull that off.

Using your WASD keys to push while not being too far ahead of your teammates is hardly difficult. All it requires is some basic minimap awareness. Then again even that is too much to ask for nowadays, but do we really want to balance around that? I can tell you from experience that my Cleve is well capable of near wiping an entire T10 CV strike out. And no, I don't run close to full AA. Actually, no, it doesn't. It only causes the worse CV player to have practically no part in the match, which too could've and should've been addressed. Obviously fighter and strafing mechanics needed changes. Sure, your team suffers the spotting disadvantage, but it can be overcome. And if you can't, well, then quite frankly you deserve to lose. CVs have very clear limitations when attacking surface ships. There is no interaction there either so whether you're a skilled CV or a complete potato makes very little difference. The problem is that the limitations aren't even close to consistent over the entire match. For example a Montana can eventually get spammed down so hard (or, you know, just get hit a few times by a Conqueror) that I can eventually attack him with few losses even in a T8 CV. The idea that AA can deteriorate is good, it prevents bottom tier CVs from being completely useless in the face of full AA ships and makes them dependent on their teammates for assistance. The execution however is a joke at best, you should never be able to completely deprive a ship of their defensive capabilities against aircraft. I've outlined as much and more in the post I've displayed above. Another example would be AP bombs. While undoubtedly broken, how are AP bombs so successful in T10 that almost every skilled Midway player uses them? After all their primary prey is also supposed to be their primary nemesis. It's because of the current meta and, ironically, due to the rarity of CVs as well as the need for surface ships to specialize into AA which is absolutely idiotic. That's like if you could make yourself completely immune to DD torps by just picking a few skills and upgrades, but if you don't pick those skills and upgrades you're forced to straight line and eat torps all day. It's inevitable that a system which has such extremes will fail one way or another when it comes to what is supposed to be one of the core classes of the game, meant to be in every match. All of these are factors independent of CV skill. The skill gap is largely an issue that affects CVs themselves, it only has impact on surface ships because it isn't the only issue by far. If air-surface interactions were properly balanced the skill gap between potato and skilled CVs wouldn't be nearly as big of a problem as it is now. Add to that other problems such as for example a Hosho having practically the same striking potential as a Shokaku and you get a cluster. Not an unfixable cluster mind you, it's actually imo a fairly easy mess to clean up, but a cluster nonetheless. One that WG never even attempted to address despite CV players giving them potential solutions on how to do so for years. Not that it matters now ofc. Braindead damage farming and disregarding my team? Here I come.

Then I can just show you a game where I couldn't do anything despite playing an "op" CV and shutting down my counterpart completely. I ended that match without flying a single effective strike. Does that mean CVs are underpowered now and need to be buffed? Hardly. Getting baited inherently implies a punishable misplay. It's not exactly hard to wait until planes have closed the distance before using DFAA to cause maximum damage. I see nothing wrong with this aside from WG usual balancing failures of making everything hinge on a one-button-win mechanic. Again. So you admit that the fact that your match ended the way it did was due to other failures from WG and had little to do with the CVs themselves? Here's the thing, I don't actually disagree with you. Yes, CVs are monstrously powerful when top tier in a predominantly bottom tier match. They're also very weak when bottom tier in a predominantly top tier match. Quite frankly such a disparity shouldn't exist. Top tier CVs shouldn't be near omnipotent and neither should bottom tier CVs be close to useless. Yet my most successful CVs are ironically T8s, a tier notorious for incredibly awful MM. That either implies that AA isn't adequate in countering CVs, at which point everyone who has seen entire T8 strikes evaporate from AA of a single T10 ship will start to laugh manically, or other factors are the cause for this. And if there are other factors then they need to be fixed, but that has little to do with CVs themselves. If you want my perspective on how I would change AA and CVs, I wrote a lengthy post on it here: Considering WGs inherent goal is to make CVs damage farming egoists to appeal to the lowest common denominator, I think we're out of luck on this.

Except those persons acting like headless chickens also had shotguns, they apparently just didn't know how to use them. Lets imagine that the vast majority of players always sail in a straight line and get killed by torps as a result. Oh, wait, don't even need to imagine that, no? I guess that means torps are overpowered and bad for the game? It's literally the same deal. Yet whining about torps is treated as whining, while whining about CVs is treated as "constructive criticism". That's not to say that CVs don't have their problems, they do. But to call for their removal due to their overperformance, primarily caused by the underperformance of everyone else, is laughable at best. Which, again, is a problem with MM and AA consistency. If you'd replace the Balti and Cleves on your team with a DM and Worchesters then you can hardly tell me that you don't have enough AA cover. Even as it stands Roon, Cleve and Balti could've disrupted strikes heavily and caused significant losses if they were using DFAA in a proper manner and positioned themselves well. Apparently that wasn't the case, but hey, if your teammates play this badly, maybe the enemy just deserves the advantages they get? Heck, Haku can't even keep Balti nor Cleve spotted as their air spotting range equals or is smaller than their max AA range. I mean generally speaking, not in context of the match you had. It's laughably easy to counter CVs if you just have one or two AA ships who know what they're doing. And yet one can only imagine what happens in a full on T9 or T10 match when T8s can already cause this many losses. That's still fewer squads to worry about when it comes to scouting or dealing actually meaningful damage. After all if all he constantly got was one fire then that means he didn't use them to contribute to the match. The damage from only one fire is insignificant for BBs after all. Fires can be healed 100%, lost aircraft can't be replaced. In that sense the damage he leeched on you only had personal benefit for him and no impact on the match. Even personal gains are unlikely to be very big considering you're a BB, the worst ship to attack when trying to make economic gain. I'd be pretty happy with the result knowing that. Though how about you just start playing AA cruisers instead? After all by playing a BB you're just part of the problem. HE bombs are far from weak. In many ways HE is actually the superior setup. The current meta is what allows AP bombs to be as successful as they are.