El2aZeR

Wrong, not counting them as individual planes is subverting the truth since you can actually score that many kills. Shooting down one consumable fighter squad has absolutely no impact on any other following squad. If they were only 6 like you say then you'd only need 6 kills to deprive the reworked CV of its entire fighter complement which is obviously not the case. Unless I suppose you only want to count squad size instead of total reserves for RTS CVs as well, which drastically reduces their fighter count too.

Kekw. Same parameters as before, except this time with fighters added in. Without rework CV hull fighters though as these serve no utility against surface ships. Hosho - 29 (13 VF / 16 TBs) vs 75 (29 RF / 23 DBs / 23 TBs) Ryujo - 48 (10 VF / 19 DBs / 19 TBs) vs 99 (27 VF / 27 RF / 22 DBs / 23 TBs) Shokaku - 72 (24 VF / 24 DBs / 24 TBs) vs 129 (45 VF / 30 RF / 26 DBs / 28 TBs) Hakuryu - 100 (30 VF / 30 DBs / 40 TBs) vs 157 (63 VF / 27 RF / 30 DBs / 37 TBs) Langley - 30 (10 VF / 10 DBs / 10 TBs) vs 73 (27 RF / 23 DBs / 23 TBs) Independence / Ranger - 37 (12 VF / 13 DBs / 12 TBs) vs 104 (27 VF / 27 RF / 27 DBs / 23 TBs) Lexington - 70 (18 VF / 36 DBs / 16 TBs) vs 127 (45 VF / 30 RF / 26 DBs / 26 TBs) Midway - 116 (45 VF / 40 DBs / 41 TBs) vs 144 (63 VF / 27 RF / 30 DBs / 24 TBs)  Saipan - 48 (24 VF / 24 TBs) vs 94 (45 VF / 18 RF / 15 DBs / 16 TBs) Enterprise - 96 (43 VF / 28 DBs / 25 TBs) vs 185 (90 VF / 39 RF / 26 DBs / 30 TBs) Graf Zeppelin - 72 (16 VF / 29 DBs / 27 TBs) vs 118 (45 VF / 25 RF / 22 DBs / 26 TBs) Kaga - 85 (28 VF / 14 DBs / 43 TBs) vs 176 (45 VF / 35 RF / 49 DBs / 47 TBs) Yeah, not looking so good now, doesn't it? Each consumable summons separate fighters which are just automatically lost once they expire. Losses suffered by previous squadrons have no impact on subsequent ones and multiple can exist at the same time. Therefore all fighters have to be counted separately as they are in fact separate entities. You can in fact attack only with the attack wing - which is equivalent to attacking only with a single squad rather than your entire strike package. Bringing more squadrons in RTS and thus putting them into harms way is the equivalent to bringing more than one attack wing. In both iterations you're only endangering as many planes as you're attacking with, nothing has changed in that regard. As such I still fail to see the relevance.

It makes for terrible CV vs CV interaction which is arguably worse than having none. I'd much prefer it if you could designate where a fighter spawns on the map as well as making fighters incapable of spotting in general. That seems much more useful to me rather than having CVs play chicken with each other for little to no effect. Sure, but then your active play has already been rewarded since you needed to actually take these caps in the first place. And if your team then subsequently takes defensive positions the current fighter consumable would do largely the same thing as your proposed rework of it, meaning little to nothing changes.

Kekw. Fine, I'll do it later. And in the rework the attack wing isn't at risk unless all reserves are shot down. The effect is still largely the same. I still fail to see the relevance. While plane reserves may not be technically infinite, they are practically due to having massive reserves and the general weakness of AA.

They are though? They are an important utility to keep up spotting when you cycle strikes - just like in RTS. You also have full control over where you can put them. Both of which curtails your alpha and reserves, in RTS it just did it straight up while in the rework it denies you subsequent attacks. I still fail to see the relevance.

You'd just have two plane squadrons annihilate each other for nothing if they happen to meet on the map somewhere randomly. The general issue with the fighter consumable is that you need to be in the area to actually cover your teammates. This is naturally untenable as you're losing out on striking time and therefore fall behind in the damage race that is CV play even if you happen to catch an enemy squad with said fighters which is likewise a dodgy prospect to say the least. This will even be the case with manually controlled fighters. Playing to react rather than to act simply isn't a game winning recipe. Unless WG allows us to control fighters at the same time as bombers, any idea to fix them is unlikely to solve anything. In fact it would actually be a better idea to just remove CV fighters entirely to curtail their spotting potential.

This is ofc utterly wrong. The utility of fighters against surface ships has not changed between rework and RTS, meaning if you want fighters to count you need to add them in the rework as well. I did the rework a massive favor by leaving them out, otherwise the rework would massively outpace RTS by several dozen planes. RTS losses were also not under your control with AA generally being much stronger than it is currently. I fail to see the relevance. Your attempts to subvert the truth are pathetic as always.

Reworked high tier CVs have the same or higher damage potential compared to before. This is because while per attack reworked CVs may deal less damage, they also cycle strikes a lot faster. Not only were strike planes back in RTS at T10 about as fast as they are currently in T4, there are no launch, service, fly back and landing times anymore. This means for every strike a RTS CV flies, a reworked CV flies about 3. That is more than enough to straight up kill any ship. As such the table is very much representative. Halland is a terrible pick against a meta CV due to how fast it loses the majority of its AA to air strikes and how big of a target it represents to both bombs and rockets. The only upside to it is its heal. DDs that have long or fast cd smoke are much more annoying.

To be honest it's not that hard to imagine - as a simulator. Which WoWs is not.

You mean for general gameplay or for CV play? Because as you surely know those are on two opposite ends of a spectrum. Meh.

Which make up less than 20% of the playerbase when comparing peak numbers. Why do you keep harping on about Steam player numbers when we have total player numbers available?

Spreading ignorance can become dangerous rather fast - as the ongoing pandemic handily proves. Weird, I could have sworn I told you already that the game is still fun for me personally and I don't particularly care anymore in which direction it moves? Or are you still salty about the whole CV thing? :)

Overall player numbers can be found here: https://stats.wotapi.ru/stats/wows/eu/total Tl;dr: - max player numbers remain the same on EU and RU, summer performance has been significantly better than previous years due to lockdowns but no real growth can be observed - slight increase in player numbers on NA starting at the time of lockdowns, currently experiencing a downward trend to usual player numbers again which for the time of the year is actually somewhat unusual - significant increase in player numbers at the beginning of the year because of the still ongoing pandemic on SEA, however a downward trend towards usual player numbers has been happening throughout the year Conclusion: Any perceived growth can be attributed to the ongoing pandemic which is currently making the entire gaming industry write record numbers, not because the game is getting more popular. Player numbers are falling back to their usual values typical for their respective server. Thus WoWs is not growing, it is stagnating as it has for years. In fact if we take last year, which saw new lows in player numbers in summer, as a continuous trend only averted by covid then it stands to reason that 2020 would have seen a further fall in player activity, but that is ofc just a hypothesis with no real proof to back it up.

The Flat Earth Society also (sadly) has a lot of followers. Should that somehow prevent anyone who doesn't have the same amount of popularity to make fun of them? Including, you know, scientists and such?

Imagine thinking that zoup is a credible source for information.

WG: "We are giving all heavy cruisers 30mm plating to reward angling better." Also WG: "We are giving every new BB the ability to overmatch 30mm plating."

When will you guys realize that bomb damage and fire chance is not what makes Implacable bad? Also Audacious nerf

Either deny the cap for as long as possible or, if you have a big enough point lead already, just keep running.

The only way to do that would be to nerf IJN DD or DD detectability in general globally. This will inevitably hit a lot of (IJN) DDs a lot harder than the Kamikaze, thus severely disrupting game balance. It has plenty. All of them are listed in this thread.

My personal guess would be that Petro and Daring falls faster since Petro + Halland likely limits CV striking ability to single attacks. This inhibits CV damage potential to a level where Daring HE spam will not be able to make it up. The Daring then dies easily after the Petro is dead.

Eh, just 24. What you basically need is a team that gets an early advantage but attempts to throw but not throw hard enough so that you cannot compensate. And ofc they all need to die in the process, allowing you to clutch out the round via points.

Hey, I did say Problem is getting into a cap in the first place. Since you know, the CV can just scout you out within the first minute of the match if you happen to press W too many times. So it is really only after everyone gets into position that you can go capping in the first place - at which point if your CV player isn't equally as oppressive as the enemy one the cap has likely already been taken for a while. Even better. Lets see how far you can run in 30 seconds.

Same as Loewenhardt.

This also requires that you have viable AA support close by in the first place which the CV can ironically just deny via spotting. Thus either leaving you in the back being useless with everyone else or expose yourself in an attempt to contest the cap. Also RN smoke timing is hilarious in that it takes exactly one strike cycle for it to expire, meaning that as soon as you smoke the CV can go strike something else and your smoke will expire just as he comes back.

Which does nothing to inhibit the CV while keeping the DD useless, thus multiplying his match influence. After all, there is nothing that prevents the CV from simply killing off your "AA support".