Ishiro32

Flooding Colorado is much more fun than setting it on fire. That speed debuff is hillarious on that ship. Just leaving this here.

That is needed drawback if you want this abillity to be as strong as it is. Taking it out would mean nerfing the damage and I honestly prefer stronger option but with an option it can backfire if misused.

Funny thread. Reminds me this little thing I have written months ago: http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/15095-fighters-broken-element-that-defiles-the-balance/page__fromsearch__1 A lot stuff from it is outdated, but sadly the main idea behind that topic is still up to date. Fighters as you have said are lacking in decision making. They are too simple. There is not enough elements which impact fighter performance which can be used by player to their advantage. Fighters have still long way to go, but at least we know that WG acknowledged that they need work. While fighter barrage skill right now is too situational and is bugged to hell, it is there. For the moment I have no idea what they can do to make it core fighter vs fighter skill the same way manual drop is core for bomber vs ship, but the direction is good. The fact that CA and BB have float planes was a decent boost to the fighters viability and expanded their gameplay a bit. We have received speed boost on empty bombers which also exapnded fighter gameplay a bit. Lower damage and more ammo also was a change to give them a bit more decision making. We might argue that steps are too small, but they are making them pretty consistently. So does anyone have some ideas of their own that would make fighters more fun?

I played LoL for over 4 years and this is not LoL. If you want to continue topic of LoL and argue with me about that then I invite you to PM. I don't want to trash your thread as I hope will be something great in the future. Excuse my harsh words earlier, but I wish for stats to be used only when needed and I have rather alergic reaction to when they are used incorrectly. I have seen enough people dismissing others by them when they were losing discussions or seen people substituting their arguments with them. So let's play nice and leave our ego in signatures like most people do. Anyway, I will stop this now as there is no further need to spam your topic with my bickering. Once again, good luck with your guide and thank you for changing that, even though a bit reluctantly.

Here is the problem. There is a difference in saying "I am good carrier player, so I know what I am talking about" or even LoL's "I am Diamond player so I have good grasp on game mechanics" and dragging fleeting records that will lose any meaning with the next patch cycle. You already have word expert in the title which implies you know what you are talking about and as I have said, Checking that data on your own is not that hard. If you wanted to make it easier would just put link to your stat page. Not to mention that you are already vain enough to put your "records" in the signature, so putting it here again is even more pointless. The data you have provided serves only self gratification, not the proof of abillity. There are already multiple guides written/recorded by well known carrier players who did not feel the need to show off their results as proof, their work speak for them. What you did is just ego trip nothing else. I have said what I think. Please leave boasting somewhere else.

It's the function of the % of the players playing that ship, ship's performance and number of posts on the forum with name of said ship. Oh and you need to add fun number like 6 to the calculations, otherwise it doesn't work.

Ogólnie t6-t8 to pierwsze tiery gdzie AAA zaczyna odgrywac znaczenie. Na poczatku gry jak najedziesz na nick gracza, mozesz sprawdzic wartosc jego obrony p.lot. Ogólnie polecam przeleciec te wartości dla każdego Amerykańskiego Pancernika by sprawdzić czy operują na ostatnim ulepszeniu kadłuba które daje im ogromną obrone p.lot. Także warto sprawdzać krążowniki by wychwycić te zbudowane w pełni na obrone p.lot. Możesz się spodziewać że Cleveland i Atlanta będą najczęściej po to wymaksowane i ich się obawiaj. Na początku gry skup się na okretach o słabej obronności. Jest powód dla którego opłaca się zostawić te silniejsze na odrobine później poza tym że na początku warto oszczędzić troche samoloty. Mianowicie pociski HE mają sporą szanse niszczenia dział p.lot. Więc jeżeli taka np. Iowa była pod ostrzałem krążowników przez jakiś czas, jej obronność wyraźnie spadnie. Bombowce nurkujące także skutecznie niszczą te działka, lecz mimo to lepiej używać ich jako samolotów od powodowania pożarów. Co do Cleveland i Atlanty. Jak sa zbudowane w pelni na obrone p.lot i odpala skill to naprawde nie masz za bardzo co zrobic. Maja ogromny zasieg i potezna sile ognia. Skoro grales juz na tier 7 to znaczy ze miales rezerwy by po prostu spisac taki atak na straty. Gorzej jest na tierach VI i V jak walcza przeciwko takiemu clevelandowi, ale no cóż. Czasem ma sie pecha. W sumie sprawdziłem teraz i ciśniesz amerykańską linie. No jest ona odrobine trudniejsza, według mnie lepiej się na niej uczyć, bo błędy łatwiej zauważyć, ale jest trudniejsza. Powiem Ci że z tego co rozmawiałem z innymi graczami lotniskowców to tier VII amerykański to obecnie katorga. Japoński odpowiednik ma bardzo dużą przewagę, a przez zmiane MM mam sporą szanse że go spotkasz. Hmmmm... Jak jestes tak zirytowany to moze wróć do IJN. Zuiho może miec problemy z Bongue na myśliwcach, ale potem to już powinno być z górki, aż do Taihou. Nie chce poki co sie wypowiadac o obecnym stanie lotniskowców, bo prawde mówiąc mam troche przerwe w grze z powodu nawału pracu w prawdziwym życiu, lecz powoli chyba będe wracał. Nie powiem, naprawde jestem ciekaw jak w praktyce wygląda to wszystko, bo widziałem już tyle łez z powodu patch-a 0.4.1, że głowa mała.

Hello Syrchalis Place for tips is nice and I like that you try to make an effort in formating them so they are easy to read, but... Can you please leave the boasting somewhere else? If what you are saying makes sense people will listen. If anyone will doubt your expertise they will check stats themselves, it is not very hard. You are not impressing anyone with selected "best stat" on server and you "holding records" and honestly the only thing it will generate, is negative feedback towards you. Cheers and good luck with your guide

Can I have anime VO? "Sugoi, enemy batturuship is kirred!" "Kyaaaaa, torpedo sighted on staruboardu" "Daijoubu, daijoubu, everything is daijoubu" "Whaaaa, gunu losto!!" But seriously, more VO options would be nice. I am sure they plan those, but it isn't really at the top of the priority list.

Sure making TB run from the mountain and droping torps on the water near the cliff is unrealistic. The same way AA fire going through said mountains. The same way that huge battleships can sail hugging those islands. If BB can sail there I think we can consider water deep enough to drop the torps. This is a game. Mechanics are simple. Torps need to swim in water for specified time before they are armed. They can be only drop on water. At this point water depth has no gameplay interactions. TB run can be initiated anywhere. If you want to consider landmass a torpedo protection you need to be close enough to it, if you are not you are pretty much on open waters. If you fail to use those rules to your advantage then you have only yourself to blame. Learn at what distance near landmass you are safe and at which you are not. The only thing at this point CV skippers are exploiting is your lack of knowledge and experience. This is hardly gamebreaking and hardly requires 5 pages of pointless bickering.

Co do spotowania torped, niewiele sie pomylilem. do 2km maja detectability i ogolnie zalezy od predkosci. Tak jak scoutowalem samolotami, zeby wykryc fale musisz przelatywac praktycznie nad nia. Fakt, nie gralem niszczycielami od czasu CBT, wiec szczerze to nie odczulem nigdy zmian w BB i CA. Ale nadal utrzymuje stwierdzenie ze ich ilosc nie zwiekszy sie znaczaca jak nie bedzie CV, a brak CV pozwoli niszczycielom operowac latwiej. Nie przewiduje bog wie czego 6 DD vs 6 DD, ale napewno mniejsza ilosc CV jest benefitem dla niszczycieli ich popularnosc powinna wzrosnac.

Yeah, yeah, I know. I am happy that at least we are going in the correct direction. Cleaning all the bugs and adjusting some balance values comes first, before we can expect anything new. Maybe some day fighter setups will be as fun as strike setups. Can't wait for it.

Scout, cap, a takze majac duzo czasu i mozna znacznie latwiej ustawiac zasadzki, znajdowac samotnych wojownikow, blokowac wazne choke pointy.No i sadze ze troche przeceniasz zdolnosci samolotow z CA i BB do detekcji. Samoloty wykrywaja z tego co pamietam w zasiegu 2km, to nie jest nic niesamowitego, a także ich ruchy sa przewidywalne. W 0.4.0 polowanie na te samoloty to nie byl jakis duzy istotny element gry CV, wiec duzo wiecej to ich w powietrzu nie bedzie niz bylo. A w zamian za to bedzie mniej samolotow ktore perfidnie spotowaly DD i pozwalaly calemu teamowi bezkarnie bic tego niszczyciela, czy IJN ktore urzadzaly polowania na DD gdyz byly latwym i bardzo oplacalnym celem.

I really wish they would make it a bit less situational. Making this ability more core for fighter vs fighter fights, not something that does wonders when planets align.

Actually people were complaining exactly about plane physics and their behavior and it were players with quite an experience. Some were being silly, but I can't remember anyone saying that turning on a dime for planes was fine back then. Healthy gameplay > realism in an arcade game. I know that planes should be able to do stuff like that considering scales, but fact is simple. It was too easy to set up great drops. Now you have to manualy turn into manual drop before the circle. It requires a bit more experience and gut feeling. It also gives an enemy a bit clearer indication who exactly is being targeted. This was biggest problem. You could not tell who is being a target. You have to iron this out before you can tacke other issues. Is it a bit too harsh? Once again, can't tell yet. If all recent changes caused class to be too weak then they will receive buffs to something else to recompensate. Don't you worry about that, but turning on a dime was unhealthy and had to go. If you noticed how the direction arrow was behaving during those drops you could tell that it was not intended to be like that in any shape or form.

My point is that it was clearly broken and could be abused so you were able to do completely unpredictable drops. On the first drop the turn was so tight that the animation was off! That's what's most people complained about. Tie fighter physics and on the 3rd attempt you can easily see that. How do you think it looks from the perspective of the ship being attacked? Because of that you were able to hit your targets always in the most optimal way. Now you have to telegraph your attacks and predict everything. I am yet to test if the approach angles are too harsh, but considering opinions of experienced players like Sharana and from what I remember on test servers, it should be fine. Point is, old turning on a dime was broken and without fixing it balancing CVs in any shape or form could not be done. And if the manual DB is hard, then they maybe should increase it's accuracy. It would be such a great thing.

Spotowanie torped owszem, dzięki samolotom katapultowym będzie do zrobienia. Lecz spotowanie samych DD to raczej bedzie trudne zadanie dla CA i BB. Nie ma co ukrywać, że mniejsza populacja CV wzmocni pozycję niszczycieli. Ciekawe ile osob sie wykruszy z lotniskowcow. Heh, szkoda że nadal nie mam czasu zbytnio by grać.

This is friendly reminder how turning looked like in 0.4.0 I know people were used to it, but it was clearly broken and there is no way WG will ever go back to it.

They need to expand the ranking system so it can be universal skill gauge for the players. Then they need to hide the stats from normal games. It only promotes and generates toxic behavior and disadvantages of having this system live outweight advantages by significant margin. If you want to know who is good and bad, their ranks should tell you. If you want to have fun or learn new tactics on normals, then you should not be evaluated based on those games. It's kinda funny reading stuff like that. This is the stat culture at it's finest. I do not argue that IJN CVs were easy to perform well in 0.4.0, but your dismissiveness of the fact that there are top CV which are skilled players is hillarious. All players who right now are considered good, were playing CVs in CBT. Tight spread, quick rudder shifts times, only US line, Essex on tier X etc. Back when IJN was considered more difficult carrier tree. With each patch they were consistent in their performance. And you dismiss that only because you got 1k damage more on one carrier than pape after 500 games. Sharana and Pape are not known for their damage whoring mate, you want damage whores, then those results are closer: IJN VI - 130k (old patch) IJN VII - 140k (old patch) IJN VIII - 150k (old patch)

Hello all, since we are having official OBT very soon, let’s have another wall of text of mine, shall we? There are couple of things that I believe should be addressed by devs regarding CVs in this patch and sorting it in one place might be beneficial for discussion. So let’s start. Obvious one is MM but I don’t really want to talk about it too much. 1. ) Strike setups were not balanced in CBT so they should no be present in the OBT. This is main thing I would like to talk about. When we had CBT I was often defending full strike and full fighter setups as I believed that WG might be able to balance them against each other and against surface ships. Concept is great and I will still defend the idea itself. Problem is that WG simply did not have enough time to do it, because of their state both setups are creating multiple balance problems. Let’s look at it closer. Biggest problem of fighter setups was that on their own they do not give any significant advantage to their team. Please go see my topic about fighters for more detailed opinion about fighters. Shoft version: no skill involved and their role is not to benefit team, but to hinder enemy which you cannot stop fully and you can’t ensure it will be there in the first place. Strike setups on the other hand give the player extreme firepower. Players who are able to use them will change the tides of battles. By sacrificing defence they get biggest carry potential in the game. Because of the random nature of MM this setup became most optimal and obvious pick for anyone who knows this class inside out. Because of this dominant strategy recently we have seen increased number of CV snipe tactic in which you crawl around map edge and get rid off most powerful enemy unit before it can help his team. This tactic started being popular after introduction of tier IX and X. Both of those ships had significantly higher firepower while also being even more prone to airstrikes than CV in lower tiers. It was the best choice to simply pick off this easy and very dangerous target. Because those ships were so fragile, people started sacrificing CA presence on the frontline just so they can defend heart of their fleet. While there is nothing wrong with that in itself, other selfdefence tactic was to use map edge to make enemy approach more difficult. You can not send planes behind the edge so doing manual drop against enemy who is sailing near it is much more difficult. Highest tier games became CV snipe games with people doing anything to give them edge. If you don’t use map edge you are just too easy target and could be picked off by anyone. Game of "Snipe a CV" was and sin't fun. WG tried to balance the power of those strike CVs, but it was pointless. Finally they droped the idea and introduced all balanced setups. All top carriers can defend themselves against strike on open water if played right. WG also acknowledged this problem on low tiers and how powerful first CVs were and forced Lagley and Hosho to go with balanced setups creating much more interesting games on that tier if those two ships are thrown against each other. Problem is that other tiers were untouched and with some other changes CV sniping is actually dominant tactic on middle tiers. What changes you say? Why it was not popular before? Rudder shift, turning circle nerf to whole CV line and fact that low tiers do not have access right now to the turning upgrade. In earlier CBT patches all light CVs (from tier IV to VI) were turning more like crusiers or destroyers. If the CV skipper was good, he was able to maneuver between torp waves and was very hard to get. Right now they are turning like higher tier BBs and whole class has worst turning characteristics in game. While I do think that big CVs (tier VII-X) should act like that, but light class was overnerfed. So what we have as result? Even at tier V I have seen people using map edge to their advantage simply because their ships are not able to defend themselves. At the same time full strike setup is still most optimal one, especially with very lacking MM. To put it simply. Specialised decks are great idea, but in the situation where they were not polished (not even close) in the closed beta, they should be scrapped and they should not show up in the open version. Force balanced setups on everyone and adjust numbers accordingly. Sniping enemy CV should not be dominant strategy but opportunistic. Most CVs with the mobility nerfs simply do not have tools to survive snipes and while I think mobility should be buffed on tiers IV-VI, it in itself is not the issue. Issue is that the best choice of deck is strike deck and balancing them is a difficult task. Don’t do that in OBT, we need heathy gameplay here. 2. ) Map edge issues While I am thankful that WG said they will address this issue in the future, fact is that this form of CV defence is breaking the game. Just because people are forced to use it doesn’t mean it is something good. It needs to be addressed with small quick fix. Which is: Create another edge only for planes which would be few km beyond normal map edge. Biggest benefit of using map edge is that it significantly hinders control of enemy TB approach. You don’t have to grind the map, just being close will create enough problems for the enemy CV. If CV skippers were able to fully control their planes even beyond map edge it would completely solve this problem. Ofc there needs to be a limit, so creating new map edge that would work only or aircraft would stop anything silly like going beyond the map. This is very simple fix, but it is needed. You can address whole map edge in the far future, but this would lessen current impact of this problem. Last words: Those in my opinion are 2 biggest issues with CVs right now. Damage balance is less important. Torp damage progression is also something that can be added later. Earlier in CBT one of the biggest problems in CVs was that with each tier all of their statistics were being upgraded. Planes were faster, more though, dealt more damage, you had more of them and you had more spares. It is difficult to balnce something when each stat goes up, so I kinda understand why they have decided for the moment for all IJN torps to deal the same damage. We need balanced setups for everyone, then see how they perform and then devs can think about giving more progression from tier to tier. Those two on the other hand need to be addressed ASAP as they do impact how healthy and by extension “fun” gameplay is. I hope most of you agree with me on that and If not, feel free to present some counterarguments. Cheers

So you have attacked US BB who was two tiers above you with single TB wing and you expected results? In the patch 0.4.0 you it would have ended exactly the same. As for the rest of argument. I still didn't have time to play, but I had to point out this little fragment.

I think we had less drama when they actually butchered IJN CVs with the wide spread. Amazing.

That is nice that I have occasion to antagonize some CV skippers. @Solial I am just asking people to stop their whine (3 topics about the same thing in one day, come on). All changes in patch were requested by the CV captains themselves. We had PT server up and if there was anything huge it would have been spotted then. I have played enough multiplayer games to know that it takes few days or even weeks for people to find out how to change their playstyle. In LoL there is a rule, if people don't cry new champion UP then it's too strong. Simply because people take quite some time to adjust to some changes. That's how it works and that's how it always have been. @repsrb Mate, this is were IJN CVs are excelling. If you don't agree with me then argue. Don't skip. Overall you should really calm down. Your anger will not help anybody. Play the game, if CVs will be underperforming then I am sure it will be adressed. Your initial reaction is negative, we get it, but with you being so angry it looks more like you are just frustrated because CVs are not godlike ships they were on those tiers. Think, play, try etc. Considering how big changes were I would say that we need at least week to really grasp them and to think if they were too much or too little. Or maybe there are some quality of life changes that also needs to be applied. Maybe some feedback regarding fighters vs fighters. How this right now works. CV sniping etc. Crying CVs are dead will not help anyone. @HariSeldon I will be a bit vain and think that you are also talking about me. I would advice you to check my profile and see on which tier I have played most games. Which is my top carrier and big chunk of them are not older than one month. I have also said I don't have time for WoWs right now, but I do plan to go back to Zuiho just to get firm grasp on the changes. I want to see Zuiho as she was considered most OP carrier. I am not ordering you to adapt, but as you have said it is the way to deal with nerfs and buffs. That is how those games are operating. We need to adapt, give feedback, generate stats, try something else, give feedback and hope game will further improve. Whining on the first day is... meh, bad idea.

Condisering how much you overreact, you should probably stop playing. IJN were nerfed but not everywhere. Their most important advantages were not touched. Ability to hunt smaller more agile targets and having multiple wings in the air. IJN full strike setups were nerfed, but some people were using universal and they were not complaining. There were no changes to AAA, only how the stats are calculated in port. Better MM is applied to all tiers and both IJN and USN. They got rid off the turning on a dime, which was obviously an exploit. You can and should adapt to playing around it. You can still adjust your drops, but you can't do retarded adjustments like you could do in 0.4.0. When I will have time, I will go back to Zuiho and see for myself exactly how she looks right now, but your very strong reaction after whole one day of the patch being live is really not healthy. A lot changed for CVs. Take time and try to play around it, the easy mode was turned off, it's now occasion to improve yourself.

What the hell.