ghostbuster_

By the time AA starts to shoot, planes were within 3,5 km. And from that point there was what like 2 secs until they droped their payload? So they were 2 secs under continuos damage. You cant be serious, right?

Omg first of all, who says that only "narrow hulls" should be behind the islands? This is some next level dumb.ss bullsht. So thats said. You do know planes spawn at 4,5 km from the ship. Considering the delay with AA, those bombers skip the flak. So, what you are saying here also wrong. Once again... I wonder if you would have said this before rework. For some reason i have the feeling that you were one of those who didnt spec into AA before CV rework and complained after getting striked by CV. Again, AA cant be affective against this new gimmick because the planes spawn at point blank range.

Move where? Because if you move forward, you will get into danger of getting bombed. If you run towards backlines, you wont be in its range since it has 13 km range. It shouldnt be possible not to understand something this simple. At this point i think you just dont want to understand. And? She barely left spawn and went a bit forward. Doesnt matter. In a large ship you are not gonna dodge these drops which takes ca 20 secs. And even if you managed to dodge some of those, it is still going to take half hp. Saying "dodge" these things is the same bullsht as saging "dodge" CV rockets.

Btw. @YabbaCoe @MrConway how was your argument again? The one about the alpha damage? One of the "reasons" for CV rework was CVs having high alpha damage, wasnt it? You said that. you also stated that you want to lower alpha damage and make them DoT based. And you come up with an idea of a new gimmick which can one shot a full HP tier 10 BB. Nice consistency right there...

Oh you suggest him to use the useless report system. Nice.

And once more you are wrong. Being next to an island or behind an island doesnt always mean that you are hiding. And it definitely doesnt mean you are camping. True, BBs should tank. Meaning, they shouldnt camp in the back. Meaning they need to get closer. But guess what, tbis gimmick punishes the ones who wants to get close and tank for their team or support teammates. Btw. "BBs should tank" doesnt mean that they should roleplay a sitting duck. Even as a BB you need to try to dodge or bait the enemy and make it as hard as possible to be killed. And to do that, sometimes you need to use island cover too. So, what you are saying, what you want to happen doesnt match with the consequences of this new gimmick.

Edit: there is. Shooting guns isnt everything. Positioning is the most important thing in this game. And if lets say a radar cruiser positions itself behind an island to deny multiple caps, its more valuable than a cruiser who spams HE from max range nonstop. It you who has to look at the minimap before putting yourself in a situation where you depend on your teammates heavly to survive. In competitive, sometimes you sit behind an island without shooting a single shell for minutes. This happens in randoms too. While getting into position, it might be that i wont be able to shoot. Because im positioning my ship. If you yolo right at this moment, well its you being overextended without being aware of your surroundings.

Exactly, those rocks are close to objectives. People who are capable of using the islands to their advantage to play for objectives are gonna get punished. The larger campers at 20 km (which are the problem) wont be touched at all. You can know this by simply looking at the minimap in any class or ship...

What you fail to understand is that the new gimmick isnt able to punish campers. It has 13 km range. How are you gonna punish larger campers who are derping around 20 km with your 13km gimmick? It only punishes the ones who actually play for objectives.

a true BBkevin who thinks using islands close to cap points is camping. there, right there is the reason why we get OP ships. imagine all of them being like this guy. at this point im suprised that they didnt give nuclear warheads to some ships yet. besides, @YabbaCoe @MrConway if you really wanna deal with camping and if you insist on this ridiculous gimmick, here is a suggestion for you. make those airstrikes callable on 20km + targets only. if that enemy ship, you want to call air strike on is closer than 20 km, general command tells you to f. off and deal with it by yourself. if the target is further away than 20 km however, air strike will be approved. this would be more realistic way to deal with camping. because if a ship plays for objectives, it means, that ship doesnt camp.

if you asked this 3 years ago, i would have suggested you some ships. but right now, just dont spend your money on this game. constantly screwing the playerbase became a daily routine for WG. here some examples of WG screwing the playerbase.

you dont need to play this game to have fun at this point. watching WGs ridiculously dumb actions from outside without paying any money is much more entertaining than actually playing the game.

so, @MrConway @YabbaCoe @Sub_Octavian @Tanatoy didnt you guys agree on a fariytale yet?

Think of a word which starts with "i" and ends with "e". Now put that word next to this guys name. Well? It started to make sense, didnt it?

And you sound like a dumb.ss. Wrong. Let me correct this. "Anyone like you who likes BBs is just braindead" there. Im a BB main. I have most of my battles in BBs. BBs are really easy to play unlike DDs and cruisers. In fact, most ships in the game which need to be nerfed are BBs. Sadly, there is no hope for "people" like you.

A mong BB kevin was having problems with cruisers which have been shooting HE at his shiney BB?

So, getting into a position close to caps with a radar cruiser is camping for you. edited* are everywhere nowadays.. edit: Watch the language please

Noone claimed that they are fast. They do have a ridiculous alpha damage woth insane fire chance and pen. Can you even understand this?

Wtf are you talking about? There is nothing to see here. I really didnt get the reason of making this video. Pretty pointless

Nope, back then we had a working AA if speced for it. This is sometbing else. Ok, @YabbaCoe @MrConway @Tanatoy @Sub_Octavian wtf is this? I mean yeah they are in test but how could they make it even into testing in this state? This is beyond dumb and broken. Jesus.

And we have a true BB kevin who down votes every single post which welcomes the thunderer "nerf".

@YabbaCoe besides this is unfair af. Before the changes there was a concealment penalty. Which means, it wasnt a valid skill for lets say kitakaze. If i met an enemy kitakaze who picked that skill for some reason in my kita, i would have the advantage because his build wasnt optimal for kita. But he made this choice. Right now, that guy has straight up the advantage against my kita because of a captain skill which wasnt optimal for kita but then got buffed and became pretty solid. And i cant make my choice of picking this NEW SOLID SKILL freely. And this is ok according to WG? Its getting more scummy every day.

So, basicly you are saying it would be ok not to give a free respec if you nerfed AR skill to 0,0000001%? It would be a change to parameters. Skill would still be in the game. Or if you buffed the secondary skills to like 100% accuracy +28km range, it would be ok not to give free respec? Im sorry but this is so scummy

True, she is not a GK nor a kremlin, but she has cruiser concealment better concealment than many cruisers in game with a ridiculous rudder shift time. meaning, she can disengage much easier than other BBs can. which also means, she can be played at closer ranges easier than other BBs. thats said, its kinda obvious that she doesnt need 24-25 km range. 21 km is more than enough.

sub octavian says that popularity is the most important thing when it comes to CVs. i think he said more about this but it is in the full summit video. if you claim otherwise, i can also dig that one out and post it here. many CCs posted that on their youtube channels, so it shouldne be that hard to find. Nope, its not mentioned there. but it is said that popularity is the number one factor about the changes to cvs. which means, they get buffed or aa gets nerfed when the popularity drops. That AA nerf was after the meeting if im not mistaken. @El2aZeR do you recall the exact date of that AA nerf which was made to pull up the population? there is a saying which fits perfect to CV changes WG has been doing. its the same sh.t with different color and it still stinks. you changed the cursor. and? what did this change?