olmedreca

Crappy poll. Also an actual hybrid CV+BB playstyle pretty definitely won't work. That said, hybrid Ise isn't completely unworkable as premium. It could have more floatplane options, like both fighter and spotter, with lots of planes in reserve, and also very nasty AA defenses. Still it would be only good enough for T5 due lack of firepower.

Nice guide, few comments (probably IJN centric): Torping If you are completely confident in predicting enemy movement, or lack of it, then with new IJN speard you can potentially score more hits by dropping torps a bit further away from target. If you need to torp under AA barrage then you should aim at bigger groups, torps missing first target may score a few bonus hits at ships behind it. Bomb drop While DB manual drop should be always used then possible, torpedo drop and fighter barrages are usually more crucial. So if you simply have excessive amount of stuff going on at once, and cant micromanage everything, then DB manual drop is the least important thing. Baiting Sometimes it is worth using „live bait“ for fighter barrage. Most simple example: 2v2 USN vs IJN fighter engagement. If both USN fighers engage the same IJN fighter then it is almost always worth it to barrage then all with second IJN fighter. Cruiser AA consumable can be also baited. One way is simply having one squad to attack in advance, so that barrage is over by the time next attacks arrive. Other way is to turn back then cruiser activates AA, and either wait, or preferrably hit something else nearby to avoid wasting time. If enemy fighters close in on bombers, and you cant make it back, nor do any anti-ship damage, then just waste his time by running away towards most remote corner of map. Imminent death You can also give last orders to your fighters. Either to engage some enemy squad, or to patrol over some friendly BB. Captain skills While I do prefer rear gunners, I would consider Situational Awareness also a legitimate choice. How to carry I would add that ultimately it is not about any single way. Most important feature of carrier is the fact that it is extremely flexible. You can do lots of things, you just need to know what to do at specific moment. In same game you can do crapload of general damage, finish off some priority target, decap, scout enemy DD etc. CV sniping High risk, high reward strat. If you get him with 1st strike, then it is an easy life afterwards. On other hand, every strike on CV that fails to get a kill is a tremendous waste. Usually there will be nobody else in your team that can „finish the job“, lower health doesn't really reduce enemy CVs damage potential, and strike on CV at backlines takes longer time lowering your sortie rate. Why you shouldn't use air superiority decks Rule of thumb: if it doesn’t have TBs then it is not suited for random battles. Also few other things I would consider relevant: Cycling squads With high tier carriers, especially IJN ones, you will have lots of squads that need to land, reload and take off. It can get quite crowded then close to combat. TBs do more damage then DBs, so it is usually worth it to give them priority for fastest possible cycling at cost of DBs spending more time waiting. Sometimes it can be also crucial to get fighters up asap for defence, on other hand if enemy cv is dead then they have lowest priority. Concentration of force and spreading the map Not so crucial with the new fighter barrage but still worth noting. Principle with fighter superiority is simple, one can be strong in small area or weak in wide area. If enemy has moderate fighter superiority (like 2-1-1 Lex vs 2-2-2 Shokaku), then head on approach will likely wear you down. If he keeps his force concentrated, then you should just attack stuff on all corners of map, as he can cover only limited area. If he tries to spread out for wider coverage then you can punch through at single point with local superiority. Obviously far harder in practice, but can be made to work. Pregame If you are not the highest tier ship in the game, then it is sometimes useful to check AA ratings of most likely targets while game is loading. It can give indication what are easy targets (lol @ stock Colorados), and what will be pain in *** to bomb.

Yes it did. Obviously I am ignoring crappy "easy mode" 0 TB decks because you cant really balance according to those things. That said, I don't necessarily disagree with USN changes at tiers 4-7, it is obvious that they need some help, especially around 6 and 7. But I don't see good reason for IJN nerfs at tiers 9 and 10.

That would be indeed unnecessary because I stated so in my post anyway. So what is it about? Balancing or providing new options? Doing both at once is somewhat messy. I just posted my observations from balancing viewpoint taking into account most effective configurations.

Currenty proposed loadouts would: Nerf IJN at tiers: 6, 7, 9, 10 Buff USN at tiers: 4, 5 ,7 Could potentially be a buff for USN at tiers: 9, 10 (not so sure how competitive new alternative loadouts would be vs 1-2-2) The rest would probably stay same as their most optimal loadouts (for random battles) would be same as currently. OP seems to ignore the fact that more squads is not always better. Squads don't mean only damage potential, they also affect replacements, squad cycling and micromanagement effort. I would always take 1 extra TB over 2 extra DBs on my IJN carriers. If carrier is close to combat I have sometimes kept some DBs simply waiting for extended periods on deck, as faster cycling of TBs and fighters would be priority. If all my TB replacements are killed it is quite bad, losing all my DB replacements is a minor issue.

OP must have bad luck, in my experience carrier sniping has been pretty much non-existent.

Fighter setup is easy mode, obviously lots of people choose it. Even a complete braindead can rack up somewhat reasonable looking killscore against strike deck and think that they "did their part", even though their actual contribution was probably miniscule compared to enemy cv.

You need to improve placement of those flags on carriers. If you cant find any other spot then just put it directly below national flag. Anything below flight deck looks just silly:

Few comments as Taiho owner: Generally IJN CVs perform better at lower tiers, with their strongest point compared to USN ones being around T6-T7. T8 is generally considered more or less balanced, as both have their strenghts and weaknesses.T9 I believe that Essex has somewhat better average stats, but overall I consider my Taiho to be a magnificent ship anyway. Cant really comment T10, last time someone posted stats Midway was clearly outperforming Hakuryu. Few other points: More squads gives IJN better flexibility, but also a lot more stuff to manage at higher tiers. T5 seems pretty miserable for everyone due massive popularity of "easy mode" 2-0-1 Bogue, the true anti-fun ship. Langley and Bogue are probably 2 slowest ships in the game. USN generally has better AA, I believe that Lexington at T8 has better AA then any IJN ship on any tier. IJN has better concealment, meaning that you can be closer to frontline without being spotted.

Modern Baltics/Scandinavia division settled with Iron Curtain, during interwar period Finland was sometimes also regarded as a Baltic state as it was quite comparable in many senses.

Whole part about Baltics is basically Stalinist propaganda, I didn't bother looking any further. If you wonder what Baltics could be without USSR then just look at Finland, before WW II they were at comparable level. And thats before we start talking about mass repressions... Also Japanese industrialized Korea and Manchuria pretty heavily, Koreans and Chinese are still extremely "grateful".

Any flags on carriers need to be above flight deck, if you cant find any other place for commemorative flag then just put it directly below the national flag. This placement looks just silly:

In memory of "good old times" then Japanese carriers had full offensive loadouts with no fighters:

Tiers 9-10 are probably not viable for ranked simply due higher repair costs. They need sufficient number of players to keep waiting times tolerable.

While I still see Ducat1st0's explanation as contradictory nonsense, I think it is reasonable to move on from his personal issue. The fact that WG never managed to determine whether aim-assist was used or not, has hopefully motivated them to raise priority on the whole aim-assist issue, as obviously they are not even capable of evaluating the extent of the whole problem.

In conclusion, while it cannot be proved 100% that he used it actually ingame with publicly available information, it is clear that: 1. He definitely took screenshots with aim-assist active (whether ingame or replay). 2. All his following actions and explanations have been full of contradictions, holes and even blatant lies ("scalable crosshair"). There is actually a good post on reddit which sums up the contradictions quite well. If OP has provided better explanation of events to WG, which actually correlates with timeline of his forum posts, when it would be better for everyone (including OP) to make it public, because what we have gotten so far is just BS.

Reading posts here it seems that many people did not even read the original thread. Half assed joke posted in hurry? Was forced to leave and could not clarify? You do realise that after making original post OP did another 3 posts in that thread in next 2,5 hour period? Original thread: http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/39469-the-end/#topmost OPs posts in that same thread it after questions were arised: http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/39469-the-end/page__pid__738898#entry738898 http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/39469-the-end/page__pid__738968#entry738968 http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/39469-the-end/page__st__20__pid__739078#entry739078 This convoluted story does not add up.

So, am I getting this right? 1. OP wanted to make joke and eddited some silly stuff on screenshots 2. Then he needed to run out and posted half-edited screenshots (one would note that his post was quite long despite being in "rush") 3. People start asking questions and OP makes 2 more posts in that thread (including " scalable crosshair" excuse, still nothing indicating a joke) 4. OP removes questioned screenshots from his original post 5. OP is away while **** hits the fan in forum 6. OP returns and comes up with this extremely convoluted explanation Doesn't really make sense. Most interesting is now WG's reaction, assuming that there actually will be one.

Nelson is obviously one of the ugliest post Dreadnought battleships in history, but at least it goes full "I am an oil tanker!" appearance. Izumo is just like someone wanted to build Yamato but did absolutely everything wrong. In Yamato main battery visually complements superstructure, in Izumo they are completely separate and contradictory. Placement of those tripple secondaries at back looks just silly. Also Izumo has no "everyone looks bad here" excuse that low tier BBs have, as all other BBs at tiers 8-10 look very nice.

I don't really understand why this skill is tied to specific caliber in the first place. Just make it "buffs secondaries and AA on all ships, primaries only on DDs".

If you figured out that code represents coordinates, it wasn't necessary to get all individual answers correct. Only numbers representing full degrees were really crucial. I had numerous inaccuracies in later numbers on first try, but the map area where it landed was still relatively obvious, making it easy to guess the most likely candidate for final answer. After guessing the final answer, first letters of problematic questions could be reverse engineered by googling its exact location.

This is the main reason why I don't play my Shokaku currently.

Shokaku really suffers from messed up landing mechanism. You just can't cycle squadrons fast enough to properly utilize Lexington's fighter downtime. Also, previously DDs often provided alternative "soft" target in case all enemy capital ships were too well defended. Now with slower torps that doesn't work so well anymore. OP was extra unlucky though, 2 CVs per team means that it is even harder to sneak around superior fighter coverage then in 1 CV per team matchup.

Flying out of map is very clumsy, so it is still advantageous to be near border as CV has to put a lot more work into getting proper angle.