Ictogan

They completely give up the ability to cap for doing that... I could just as well argue that not being able to cap makes them UP. I don't have any statistics and I don't actually have a Hakuryu, but in my Taiho I loose enough planes for it to matter about once in 3 games(just a rough guess, don't know the precise number). And that's before the 0.5.6 AA buffs, haven't bothered playing it afterwards yet.

So a you are saying that a CV strike(every 2-3 minutes) should on average deal the same amount of damage as a BB salvo(every 30 seconds)?

I always love how people who don't play CVs think they can judge the weaknesses of CVs.

No matter how you change them, CVs are always gonna have have a huge k/d due to not getting into danger with their ships. Unless you somehow force them to get close to the enemy and just get instarekt. And yes, it's possible to loose such a significant amount of planes that you can't put all squadrons back in the air or even loose all squadrons. And loosing such a significant amount of planes that at least some of the squadrons can't be launched anymore happens in every game where the ships in the enemy team are actually smart enough to stick together.

More like one in 20 or 30 tier 10 matches.

When faced with multiple BBs you have the option to stay at a distance where you can dodge the shells and if you have allies on that side of the map the enemy BBs can shoot at them. A CV can't attack a group of enemies sailing close together even if he has more allies on that side of the map.

The thing is that when two BBs are together, they reduce the damage twice as much as if it's only one BB. Something like this only applies to CVs, noone else. You may just say "l2p, don't target ships sailing together", but it's still something that needs to be considered when balancing CVs and one of the reasons why I don't think it's possible to "put CVs in the regular meta" without some fundamental changes to the AA system.

I would have said it would be SOMEWHAT balanced if it weren't for all the BS AA buffs.

As a DD, I can attack enemies without having to rely on my allies. As a CA, I can attack enemies without having to rely on my allies. As a BB, I can attack enemies without having to rely on my allies. Why should I have to rely on my allies to be able to attack enemies in CVs? And keep in mind that AA guns only realistically get destroyed to an extent where it has any impact at all when the first half of the battle is already over and at that point most matches are decided anyway, so if CVs should rely on AA guns being destroyed, they couldn't influence the outcome of a battle where the outcome of the battle has already been decided in the first half of the match. Some of my highest damage games in CVs were losses and even though I might have ended up on top of the team that was usually the battles where I have contributed least to my team due to only really doing damage in the second half of the battle.

Look in the description of his nautical tales vids.

Auto drops are crapanyway, I'm happy when someone uses them on me.

So CVs should be reliant on the ships in their fleet spamming HE on the enemy? And even when they do that, unless they spam HE at both sides of the ship, a lot of AA guns on the other side of the ship will be impossible to hit. Quite honestly I think that AA gun destruction could just as well be removed, as a CV I don't benefit from it a lot and can't use it when selecting targets because checking how many AA guns a ship has left by zooming in on it would take a stupid amount of time. And as a surface ship I never feel like it make any difference either.

That's a terrible idea. And I'm talking from the perspective of surface ships here, not CVs. Against TBs you have three possibilities to defend yourself: 1. Shoot down planes with AA and sail near allied ships with strong AA to have this effect even stronger 2. Use defensive AA consumable or have someone near you use it 3. Maneuver so you will either dodge torps or at least force the CV player to readjust his drops and thus spend more time in your AA range and shooting down more planes before he drops Against DBs, you have the third option of defense taken away from you. Which is also why I'm opposed to AP bombs being introduced which could potentially do 10k+ damage per squadron.

I know. But if someone else uses the same mod as he does, his ship will look the same to him as the other guy.

Only to people who have installed the mod.

There will still be a 3s delay between the point where you aren't detected anymore and the point where you aren't visible anymore, but SA will work based on visibility instead of detectability.

So the 3s delay will stay but SA will also indicate it? Not something that makes me happy, but at least it's better than the current situation.

Myoko is an Atago with AA and a higher fire rate but without the heal and with worse turret traverse. It also is one tier lower so it faces weaker enemies. It's really awesome. Mogami is just flat out a worse Atago. Can't speak for Ibuki or Zao as I haven't played them yet.

Personally I wouldn't mind a complete rework of CVs, but how would you want to put them in a similar place in the meta as other ships?

I also want some of my own ships such as the Atago or Myoko nerfed but I will keep my opinion that the buffs to AA were completely unnecessary and unlike you I actually knew the story from both(or rather, all 4) sides. And the only class I consider CVs OP against are DDs, yet they are the only class that's not benefiting from the AA buffs.

That forum logic thing you pointed out can be applied to you just as well as to any other person. But if you look at my stats, I have more games in any other ship type than in CVs, yet I'm arguing for CVs.

Battlefield tries to prevent any mods from existing, are there no cheats for it?

If they didn't intend a nerf, they could have simply changed it from multiplying the caliber by 30 to multiplying it by 27 at the same time as doing this change and it would've made the mechanics more understandable and logical without the need for a nerf. And this isn't even something difficult to come up with, so unless their devs are too stupid to figure this out this was at least partially intended as a nerf.

At the ranges where DDs are able to invisifire, it's easy to dodge their shells.

No matter how the battle went, it was a strategical victory for Britain, because they succeeded in their strategical goals whereas Germany didn't.