Last_Rites

It feels like AA range has been changed to global sometimes. It's probably just being too close

Where did I say they were not OP. The point is they're not as OP as people were making out, most of whom had never even touched a carrier. All they needed to do was; nerf IJN re-arm time, slightly buff AA/make planes easier to shoot down/remove 3 bomber loadout for pre tier 9 IJN carriers No more, no less. Overkill is just as bad as letting them be 'OP'

Maybe slightly, you provide me with concrete evidence from an independent study and let me know Go play with 10 friends 10 games each in a ship of your choice to use as accurate data representation, then compare the win/loss with those of 5 different friends in a different ship.

What works - not a lot What doesn't work - mostly everything Again, the stats don't mean anything and don't prove performance. How many people in carriers charge in and die instantly before they do anything? I've never seen it. How many people charge in as a DD/BB/CA? Loads, probably 1-2 a game. There's your stupid statistics for you.

This in part, but buffing fighters to have way more ammo means if you're against a US carrier you can't do anything for <20 minutes

Eh, The issue is nerfing planes while buffing aa overall, and nerfing carrier damage while meaning they have less planes to cause damage too.

It's quite amusing. Destroyers are actually now fairly broken when it comes to capping. Carriers have basically no chance at all anymore to stop a destroyer capping now.

Why were they nerfed to the ground then?

Balance is an illusion that is impossible. Nothing is balanced because it's impossible. Something always has to come out on top, it's how life works.

It's like two different games, RTS vs Shooter ---- Yeah, the patch made nobody want to play carriers. I suppose it's the easiest but worst way to fix an issue (if there was even an issue)

Even the slowest of ships would dodge every single torpedo 100% of the time unless they were actually blind irl. It's very possible for you to dodge torps, it was, and it is even more so after the patch.

I've agreed they needed nerfing, not in way they were nerfed however. CVs are like a strategy game, people who are good at micro and such will obviously be better at carriers. And again, the stats don't mean a lot. How is it an accurate representation of players. Get a bunch of people who don't play carriers to play x amount of games pre patch from all win rates. Somebody who has a terrible terrible win rate in a cruiser isn't going to become a carrier god are they. What? I've played more non carrier games than carrier games, and they didn't really bother me unless I was focused down, in which case I thought oh well and jumped into another ship. As I said before, there's no reason they actually over performed based on stats. Perhaps every other class under performs because they're more fun and friendly towards players who aren't that skilled? It's was very rare to see players who had insane winrates in carriers anyway. I started on CA/BB and didn't really know what I was doing. It's hard to balance out high statistics and easy to improve low ones, which is a point I've made previously. I started playing carriers after reaching Tier 8 in a CA, and only then after watching a lot of streams and video makers who also play carriers. Even then, I was hardly that good at carriers. Then you could also say my Atago is very close to my carrier level, and I've played not nearly enough games to be good in that.

If you actually look at the statistics, far fewer people play carriers. Fewer people, fewer stats to add up, if those fewer people win, higher win percentage is easier to come by. Doesn't take a genius to work that out. How is it healthy for win rates to plummet by like 30-40%

You can't really base everything on the best player in a class, I mean they're the best.... Carriers have a LOT of rng, will bombs hit, will torps do full damage, will bombs apply flooding or fires, even down to the fact that planes being shot down is also rng. You don't get rewarded for scouting at all. It doesn't make the game work any more or any less, it just makes carriers work less.

There has never been enough data(accurate) for carriers and now there never will be. +1 Wargaming

Overnerfed is an understatement. Statistics for a game like this can't be used, they're not any good. They would have to do an independant test on an independant server with a random selection of people who'd never played the game before for a specified amount of games at each tier to work out some more useful statistics. Say, 100 people each play every ship at every tier for 100 games. Even then that would not prove a whole lot, but a lot more than the statistics of like 30k people playing one kind of ship to the 230 playing a certain carrier.

All they really needed to do (to make it somewhat balanced) was add the extra recharge time and make it slightly easier for ships to shoot down planes. That's it. I used to play cruisers all day, didn't really care about carriers being in the game - they don't really affect you, especially EVERY game. Nobody is being one shot by a carrier game after game, the only people this patch really affects is carrier players. Everyone else could go on like nothing happened, I bet most people wouldn't have noticed if you didn't tell them (other than carrier players of course)

I didn't know you were appointed by Wargaming to express their opinion on the matter. Most of it is constructive, it's the people like you who have nothing to say other than 'boo-hoo' who are not constructive.

Now you can almost never torp destroyers or cruisers and lose more planes, which before you lost a lot of planes anyway.

That logic is how WarGaming deals with their game.

I see that destroyers are very often top in games now, maybe they should be nerfed again, then whichever ship is best after that. nerf it too

You only way you could nerf them further is removing them from the game.

In the real world 1 torpedo can sink a massive battleship. This isn't a simulator. IJN fighters are worse than pre patch in fighter vs fighter scenarios

That's actually another really good way to look at this. Why does win rate justify nerf? I'm sure the least played class is carriers, so obviously the win rate is going to be higher. It's like 10 people win a lot, obviously it's going to be good. If 30000 people play cruisers and a lot of them don't have a clue (which they don't) then the good players can only drag the win rate up so far.