dasCKD

Because unlike torpedoes, dive bombers are inherently a mechanic that breaks the game if it can be used primarily as anything but a DoT mechanic.

I would also like you to thank you for your oh so creative and intelligent response that adds so much to the conversation!

Seriously? AP bombs is just about the worst thing they could give ANY carrier.

By the way, what would the Hakuryuu look like as a shipgirl?

I do like that artist, but you appear to have a weird definition of the words "beautiful smile". These are beautiful smiles.

It's Monday, and the cretins are rolling in.

Load AP, pick up your torpedoes, and remember that you only live once.

Yes, tier 7 dive bombers. Such a gigantic asset to the Hiryu! It's amazing the Hiryu's dive bombers haven't been nerfed yet! None of that changes the fact that the Kaga is a tier 7 carrier with the strike force of a Taiho.

Go to your Hiryu. Look at her torpedo bombers. Now come back here and tell me again that she has tier 7 torpedo bombers.

She is pretty. So much nicer looking than the Lexington. I probably won't get her though. I won't take the moronic "W" drop from the Kaga, and I won't take it from the Enterprise.

Of course not. Having identical primary planes to her tech tree counter part whilst having a strike weight of a ship two tiers above her in the tech tree is entirely balanced and fair.

People want to be able to pay for skill. Training, studying, and pushing your way through a game system only to be let down when you face a strong enemy is disheartening. In comparison to the effort that needs to be put in to learning a class compared to the effort needed to flash the credit card, it's not surprising that people would want the easy way out. It's easier to buy skill than it is to train skill up. What people don't understand however is that this is nothing but a matter of mutual escalation. If the Enterprise was released completely broken and overpowered, then they won't get to run around ROFLstomping everyone else. No, the good players would also just shell out money as well and then we're back where we started, getting stomped but now 30-40 dollars shorter. The Saipan was a mistake. The Kaga was a mistake. Those ships are terrible for the game when you compare them to the silver counterparts. The other problem is her tier. Tier 8 is the one tier than an overpowered ship CAN'T be allowed to exist. The Kutuzov for example already breaks competitive beyond recognition, despite the fact that her advantages to the silver ships are only marginal compared to, say, the Belfast or Scharnhorst. Tier 8 is the competitive tier, it is the one tier that balance is mandatory in. The Enterprise was just a victim of her own place in the tech tree.

I entirely blame OM. I had nothing to do with this. Nope. The fact that I didn't listen to Kleine and Kann and lost most of my HP early was their fault. Same with that part where I broadsided a North Carolina. Nothing to do with me.

The problem is that they attempted to build a CV to try to contest a Shokaku directly with no regards to the gameplay in the larger scale. It's nigh-impossible for a CV with lower tiered planes, with the current gameplay mechanics, to be an anti-CV carrier. The plane undertiering works fine for the Kaga because she's a strike carrier, and so her slower planes aren't crippling. In air fights in this game, speed trumps power by several orders of magnitude and Enterprise appears to be designed without this consideration in mind.

I'm Baaaaack~ Same notes applies as always. Not a guide. Not about the current patch. DO NOT MOVE. "Realistic" matchmaking It really has been a while hasn't it? This is a thread I've been threatening for a while, but I haven't quite gone through with it. The concept is relatively simple, this thread is here to say that cruiser mechanics and engagement rules should be overhauled before being handed over to the destroyer class because it'll probably do more good there. I, for one, found it very odd that the first ship I had access to when I first joined the game was a cruiser. Generally speaking, games start you off with the smallest ship and you have to work your way up the tree. it makes more sense for a game like World of Warships to have a player of equal tier across different ship types to have about an equal role in representing their team, but the idea of destroyers being the most logical option as the universal class is something that always clung to my mind. The Game Cruisers and Battleships The game began as something of a rock-paper-scissors rotation system. Battleships had slow firing but powerful guns, ideal for dealing with cruisers. Cruisers had fast firing guns that are weak against heavily armored targets, whilst powerful against the badly armored but agile destroyers. Destroyers (back then) had anemic guns with poor arcs but can be used to great effect against the slower battleships before the introduction of the 1:4 or 1:6 high explosive rule and torpedoes that only really worked against the large turning circles and slow rudder shift of battleships. It was easy to do 100k damage with nothing but HE damage using a Farragut's guns against battleships in those days. The collapse of the RPS system wasn't dramatic, but the issues caused by the remains of the system persists even today. Fundamentally however, battleships are poorly suited to hunt cruisers. Cruisers are poorly suited to hunt destroyers. Destroyers are poorly suited to hunt battleships. I don't have enough time to elaborate, this thread is about destroyers. Destroyers In many ways, destroyers are a good universal class. They're very forgiving at the lower tiers due to their lack of citadels and the fact that cruiser guns at that tier are relatively ineffective with only a few notable exceptions. Their maneuverability (German destroyer aside) is very impressive, and many of them have the tools already available to a cruiser. It's relatively rare for any ship of the destroyer class to be able to one-shot unless they're being hunted by a carrier or are spamming shells from a smoke screen next to another destroyer with a full salvo of torpedoes. Very few nations at the era of the game had battleships, even fewer had carriers. Basically every nation with a shoreline had destroyers however, and it allows for a far larger variety of ships to pick from before WG needs to begin inventing their own ships out of the blue. Even with cruisers, they are already struggling with maybe 3 other nations able to truely represent a cruiser line in game. As they are currently however, they generally have to maintain full silence in order to operate. If destroyers are to take up the cruiser's role as the universal class, some tweaks will have to be made to the class itself in order to make it more like a cruiser and able to fulfill their new role. Analogues I'm a cruiser player, so it's probably inevitable that I was going to go the path of basically conversing destroyers into smaller and more annoying cruisers. The current cruisers already provides a very good template to base the destroyer redesign off of however. As the Khabarovsk demonstrates, the miniature cruiser model makes for a very strong ship line and small but fast ships will naturally lurk closer to the caps than cruisers currently can and therefore can more quickly respond to changing game scenarios. I don't know where this article is going anymore. It's been a few weeks, and I've been writing nothing but project diary entries and programming code. Don't give me that look, this is an idea that War Gaming would totally implement!

I implied no such thing. You don't land citadel hits against German cruisers at close ranges. That doesn't chance the fact that British CLs and DDs shells will still score standard penetrations.

You shot at a broadside of a high tiered German cruiser at close ranges. Unless you're a British cruiser or a destroyer, that's always going to end in overpens. Always. There is no inconsistency here.

What does it do? I wouldn't have to ask here on the forums, War Gaming, if you just had all of the benefits of the camo listed on the premium page.

Yeah sure, let's make the Des Moines and Moskva tier 5s too! They don't have torps either!

Have you seen what a Pensacola AP does to tier 5, 6, or even 7 cruisers?

Pensacola at tier 5 will be completely overpowered.

Quite frankly, AP bombs will not fix USN carriers. Dive bombers are a fundamentally unbalanced mechanic except in the case of the IJN dive bombers where they are restricted mostly to DoT. Further buffs to the damage of AP bombs will not fix the game. USN carriers (Lexy, Essex, Midway) are already more than capable of ripping battleships to pieces when the bombs land. The problem is far deeper than that.

They could solve a lot of these issues by introducing the radar consumable on the Pensacola and the Schors.

The Zao only really has her concealment (which she loses to the Minotaur in), speed (which she loses to a large margin to the Henri and slightly to the Moskva), and her size (even then, the Minotaur is far smaller than her). The only thing that I think is a bit excessive in the Zao is her AP penetration, but even then it's not completely overpowered and her general squishyness and large turning radius makes it hard to ever utilize.

I doubt they'd leave out the Fantasque with her 45 knot top speed. Imagine that thing with speed boost and the speed flags.