Capra76

Why? If CV is stupid enough to sit still whilst DD sneaks around the map undetected why should it have a get out of jail free card?

I did something similar in a spreadsheet a couple of years ago, 6 ships or more or under 10 minutes counted as a landslide victory, over 230 games it worked out at about 40% of games ended as such.

Maybe the OP should try playing some of those ships rather than whine about them on the forum, perhaps he might learn how to deal with them better as well.

It's on the PT server at 2m, but that could be a placeholder value so there's no guarantee that it'lll be that on live.

Also if WG were seeding the game with bots, they'd presumably try to tune the AI to mirror an average player, not this kind of 40% WR single figures damage botting.

All of this misses the point. New CV are all about damage, anything that reduces damage makes them less playable thus any effective quality of life improvement for other classes makes CV unplayable and anything else isn't effective. So CV either annoy the out of a large proportion of players (and offer little back in return), or they're not in the game.

The biggest problem I find is their effect towards the end of close games, 3 or 4 ships left on each side, it used to be exciting to see if you could make the difference, now it's almost inevitable that at least one of those will be a CV amd it just comes down to which one is better. If the close games are gone, and all that's left is steamrolls, what's the point in playing?

Yep, but because they existed they get to be bad, had they stayed on paper they would be much better.

My comment was largely in jest, but T5 probably is the right place for her, she did after all end up defining the limits of what a cruiser could be. Problem isn't the tier, problem is that WG just made her bad.

Simple really, the RN made a noob mistake and actually built ships and used them at sea, hence all of the historical limitations get modelled in the game, had they been a properly first rate navy they would have simply designed far more capable vessles and kept the plans under lock and key in case they ever needed them.

L2P issue detected.

What's the problem, CV are "mostly fine".

You've played 54 DD games at T6 and that's it, maybe play the class and gain a bit of experience in it before you start telling us what they can and cannot do. Who knows, maybe it'll help you find your WSAD keys when you're playing BB.

Fundamental balance problem, not adressed for 4 1/2 years, dont' expect anything to change.

Doesn't that say something truely profound though? If you have to place MM limits on ships, is it the MM that is the problem, or is it the ship itself? And if WG thinks that one CV is acceptable at higher tiers whilst 5 x any other class is reasonable then just how broken is the class?

Who then start whining about static gameplay and HE spam whilst missing the connections.

I've said it before, but I think this is WG using a global change to swing the nerf-bat at Asashio and not giving a damn about what other ships get hit as well.

Might've been something they planned to work into a scenario battle or maybe an event, since WG seem to have given up on these there's no longer a need for it.

Well, first off Kongo and Myoko are very good ships for their tier. Secondly, it's worth keeping them as captain trainers for the daily bonus even if you only use them in co-op.

Follow the money. Playing mid tier games doesn't profit WG, paying to progress back to T10 does.

Superstructure, early game? What happens later on when that's depleated?

I make it just under 0.1% for a 50% WR player, although based on your hidden profile I'd guss 0.25% is probably closer to the mark in your case. What you're forgetting of course is the number of tickets you've bought for the lottery, but a thousand tickets and with a 0.1% chance you would expect to win it once.

IJN DD re-work for me. The old Isokaze/Minekaze used to function as a skill check for low to mid tier BB players, they either learned to play or left the game, once they were gimped even the most learning resistant BB players were free to sail in a straight line all the way to T10.

Thinking about this a bit further, is this the source of your confusion? Do you think that the two month average is more reliable than the weekly average in this case? If so then I have to tell you that you're wrong and I can explain why if needed.

Still carrying on with the insults I see. Well, I downloaded the entire MapleSyrup weekly database into one then use pivot tables to analyse ship populations over time and use that to make charts to illustrate the results, which I then post on here, but sure, I don't know my way around a spreadsheet. My first post (#12) indeed refers to the two month average figures however in subsequent posts I decided to substitute the weekly figures (and made clear these were weekly figures) because the fact that there's only about 60 Belfast players in any one week makes the problem with comparing WR% between Smolensk and Belfast even more obvious. Was your OP anything other than "look at the WR%"? If not perhaps you should stop calling me stupid and realise that there is indeed a very real problem with comparing WR% in ships with such vastly differening in-game populations.