LOZFFVII

I've had an idea: If we're going to go with unlimited planes, we should implement a 'load' time in the same way that main batteries and topedo tubes need to load. And of course, if main batteries and torps need to load at the start of battle, so too should planes. This way DDs shouldn't find themselves being overrun by planes before even being able to get into position. Also, logic dictates that a plane should take longer to load than TTs, so if they take long enough to load this can force CV players into picking different squads than just rockets or db's. Alternatively, just require CVs to restock their deck, as though all of their planes were shot down, at the start of battle. With this idea, not only does it not require much more programming, but also gives CV players a tactical choice: either they can launch a squad of only one plane early to provide spotting for their team, or wait until they have a full squad to provide fire support. I also agree with @Rowboat_Cop and @10ThousandThings, that planes should not be able to know when they are detected and should not be capable of using Radio Location. Planes counter DDs hard enough just by being faster and most DDs being unable to mount the AA firepower to down them they really don't need the added bonus of being able to know there is a DD close to them and where they are. By all means, allow planes to know when they are under AA fire and when the CV itself is detected, but planes knowing they are detected is too powerful. I think the above two ideas could go a long way towards balancing CV-DD interactions in the game. If (and only if) the increased reload on planes causes CV damage to drop enough that the grind is a slog, should the damage plane ordinance does be buffed.

What if I don't want to?

All of the current event ships have been added to the Light construction pool, with no 'event' pool being added. They will likely be removed once the event is over, as per usual. The music is probably something to do with this: Stuff from Reddit:

Right, but they cannot stack both fires and floods. Also, the longer their planes stay in an enemy ships' AA range, the more damage they will take, so they will most likely not have a complete third run (if they even get one). You just need to learn not to use your DCP at the first sign of a fire and git gud at torpedobeating (I've seen someone dodge three individual torp bomber strikes with RTS CVs in an Akizuki). Not my point. My point was you completely failed to pick up on that detail, despite it being highlighted in the news article. Even going so far as to state WG hadn't given us a deadline for free respecs, when in actual fact they had. I agree that the period given is a tad short, but eh *shrug*, I can just free respec them all and use one-or-two to decide what skills are needed in the new meta. The only hard part then is remembering I've got a whole bunch of captains with effectively 0 skillpoints. Oh, but my meme builds, like HE-only Nelson and Secondary Bismarck won't be respecced. You don't have an argument against the rest of my answer to that? Shame. That 'barely able to protect themselves' and 'no more aura to protect other ships' remains to be seen as far as I'm concerned, as I've seen arguments on BOTH sides of that. I was not aware of the non-overlapping auras, but thank you for sharing.

Actually, now that I think about it, I should be just 'LOZFFVII' (short for Legend Of Zelda Final Fantasy 7), but when I initially signed up that was already taken. Which is odd, as LOZFFVII is (was) available everywhere else I tried using it since 2006. ...I just took a look on the 'players' tab for LOZFFVII and it appears to be available... EDIT: What do you guys think? Should I go for it and switch to LOZFFVII? I don't know about paying £8.52 for the privilege...

O. I. C. Fair enough.

>245 battles How?

Okay, I'll admit I never read the word 'yesterday'. But this still raises a point: Why bring up old carrier gameplay when their gameplay is being completely redesigned? You...do realise that the new carriers cannot launch multiple squads at once, right? So, even with three CVs on either team, you'll only ever see three squads in the air at once. MAXIMUM. So... What exactly was your point in mentioning an event that occurred yesterday in a version of cvs that, as of tomorrow ceases to exist? I think that's pretty clear-cut case of 'overextending', except he was too dumb to look at the minimap and see that the team were retreating. Classic potato BB. Untrue. It's been in the wings since at least April last year - or whenever it was Jingles made that troll tease video (idk). Untrue. We have a little over a week. So much for your reading comprehension. https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/game-updates/update-080-takeoff/ How about the same way they did before? Hanging close to strong AA ships. Or utilising smokescreens to break line-of-sight. Also, let's not forget the new aircraft spotting mechanics means they cannot see through mountains, so ducking behind cover works vs planes now, too. Check my stats. I'm an optimist DD player. And I can point out things I don't agree with in the CV rework, but it's easier to quote someone who's done it for me. I agree on all of the above points, however I want this change to succeed so I'm keeping an open mind and looking forward to how the new CVs will balance out over patches 0.8.0, 0.8.1, etc.

That's fine then. You do you. I'll do the job of playing the new CVs, as well as DDs and Cruisers and see if I can help get these things balanced for your return to the game. Honestly, it's not like I play this game religiously, so it should be fun to see how things change over the next few months.

That's fair, to be frank when I say 'toxic' I'm actually referring to the particularly ott examples, such as the ones I outlined above: And if I'm being completely honest, I haven't read this whole thread - mostly just skimmed the first two pages then skipped to the last one, so it's not like I've read all the comments here. I also class those who have glossed over the 50minute Waterline video on the rework and still claim things like "Its desgined for console players" to be a particular form of toxic ignorance.

And I can agree with you there. I'm just remaining optimistic in the sense I believe that this isn't going to be final as of 0.8.0. It's probably going to be 3-4 months of balancing until we find something that we can all agree is fair. The difference is some of us appear to have the patience to weather the storm while others are either: "You've ruined my carriers forever! Goodbye!"; "Carriers should never have been in the game, remove them or goodbye!", or; "I'm not your guineapig, WG! See you in three months! If I still don't like it, goodbye!".

Yodellers can shout as loud as they like, are they also crybabies?

Where did I say that?

'A' T8 decent cv player (singular) cannot send out AP bombers and torp bombers simultaneously under the rework. Also its impossible to send out 1 squad of dive bombers, followed by a squad of torp bombers and then follow up with another squad of dbs in less than 30 seconds whilst also flying across most of the map in order to hit your target under the rework. Remember, 'First 30 seconds' means from minute 20:00 to 19:30. You go alone -> you die alone. That hasn't changed. This is true even if there are no CVs in the battle. 'Several wings of tb+ap bombers', so this is not the rework you're talking about? Or are you talking about more than one CV player ganging up on a single overextended target? AP bombs do not set fires. Again AP bombs DO NOT SET FIRES. And you also changed the order of events from AP->Torp->AP to AP->AP->torp. Either you're extremely confused or you're exagerating things to suit your own ends. Most of the optimists are probably like me, they try to actively avoid toxic threads (like this one) as much as possible. Unfortunately, this results in an echo chamber where the anti-cv-rework vocal minority can shout as loud as they like.

You can disable the current lock by pressing the X key, then hovering your mouse over another target press it again to set another lock. It does both.

Actually, that's completely impossible. You're trying to tell us that a T8 CV was able to bypass the enemy team's cruiser flak and Musashi's flak and sucessfully score 3 separate strikes (launching and returning planes three times) in 30 seconds? You're lying. Please provide replay evidence to prove what you saw. Press the X key.

If nothing else, you current name is quite funny.

Are you aware of how long it took WG to release T61 when it was finished? I think you can wait a few more months.

She's good. And a much better IJN premium T8 DD than...the other one.

Nonco's Yuu is so damn sweet. My first encounter was with a comic where she's floating downstream, bonks her head on a stick sticking out of the water and then just rotates around it and floats on... (I would link to the comic, but Safebooru's server appears to be down). I don't really care about the DDs, but at least I can FINALLY get my hands on Yat Sen. Inb4 "What? Loz doesn't care about DDs? Has Hell frozen over?" Yay! Another light carrier to scrap as soon as she appears!

Alternatively, it also increases the damage a single bad player can do to overall team cohesion. 1/12 is manageable. 1/6 is catastrophic.

Thank you for your contribution of meaningless drivel to this thread about the CV rework. Do you actually have an opinion beyond 'thumbs down'ing a couple of posts, or are you just a troll out fishing?

It's normally thought to be good practice to only go so far as three losses in a row and then quit and come back later. If you keep trying, you'll only get more frustrated and start making mistakes, which just makes you lose more and thus more frustrated. Yeesh, I wouldn't be surprised if you get flamed HARD for that one. There is a very vocal group of ranked players who think you shouldn't be able to keep any ranks. Personally, I'd rather they remove the 'keep your star' mechanic so we don't get so many selfish plays on losing teams. If you're losing you go down with the rest of the team.

Think of it more like how Nintendo does not techinically make Fire Emblem, Kirby or Pokemon games. All three are actually made by smaller companies that exist under the umbrella of 'Nintendo'. (If you're curious; they are Intelligent Systems, Hal Laboratories and Game Freak respectively) All three are made independently of Ninty's direct invovlement, mainly receiving guidance and exclusivity under their wing. You can think of WG's relationship to the creators of WoWS, WoWS Blitz and WoWS Legends as being similar to the above (a note: all three games under the 'WoWS' banner are made by different developer studios). If you're unfamiliar with Nintendo, Sony has a similar relationship with Naughty Dog (Crash Bandicoot, Jak and Daxter and Uncharted series), Insomniac (Spyro and Ratchet and Clank) and a few others that don't spring to mind right now...