antean

Absolutely incorrect. CVs can be stopped by any other ship. Are any DDs, CAs/CLs or BBs 'gunless'? I note that guns stop CVs very well. (Could ships guns be OP?) I can only imagine that Pikkozoikum has not yet mastered this skill.

Apparently, he does hate CVs. Apparently, he supports the rework.

This ship is appropriately named? I mean there's three choices here - Bleh, OK or OP. Which one is it?

I have Hipper in NA & it is one of my favourite ships. How to play it? Stay back at first till the enemy is spotted where you are moving towards. Definitely play bow on or angle cause if you don't you'll be deleted. He or AP as the enemy you are shooting at requires. I find the Hipper very accurate in firing so fire away. The Hipper is an excellent harasser (harassing fire) so if an enemy turns to flee - keep chasing it. I have no problem being uptiered with it - it is so much fun to hit a T10 & watch that T10 turn & flee. I do not complain about whatever deficiencies it allegedly has. For me, the Hipper is a fun ship.

Good question, lol.

Well, I have paid in NA & I'm 48/49% overall there (better in some, worse in others) so I likely climbed tiers too fast, myself. Here, I F2P and I am doing much better, lol. probably cause I'm in lower tiers still & (mostly) now know what I'm doing.

Some players actually try to lose a battle intentionally. There are those 'Specials' around. Perhaps, you've seen one. I saw a T4 Wyoming run from it's spawn to a corner & 'anchor' there & did nothing (of course). This in a T3/4 battle where his T4 BB could have been important.

Not at all, just that most bad players are likely to be F2P. P2P players can have any kind of player intelligence (as can F2P types)

WG has those numbers & you can bet they are continually marketing to induce players to spend money on their product. (I won't make any further comment as I do not want to get 'flamed')

auto-pilot is not even required in current CV play if the CV player has any kind of 'intelligence/skill'. continual manual ship control is necessary as the movement situation can change in an instant (like when an enemy DD appears nearby). really, really dumb to prevent a ship class from having continual manual speed & steering control (as proposed, in this CV rework). Lets force all CV play into a ship class that anchors or barely moves (just like the current CV play of the certifiably stupid)

Is not the Khabarovsk powerful enough already? Power creep anyone?

There is no rule that any player has to play WoWS with even a modicum of intelligence. *edited* In fact, the F2P model of WoWS ensures the maximum amount of stupid players will play WoWS. How does one conclude this? WoWS wants the F2P crowd to play so that the P2P crowd (their bread & butter) has enough opponents to play against. Working as WG intended.

Duh! Just because it isn't a US designation does not make it any less valid (not to mention obvious)

???? the connection to Trump here is ……??? Some persons thinking processes are plain weird, aren't they? & humour (if that is what is being attempted here)? Is this person's sense of that, perhaps, somewhere out around the orbit of Pluto?

TY

When I was whatever age this 'lill tub' is, I was; #1) better looking & #2) not a 'clothes horse dork' posing for his Mom's phoney 'isn't he cute' photo shoot. 'Edgy' enough for you, Aboomination?

I won't buy these little Lollipops for the Suckers but WG 'wants' you to …… (resist assimilation, resist the Borg)

Good, BGrouse. You are limited at start. You need to play until you have gotten to service level 15 (for everything to unlock). Be attentive to your Credits (silver) so you can buy modules & upgrades. Figure out what T1 ship you like the most & go to the T2 ship in that national line (plus further). Figure out if you like DDs, CLs/CAs or BBs more - CVs are last as they start once you get to T4). Enjoy your journey in PC WoWS - there are some really neat ships here (well most of them are that, imho) Always ask for assistance if you require it & try to division - that will help you too.

OK & how effective were those? I don't recall seeing many films of air to ground rockets from 1937 - 1943. I see or have seen late war (44 & 45) films of airplane mounted rockets - you know when the technology was good enough to actually be effective.

What utter crap, Ballsey, as if just one CV is so OP that it can 'dominate' 11 other 'poor souls', as you put it. What a complete nonsensical anti-CV rant. You show your true bias. Fact is, it's as easy for one good DD, CL/CA or BB player to do exactly the same. How convenient you ignore these other three classes of ship. Fact is (depending on the relative abilities of the two teams) it takes from 3 - 5 (or more) good or decent players working as a 'TEAM' to dominate any battle. One or just two players? In your dreams (tho 2 might pull it off) The % of battles decided by just one player (no matter the class of ship) is abysmally small & you and any player with any intelligence will know & acknowledge this fact. * The real one or two players who affect battles are those idiots who run out & die early. That fact, I can believe.

well, not here, but on my main account in NA, I'd have to say a number of Ships. Not because I play them well (I prob don't for the most part) but because I find them 'fun'; V-25, Iwaki Alpha, Arkansas Beta, my 'Ho', ARP Myoko, Hipper, Z-23, Yugumo, Graf Zeppelin, Taiho Agreed Sargeant Yo, until WG (sadly) destroys CVs. I have Zuiho but nowhere near your stratispheric WR, lol

This is an easy question, OP, a couple of things; 1) F2P - never spend a cent on a substandard product 2) take one's time to grind to high levels thereby learning more earlier 3) being informed by others how WG products continually cheat the player (in so many ways) (eg: MM stacking one team to have better players, targeting resolutions where somehow their teams shots hit more but your teams shots barely hit - odd how that happens so much) (note: WG zombie Trolls need not flame me - you are in 'denial' anyway)

Additional comments, Adm_Ballsey; 2:20 I could not read the Cpt changes - illustration was too tiny 3:30 Ijn deep water TBs - OK, a new/revised ability - how well is this going to work by removing Ijn TB planes ability to torp DDs? Is this even historical? (just wreak Japan some more) 12:17 Rocket bombers/fighters - Correct me if I am wrong here but weren't 'rockets' as a plane armament a late WW2 development? Hence, a high tier weapon. Is WG forcing high tier CV play here? (sure looks like it) 16:49 Armour piercing dive bombers - Another question about later WW2. AP bombs for Armoured CV Flight Decks. Again, a later WW2 development. Is WG, again, forcing players to high tier CV play? (sure looks like it) It's good you show these features, Adm Ballsey, if only to illustrate just how 'farcial' some of this appears to be (actually is).

If the current CV play is 'simple' (as you put it) what is the new rework CV play to be considered? 'Imbecilic' play?

@Adm_Ballsey (great name btw) I applaud your video effort. I do not mean to be totally negative (in my earlier comment), however, this rework is going to cause many more problems than it solves. CV play has been established for years now. One does not throw the baby out with the bath water and this rework appears to do just that. WG has had these years to 'fine tune' current CV play which , imho, is decent enough 'now'. Look, also, at the numerous 'fine tuning' on all the other classes, be it DDs, CLs/CAs & BBs. Everyone has complained about all classes at one time or another. The WG Buff or Nerf Bats have been wielded numerous times (as each case was dealt with). There has been many minor changes. What about the CV Cpt skills that will need to be altered? What about DD/CL/CA or BB Cpt skills that may need alterations due to the CV rework? Is WG planning on offering free Cpt Skill resets everywhere necessary? What about the Signal Flags? Any alterations required there? What about AA? If the CV planes are so radically altered, what about a radical alteration of AA parameters? What other 'can of worms' will this rework open up? This rework is, unfortunately, a major change and, imho, not one for the better. What is the real reason for the change? It does not appear to be for 'balance'. It appears to be a blatant alteration to accommodate the console device playing crowd. This is not my idea - this is prompted by other chat/forum commentators. I'm just pointing out that the current CV player crowd will not likely stay in WoWS (or if they do they won't be playing CVs). In NA (my main account) I ground out & worked to both T9 CVs. I have the GZ (always w the original loadout, btw). I have five other CVs for a total of eight. I will likely play WoWS even if WG institutes this rework, however, I will just drydock/moth ball my CVs until WG returns their play to what it currently is. I can play my DDs, CLs/CAs & BBs instead. I will do everything I can to encourage all players to sink all CVs (of the new type) whenever seen in battle so that these reworked CVs will get whined about continually. Then, maybe, WG & the current anti-CV whiners will get the message.