WWDragon

Honestly all they needed to do first was having machinegun firing during the attack phase as it would indicate were the rockets would land when launched since, as many apparently dont know this, rocket planes have like the other modes two phases ... attack and launc and you cannot launch immediate, there are a few seconds during attack phase were you cannot launch. Lets say they do this for the other two attack modes, torpedoes would need more lead but not as much affected as bombing would be more affected in dive but since level bombing is already the crapshoot that it is it wouldnt matter, it would simply render level bombing useless against anything moving. Another thing, I am only seeing this "this is fine, learn to lead" when it comes to DDs, not AP rockets that were nerfed during testing and quite frankly this is the same as firing your guns just to have a 5 seconds delay before they actually firing with AP rounds, even if we agree that this is "unfair" in relation to HE rockets, then how about AP rockets? This is a heavy and undeserved nerf to KM CVs ... unless we go to the truth, certain players want to remove CVs because its a counter to then be it spotting (that WG wont remove, they actually tried to reduce air spotting but it never even come to testing) or with damage that leads to the question of if the idea is that every class can attack the other then why this? AP rockets been severally reduced in functionality and HE is a crapshoot of RNG because we arent talking about a accurate weapon here, if these were accurate it would be one thing but they are not, they just hit by volume, even AP rockets arent exactly accurate either.

I said this when it was in testing, this change will have repercussions. This is too much, in Grand Battle I noticed there is a larger number of DDs present, its not uncommon to see 4 DDs with rest being BBs and 1-2 cruisers and as this is leading to a higher number of DDs that are taking slots on the MM at the expense of cruisers with CVs being rarely present the following will eventually happen. DDs get nerfed because in the end BBs are the most popular class and they are the most affected class by virtue of having few counters to DDs, how they will be nerfed I cannot say but anything that gets too popular gets gone from the game or nerfed. Another class gets buffed as to provide a counter to DDs without changing DD stats (a indirect nerf), this will either be cruisers as they are in a sad state or BBs (as secondaries are a joke), also if CV stats drop enough they can just rework this change trying to get players back as well to nullify the problems the rocket changes created that allowed DDs to be too popular and "overperform". So all you "DD mains" that in chat tell to CV players to "get gassed" because they are "ruining the game" ... be aware this isnt World of Destroyers, anything that gets too popular gets hammered down to maintain numbers balance, if DDs go out in force because they feel invulnerable and can only be countered by other DDs (the game you want to be, never mind the rest of us and that includes battleship mains) WG will take note and not in a approval manner.

Well the British happened to been far more dependent on trade routes and had colonies even father away as well more of then so we can compare both. De Ruyter was designed during a time were the Netherlands were broke and to support the Java-class cruisers in the defence of the Dutch East Indies, she wasnt mean to go around patroling the oceans, she was meant to be based in the Dutch East Indies and she was a very compromised design due to all the cost-cutting measures being underarmed and underarmored with comparable ships. It was never meant to faceoff the IJN heavy cruisers, even the Dutch knew that and that is why the Design 1047 come into existence as they thinking in case war come into being that the IJN would send their battleships and carriers to face-off against their RN and USN counterparts with the light and heavy cruisers being sent on the invasion the Dutch East Indies, De Ruyter was never any believable threat to the Myōkō-class and was never designed to be one, just to fill in the gap of the cancellation of the 3rd Java-class cruiser that in turn were meant as counters to the Chikuma-class cruisers and the Java-class was already outdated when they finally launched.

Because FDR is a worst Midway, even before this rocket nerf it was almost useless against DDs.

Yes but they are the cruisers that been added with 203mm, 240mm and 283mm from tier VIII to X. Tier VI is Kijkduin that is De Zeven Provinciën as that was the original name and seems to be the original design, in fact you can even spot were her torpedoes tubes are meant to be if they were added to the ship since she originally had then.

They pulled the same trick with Italian BBs, getting the Tier IV ship will end up to just being credits in the end as I suspect they will do exactly the same with Dutch Cruisers ... you get a Tier VII at end of directories.

Well I am used having to do the whole chain, those types of mission chains are usually dockyard since they are directives that in the old days had their own UI interface and someone on WG likes to leave these little presents were they force randoms unto players to complete the mission. Also Colorado is not that bad because like all Tier 7 ships you can just Narai pass then.

Sure its *easy* after all you only need to get a Kraken. I am not even mad because this is entirely within what expect for this *f* company, needless to say I am not giving a flying f to this f event ...

No, I am aware of that ... JB can easily lose her turrets. However what are the realistic chances of that happening? its more likely to be sunk lose your turrets, a DD that is under fire to the point her turrets are destroyed is not likely to survive for much longer and we talking about the "module damage" class, cruisers get even worst were they can lose torpedo tubes but not likely they will lose all turrets, even Atlanta that gets her turrets knocked out fairly easy doesnt get all of then destroyed, she will likely be sunk first. Turret damaged, sure ... destroyed? not likely outside a few ships like JB, try destroy Iowa turrets. CVs on the other hand can be deplaned, granted its not easy and you have to throw out a lot of planes but it can happen, Saipan is a good example to the point I wish they adopt the Soviet mechanic to CVEs (well, Saipan and her clone) simply because it suffers so much from loses. Also tell me, do cruisers, DD or even BB suffer from barrels not firing because they are being replaced? Because CVs do suffer from that ... you can shoot all day without a damn care about ammunition, launch torpedoes without a care because if CVs have a factory, DDs have one too ... but CVs have more of timers management because they dont have a timer until they can launch again but they have a much but much longer timer until a squadron been regen.

You mean the game mode that was so favored towards a certain side it it was canned due to being unplayable?

Yes, I made a strawman but that argument about AA grown tiring. Should known better ... The people that want AA at the levels they were pre-CV rework should remember that pre-CV rework CVs had multiple squadrons and a much higher alpha, Hosho used to drop 4 torpedoes as that was the standard drop pattern of IJN, (except Kaga), USN (except Enterprise) dropped 6, cutting down CV Alpha would necessitate also cutting down AA because as I said, if secondaries have to fireworks because "automated" then AA cannot be set in a way that makes the ship immune to planes, if AA goes up then a lot of things have to go up as well.

Hold on, this is BS. I been on CV sniper matches were the red CV just spots for their BBs so no, dont give me that crap and also yes, there is a retaliation ... its called plane losses because the whole "CV have a airplane factory" is just a moronic statement from the bowls of reddit for easy karma, losing a squadron on a CV can be a terrible blow that you wont come back, apparently "retaliation" for you bogs down to damage the hull ... thats all, I hate this kind of mentality because CV dont HAVE weapon systems beyond their AA, any plane you shoot down *is* a loss and that is why the superunicorns are very good at plane conservation because they know the impact it have on their ability to remain in the game. I say this, if AA can nullify entire squadrons then secondaries must be as valid and demolish any DD that is spotted within their firing range but lets be honest here ... you want AA to make you immune from attacks but you dont want secondaries to be as viable against DD.

Auxiliary ships are not combatants and they are used to carry ammunition, fuel, supplies, etc for the fleet they are attached, they are only armed for self-defense so of course they will end up looking similar to a cargo ship since that is what they are, cargo ships. in Orkan case I think she as passager liner since if you look at the model, there are a lot of windows in the hull.

Well no considering their major harbors were captured but this doesnt exactly help WG diverse surface fleet considering they couldnt but then again, how many surface units did Germany completed during the war? There are enough to hit Tier VIII (except DDs and CVs were in DD case they are all more or less historical as in CV only one could be called that) and the same with Japan were with the Soviet Navy not only we have the paper ships but also post-war paper ships were only their DD line is more or less historical.

Well two things, first they did had a navy but not a oceanic Navy as WG ignores the countries that actually had one for projects and often unrealistic ones that never gone pass the design stage. Second, Imperial Russia had battleships but due to a revolution they got stuck until about 1950 without a oceanic Navy and we should be true to this game time period that was about 1910-1950s were Russia naval power was much reduced after the Russo-Japanese War. Another thing that begs the question, why would the Soviet Union would want a carrier? Post-WWII the reasons are entirely obvious but unlike the USN and the UK or even the Dutch they didnt exactly need a Oceanic Navy because of several events, they only declared war to Japan after they got nuked and were scrambling to "liberate" as much territory in a attempt to get into the Japan occupation (that didnt happened as they wanted, that being a partition like in Germany). Simply these designs are as bad as the German ones, except at least Germany actually build one of then as these never gone beyond the "idea" stage and some are rather suspect. I dont question Russia having a Navy but I question it having a significant diverse Navy to have all these trees, they were certainly NOT the USN or the RN to justify so many bloody ships especially when most of then never gone pass early design stage.

They are like James T. Kirk that managed to get demoted back to captain or Jean-Luc Picard that never took a promotion pass Captain during TNG despite being offered at least once the post of Headmaster of Starfleet Academy.

I dont think he said that, FDR planes can only attack every 20 seconds and will take damage due to the AA bubble. Now here will be boom and zoom ... there is only one squadron so they attack and intimidate return, meaning they dont spend much time in the AA bubble, then we have regeneration and planes on deck because Kaga can strike again and again until runs out of planes on deck and regeneration kicks in and its glacial, if these Historical And Famous Soviet CVs have a good number of planes on deck as well relative fast regen we end up with a CV were it will strike again and again with a single wave but because of how AA mechanics are, most of then will survive and be added to the planes on deck pool with regen covering the few losses, simply this negates entirely the current downside of CV play that is plane conservation and why there is pre-drop (that doesnt work well on FDR because it starts the 20s timer) something these CVs dont have to use because they will have abnormal higher plane conservation. I mean, if they done this to CVE at least Saipan would not the damn trap that it is but freaking 8 planes when you can send another wing in what? 20 seconds or less? thats FDR now isnt?

Yes. Almost, firing torpedoes will automatic spot the ship, except for DDs.

Actually, speed was because of hydrodynamics not power itself ... that deck gun? its like putting then on the nose of a airplane, will affect the speed. Also as I mentioned, the Type XXI was actually faster underwater that surfaced, going at 17 knots because her hull design was to offer as little water resistance as possible and that is true to modern submarines, even nuclear ones ... take Skipjack, 15 knots surfaced and 33 knots submerged, Sturgeon 15 knots surfaced and 26 submerged and then we have Barbel that were the last USN diesel submarines but had a teardrop hull design that had a surfaced speed of 14 knots but a submerged speed of 18 knots, now compare then to the Balao that had a surfaced speed of 20 knots and a submerged speed of about 9 knots. Besides fleets did not move at flank speed, not only fleets travel at the speed of their slowest member in the group but also they dont go at their maximum speed to conserve fuel, besides you had the US Fleet Submarine program that was intended to create a submarine that could operate along the Standart Battleships even if the idea was a surface speed of 21 knots. But I agree, submarines pulling about 30 knots surfaced and roughly 26 submerged is rather unhistorical, they could use their historical speeds and just work with concealment instead of giving away ASW weapons to everyone (except CVs even if they current get the anti-ping due to their auto) so a submarine would have to position itself to be able to launch on targets, considering how campy the game is, that would not be a problem and if its a problem then just work with the torpedo speed and ranges. Another problem is their fixation with having wire-guided torpedoes and their ping mechanic, if they wanted to do it right simply let submarines to lock on a target and send a torpedo in a wide arc ... periscope depth, lock on target and press a button or something and fire the torpedo ... it would be either hit or miss, allow then to use acoustic torpedoes that would home on whats in front of then after 5km with noisemarkers to throw then off ... but no. wire-guided torpedoes as we shoot a watergun to guide then.

Dont worry they have 5 seconds to just turn and avoid all damage baring some stray rocket due to RNG or did you miss the " won't be able to adjust the flight path" part? Unless you want to argue that for 5 seconds they would be in the close AA aura just eating damage, if you do them your funny reaction image is directed at you.

Dont worry, at one point they will just make DD invulnerable to damage and then we call this game what it is, World of Destroyers.

So you pushed ahead with the rocket crap heh? Can I at least replace those WORTHLESS planes with something functional?

Its missing a n ...

Well no, submarine snorkel was retrofitted to the Type VIIC and IXC even if the Type XXI and XXIII were designed with then but the Germans didnt come up with then, in fact they took then from the Dutch O-21 class they captured as they were outfitted with them, O-19 and O-20 were the first submarines outfitted with such system and they operated in the Pacific since they escaped capture. So yes, they could do that since 1939. Also its not about nuclear power, its about nuclear reactors ... nuclear submarines dont need to surface because their nuclear reactor doesnt need oxygen, the point was the ability to remain underwater for extended periods of time is because of that, a Type XXI could not remain underwater for more that about 4 days running at slow speed. The use of the snorkel is entirely obvious but apparently not for WG, it would be a way for submarines to recharge battery at periscope depth at slow (1/4 at best) speed as other submarines would have to surface to do that, the Type XXI advantage in the game would be being able to remain submerged for most of the match that would be, naturally, offset by the smaller number of torpedo tubes, kinda of a "true" submarine that in exchange cannot hit as hard as other classes. The fact they given us deck guns at least gives some hope they implement snorkels and go back to battery use.

Its still the same as adding a extra turret on Iowa, the Type XXI never had rear tubes and its not as if Iowa AA mounts in the game are entirely historical either but still, there are limits. Type XXI was a logical continuation of U-Boat design, this is why the deck gun was gone (useless at that point) and her AA suit was build-in on the conning tower, the main features of the class was it could remain much longer underwater and was very silent, she was also faster submerged having a speed of 17.2 knots but slower surfaced of 15.2 knots, she also had electric engines designed for silent running that engaged would give her a speed of 6.1 knots. If anything the Type XXI should be stealthier and faster, capable of engaging escort ships as the Balao should be more of a "anti-capital ship" submarine that lacks the submerged speed and endurance and relies on longer range attacks as a result, the Type XXI is weak because WG "listed" to all the REEEEEEEEEEEEEEplayers and nerfed the stealth of subs that was Type XXI "thing" as since Balao retains her armament we just get 2 similar ships except when it comes to armament since Balao was a continuation of the USN "Fleet Submarine" as the Type XXI was a U-Boat, a raider were it didnt need as many torpedo tubes .