NewHorizons_1

And yet you propose an even worse mechanic. Russian CVs can avoid AA by dropping their payload outside of its range. That at least, in theory, allows the target time to evade. You propose ships having no AA at all so that you can drop at minimum arming distance, with no risk at all, but giving the target no time to evade.

CVs can't be detonated, yet they can detonate surface ships CVs have a very good auto damage control that makes them very hard to set on fire, cause flooding or incapacitate modules (engine, rudder etc). Something that players in surface ships have to do manually and with great care to avoid being burnt or flooded to death while it is on cooldown. Meanwhile the CV can set fires, floods and incapacitate surface ships at will. Immunity of aircraft when they attack or are returning back to the carrier. This is part of the reason why there's animosity when CV players ask that carriers are made easier to play.

It's a pity it isn't Narai week.

Anyone would think who ever thought that up was a

They're not welcome there either where the bot subs are often in a higher position on the score-board than the "humans".

Re-install or disable any mods. I had the exact same problem a couple of months ago.

It's certainly a bit of a stretch to do it, in 8 days, for the PvE crowd.

Pleb. T11 is where it's at .... according to WG

Where AA range == main battery range.

Sounds like we need a "Most annoying CV" poll.

The clue is in the title. Probably doesn't make WG much money - their priority now seems to be high tier RB ships. That probably also explains the lack of new FreeXP ships as well. The former is a few times more expensive than the latter, so they're probably hoping to milk the player base via converting FreeXP etc. Also WG can't have players farming XP/credits in ops with new mid-tier coal ships - they might actually enjoy it.

Pretty much what I'm doing with the Pan-Asian cruisers. I may as well use up my camos with XP bonuses anyway before the new economy patch hits the fan.

Given that you don't have any battles on your account in Alaska, this kinda sounds like something Gwynbbleid would say.

Let me guess, AA range would be too large - it allows the target to use WASD hacks and dodge.

Most spotting damage I've done in co-op tends to be in BBs, probably when escorted by a Royal Navy CL or Smolensk that smokes up along with the DD. They sit in smoke, I spot, they spam high DPM shots, I reap spotting damage. I suppose you could div up with clan mates to ensure that line up.

Interestingly the Shkval is intended, IRL, as a torpedo counter measure. So my guess would be we'll see them equipped on a Soviet premium sub which will be sold as a solution to the homing torp problem.

Agreed. The problem here is distinguishing the performance of the player from that of the ship & squadrons they're controlling. I'm sure if I went into a Random match with FdR, Eagle or Nakhimov I would perform way worse than the OP. Does that mean these ships are underpowered? Do they need buffs? Does AA need nerfs? Do we need ships with no AA at all? No, of course not! It just means I'm crap as I've only ever played a few low tier CVs (... and found them very boring. ) However I've been on the receiving end of many a CV air strike and know all too well how ineffective the so-called counter measures are. To be fair to the forum community, they're opposed to classes of ships that have ineffective counters - which is reasonable enough. Just look at all the static submarines get. I mean, who in their right mind would think it's OK to be attacked with no way of defending yourself or retaliating/repelling, or even mitigating, the attack? If I was in an zero-AA ship do I want to rely on a team mate with AA? Of course not. He may want to go off and chase down a DD or he may get sunk. Then what? Be quiet and hope the CV player forgets about me? The issue here isn't that CV players need help (I'm pretty sure El2a is laughing his socks off here) - it is that mediocre players need help to improve. By suggesting that WG improves CVs, even indirectly by reducing the amount of AA that can be fielded in a team, you're vastly increasing the power available to the really good players. However, you can improve your skills yourself. If you had asked how to improve, dodge flak or whatever, then some of the good CV players may have offered some advice. No doubt you would have got your leg pulled, but you probably would not have been shot down (pun intended) like what happened here.

Awww, boo hoo! You executed an attack that failed - it happens to all classes, big deal. You get to loose some planes that regen shortly after and your attack put you at no risk at all. Meanwhile surface ships risk revealing their location when they fire their guns. Their shots may miss, ricochet, fail to penetrate and now they may be vulnerable to counter attack because they're detected. And good luck if you're a T8 cruiser with the T10 457+ brigade lurking around to dev strike you from across the map. Sheesh, get over yourself.

I gave up when I saw how the question was asked. Horizontal scroll bars? Really?

Don't give him ideas. Next he'll be switching to subs and complaining that players have the impudence to DCP mitigate pings or that there's too many ships with ASW air-strikes, hydro is too powerful etc, etc.

WG would balance it by making it completely broken in every other aspect. For April Fool's I reckon WG should introduce a 2nd Soviet BB line which have zero AA but has that old idea of Soviet BB radar that would only reveal capital ships - but refine it to have +200% range against CVs. No delay in revealing location to rest of team and 20% accuracy bonus to the team when they are firing at the target revealed by the radar. Pop radar, locate CV anywhere on the map then delete with Stalinium AP - if rest of team doesn't beat you to it. No AA but it is "WG balanced" as it can protect itself from aircraft by eliminating the problem at the source.

Damn those pesky sailors furiously wafting their tennis rackets in the air!!!!

Remember that CV bingo card I proposed? I think we need your graphics skills

Me thinking about how WG would motivate the player base

I've had a similar idea myself. "Random" matches for those spehsul CV & sub players** are actually a variant of co-op in disguise. Only human players are in CVs & subs - all the surface ships are bots. Can't be hard for WG to generate player names - [CLAWS] did it - and clan tags to make the team lists look believable. WG could probably generate believable stats if anyone bothers to look at the bot's "profile". To make them feel right at home the bot responds with some salt in chat and they may lose a karma point or two when they get a kill or blow a DDs cover by spotting it. I wonder how long it would take them to notice?? ** those that claim CVs need buffs & are discriminated against and those that claim subs are ready for release.