The_Angry_Admiral

But these don't have magical tyres.

I have a feeling Hornet is going to be nerfed. It's a very good CV.

Sure they might as well shut up shop then.

But they will is the thing so might as well push for something that people may actually like.

Well I've been saying for years about all of Wargaming's products they should actually just fix the basics before bringing in new stuff but sure they just continue to pile on the next thing so it's screaming in a wind tunnel.

Attention?? WTF cares about attention when I get all I need from my wife. Sorry mate but your attempts at coming off as superior in some way are failing badly. Maybe you should have a rethink of yourself and maybe I will bless you with my attention when you actually formulate something that isn't snark.

I guess what's lost on you is the fact you have 0 proof to back you up. What sly remark you got to come back with?

So what you think they aren't going to add anymore content to the game?

If you got any worse you would be intentionally trying to destroy the game with lasers, nukes, and magic.

What I find funny is the people thinking we aren't going to get anything else in this game and after the abomination of subs, Super CV's, and Super ships that anything mentioned is just far worse. This game has already been nuked to death so you really couldn't make it any worse.

I would just make them bigger, give them two 8 km torps every 30 seconds, a speed boost, and give them just two guns. Max speed 50 knots but a very good turning circle because the boat itself is your torp launcher so in order to aim you need to move the boat quickly.

Well they've already reached the epitome of design failure with subs so how much worse could it get?

Nothing can be like an EBR.

It's just a Fast Attack Craft with with foward shooting torps, one cannon, and some flak. Sounds like it could be great and it was real.

Two teammates just watching me take on a Nelson and Jervis.

In my opinion passive gameplay because of submarines and CV's only come from the players who actually understand this game. I think the majority of passive spuds in this game play passive because they don't know what they are doing and because they heard it from Youtube without understanding why. It's mostly from a lack of experience. I see constantly for example 5 ships running away from 2 and when I ask why are you running I'm told they are kiting. Why do you need to kite with full HP and a three ship advantage? By doing that as well.you open up your broadside for a bit to take some preventable damage. Also what I see is people only moving forward when it's either too late or victory is assured. This is in no way a defense of Subs and CV's but I think shifting the blame for the awful playing is just BS. It's WG pushing people to the higher tiers very quickly as well as some Youtubers not giving very good advice. "Oh you are struggling because of subs and CV's". No you are just even easier pickings for subs and CV's because you are just a bad player. I can have ten games in a row where I have no less than 3 of these types of players on my teams and they can easily carry us to a defeat. The game really needs some proper tutorials and stop blasting people to the higher tiers so quickly.

Passive play against subs and CV's don't make any sense as they can get to you no problem and if you are caught out alone (which I do all the time in my Hornet) their AA is usually not adequate enough (with the right skills taken to make my planes withstand more AA) I can get two full passes with one group of planes. Explain how exactly playing passive has helped here. Now that submarines are faster and can stay underwater longer and go from one end of the map to the other remaining undetected how exactly does playing passive help you in this situation? I don't care about anything outside of subs and CV's at the moment as this is about the false mentality that is planted where if you see a CV and/or submarine in the line up with need to auto play passive by hanging in the back.

Show me then. I hear about it a lot but nobody provides concrete evidence that isn't debunked. Most of it is a false mentality.

Mmmmmm no it's not actually because people are aware of people just sitting in the back so they push as a team, take the caps, then shoot those with their backs against the wall.

There is zero evidence to show hanging out in the back mitigates CV's and subs.

I'm using passive play in this argument as to players just sitting in the back and not moving forward because they don't know what they don't want their paint scratched or they begin kiting the moment they see a ship when they don't have to. Any excuse to head towards the back and say their favourite Youtuber told them to.

Everything you have listed here has absolutely nothing to do with passive gameplay. Gaining DPM in a CV doesn't just mean how many planes you can attack with - you also have fire and flooding that can add to DPM not to mention that planes are getting faster and faster as well as CV's actually moving to close that distance so your argument about creating distance just falls flat. Also by staying alone with minimize damage to planes thereby allowing them to possible give two full passes.

I think the issue is more around how passive play is defined. Playing smart is not playing passive.

None of your examples require passive play.

Everyone no matter what ship should always be on high alert in all games but this whole needing to stay in the back and shoot from my max range is just BS has been proven time and time again to not work. Those that move up as a group actually watching each other's backs is the team that wins. Those in the back just usually die last which helps the team out none - it only benefits their other stats.