CV Rework Discussion

[_barman_]

 p

[_barman_]

22 minutes ago, Europizza said:

What's wrong with this community's thinking about CV's? Are we as players so spoiled that 'killing a target without it being able to do anything about it' is considered normal and a final state of balance for that class? What the...?

That is an absurd statement regarding proper balance. I would suggest that if said Shima gets in avg. torp range of 12 km of any CV, the carrier should be completely unable to do anything about it and get punished without mercy.

I find the carriers balanced but from a gameplay perspective you are forced too much on a defensive aproach regarding the vessel(not the planes though). 

However If you are bold enough to go out alone trying the sneaky aproach in a match with cvs you have to pay at least some consequences. 

[Isoruku_Yamamoto]

41 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

and do you really think it shouldn't be like this?

A lone shima should not be able to kill 3 out of 12 airplanes attaking on her?

 

....

Obviously not no. A shimakaze has a couple of weaknesses, one significant one should be the near-abscence of AA. So basically a CV attacking a Shimakaze, even if it were a tier 4 CV, should come out practically without aircraft losses. 

If the Shimakaze feels that aircraft are a threat, it should either smoke up, find island cover or find AA cover with friends. If it cant do the latter, then he's out of position for the battle scenario- something that a Shima should always be punished for. 

 

16 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

 

No.

I am Sorry but this is Simply not True.

There is currently no Ship in this Game. Which can Prevent you from the First Drop.

I am not even sure that anything below a Blob of 3 or more T10 Dedicated AA Cruisers is Capable of Destroying an Entire Squadron before it can Drop at least 1 Wing worth of Payload.

 

You say you should have a Chance to Hit a Minotaur.

I am saying that Hitting even a Minotaur is not a problem for a CV.

 

For example. In this Screenshot I have Double Citadelled a Minotaur which made the Mistake of Stopping behind an Island.

And as you can See. Even after this Double Citadel I got 4 Planes left. From my 8 Planes I started with and from which 2 Dropped their Load and Left.

And I am in Fact in a T8 CV which on top is considered one of the Weakest T8 CVs in the Game.

 

 

No Ship in the Game. Is Currently Capable of Preventing a Squadron from Dropping at least Once.

 

And No.

Sorry. But if anything. The Continues AA Values need to be Increased by at least 30%

Because currently.  As Proven many many times. Even a T8 CV can Still Bomb a T10 Dedicated AA Cruiser. It certainly is not a Good Idea because it costs alot of Planes to do it which are not worth the Damage you do. But they can still do it.

While a T10 DD despite having AA Upgrades is still Fodder for a T8 CV which is barely Capable of costing him 2-3 Planes assuming the CV keeps Flying above him several Times to make Additional Drops on him.

No Ship. Should be Helpless ever.

No other Ship in the Game is Safe from Damage when Attacking another Ship. And the CVs ONLY Risking Planes instead of their actual Ship. Is in itself already an Incredible Advantage and Complete Breach of that Balance.

But Sure as Hell. These Planes should not then be Safe from being Killed just because the Ship they Attack is not the Class Countering them.

Otherwise I demand that Cruisers are Immune to Torpedoes from DDs. Battleships become Immune to HE Shells from Cruisers. And DD become Immune to Hits from BB Secondaries.

 

 

All fun and all, but you are giving examples where you in a CV would be able to damage a minotaur- whereas im talking about the scenario where a mino shoots down all aircraft before you can drop, and these two scenarios are- unlike what you are suggesting- not mutually exclusive. 
I've shot down all aircraft from i believe a Midway strike group in my Fletcher yesterday before he could drop, and this happens regularly in my fletcher- difference being that i don't beach myself, the enemy CV did not approach over islands etc. 

There are two sides on this: 

1. Yes, playing a CV properly against easy, predictable enemies is still fairly okay
2. If you counterplay a CV properly, even a good CV can't do crap against you at the moment. They can try, but in most cases they won't be leading the dance. 

 

21 minutes ago, Europizza said:

What's wrong with this community's thinking about CV's? Are we as players so spoiled that 'killing a target without it being able to do anything about it' is considered normal and a final state of balance for that class? What the...?

That is an absurd statement regarding proper balance. I would suggest that if said Shima gets in avg. torp range of 12 km of any CV, the carrier should be completely unable to do anything about it and get punished without mercy.

Hold on. I'm not saying it is normal that a carrier should be able to kill a shimakaze easily. In fact, you're skipping multiple steps by saying that. 

1. the shimakaze shouldnt be found to begin with, thats the main strenght of the shimakaze

2. I'm not saying a CV should easily be able to kill a shimakaze, much rather damage him without taking losses on the CV side. Thats a rather vital difference. 
3. A shimakaze is, as i pointed out before, balanced around having huge potential as long as you are not spotted or not out of position. When you do get spotted out of postion, it is normal that you get punished for this- not by instantly dieing. But a Minotaur that goes broadside to any BB at roughly 8km can tell you what "out of position" means. 

[ChatBanForSayingTruth]

2 hours ago, Sunleader said:

Read it again. My skills should be rewarded and not decided by rng. He bombs became as useful as your TiTs out of stock. The vast amount of randomness in these bombs can't offer anything better what rockets can't do. At least Midway drops more of those with higher chance to hit.

But you are pointless to argue with. Buy Saipan, go into tier 10 battles with only 11 planes each on deck with massive recovery times.

My point is - take away the fun part of playing those and we end up where we were before rework.

Ps. : your wall of texts soon won't fit in one page.

[Alfa_Tau]

2 hours ago, Excavatus said:

But If you ask me, Kaga vs akizuki, aki should take moderate to high damage If the captain of the CV skilled enough. But would be able to kill a lot of planes If AA specced.
But a kagero should be able to kill planes in low or mid numbers depending on the AA specs, and should eat a lot of damage If the skilled CV captain decides to drop anyway!

Hello Excavatus

I have KAGA but have played very little since the  hit the fan. 

Concerning your point I can tell you usually the biggest problem VS DD is you spot them very late. This means you have to fly around and drop a fighter to keep them spotted. During the manouver you will suffer  AA from the DD (if he reminds to press P ) and from cruiser that are nearby. 

Usually I can do 1 or max 2 pass on any isolated DD of the same tier. And the damage ofc depends on the rockets number (and some RNG). What I have observed however is that the damage itself is not the first cause of Death for the DD. Instead the problem is that rockets quite often cause critical damage to engine or rudder, Believe it or not it is still plenty of DD captains that DO NOT RUN last stand!! This is a Death sentence for a DD under air attack, cause even if CV is not killing the DD, it will keep the prey spotted long enough for its teammates to finish the job.

the advantage of KAGA are the big reserve of planes. Especially TB.

Thats why it is "less "  impacted by the Genius who changed the AA damage.

In my opinion the best way to balance CV would be in reducing slightly the Alpha damage done by all ordinance, and eventually the fire chance. This would have balanced much more the game of the actual system.

 

 

[Excavatus]

52 minutes ago, thisismalacoda said:

Even as somebody who strongly dislikes the current easy mode CV implementation and their pre 0.8.5 balancing, let me disagree.

If somebody willingly brings a knife to a gun fight, he should suffer the consequences. A captain, who not only plays Musashi in the current meta, but also frolicks sufficiently far away from friendly AA, should sink. We owe that to evolution.

 

28 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

Obviously not no. A shimakaze has a couple of weaknesses, one significant one should be the near-abscence of AA. So basically a CV attacking a Shimakaze, even if it were a tier 4 CV, should come out practically without aircraft losses. 

If the Shimakaze feels that aircraft are a threat, it should either smoke up, find island cover or find AA cover with friends. If it cant do the latter, then he's out of position for the battle scenario- something that a Shima should always be punished for. 

I'm sorry gentelmen, but both of your statements I've quoted above,

summarizes me the core problem behind the balancing problem of the CVs,

so, I understand, some CV captains will never be satisfied, If there wasn't some free food in the game for them.

and that is unacceptable for me personally. Because this is not a realistic simulatior. This is a game, and everyone playing this game has a right to have fun in their whatever ship they pick.

But with this mentality, we are stripping some ships totally out of their fun. at least that is how I see it.

 

Because when I'm in shima, telling me to stay inside the AA bubble of my teammates is just telling me "to be useless"

 

Just tell me one thing... Yes, A shima or a musashi should be helpless against a CV.

Lets say, a desmo should be helpless against a rushing BB (there is always ramming though)

lets say, a BB is helpless against a shima or gearing or YY..

 

What are the CVs helpless against under any condition?

What needs to be happen for a CV to be able to do nothing and go back to port?

 

If you can honestly answer the last question, I think you may understand a little bit of the problem.

[Sunleader]

3 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

Obviously not no. A shimakaze has a couple of weaknesses, one significant one should be the near-abscence of AA. So basically a CV attacking a Shimakaze, even if it were a tier 4 CV, should come out practically without aircraft losses. 

If the Shimakaze feels that aircraft are a threat, it should either smoke up, find island cover or find AA cover with friends. If it cant do the latter, then he's out of position for the battle scenario- something that a Shima should always be punished for. 

 

All fun and all, but you are giving examples where you in a CV would be able to damage a minotaur- whereas im talking about the scenario where a mino shoots down all aircraft before you can drop, and these two scenarios are- unlike what you are suggesting- not mutually exclusive. 
I've shot down all aircraft from i believe a Midway strike group in my Fletcher yesterday before he could drop, and this happens regularly in my fletcher- difference being that i don't beach myself, the enemy CV did not approach over islands etc. 

There are two sides on this: 

1. Yes, playing a CV properly against easy, predictable enemies is still fairly okay
2. If you counterplay a CV properly, even a good CV can't do crap against you at the moment. They can try, but in most cases they won't be leading the dance. 

 

Hold on. I'm not saying it is normal that a carrier should be able to kill a shimakaze easily. In fact, you're skipping multiple steps by saying that. 

1. the shimakaze shouldnt be found to begin with, thats the main strenght of the shimakaze

2. I'm not saying a CV should easily be able to kill a shimakaze, much rather damage him without taking losses on the CV side. Thats a rather vital difference. 
3. A shimakaze is, as i pointed out before, balanced around having huge potential as long as you are not spotted or not out of position. When you do get spotted out of postion, it is normal that you get punished for this- not by instantly dieing. But a Minotaur that goes broadside to any BB at roughly 8km can tell you what "out of position" means. 

 

1.

By that Logic my Average Damage in a CV would Increase to 500k because we have to assume Enemy Ships to be so Incompetent that they will not even Drive Evasive Maneuvers when I drop from 5km away.

But we are not Talking about Incompetence. We talk about the actual Game. And in the actual Game. Unless the CV just Flies Straight Ahead into a Minotaurs AA and is Hit by Heavy AA Explosions. The Minotaur will not Stop him from Dropping.

2.

I am going to Call Bluff on that. And Ask you Politely to Provide Evidence of such Claims.

Due to the Nature of the Claim a Replay might be Best. But I will also Accept you to post at least 2 Screenshot Sets of 2 Screenshots each where you Show us the Approaching Squadron in the First Screenshot and then your 9-12 Plane Kills in the Second Screenshot.

And since your Claiming that this is a Common Occurence. (Which I know is not True because your Profile is Public)

I would also Request you to Publicly Post a Picture of your Statistics (Or Alternatively give me Permission to Post your Stats) of your Games in the Fletcher.

3.

I have yet to meet the Player whom I cant Drop against in this Game. So again. Evidence Please.

4.

You cannot Hide from a CV that can Cross the entire Map in 1 Minute.

You can easily Damage a Shimakaze without taking any Losses. The Shimakazes AA is Horrible and only even usable on below 2km. So if you just Attack once and Withdraw he usually wont be able to Kill a Plane.

The Shimakaze is currently not Balanced at all Unfortunately. Because exactly as you say. The Shimakaze is Strong because it can Launch Strikes from Stealth. Which is currently Impossible as CVs can easily Scout any DD on the Map thus currently making such Play Impossible. Even more so. Because Shimakaze has Horrible AA. So if a CV Finds it away from the Fleet even if it costs the CV 2 Aircraft. He can easily Trash the Shimakaze to Death with Rockets.

Something I did not too recently in my T10 CV Haku when an Enemy Shimakaze in the Endgame was trying to Reach me. And had to Find out that my Assaults had other Plans.

 

 

16 minutes ago, Filipin00 said:

I'm having a hard time figuring out if you're actually serious or just taken the sarcasm so far that you've reached another existential plane

While I'm not opposed to balancing CVs in a way that benefits all classes, wouldn't it make fighting tier 8 ships in tier 8 CV like fighting tier 10s in current system? Besides if it was like that in real life we would have no WWII veterans survived post-war rofl

edit: I don't know how you guys make double citadels with GZ or any CV for that matter when RNG is such a troll that even fully aiming doesn't help and bombs just fly all over the place but where I aimed them

 

If we did it like Real Life we would Send out a Wave of more than 200 Aircraft which would Score a Total of 3 Hits on a Battleship and which would have a Total Loss of about 10 Aircraft.

Or we could assume a Similar Scenario as the Bismarck. Where Half of the Planes Send by the Royal Air Force and Royal Navy Bombed their own Ships because they tought it was the Bismarck. :)

But this is not Real Life. Its a Game. And thus it has to be Balanced. Not Realistic. (Unless its a Simulation Game that is supposed to be Realistic. Which World of Warships is clearly not)

 

And No. The Comment was Made in Response to his Demand that the Class System is more Extreme. Meaning a Ship with Weak AA Should not be able to Shoot down Aicraft even if the same Squadron Bombs it 3 Times.

While a Dedicated AA Cruiser should actually be Immune to AirStrikes and Shoot down all Aircraft before any Bombs are Dropped at him. Even if he is Attacked by a Full CV Squadron.

To Achieve that. We would first need to Increase Continues AA by about 30-50% because currently even T8 CVs can still Yolo into a Minotaur and Bomb it.

 

As for the Double Citadels. The thing with GZ DBs is that its Aiming Indicator Sucks. When you Start the Attack while the Cross is on the Enemy. Your Bombers will have nearly Leveled out when you reach the Enemy Ship.

So unless your Bombing a Light Cruiser and want to have a Sure hit. You should not Start your Attack when your White Cross is before or at the Enemy.

When however you want to Citadel Cruisers and BBs. You should Start the Attack Run Preferably from the Broadside. (Because GZ Dive Bombers tend to Drop to the Sides of the Aiming Cross. And thus nearly always miss when you Drop a Cruiser from the Front or Rear) And you should only Start the Run when the Cross is already a Full Diameter of itself behind the Enemy Ship. Because then you actually Drop from above and the Bombs Strike Down. And as the Bombs of GZ DBs. Nearly always Fly to the Sides but not that much higher or lower. You tend to get pretty Reliable Results of 1 and sometimes even 2 Citadels :)

But I dont want to Increase your hopes too much either. The German DBs do have very high RNG and really MISS ALOT of their Bombs. And worse when they hit they also often Overpen and other things.....

[Isoruku_Yamamoto]

1 minute ago, Excavatus said:

 

I'm sorry gentelmen, but both of your statements I've quoted above,

summarizes me the core problem behind the balancing problem of the CVs,

so, I understand, some CV captains will never be satisfied, If there wasn't some free food in the game for them.

and that is unacceptable for me personally. Because this is not a realistic simulatior. This is a game, and everyone playing this game has a right to have fun in their whatever ship they pick.

But with this mentality, we are stripping some ships totally out of their fun. at least that is how I see it.

 

Because when I'm in shima, telling me to stay inside the AA bubble of my teammates is just telling me "to be useless"

 

Just tell me one thing... Yes, A shima or a musashi should be helpless against a CV.

Lets say, a desmo should be helpless against a rushing BB (there is always ramming though)

lets say, a BB is helpless against a shima or gearing or YY..

 

What are the CVs helpless against under any condition?

What needs to be happen for a CV to be able to do nothing and go back to port?

 

If you can honestly answer the last question, I think you may understand a little bit of the problem.

So, lets get this straight for me. 

 

A shimakaze is free food for a yamato, since a yamato outranges it. 

A yamato is free food for a shimakaze, since it outspots it. 

 

A Yamato is free food for a zao, since it outspots it and can then drop torpedos. 
 

A Zao is free food for a yamato, since the yamato outranges it. 

 

A Zao is free food for a Shimakaze, since it outspots it

A Shimkaze is free food for a Zao, since the Zao outranges it. 

Many more arguments to think of for all of this. Free food exists in the game, and its part of balancing the game. 

The things that a CV is weak against are the following three: 

 

1. Getting the ship destroyed by being "slow" (uneasy to move) and easy to detect, plus enemies sometimes get behind lines & aircraft easily spot you. 
2. Getting deplaned, or losing free choice over squad- which is already true at the very start of battle. 
3. Not being able to get your damage out. This doesnt send you back to port, but severely hinders your battle performance. If the only criterion is going back to port, then most tier 2 destroyers can hold up fine in tier X battles if played carefully- thats a challenge im willing to take- but they wont do over 2k damage unless they get extremely lucky. 

[artic_99]

Vor 3 Minuten, Excavatus sagte:

 

I'm sorry gentelmen, but both of your statements I've quoted above,

summarizes me the core problem behind the balancing problem of the CVs,

so, I understand, some CV captains will never be satisfied, If there wasn't some free food in the game for them.

and that is unacceptable for me personally. Because this is not a realistic simulatior. This is a game, and everyone playing this game has a right to have fun in their whatever ship they pick.

But with this mentality, we are stripping some ships totally out of their fun. at least that is how I see it.

 

Because when I'm in shima, telling me to stay inside the AA bubble of my teammates is just telling me "to be useless"

 

Just tell me one thing... Yes, A shima or a musashi should be helpless against a CV.

Lets say, a desmo should be helpless against a rushing BB (there is always ramming though)

lets say, a BB is helpless against a shima or gearing or YY..

 

What are the CVs helpless against under any condition?

What needs to be happen for a CV to be able to do nothing and go back to port?

 

If you can honestly answer the last question, I think you may understand a little bit of the problem.

Well I felt helpless against that Montana rushing alone the flank my cv was. He had speed flag I guess cuz he was able to catch up. He spotted me after 12 mins or so. He couldn't kill. Me cuz my implacable was angled and the game ended to soon. But still I wasn't able to defend my one ship from him as I alsway just got one drop on him and just 2 planes returning from that drop. That's why I stopped playing Cv's cuz I thought that's [edited]. I will give it a try as I promised sunleader this or tomorrow evening. Maybe it was just bad luck. But I never felt that helpless in my t8 bb vs a T10 bb. 

[Excavatus]

1 minute ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

So, lets get this straight for me. 

 

A shimakaze is free food for a yamato, since a yamato outranges it.  WRONG

A yamato is free food for a shimakaze, since it outspots it. WRONG

 

A Yamato is free food for a zao, since it outspots it and can then drop torpedos. WRONG
 

A Zao is free food for a yamato, since the yamato outranges it. WRONG

 

A Zao is free food for a Shimakaze, since it outspots it WRONG

A Shimkaze is free food for a Zao, since the Zao outranges it. WRONG

Many more arguments to think of for all of this. Free food exists in the game, and its part of balancing the game. WRONG

The things that a CV is weak against are the following three: 

 

1. Getting the ship destroyed by being "slow" (uneasy to move) and easy to detect, plus enemies sometimes get behind lines & aircraft easily spot you. 
2. Getting deplaned, or losing free choice over squad- which is already true at the very start of battle. 
3. Not being able to get your damage out. This doesnt send you back to port, but severely hinders your battle performance. If the only criterion is going back to port, then most tier 2 destroyers can hold up fine in tier X battles if played carefully- thats a challenge im willing to take- but they wont do over 2k damage unless they get extremely lucky. 

Thank you for your civil manner in all of this.

I would like to cut the discussion here, because I think you won't be able to understand my view at all.

So, before grinding towards a long reply fest to each other. I'm stopping here.

I'm just gonna say something again, one more time... please try to understand that.

Right now, CV captains who thinks the CV became almost unplayable,

are feeling exactly like how the surface ships captains but especially DD captains for 6 months.

I hope It makes people understand.

 

5 minutes ago, artic_99 said:

He spotted me after 12 mins or so. He couldn't kill.

after 12 mins.. and he couldn't kill :)

how long for it takes for a CV to spot a DD on the other hand?

How many strikes for a CV to take to kill a DD though?

Yet again, 12 min, a BB, finding you.. and game ends before he kills you, I suspect a very heavy roflstomp you guys had under those enemies.

 

[artic_99]

Vor 1 Minute, Excavatus sagte:

Thank you for your civil manner in all of this.

I would like to cut the discussion here, because I think you won't be able to understand my view at all.

So, before grinding towards a long reply fest to each other. I'm stopping here.

I'm just gonna say something again, one more time... please try to understand that.

Right now, CV captains who thinks the CV became almost unplayable,

are feeling exactly like how the surface ships captains but especially DD captains for 6 months.

I hope It makes people understand.

 

after 12 mins.. and he couldn't kill :)

how long for it takes for a CV to spot a DD on the other hand?

How many strikes for a CV to take to kill a DD though?

Yet again, 12 min, a BB, finding you.. and game ends before he kills you, I suspect a very heavy roflstomp you guys had under those enemies.

 

Well yes we won XD he was the last survivor. But still it was no fun seeing this guy coming closer and closer without being able to stop him or even slowing him down. I don't want to fight you as I said before I can't really judge but I can judge that that is not a fun game :P I agree with you in some points but if any ship can survive VS Cv's alone there is no need for teamplay which is bad for the game as even the greatest noob can do that without getting punished... Just my opinion lol cuz this Montana was clearly a bad player. 

[Isoruku_Yamamoto]

21 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

Thank you for your civil manner in all of this.

I would like to cut the discussion here, because I think you won't be able to understand my view at all.

So, before grinding towards a long reply fest to each other. I'm stopping here.

I'm just gonna say something again, one more time... please try to understand that.

Right now, CV captains who thinks the CV became almost unplayable,

are feeling exactly like how the surface ships captains but especially DD captains for 6 months.

I hope It makes people understand.

 

after 12 mins.. and he couldn't kill :)

how long for it takes for a CV to spot a DD on the other hand?

How many strikes for a CV to take to kill a DD though?

Yet again, 12 min, a BB, finding you.. and game ends before he kills you, I suspect a very heavy roflstomp you guys had under those enemies.

 

Well, since you guys already figured out that you can see my profile (not sure if it was you, but well, you too can see it) : 

I play DDs a whole lot more than i play CVs. After the CV rework i've played more DD battles than CV battles i think, even though ive played quite a bit of CV battles. And i've never found DDs unplayable- although the 20% air detectability reduction was quite called for. And yes, occasionally in the weak-AA DDs the counterplay is difficult- which is understandable if you are 10km in front of the rest, without proper AA mounted on your ship. 

As for how many strikes it takes a CV to kill a DD: lets assume equal tier, USN CV. USN CVs are IMO by far the best. 
A good CV player will kill a bad DD player in as few as 2 full runs very rarely less- when the enemy is AFK or just sailing in a straight line, so that would be 6 attack runs. Assuming solid hits in all 6 attack runs. 
A good DD player will be able to postpone that to up to 20 when he doesnt seek AA cover or smoke, or even far more when he does. If you have a bad CV player on top of that i reckon the DD player can survive the entire battle. I remember a battle in my Akizuki shooting down 39 aircraft before the enemy CV was sank- he didnt even show signs of giving up at that point. 

You see, by large i think i actually agree with both you and Sunleader in that especially the hunting potential against destroyers can be fairly annoying. But the problem there is not the amount of aircraft the CVs have, but the damage CVs deal against DDs combined with their spotting potential. 
You don't solve that by blanket nerfing the potential of CVs over the whole line. 

You see, BB AP against DDs was nerfed by introducing a special "BB AP against DD" mechanic. Why not do that for- especially, and i'd promote this, both from the CV side and from the DD side, a CV HE against DD mechanic. Because that is the true problem here. 
 

The problem for CV players is that this is the 8th major nerf to CVs since introduction of the rework, offset by 1 slight buff, a partial negation of a nerf (the speed boost decelaration partial reset, which resets 1 nerf for about 10%) and a tiny buff on SE which no one asked for because honestly, its pathetic. 

I think i speak for all CV players when i say that we want CV gameplay to be enjoyable for both surface ships and the CV. But right now, its simpy not very enjoyable for CVs anymore unless you accept that you probably wont be able to breach the 50k damage mark in a tier 8 anyway- while at the point where im now i hope to cross 50k in every tier 8. Not in each battle, but i want to realisticly be able to do that. 
After all, a CV cant cap, is unable to take and hold pinpoint positions, so you also miss out on a bit of the strategic fun that surface ships offer- that needs to be offset by dynamic CV gameplay style. And it used to be, but the 0.8.5 AA change is so big on most CVs that it just takes away a good bit of fun from most battles. 
Of course CVs can still have great battles, thats not the issue here. i just want CVs to stay a fun class, As do i want especially DDs to stay fun, and cruisers, and BBs. But right now, CVs just arent that much fun. 

P.S. It can happen that a CV is unable to find a DD for a whole battle. Personally i'd be in favour of a tiny air concealment buff to DDs, only by 10% (which gives a far greater result than you'd think), so CVs will be less good at self-spotting DDs. 

Right now when a CV spots a DD you can turn around, approximate where the DD will be and often hit the DD. a 5-10% buff in concealment would help DD players to at least manoeuvre more and make it harder for the CV player to estimate where the DD is. 
Again, i'd be in favour of this- and i think many CV players would be, since most CV players will agree that its relatively too easy to deal good damage to DD players. Now a good bit of that is down to poor counterplay, but if the playerbase doesnt learn this counterplay perhaps it should be made easier. 
That being said, again, the current AA is simply far too heavy, it has implications never intended in the CV rework and IMO thats bad. Heavy AA can be good, but it was never meant to function the way it does now, so the damage output, regeneration etc of carriers are not adjusted to the current AA which i think is a bad thing. 

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

1 hour ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

Obviously not no. A shimakaze has a couple of weaknesses, one significant one should be the near-abscence of AA. So basically a CV attacking a Shimakaze, even if it were a tier 4 CV, should come out practically without aircraft losses. 

If the Shimakaze feels that aircraft are a threat, it should either smoke up, find island cover or find AA cover with friends. If it cant do the latter, then he's out of position for the battle scenario- something that a Shima should always be punished for. 

 

All fun and all, but you are giving examples where you in a CV would be able to damage a minotaur- whereas im talking about the scenario where a mino shoots down all aircraft before you can drop, and these two scenarios are- unlike what you are suggesting- not mutually exclusive. 
I've shot down all aircraft from i believe a Midway strike group in my Fletcher yesterday before he could drop, and this happens regularly in my fletcher- difference being that i don't beach myself, the enemy CV did not approach over islands etc. 

There are two sides on this: 

1. Yes, playing a CV properly against easy, predictable enemies is still fairly okay
2. If you counterplay a CV properly, even a good CV can't do crap against you at the moment. They can try, but in most cases they won't be leading the dance. 

 

Hold on. I'm not saying it is normal that a carrier should be able to kill a shimakaze easily. In fact, you're skipping multiple steps by saying that. 

1. the shimakaze shouldnt be found to begin with, thats the main strenght of the shimakaze

2. I'm not saying a CV should easily be able to kill a shimakaze, much rather damage him without taking losses on the CV side. Thats a rather vital difference. 
3. A shimakaze is, as i pointed out before, balanced around having huge potential as long as you are not spotted or not out of position. When you do get spotted out of postion, it is normal that you get punished for this- not by instantly dieing. But a Minotaur that goes broadside to any BB at roughly 8km can tell you what "out of position" means. 

Finding a DD out of place isn't very hard for a CV. And again, without losses? Where did you get the idea that Shimakazes should have zero AA capability? They have been pretty nasty since 0.8.0. No losses means a CV can spam rocket plane wave after rocket plane wave until the Shima is dead without any consequence, where is that balanced? Why is that a good thing according to you? A carrier within 12 km torp range of a Shima is out of position too, so what do you propose the Shima can punish the carrier for that a carrier can't do anything about? How about the 'spotted' indicator for planes and the carrier vessel? Should we maybe get rid of those?

1 hour ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

So, lets get this straight for me. 

 

A shimakaze is free food for a yamato, since a yamato outranges it. 

A yamato is free food for a shimakaze, since it outspots it. 

 

A Yamato is free food for a zao, since it outspots it and can then drop torpedos. 
 

A Zao is free food for a yamato, since the yamato outranges it. 

 

A Zao is free food for a Shimakaze, since it outspots it

A Shimkaze is free food for a Zao, since the Zao outranges it. 

Many more arguments to think of for all of this. Free food exists in the game, and its part of balancing the game. 

The things that a CV is weak against are the following three: 

 

1. Getting the ship destroyed by being "slow" (uneasy to move) and easy to detect, plus enemies sometimes get behind lines & aircraft easily spot you. 
2. Getting deplaned, or losing free choice over squad- which is already true at the very start of battle. 
3. Not being able to get your damage out. This doesnt send you back to port, but severely hinders your battle performance. If the only criterion is going back to port, then most tier 2 destroyers can hold up fine in tier X battles if played carefully- thats a challenge im willing to take- but they wont do over 2k damage unless they get extremely lucky. 

All your free food examples are misrepresentations. None of these examples are free food.

 

CV's have never been weak (Edit: at anything at higer tier brackets) (Edit: up to 0.8.5 - I haven't played them after that update), unless uptiered heavily. In that case it should be played with care instead of mindlessly spamming damage. The examples of CV weakness you give are only apllicable to badly managed CV's. If a CV captain can't locate a DD behind enemy lines with the current tools given to CV's he's/she's just not even a mildly average captain, that's not a CV weakness, but a player weakness. Next, getting deplaned means the captain played his CV wrong, no reason not to be punished for that. Again that is a player issue, not a vessel issue. That's point 2 and 3 covered.

[Sunleader]

5 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

Well, since you guys already figured out that you can see my profile (not sure if it was you, but well, you too can see it) : 

I play DDs a whole lot more than i play CVs. After the CV rework i've played more DD battles than CV battles i think, even though ive played quite a bit of CV battles. And i've never found DDs unplayable- although the 20% air detectability reduction was quite called for. And yes, occasionally in the weak-AA DDs the counterplay is difficult- which is understandable if you are 10km in front of the rest, without proper AA mounted on your ship. 

As for how many strikes it takes a CV to kill a DD: lets assume equal tier, USN CV. USN CVs are IMO by far the best. 
A good CV player will kill a bad DD player in as few as 2 full runs very rarely less- when the enemy is AFK or just sailing in a straight line, so that would be 6 attack runs. Assuming solid hits in all 6 attack runs. 
A good DD player will be able to postpone that to up to 20 when he doesnt seek AA cover or smoke, or even far more when he does. If you have a bad CV player on top of that i reckon the DD player can survive the entire battle. I remember a battle in my Akizuki shooting down 39 aircraft before the enemy CV was sank- he didnt even show signs of giving up at that point. 

You see, by large i think i actually agree with both you and Sunleader in that especially the hunting potential against destroyers can be fairly annoying. But the problem there is not the amount of aircraft the CVs have, but the damage CVs deal against DDs combined with their spotting potential. 
You don't solve that by blanket nerfing the potential of CVs over the whole line. 

You see, BB AP against DDs was nerfed by introducing a special "BB AP against DD" mechanic. Why not do that for- especially, and i'd promote this, both from the CV side and from the DD side, a CV HE against DD mechanic. Because that is the true problem here. 
 

The problem for CV players is that this is the 8th major nerf to CVs since introduction of the rework, offset by 1 slight buff, a partial negation of a nerf (the speed boost decelaration partial reset, which resets 1 nerf for about 10%) and a tiny buff on SE which no one asked for because honestly, its pathetic. 

I think i speak for all CV players when i say that we want CV gameplay to be enjoyable for both surface ships and the CV. But right now, its simpy not very enjoyable for CVs anymore unless you accept that you probably wont be able to breach the 50k damage mark in a tier 8 anyway- while at the point where im now i hope to cross 50k in every tier 8. Not in each battle, but i want to realisticly be able to do that. 
After all, a CV cant cap, is unable to take and hold pinpoint positions, so you also miss out on a bit of the strategic fun that surface ships offer- that needs to be offset by dynamic CV gameplay style. And it used to be, but the 0.8.5 AA change is so big on most CVs that it just takes away a good bit of fun from most battles. 
Of course CVs can still have great battles, thats not the issue here. i just want CVs to stay a fun class, As do i want especially DDs to stay fun, and cruisers, and BBs. But right now, CVs just arent that much fun. 

 

1.

Once More. Please Provide Evidence for such Claims.

I dont want to Nag on you here. But I do really dislike it when People Lie into my Face.

And for a Fact. I just rcently had a User Claim to me. That he would Commonly Shoot down whole Squadrons of Midway Planes before these can Drop their Bombs in a Certain DD he Owned.

Just that the user when I checked. Had only Played 2 Games in that DD and had Shot Down a Total of 11 Planes over the course of these 2 Games. Thus his Claim not exactly making much Sense.

I also had the Case with a different User which constantly Claimed he would be Playing Surface Ships and Easily Deal with CVs in his Surface Ships. But whose Account never really Showed any Games and partially not even Ownership of these Ships.

As such I have become rather Distrustful towards such Claims. And would once more. Request that you Show us Evidence for these Claims.

Otherwise I am Sorry. But I cannot Trust your Words to be True.

 

2.

And See that is the Thing. I do not think we can Agree on. Because while you Claim you want the Game to be Fun for both Surface Ships and CVs. Your Suggestions and Demands are Simply not Allowing for that.

When a Shimakaze which is a T10 DD. Can be Bombed by a T8 Aircraft Carrier 3 Times with the same Squadron without that Squadron even losing Planes in this Action.

Then I can Guarantee without even the Shred of the Slightest Tiny itsy bitsy fraction of a Piece of Doubt. That this Shimakaze will NEVER Have Fun in any Battle where a CV is Present.

The same goes for any other Ship with Weak AA.

No Ship in this Game is Immune to Counter Fire. And even if you bring the Class most Suited to Fight an Enemy. This Enemy will still always be able to Fight Back. Which is to be Expected. Because otherwise the Automatic Matchmaking would need to Completely Micromanage all Matches to Contain the exact same Number of Suited Enemies for each Class and Ship Present in the Battle.

 

For example. If we went by your Suggestion. And made it so. That Weak AA Ships are Helpless against CVs and cant even cost it Planes when the CV Attacks them Repeatedly. But in Exchange made AA Cruisers very Strong so they will Destroy entire Squadrons of Aircraft before they can even Drop their Bombs.

You would end up Requiring the Matchmaker to also Always make sure that each Team has a Number of both of such Targets Available. Worse this has to be Balanced Extremely Carefully. Because otherwise if a Match ends up with alot of AA Ships you as a CV cant possibly have Fun. Because you will leave the Match with 0 Damage.

The other way around. If a Team is Unlucky and gets alot of AA Weak Ships they will be Helpless against the CV and the CV will Farm Damage like Crazy on them as it was in the 0.8.0 Update where CV Player racked up 500k Damage Matches left and right.

Needless to say. This will never Happen. Because the amount of Micromanagement for the Matchmaker Required to do this. Would be absolutely absurd. And then there would also be the Obvious Complaints from CVs when the Enemy Team actually worked together Properly and the near Invincible AA Cruiser Defended his Ships. And the Complaints from the Surface Ships which got Massacred by the Enemy CV because their AA Cruiser did not Defend them properly etc etc.

This will NEVER work. :)

 

 

 

 

[Alfa_Tau]

2 hours ago, Sunleader said:

The Minotaur will not Stop him from Dropping.

This is insane. Mino WILL slaughter your SQ before 1 bomb is dropped. Especially because it's often hard to spot from the distance and usually is never TOO far from another ship.  Then OFC exceptions may exhist. But the game should be balanced around the average (or midlle of the possible ranges) not about the extreme. 

 

2 hours ago, Excavatus said:

This is a game, and everyone playing this game has a right to have fun in their whatever ship they pick.

That's abolutely right. Or at lest I totally agree with you. So now you understand that Flying around hoping to find the "bravest" person in enemy team that decide to sail apart from his team and ask to be bombed is not really fun? 

 

We need to find a way which grant:

1.  CV the opportunity to drop over the target,

2.  at a cost that will be proportionate to the target AA capability, and

3. with an accepatable level of damage on target (depending on the type of ordnance).  

In my opinion the 084 was satisfing the first 2 of the above conditions. The latter was probably a bit high. so it's the last that could be changed. Reducing by 5 % or 10 % the Alpha of a AP bomb will make all vessels stronger and CV will require more strike to achieve a kill. 

 

Denying CV the capacity to strike or at least make them pay an impossible price for it, result in frustration and this is not really good for the game. 

[Sunleader]

4 minutes ago, Alfa_Tau said:

This is insane. Mino WILL slaughter your SQ before 1 bomb is dropped. Especially because it's often hard to spot from the distance and usually is never TOO far from another ship.  Then OFC exceptions may exhist. But the game should be balanced around the average (or midlle of the possible ranges) not about the extreme.

 

I have proven that Wrong several times in the Past.

By Bombing Minos and even Sinking Minos. As well as Bombing Ships next to them etc.

I am currently Playing Haku. And even here I just in my last Game came across a Minotaur and just Greeted it with an 8k Damage Salvo from my Rockets.

 

Sorry. But a Mino will not Stop you from Dropping Bombs.

 

And Mate no Offense. But you dont Balance around Averages. You guys try to Balance for the Average CV Player.

Completely Ignoring that this results in the Average Surface Ship Player ending up Constantly being Frustrated and Completely Unable to Play the Game.

Because he cant do ANYTHING about constantly being Bombed into Oblivion by CVs.

 

You guys keep Demanding that AA is so Weak. That even an Average CV Player in a T8 CV can still Bomb a T10 Dedicated AA Cruiser.

But if AA is Nerfed to such Levels. (Basicly back to the Levels of 0.8.4) then the Result is. That the Average DD Player the Average Cruiser Player and the Average BB Player end up being Helpless Fodder for CVs.

Because their AA just doesnt do anything to the Squadrons.

 

 

 

Let me get that Mirror for You. And Just make the Same Ridiculous Demand the other Way around for you. So you get an Idea what you Guys Demand.

I think that we need to Buff AA so that an Average T8 BB Player has a Chance to Defend against Attacks from a T10 CV.

Because we have to Balance the Game According to the Average Player. Not by the Extremes right.

 

 

[Isoruku_Yamamoto]

12 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

 

1.

Once More. Please Provide Evidence for such Claims.

I dont want to Nag on you here. But I do really dislike it when People Lie into my Face.

And for a Fact. I just rcently had a User Claim to me. That he would Commonly Shoot down whole Squadrons of Midway Planes before these can Drop their Bombs in a Certain DD he Owned.

Just that the user when I checked. Had only Played 2 Games in that DD and had Shot Down a Total of 11 Planes over the course of these 2 Games. Thus his Claim not exactly making much Sense.

I also had the Case with a different User which constantly Claimed he would be Playing Surface Ships and Easily Deal with CVs in his Surface Ships. But whose Account never really Showed any Games and partially not even Ownership of these Ships.

As such I have become rather Distrustful towards such Claims. And would once more. Request that you Show us Evidence for these Claims.

Otherwise I am Sorry. But I cannot Trust your Words to be True.

 

2.

And See that is the Thing. I do not think we can Agree on. Because while you Claim you want the Game to be Fun for both Surface Ships and CVs. Your Suggestions and Demands are Simply not Allowing for that.

When a Shimakaze which is a T10 DD. Can be Bombed by a T8 Aircraft Carrier 3 Times with the same Squadron without that Squadron even losing Planes in this Action.

Then I can Guarantee without even the Shred of the Slightest Tiny itsy bitsy fraction of a Piece of Doubt. That this Shimakaze will NEVER Have Fun in any Battle where a CV is Present.

The same goes for any other Ship with Weak AA.

No Ship in this Game is Immune to Counter Fire. And even if you bring the Class most Suited to Fight an Enemy. This Enemy will still always be able to Fight Back. Which is to be Expected. Because otherwise the Automatic Matchmaking would need to Completely Micromanage all Matches to Contain the exact same Number of Suited Enemies for each Class and Ship Present in the Battle.

 

For example. If we went by your Suggestion. And made it so. That Weak AA Ships are Helpless against CVs and cant even cost it Planes when the CV Attacks them Repeatedly. But in Exchange made AA Cruisers very Strong so they will Destroy entire Squadrons of Aircraft before they can even Drop their Bombs.

You would end up Requiring the Matchmaker to also Always make sure that each Team has a Number of both of such Targets Available. Worse this has to be Balanced Extremely Carefully. Because otherwise if a Match ends up with alot of AA Ships you as a CV cant possibly have Fun. Because you will leave the Match with 0 Damage.

The other way around. If a Team is Unlucky and gets alot of AA Weak Ships they will be Helpless against the CV and the CV will Farm Damage like Crazy on them as it was in the 0.8.0 Update where CV Player racked up 500k Damage Matches left and right.

Needless to say. This will never Happen. Because the amount of Micromanagement for the Matchmaker Required to do this. Would be absolutely absurd. And then there would also be the Obvious Complaints from CVs when the Enemy Team actually worked together Properly and the near Invincible AA Cruiser Defended his Ships. And the Complaints from the Surface Ships which got Massacred by the Enemy CV because their AA Cruiser did not Defend them properly etc etc.

This will NEVER work. :)

 

 

 

 

 

28 minutes ago, Europizza said:

Finding a DD out of place isn't very hard for a CV. And again, without losses? Where did you get the idea that Shimakazes should have zero AA capability? They have been pretty nasty since 0.8.0. No losses means a CV can spam rocket plane wave after rocket plane wave until the Shima is dead without any consequence, where is that balanced? Why is that a good thing according to you? A carrier within 12 km torp range of a Shima is out of position too, so what do you propose the Shima can punish the carrier for that a carrier can't do anything about? How about the 'spotted' indicator for planes and the carrier vessel? Should we maybe get rid of those?

All your free food examples are misrepresentations. None of these examples are free food.

 

CV's have never been weak (Edit: at anything at higer tier brackets) (Edit: up to 0.8.5 - I haven't played them after that update), unless uptiered heavily. In that case it should be played with care instead of mindlessly spamming damage. The examples of CV weakness you give are only apllicable to badly managed CV's. If a CV captain can't locate a DD behind enemy lines with the current tools given to CV's he's/she's just not even a mildly average captain, that's not a CV weakness, but a player weakness. Next, getting deplaned means the captain played his CV wrong, no reason not to be punished for that. Again that is a player issue, not a vessel issue. That's point 2 and 3 covered.

So, let me clarify why i state that i think a shimakaze shouldnt be able to take out CV aircraft consistently. Im not saying it shouldnt be able to take any out at all, i just think it currently has a far too good AA capability for the role its in. 
You see, i've been playing since 2015 or something and the Shimakaze line always used to be stealthy and deadly, but once you got caught in a shima, you'd be in trouble. 

Now, if we look at a Shimakaze we find that it has an AA rathing of 29 for me, i believe thats the base rating. 
This is comparable to a C hull Omaha (rating 27) or a Myoko A (30) or B (31). 
The Myoko is at its tier known for having rather inadequate AA, and this is a tier 7. It kind of holds up against tier 6 CVs though it surely wouldnt get away easily- but it didnt do a thing against tier 8 CVs. 
An Omaha with C hull is two tiers lower, so it does a fairly good job at protecting itself from tier 4 CVs, maybe even sometimes against tier 6s. 

The shimakaze on the other hand is a T10 destroyer which will meet T8 or T10 CVs. It should not be able to consistently shoot down aircraft of such CV, simply because a Shimakaze does not carry the AA to do so. 
Instead it should rely on its stealth and speed, which can be tricky. 

Now i do agree that it is too easy to catch a DD with a CV, so the suggestion to for instance remove the spotted icon for aircraft is one that could be considered IMO. Not even sure if i'd be against that, i think in the long run i'd be in favour indeed. 
Also, as i said before, the damage that CVs can (and i feel i should say can, but okay) is too extreme. Which is why i also suggested the CV HE against DDs to be done alike the BB AP against DDs. I have suggested this before btw, i think like two months ago or what. 
Simply cause i understand CVs cant be allmighty monsters, but i do want them to have their strong potential where they need it- against heavy cruisers and BBs. 

As for your question @sunleader: i'll take a look if i can find my Fletcher replay. 
After some searching i found the 39 aircraft kill akizuki battle, dunno why i was pink ;)

Anyway, IMO the CV rework should not go in the direction of blanket nerfing CVs like what has been happening lately, but much rather addressing specific issues like how to deal with destroyers, low AA/ high AA ships, and a better FLAK system. 
But you guys wont hear me say that it was perfect in 0.8.4, i'm just saying the change is completely irreasonable for CVs- even though i strictly do advocate other changes that help more with addressing specific issues. 

 

Grtz I_Y 

 

 

[Isoruku_Yamamoto]

23 minutes ago, Alfa_Tau said:

This is insane. Mino WILL slaughter your SQ before 1 bomb is dropped. Especially because it's often hard to spot from the distance and usually is never TOO far from another ship.  Then OFC exceptions may exhist. But the game should be balanced around the average (or midlle of the possible ranges) not about the extreme. 

 

That's abolutely right. Or at lest I totally agree with you. So now you understand that Flying around hoping to find the "bravest" person in enemy team that decide to sail apart from his team and ask to be bombed is not really fun? 

 

We need to find a way which grant:

1.  CV the opportunity to drop over the target,

2.  at a cost that will be proportionate to the target AA capability, and

3. with an accepatable level of damage on target (depending on the type of ordnance).  

In my opinion the 084 was satisfing the first 2 of the above conditions. The latter was probably a bit high. so it's the last that could be changed. Reducing by 5 % or 10 % the Alpha of a AP bomb will make all bessels stronger and CV will require more strike to achieve a kill. 

 

Denying CV the capacity to strike or at least make them pay an impossible price for it, result in frustration and this is not really good for the game. 

Look, i personally think this is NEARLY spot on. 
 

In my opinion, the main problem in 0.8.4 was dealing proportional damage- mainly to destroyers, which again is why i suggest the CV HE against DD nerf. (calculate pen damage as overpen). 
However, i'd say adding a say 5% AA, not more, but 5%, would be welcome. Not combined with the single aircraft focus, but AA in 0.8.4 was JUST slightly too weak IMO, unless you got uptiered too heavily. 

 

IMO one solution there could be for a CV to get faster regen times as there are progressively more high tier ships in a game, so: 

tier 8 CV 
base regen 80s. 

Regen if average ship tier =8 or lower: 80s
if higher: 80s - 10s per average tier higher than 8
example: average tier 9 (excl carriers) then make the reload 70s, average tier 10 make the reload 60s. 
Or base it on AA ratings or something alike. 

That might sound weird, but youd have to consider that using AA does not go at the cost of firing main guns or torpedos, so if you think about it it somewhere kinda makes sense from a balancing point 
now, of course the 10s per tier may be too much but its the idea that counts right

[Atris2nd]

32 minutes ago, Alfa_Tau said:

This is insane. Mino WILL slaughter your SQ before 1 bomb is dropped. Especially because it's often hard to spot from the distance and usually is never TOO far from another ship.  Then OFC exceptions may exhist. But the game should be balanced around the average (or midlle of the possible ranges) not about the extreme. 

 

That's abolutely right. Or at lest I totally agree with you. So now you understand that Flying around hoping to find the "bravest" person in enemy team that decide to sail apart from his team and ask to be bombed is not really fun? 

 

We need to find a way which grant:

1.  CV the opportunity to drop over the target,

2.  at a cost that will be proportionate to the target AA capability, and

3. with an accepatable level of damage on target (depending on the type of ordnance).  

In my opinion the 084 was satisfing the first 2 of the above conditions. The latter was probably a bit high. so it's the last that could be changed. Reducing by 5 % or 10 % the Alpha of a AP bomb will make all bessels stronger and CV will require more strike to achieve a kill. 

 

Denying CV the capacity to strike or at least make them pay an impossible price for it, result in frustration and this is not really good for the game. 

 

I was able to dive bomb Minotaur with Graf Zeppelin so I can dispute that claim as well. It is nevertheless suicidal to try and if your evasion isn't 100% on point, you will likely lose the whole squadron. But it's not impossible. Since the experiment I did with Sunleader yesterday, I've started taking my brave pills a bit more often with generous results. The best I've managed to do when a Minotaur was holding down a flank was land 3 torpedo hits on him. Still, taking on a Mino isn't ideal but when it's one of the only things you can do, then any bit helps, even if it is at your own expense. Sometimes skimming along the edges of its range and spotting it can work out as well if you have half-competent teammates willing to shoot. But you can take things into your own hands if you have to. It's just not ideal.

 

I agree that planes should recharge a bit faster. Just a few seconds faster will give me a lot of leverage to take some more risks with some planes. But I think this should be a case-by-case change, not a universal one. Kaga and Enterprise definitely don't need faster recharge. But Saipan, Zeppelin, Lexington and Shoukaku do for example.

 

The rest, well... That's already the case if you ask me. If you go up against a Mino, Salem, Des Moines or Worcester with your planes you can strike them. You just need to be at the top of your game, avoid every flak burst and expect heavy casualties. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. To give you a similar example, if you're playing a destroyer like Gearing and you have to engage a Minotaur, you might be able to close the gap and torpedo it, but expect to lose most of your hp in the process etc. A carrier can do this at no personal risk however the reward is far lower. 

[Alfa_Tau]

4 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

You guys keep Demanding that AA is so Weak. That even an Average CV Player in a T8 CV can still Bomb a T10 Dedicated AA Cruiser.

I never said that, So don't put in my mouth this kind of 

It is absolutely natural that when you are bottom tier you struggle. This happens in every class by a logic reason.

19 minutes ago, Alfa_Tau said:

But the game should be balanced around the average (or midlle of the possible ranges) not about the extreme. 

The one above is my original sentence. Let me explain further as I am suffering from intense summer heat and my english is also suffering

When I speak about ranges I speak about probability. If you know something about statistics you know there is a range that goes from one extreme to another and there is a middle. For example: assuming  the dispersion of a BB's main guns is 200m at 10 km it means that the majority of the shells will land inside that area. Some will still land outside randomly (due to air drag, humidity, a not perfect barrel etc etc) but the majority will land in the middle.

 

Same for planes: when I said that in average a Squadron of planes should be able to drop onto a target I meant that. Then of course sometime you will los 50% of the SQ, some time 90% BUT IN AVERAGE you should be able to drop.

Of course I am talking about same tier ships/planes. And of course the result of the drop WOULD be still affected by AA strengh , aim etc. Wich doesn't mean it will automatically result in max damage.

I wasn't talking at all about players. only about an action (bombing) and its outcome.. 

 

16 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

And Just make the Same Ridiculous Demand the other Way around for you. So you get an Idea what you Guys Demand.

Here there are 2 BIG mistakes 

If u quote me then I am a single person. I do not represent Others neither I have this presumption. I am only trying to contribute to a discussion, hoping that this will lead to a good solution.

Why do you have to use the word ridicolous? Perhaps not all palyers have your experience or your level of skill. Some request may be a little naive but to tell other their opinions are ridicolous it is not nice and certainly doesn't help to find a solution.  

[Sunleader]

13 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

 

So, let me clarify why i state that i think a shimakaze shouldnt be able to take out CV aircraft consistently. Im not saying it shouldnt be able to take any out at all, i just think it currently has a far too good AA capability for the role its in. 
You see, i've been playing since 2015 or something and the Shimakaze line always used to be stealthy and deadly, but once you got caught in a shima, you'd be in trouble. 

Now, if we look at a Shimakaze we find that it has an AA rathing of 29 for me, i believe thats the base rating. 
This is comparable to a C hull Omaha (rating 27) or a Myoko A (30) or B (31). 
The Myoko is at its tier known for having rather inadequate AA, and this is a tier 7. It kind of holds up against tier 6 CVs though it surely wouldnt get away easily- but it didnt do a thing against tier 8 CVs. 
An Omaha with C hull is two tiers lower, so it does a fairly good job at protecting itself from tier 4 CVs, maybe even sometimes against tier 6s. 

The shimakaze on the other hand is a T10 destroyer which will meet T8 or T10 CVs. It should not be able to consistently shoot down aircraft of such CV, simply because a Shimakaze does not carry the AA to do so. 
Instead it should rely on its stealth and speed, which can be tricky. 

Now i do agree that it is too easy to catch a DD with a CV, so the suggestion to for instance remove the spotted icon for aircraft is one that could be considered IMO. Not even sure if i'd be against that, i think in the long run i'd be in favour indeed. 
Also, as i said before, the damage that CVs can (and i feel i should say can, but okay) is too extreme. Which is why i also suggested the CV HE against DDs to be done alike the BB AP against DDs. I have suggested this before btw, i think like two months ago or what. 
Simply cause i understand CVs cant be allmighty monsters, but i do want them to have their strong potential where they need it- against heavy cruisers and BBs. 

As for your question @sunleader: i'll take a look if i can find my Fletcher replay. 
After some searching i found the 39 aircraft kill akizuki battle, dunno why i was pink ;)

Anyway, IMO the CV rework should not go in the direction of blanket nerfing CVs like what has been happening lately, but much rather addressing specific issues like how to deal with destroyers, low AA/ high AA ships, and a better FLAK system. 
But you guys wont hear me say that it was perfect in 0.8.4, i'm just saying the change is completely irreasonable for CVs- even though i strictly do advocate other changes that help more with addressing specific issues. 

 

Grtz I_Y 

 

 

 

Mate.

This Screenshot is from February. Its entirely Irrelevant to 0.8.5

 

 

1.

Shimakaze has Extremely Bad AA Rating Yes.

But if you would actually bother Looking. You would note that is due to its AA Distribution.

Shimakaze has all of its AA on Close Range below 2km. Where it has very Decent AA Damage of 200 per Second.

Its just that Beyond 2km its basicly Non Existent with AA Damage of something like 40 per Second.

 

Which is also why I said. That you can in Fact Bomb a Shimakaze without losses if you just do it Properly.

What you cant do. Is Bombing it without losses if you use the Same Squadron which always Crosses into the 2km Range and thus gets into the Small Area where Shimakaze has Decent AA :)

 

The Rating is only a very rough and very Inaccurate Description.

You can usually Ignore it.

 

2.

Mate no Offense. But we are Sitting here Talking about T10 Ship being able to Destroy 2 Planes of a T8 Ship.

If you Seriously want to Talk about Buffing CVs or Nerfing AA then we could just as well Talk about Godmode for CVs Squadrons.

 

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

33 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

Anyway, IMO the CV rework should not go in the direction of blanket nerfing CVs like what has been happening lately, but much rather addressing specific issues like how to deal with destroyers, low AA/ high AA ships, and a better FLAK system.

We can agree right there, 100%. 

[ChatBanForSayingTruth]

What pisses me most is this HE bomb nerf. WG don't want skilled players to dominate, useless potato DDs cried half a forum mimimimi about it so they gave such a horrible rng to it that its practically useful only vs afk targets.

Just had a battle in Midway where i perfectly aimed my bombs target 100% over Iowa. 2 bombs landed. Where the rest of them? Are they all dropping outside the circle? Or if there is a 1 cm gap outside the ship "RNG" will land all bombs down there? Can't my perfect aiming get rewarded without your stupid RNG (which never lands in a middle anyway, so it's a dodged RNG)?

 

I swear this crap is bugged. Just did same thing and had ALL cyrcle on Moskva, pefectly aimed, Moskva slowly reversing. 3 out of 6 bombs hit. I even watched replay frame by frame, pitty it doesn't show aiming cyrcle on replays but clearly didn't miss 3 bombs.

How this is even possible to miss half a bombs if circle is fully on the ship? @MrConway

[El2aZeR]

Spoiler

 

[Ze_Reckless]

6 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

  Hide contents

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

Must be something about Pyotr armor, I citadelled one with Izmail HE today. He was angled, my shells hit his super structure.