Zaydin

I'd only get the captains if I had absolutely nothing else to spend coal on. Ships should come first.

Only if torpedo tubes can no longer get reloaded in battle, either, since most nations couldn't reload torpedoes in the middle of battle.

FFS, this has been explained thousands of times: CVS DO NOT AND NEVER HAVE HAD UNLIMITED PLANES IN PRACTICE. There is a finite number of planes they can regen per match due to the 20 minute time limits of every round. Stop lying. A carrier that is reckless with its planes will be a carrier that struggles to do damage due to burning through their reserves. Launching understrength flights is a bad idea since they have less combined health and therefore is easier to shoot down versus a full strength squad. A squad of three planes is much easier to shoot down than a full squad of 9 planes. There is a reason I start the match with a scouting flight of three planes; to minimize my losses while scouting to avoid hurting my potential damage.

The Midway actually did have AP bombs pre-rework. So did the Lexington and Essex. Both got removed with the rework, however, leaving the US with HE dive bombers, the Japanese with AP and British with level bombing.

Lost track of how many times I tried to explain to anti-CV players that CVs only have unlimited planes on paper but not in practice and a lot of them insisted that still meant CV had unlimited regeneration.

If you can't stand toxicity, don't play a carrier. You get so much crap for playing one and the worst part is the trolls on the forums, reddit, etc who will defend/justify people who tell you to kill yourself for playing a carrier

The irony is that the baddies are the reason CVs lurk in the back. The ideal position for a carrier on paper is for them to shadow their fleet, lurking just behind the front to minimize flight times. In practice, however, so many baddies have a hate boner for CVs and they fixate on carriers the instant they get spotted over actual immediate threats, forcing carriers to the back. Was in my JB a while back and there was an enemy Kremlin about 10km in front of me. Instead of focusing on me, he was firing at the carrier 20km away while exposing his broadside to me. You can guess what happened.

The Worcester has no smoke and so it's far more vulnerable than the Smol. It's also a much bigger target and has to expose a significant amount of broadside to bring all her guns to bear. The Worcester also does not have the burst damage up close that the Smol does due to the Smol having torpedoes, something that can give a Smolensk a key edge in a knife fight.

Thing is that IFHE has been in need of a rebalancing for a while. There are a lot of ships where it's pretty much mandatory and when an 'optional' skill is mandatory something has gone wrong balance wise and the current 'penalty' with the reduced fire chance wasn't enough of a drawback. Now whether WGs current proposal for the rework is the right idea remains to be seen.

A lot of the time, ''OP' can translate as 'it sank me'.

Is it 'balanse' if a DD can get within 10km of other surface ships and not get spotted? Because that shatters suspension of disbelief considering in real life ships were spotted much further away even by surface ships.

Because there are a lot of bad players out there who refuse to learn how to adapt to the presence of a carrier in a game and instead want to be able to play the way they always play because adapting is hard.

How it works: It doesn't.

Destroyers.

A lot of disposable income.