Elijah2159

Thoughts on Super CVs: Experience: Good experience overall, I equally enjoy United States and Eagle. The firepower against ships is amazing and the AA ignorance is good as well. I have noticed that I get more damage playing Eagle than I do United States and I have averaged about 175K with Eagle and 125k with US. General buffs/nerfs: Reduce detectability range (I have had multiple battles where destroyers have purposefully rushed my teams line just to spot our CV and to get their BBs to sink it) Reduce reload time for bombers (Self explanatory - you usually only get to launch bombers 1 or 2 times) Reduce the machine gun time or make the aircraft begin their attack out further for the F8Fs on United States (It just feels and looks like that the planes get too close to the victim) Reduce the maneuverability of the tactical squadrons while in the attack stage (Too hard to aim most of the time) In conclusion, I really like the general gimmicks and gameplay that these carriers provide. With a couple more tweaks they should be ready for the live server. (See attached images for Eagle battle results)

To be honest I kind of like their testing method mainly because it gives the players the opportunity to give feedback and test new content

No. This would LITERALLY ruin all CV gameplay because if all fighters followed you to altitude this probably means that they can engage you up to cruising altitude as well basically making all attacks against a target with fighters in the vicinity around it impossible. A change like this would probably encourage a lot of players to put fighter consumables on their ships basically making themselves inattackable (not to mention you don't want a Des Moines on your team with fighters). A major flaw in your recommendation: You claim that the enemy carrier can just counter with their own fighters or the enemy carrier can just lead the fighters to one of their friendly ship but interceptors (the main reason you are making this suggestion) are invulnerable to fighters and AA. If your proposed change WAS to be implemented, I would expect a huge nerf of interceptors to go along with it. Also fighters are not useless as they can be used for spotting as well.

Hello everyone, With the recent announcement of a new battle type (Airship Escort), I thought that I might as well propose a temporary battle type that I have been wanting for a long time. The basics of skirmish Skirmish is set up almost exactly like random battles but with some major differences: There are no caps or points and the border slowly shrinks. The goal of the game is to kill all enemy ships or to be the team with the most number of ships left when the game ends (after 20 mins). This gamemode would be temporarily held for 2 weeks with T6 ships and then after a week long break would be held for another 2 weeks with T8 ships instead. Because of the "brawling" enviroment of the gamemode, submarines would not be allowed. Thoughts?

Hi, I have some recommendations for the Airship Escort Gamemode. 1. Scale down the size of the airship (its just too big) 2. Make it so that the airship can be damaged (just a little more realistic) And the major one: Let the airships launch tier 4/5 planes (fighters or bombers). Only reason I am suggesting this is because it was something in real life (see Akron class airship) and it would give the Airship some purpose besides just being a big floating blob that you have to sail below AND it would give the airship a weak defense/attack method against the CVs and rushing DDs it is guaranteed to be up against. Thoughts?

Sadly this may be a reality with anti-ship missiles modeled onto ships (Samaland)

Got torpedoed in a submarine by a destroyer

I would VERY much like this in game possibly with the same plane system that the hybrids use (after a period of time all 16 aircraft will regenerate then once the attack is complete the planes do not return to the ship). Also I would like to see different aircraft skins for each bomber as some of the bombers had different nose art.

I was kind of thinking of just a normal takeoff (with the 2 planes as suggested) on cvs without a catapult or cvs that didn't use a catapult historically Very interesting bit of history thanks for sharing :)

Hi, As I was looking at the video for USS United States (from the most recent devblog), I noticed that the F9F rocket planes are launched from a single catapult. I would love to see 1 aircraft launched from each catapult, which would be a more historically accurate (and more visually pleasing change). I think that this suggestion could be applied to ALL Carriers in the game as historically in a combat situation planes took off in pairs. Thoughts?

Hi, This is not a rant. This is just a suggestion with the most recent devblog. Pls fix the spelling of the title of the attack aircraft video: With the same video, add or redo the clip so we can see the jets attacking Also PLEASE do the same videos for Eagle as well Thanks!

Update: Turns out that Wargaming IS adding super CVS https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/262 (BTW I AM SO HYPED AND AM FREAKING OUT)

I would like to see some floatplane fighters as well in this series

Oh don't worry this already exists Either get in the AA range of an enemy ship or turn off your aa when the enemy CV drops fighters on you

I like this proposal a lot 1. There are no ships names Pennsylvania yet in the game 2. Has actual historical value (First plane launched and recovered at sea) 3. Would fit perfectly in at tier 4 - 5 (Gun size, secondary count and speed) 4. There are no ships like it in the game (this is an "armored cruiser" and we haven't gotten many of these in the game) Only issue is that the plane deck may be removed but other then that, I would like to see this in game as a Tier 4 - 5 premium cruiser