Search the Community

Saw a comment in the live chat from last nights BattleshipNewJersey video. Apparently they are pulling parts off of CVN-79 USS JFK to get CVN-78 USS Ford ready to deploy. To me, that seems sketchy, but I'm asking the Navy Vets here, specifically ones who may have been plank owners on class leaders: How often does this happen? https://thewebserv.com/business/us-navy-pulls-parts-off-an-under-construction-aircraft-carrier-to-get-uss-gerald-r-ford-ready-to-deploy/

Here is my suggestion for what an actual USN CV line with both Attack and a Support line could look like (including the Alternative Attack line). I'm still wondering what could go in the TX slot for the Support line since the US didn't produce that much heavier designs (that I know of) to fill that TX support line gap. Any suggestions would be appreciated!

I found some blueprints for submarines, destroyers, cruisers, and aircraft carriers designed by other countries for the Kuomintang. The National Archives of Taiwan opened these drawings for viewing at the beginning of this year. Submarine: Destroyer: Cruiser: Aircraft carrier: I also found a Thai light cruiser designed by Italy: Taksin-class light cruiser The current Pan-Asian cruiser branch, to be honest, is disappointing. :(

I have played a couple of games to test the new commander skills and I noticed a big difference in my gameplay, the game has turned more "complex" for CVs, for example: Cruiser AA buff went from 10%+ to a maximum 65%+ (Adrenaline Rush), 55% more than before, playing as lower tier is a hell specially when ships are grouped They changed Concealment Expert skill to Stealthy that implies a penalty of 50% aircraft return time, the issue is your planes now will stay 50% more time under AA fire when them are gaining height till scape from AA to fly to your ship, that means you will lose all your returning planes before them reach your CV this nerf is that evident that devs added a secret penalty to Torpedo Armament Engineer undeclared in the skill info lol, you can prove it seeing the torp planes stats when you select that skill Torpedo Armament Engineer, Stealthy, Improved Engine Boost are direct nerfs They removed useful stuff like airplane additional speed from Adrenaline Rush and that -10% detection radius to your planes from Concealment Expert My Opinion: CV is the most hatred class because people do not lend themselves to understand it, people hate their nature role as DDs, cruiser and BBs have their own, but ignore the "reach" cvs really have in the gameplay, them are not really that overpower as they think, dealing Attacks take minimum a minute at least with the possibilty to miss and lose all your "bullets" giving a feeling of "running out of ammo" unless you were Kaga, you can only focus one target once People hate you if you play good or bad, if you did good, enemy team report you, if you don't, your team do, you can't literally or hardly have karma if you're main CV, your teammates blame to you for the entire team mistakes, they ask you do multiple task at same time, giving AA, spotting, dealing dmg, dening capture, giving vision as you were RTS while you're helping one flank, the other get mad, the dumbest players are who more complain to CVs the ones who don't dodge, fight alone away, bad positioning, etc Is not fair this class is getting nerfed constantly for those kind of players for no having common sense, a Yamato can oneshoot you 26km away if you give him broadside, you need to put attention to your map and around for comming threats like planes, "you can't complain you're a CV lmbo" ridiculing one of my big reasons why I play and like the game They don't only affect the gameplay of my favorite CV Shokaku, they did to an entire class, I hardly enjoyed those games (Sorry for my grammar errors)

It was either sheer luck or applied skill that turned this game around. Playing a ranked match on Northern Waters in Silver League we make a comeback from being triple capped.

Hello all, If WG wants to add a Tier 6 Premium Normal Aircraft Carrier for US Navy, USS Wasp would be a good idea. Ship Length - 225.9 meters ~ 226 meters Beam - 33.2 meters Draft - 6.1 meters Speed - 29.5 knots Cost - same as Ark Royal and Erich Loewenhardt (6,300 doubloons) Secondary Armament Eight 127mm guns Firing Range - 4.5km Rate of Fire - 13.33 shots/minute Reload Time - 4.5s HE shell - 127mm HE/HC Mk36 (Same as Ranger) Maximum HE shell Damage - 1,800 AA Defence 1 sixteen 28mm AA guns Average damage per second - between 24 - 34 Firing range - 3 - 4km AA Defence 2 twenty-four 12.7mm Browning Average damage per second - between 90 - 120 Firing Range - 1.2km Maneuverability Top Speed - 29.5 knots Turning radius... Rudder Shift time... Concealment Detectability by Sea Ranger - 14.22km Wasp - 14 - 15km Detectability by Air Ranger - 10.66km Wasp - 11 - 12km Aircraft Compliment Rocket Aircraft - F4U Corsair Rockets in payload - 8 Damage - 2,000 Fire chance - 7% Cruise speed - 130 - 150 Hit Point - 1460 Squadron size - 6, 3 per attack run/ 2 per attack run (Tell me what you rather) Number of Aircraft on deck - 9 Aircraft restoration time - 45 - 60 seconds Torpedo Bombers - TBF Avenger Torpedos in payload - 1 Range - 2.5km Damage - 6,467 Flooding chance - 52% Cruising speed - 110 - 130 Hit points - 1,800 Squadron size - 8, 2 per attack run Number of Aircraft on deck - 12 Aircraft restoration time - 50 - 65 seconds Dive Bombers - SBD Dauntless Bombs in payload - 1 Bomb type - AP(according to Enterprise, If a light cv is added, bomb type would be HE) Maximum damage - 8,000 - 10,000 Cruising speed - 90 - 110 Hit points - 1,890 Squadron Size - 6, 3 per attack run Number of Aircraft on deck - 9 Restoration time - 40 - 55 seconds

Heya, it's ReimuBakarei. You guys might've heard of me from watching a video or two of mine. I am the CV player for the clan -KIA- and I have been playing carriers since pre-rework. Our clan has repeatedly reached Hurricane pretty much every season and CVs being added to clan battles lately has allowed me to participate and teach my clanmates how to play around carriers as well as fight them. I just started a new series that I plan to continue on throughout the future called CV Academy and my goal from this is to help you guys who have any questions or struggles with your CV games. I have been making videos for a while and only started using voice commentary recently so still getting used to that. If you guys are interested, please feel free to check out my content and I hope they are helpful to you guys! Link to the first video of the series and my YouTube channel

Hey I'm back again, grinding up the French cruiser line but I've also decided to try and grind the US CV lines as well, well I don't really have them quite yet but what should I expect from the US CVs? Do they differ from other CVs and do they have different playstyles or something? And also what commander skills would do me well for the whole grind?

So I know that people are going to get angry at me and tell me CV's should be garbadge and be removed, but I'm going to say this anyway Tier 8 carriers, when uptiered to tier 10, are woefully underpowered. There. I said it. Let the angry comments and negativity flow! All kidding aside, I feel that tier 8 carriers are in a good spot at their tier. At tier 8, I feel that most carriers are in a pretty good spot with some even being borderline overpowered. Sure you can have a CV focus you down if you're alone, but usually you won't do a huge amount of damage or get an absurd number of kills (in my experience). There can be exceptions, *cough American CVs cough*, but for the most part, carriers are not as rewarding as surface ships are. However, notice that I said they were fine at tier 8. When these ships are uptiered, it's a nightmare! Now I am not saying that tier 10 ships shredding planes is a bad thing, I've gone full AA builds on my Des memes myself, but it would be fine if there was about 3 or 4 tier 10 ships as you can try and avoid them and wait for ships to isolate themselves from the rest of the pack. But the constant matchmaking I often have is that the entire enemy team is filled to the brim with tier 10. In that situation, the best you can hope for is to maybe get some chip damage on enemies while having all of your aircraft lost at the first half of the battle. In something like the saipan, where your aircraft replenish slowly, you have to rely on getting your armament on target while being sure you will be completely deplaned. That's why I consider it the weakest aircraft carrier in the entire game as of now. In short, I feel that tier 8 carriers are so underpowered for the constant tier 10 matchmaking they are faced with. But I want to keep this positive so I wanted to give a few suggestions to any of the dev's who might be listening. After all, we should try and give feedback to help make things better. My first idea is the most straightforward. Make it harder for the matchmaker to uptier carriers. Heck, maybe make it harder for some other ships to be uptiered like cossack and z-39. Other ships which have heavy problems with being bottom tier. Maybe after a certain time, the matchmaker allows these ships to go into tier 10 battles just like tier 10 double cv games were solved. My second idea was a little bit more risky. Nerfing the AA of tier 10 ships to tier 8 aircraft. Not tier 10 aircraft, tier 8, ok? Good. As I said this is a bit more risky since this could be exploited by unicums and statpadders alike so I am not sure about this option. Finally, my last idea was to give tier 8 carriers planes a little more health. This isn't the best idea either and is pretty much here just for the rule of threes. This could be easily exploited by sealclubbers who could slaughter enemies without fear of taking heavy damage. Anyways, these are my thoughts on this. I may be wrong about some things so I would love feedback from others. I don't want carrier's to be broken or horribly unfun to play as or against. I do want to see this rework succeed. I hope this layed out my, and other's, issues to those who were willing to read this gigantic vomit of text. Have a great day out there wherever you are! (And please don't get me started on AP bombs vs HE bombs. That's a topic for another day)

So why would I hate Carriers after living through RTS and double carriers in the beginning? Within 1 minute my destroyer can loose over half it's health. All AA under tier 8 is useless and puts your ship at the mercy of enemy carriers skill. Being able to take a Des Moines and stop a push while hugging an island, to suddenly loosing 20l health to a midway bomb attack with def AA on.... ... It is real simple, skill gap still exists, but now it's fun for noobs to fly planes. A good CV player dictates a match, a bad one is worse than an afk dd.... .... Dealing with, dodging and being focused is still no fun, but now it takes less skill to do it. Now that we have AP rockets, I'm going to learn to love my carriers again.

So here's an Idea I've been mulling about in my head for a while, that could (hopefully?) solve some issues people have when it comes to carriers. Do take what I say with a grain of salt and I'd love to see some, respectful, insight into this idea. Damage Lean heavier into the DOT damage model, increase fire/flood chance, but lower damage. This one change could take the pressure off some other classes. Speed and detection. so, as a CV, it can be difficult trying to support your team, especially if they split into two flanking columns on opposite sides of the map, an increase in squadron speed would allow the carrier to arrive on the scene faster to assist should the enemy carrier be present. Additionally, and this is the most radical part of the idea, change the spotting mechanics. What I mean by this, is: Reduce surface detection range for all ship classes to above current air spotting, but below current surface spotting, preferably somewhere in the middle. Increase air spotting range to current surface spotting range, with the caveat of being unable to spot a ship outside its normal detection range when firing (so no spotting from an enemy firing, just visual of the shells) and limited plane travel height, (so no climbing mountains, I'd imagine this would function like the barriers of the map, automatically turning the squadron around if it scales a taller mountain) When spotting, have a delay to the reveal of the target, similar to radar, but perhaps a longer duration, ~10-15 seconds maybe. This may not be perfect per se, however the idea is to incentivize CVs to play a far more supportive role, spotting for the team and guarding against enemy carrier spotting/attacks, which ties into the third point; Gameplay Currently Carrier stands as the hardest class to master as well as the most expensive class to play, I'd like to propose one last set of changes. Remove fighters as a consumable, and give the player an option when selecting "Attack Aircraft" , when selecting squadron 1, press either T or Y to select between rocket aircraft, for an anti-ship role, or fighter aircraft, for an anti-air role. Incentivize support play by rewarding EXP and credits for both spotting damage and aircraft damage, maybe not as much as kills, objectives, or raw damage, but enough to make people want to play to and with their team. Conclusion I know I don't have thousands of battles like many others, so my opinion may not be worth much, but I have played the game since beta, and think it would only further help the health of the game to bring in changes such as these, feel free to let me know what you think or maybe provide criticism about something I didn't take into account. See you on the water, fellow commanders.

Hello, FDR has her embargo fall? Richtofen too? I know Richtofen will hit our shores on 08/05/2020... But already? I see ST doing matchs today...

Wargaming are you planning on adding German carriers to WoWs in a line or a premium ship. If anyone else thinks that German carriers may be a good idea to add this ship class to the German tech tree in a premium or a line let's talk about it. I think that adding German CVs will add more diversity to WoWs in gameplay and choices of every player in the game.

This will be a short-ish post, but I’ve really thought about it for quite a while. Surface ships have HE/AP differences in damage, controllable by captains. Subs will be having their torps do different damage based on if they’re homing vs dumbfire, as of current time of posting of course, and again controllable by captains. Aircraft carriers have nothing. So to the devs, and my fellow captains, I offer this idea: implementation of random wind. In World War II, it’s common knowledge that to properly and most efficiently launch your aircraft, you had to be steaming into the wind. So my idea would be to make it so the game assigns a random wind direction, then checks the heading and power setting in comparison to said relative wind, and if it’s say 10-15+\- the proper heading, and a higher power setting (3/4 to full) a proper damage boost is given to the aircraft launching. Further, if it’s the entire wrong direction, the squadron actually gets a slight debuff. I say slight because they’re already damage deficient as it is. This would make it so there’s now a decision to be made in regards to how and when to launch your aircraft. I’d also suggest changing the winds every few minutes as well, as this would negate any major disadvantage that one side would face vs. the other. By adhering to launches into the wind, the carrier captain can finally have a way to modify his rather sad current base damage. So if you like this idea, upvote it so it has a chance to be seen by devs. Help make carrier play great again!

Why do all squadrons fly directly over a target as they drop ordnance? AA is already really effective, to the point where 8 aircraft will be reduced to 2 aircraft in the span of one bombing/torpedoing run, just because the entire squadron is exposed to AA fire the whole time. Carrier gameplay would be great if: Custom formations were allowed. Generating the ability to attack with all bombers at the same time. Or maybe attack from multiple directions simultaneously like in an Anvil formation. Complexity and the requisite skills goes up as a result creating more dynamic gameplay as opposed to what's available right now. Of course with the current MM these carrier players would dominate, so carriers would have to be limited to 1 or 2 per team depending on their resulting potency. Also the number of planes in a squadron could be reduced, AA could be rebalanced, etc... I can't be the first one to suggest this, nor the only one who thinks this way. But based on the fact that I don't really see CV's playing at tiers 8 and 10 makes me think that people get bored of the same un-intensive, low-skill gameplay that CV play currently gives.

Just bought lex yesterday. Does the default plane really that easy to shred ?

Review of the KMS Bismarck Review of the USS Enterprise CV-6 The Review of the HMS Ark Royal! Enjoy! The review review of the IJN Akagi! Enjoy! Here's a quick summary of my current model kit project the IJN Akagi from Hasegawa 1/700 scale. Enjoy!

So I was playing my HMS Hermes just now, and part way through the battle I had a squadron in the air, while the squadron was in the air I opened up the map to set my autopilot to re-position myself, left the map, then set myself up for an attack. Only when I left clicked, NOTHING HAPPENED. I thought no big deal, temporary bug, maybe going to a different squadron will fix it, so I hit the F key and tried again. Except that was only the beginning. I couldn't select another squadron, I could no longer speak in chat, I could open the map but when I clicked on it to set an autopilot nothing happened. I couldn't manually control my CV and drive it somewhere, nothing. The only thing I could do is press the enter key and then the tab key to select which chat I would theoretically want to type in, yet when I wanted to type nothing happened. So next thing was I went to the player support tab on the website (this did result in my CV dying), checked the relevant boxes, but then nothing. Nothing came up to let me type in my issue, there wasn't a submit button, nothing. So I am left to come here and vent it out and maybe get some real help on why this issue occurred, how to keep it from happening again, and maybe figure out why player support is not cooperating with me. Edit: I tabbed out to wait on the battle to end so I could try again and see what happens, and this is what I tabbed back into a few minutes later lol. (Btw at this point in the battle I had been dead for quite some time, so the battle report stating my death you can see is waaaayyyy out of date and is just another issue here lol.) When I have the patience again I'll load up later tonight and play, I had to use my task manager to kill the game as it had completely locked up. I can't wait for my brand new computer to show up tomorrow so I can install this game on an SSD and be done with it all lol.

In my last post on this subject (CV Play) the CV Rework was just coming out, and I said I'd keep an open mind, and try it out for awhile, then see how it went. Well, here's my take pm it, at this point (6 Apr 19): The current Update to Carrier Play has caused quite a few players I know personally, as well as others I chat with during matches to simply refuse further CV Play, and many former CV players have even sold-off their carriers in disgust. I have tried to keep an open mind, hoping further "fixes" will make CV Play viable and enjoyable, but so far, have found it to be neither, and in fact, an extremely annoying WASTE of my precious gaming time, particularly when my Tier VIII CV is pitted vs. Tier IX and X ships—even a single, lone CL wipes out my planes before they can drop a single bomb. The CV aircraft flight model continues to be "jerky" (due to the time compression needed) and overall, CV Play has become increasingly "unrealistic" with each new "fix", causing some players resort to unrealistic "work-arounds" to "game the system" --departing even further from logic and historical practice so as to succeed in the faulty CV Play system. Although with practice, I will no doubt develop the proper technique for accurate aerial attacks-- while losing most or all of my attacking squadron by the end of my 2nd pass-- in its current state, I doubt I will ever find CV Play "enjoyable," much less "rewarding" and thus, will avoid it, keeping a token CV for "Spotting" tasks and little else. I have so far resisted selling-off my last CV in disgust, and have not enjoyed even a single mission yet. HOWEVER— aside from a much-needed toning down the fantastic hyper-lethality of AA in general, with some minor "fixes" using existing game mechanics, some of the more frustrating aspects of Carrier Play for both carrier and surface combatant players might be alleviated, as follows: SUGGESTION #1: British Dive Bombers should be allowed to carry, at minimum, 500-lb/230 kg bombs, and ideally, 1,000-lb/500 kg and heavier bombs, just as they did in real life. No aviation force would ever seek to attack armored warships with piddly little 250-lb General Purpose bombs, though they may have been adequate vs. small craft (E-boats, F-lighters, armed trawlers) and coastal freighters-- 500 lb bombs were the rule vs. smaller combatants, such as frigates and destroyers, and were the minimum vs. armored warships. E.g., in a 1944 attack, Fairey Barracudas attacked the battleship Tirpitz with with 1,600 lb (730 kg) and 500 lb (230 kg) bombs, scoring 14 direct hits, which even so, only put the Tirpitz out of action for 8 weeks. Had they used mere 250-lb bombs to which the game currently limits them, there likely would've been no significant damage whatsoever. [Note that of 42 attacking Barracudas, only ONE was lost to enemy AA-- a far cry from the uber-hyper-collossal lethality of AA as it currently exists, and I'm primarily a surface ship operator, and yet I'm embarrassed by just how unbelievably lethal even my little Leander's AA is-- enemy planes just melt away and do nothing, and I've removed all my AA builds, upgrades, and skills-- they're no longer needed, and I pretty much ignore attacking planes.] SUGGESTION #2: Have the ENTIRE attack aircraft squadron, whether Torpedo, Dive Bomber, or Rocket Aircraft launch its ordnance near-simultaneously with the "Squadron Leader" (the central aircraft on the screen the carrier player "flies"). When the player hits his mouse key to "launch ordnance", remaining aircraft of the flight also launch their ordnance, but with a delay of, say, 0.1 seconds to 5 seconds. This will prevent unrealistic "robotic perfection" in the resulting bomb or torpedo pattern that surface ship players used to complain about. In the same manner, the Squadron Leader's (center aircraft) places its strike at the exact center of the "crosshairs" (or torpedo arc), subject to normal "dispersion", and remaining aircraft of the squadron launch their ordnance subject to dispersion from that point, as well possibly a short time delay, just as a volley of warship shells deviates within its "Maximum Dispersion" ellipse already. This is already included in the game mechanics, I believe, but it should be able to be "improved" via certain "Captain Skills" and/or via ship "Upgrades" (see further below). E.g., for dive bombers, bombs other attacking aircraft would have a similar "dispersion" within the "ellipse" that appears on the aiming diagram the player uses, and torpedoes deviate a few mils left or right (randomly) from the "center" of their assigned point in torpedo squadron formation. I.e., torpedoes would also have a "dispersion" of a few mils, left or right, and in time of drop, for each torpedo the squadron successfully drops. Thus, mass torpedo drops will have an appearance similar to a volley of shells, with each individual torpedo deviating slightly, at random, within the Maximum Dispersion parameters for the ship/squadron, just as in real life, and as surface ship shells do already. This would eliminate the unrealistic (and silly) game mechanism that allows only 1 or 2 bombs/torpedoes to "launch" from an entire flight of 4 to 8 aircraft, while the remaining aircraft of the squadron do nothing but fly along as targets, waiting their turn on the next target pass (which is utterly unrealistic, and NEVER done in combat). But it would also prevent the target ship from being overwhelmed with huge numbers of "un-dodgeable" torpedoes or bombs, as many will certainly miss, unless the attacking player is very lucky (as per warship volleys now). So— having the entire squadron attack at once, but with a slightly varying "time of drop" by say, 0.1 to 5 seconds after the "Leader" aircraft (reduced by certain "Crew Skills", as well instituting a "Maximum Dispersion" variance for torpedoes, etc.), targeted ships won't be overwhelmed by a concentrated "perfect" swarm of torpedoes, especially as they "shoot holes" into the attacking formation, and carrier aircraft will be far less exposed to the (already excessively lethal) ship AA defenses, but make attacks like their historical counterparts did, and with similar results.As a starting point, I suggest that the "mil dispersion" for Torpedo Aircraft be placed at +/-10 mils dispersion for early (Tier IV) carrier planes, and reduced slightly for each carrier tier above that, i.e., +/-8 mils @ Tier VI, 7 mils @ Tier VIII, and +/-6 mils @ Tier X, to reflect improved aiming equipment, torpedoes, aircraft, and training of torpedo pilots as the war progressed. Note that this mil dispersion is from each individual plane's position in the FORMATION, not from the Squadron Leader's aim point, as torpedo planes attacked in an on-line formation, spaced at intervals of 50 to 100 meters or more, ensuring a wide "spread" to increase the possibility of a hit for the squadron as a whole. Note that this also assured that it was virtually impossible for every torpedo, or even most of the torpedoes in the squadron's "volley" to hit the target, as many would automatically miss, depending on the target ship's relative course and subsequent reaction. [A "mil" (short for "milliradian) is a measure of angle, typically used in ballistics, i.e., a minute fraction of a circle. Easy to look up, if you're unfamiliar.]kills such as "Basic Firing Training" and "Advanced Firing Training" could be modified to give air squadrons a tighter Maximum Dispersion pattern, by, say, 2 mils each, as well as a "tighter" ordnance drop time relative to the Squadron Leader, say, by 1 second each. Thus a Tier VIII torpedo squadron with both Basic and Advanced firing training would improve its Maximum Dispersion to +/-6 mils, left or right, and drop their torpedoes within 0.0 to 3 seconds of the Squadron Leader's torpedo. For Dive Bombers, the Maximum Dispersion ellipse (that already exists) could be reduced in a similar manner, by say 5 mils "tighter" for both Basic and Advanced Firing Training, each. Thus, a dive bomber squadron with both skills would have its Maximum Dispersion ellipse reduced by 10 mils width and length. [A "mil" (short for "milliradian") is a measure of angle used in ballistics , surveying, etc. I.e., a tiny fractional "slice", if you will, of a circle. Easy to look up if you're unfamiliar.] "Sight Stabilization" Skill would remain as-is; "Aiming Systems Modification-1" might be extended to include reduced aircraft ordnance Maximum Dispersion as well. Later-war (Tier VIII and X) aircraft should be able to attack from higher up, and at much faster airspeeds, as improved torpedoes obviated the need for very low, very slow torpedo drops to prevent destruction of the torpedo. SUGGESTION #3: Aircraft Spotting of Surface Ships— THE PROBLEM: Aircraft are able to spot an enemy ship, so that other ships can fire upon it too easily and in real time, and yet, the range for aircraft spotting of an enemy ship is so limited that a flight of planes often loses sight of its target between passes. Currently, aircraft not only reveal far too much information to allied players, enabling any enemy ship they spot to be fired upon by all; they are also often taken under intense AA fire without even being able to spot the enemy ship that is firing upon them. DISCUSSION: Carrier aircraft of the period were totally unable to provide more than an enemy ship type and rough location and course to distant stations, and typically were, at most, in radio contact only with their own ship's Combat Information Center, assuming it was even in radio range, and long-range radios of the day were often Morse Code key sets, not voice comms, and the enemy ship type and course reported was typically vague at best, and more than not, inaccurate. So as to go undetected, attack aircraft typically flew on "radio listening silence" until commencing their attack, could not communicate with other ships in real time, and went silent again for their return to their carrier, so as to not reveal its location. SOLUTION: To reflect this and improve Aircraft Spotting of Ships, non-spotter aircraft should be able to see enemy surface ships well before they enter the enemy's AA zone— but unable to pass anything more than that ship's type and location for at least 6-12 seconds afterward. Thus, non-spotter, attack aircraft and fighters should UNABLE to spot targets spot enemy ships in real time as if they were a surface ship—they could only reveal an enemy ship's basic type (not name), and only on the Mini Map. Sighting of surface ships by non-spotter aircraft should provide a player's allies ONLY a "shaded red/dashed red" outline of an enemy ship on the Mini Map ONLY, in exactly the same way an enemy ship obscured by bad weather, or spotted by others beyond one's ship's sighting range is currently shown on the Mini Map. Such "spotting" should be revealed to friendly players only after a slight delay— of say, 6 to 10 seconds, to reflect the time required for an aircraft's "home" ship to pass enemy location data to other friendly ships. Spotting Aircraft Use and aspects would continue unchanged. PROBLEM: Overly Lethal AA's Severe Impact on Game Balance: AA is so lethal now that I pretty much ignore incoming planes unless they're from a Tier X CV. The rest just "evaporate" and even if they hit me, they do about as much damage as an 8-inch shell strike, and torp hits virtually never flood. When operating a CV, I suffer from having my planes wiped out on approach to higher-tier and even sometimes to lower-tier ships. My planes are often "surprised" by hidden enemy ships and downed before they can escapey, even with Engine Boost and calling for Fighters to help absorb attacks. Such hyper-lethal AA guarantees that I can never even make it into the upper half of scorers on my team, and am almost always at or close to the bottom. SOLUTION A: Have dual-purpose guns (e.g., Atlanta's 5" guns; the 105mm dual-purpose guns of Prinz Eugen or Tirpitz; 100mm guns of Akizuki…) either fire upon surface targets, or vs. aerial targets, BUT NOT BOTH at the same time. The player must choose, or let the ship's AI decide— When under aerial attack, it fires all guns vs. attacking aircraft, or at least all guns on the "Priority AA" Side, unless the player chooses otherwise, by clicking on a surface target. Medium and Short-range AA guns, of course, would continue to defend the ship, as usual. SOLUTION B: Halve the Hit Probability of all ships— Really now, Continuous Damage Ph's of 88% and 95% (Tier VIII) and 100% (Tier X) are ridiculous for that era, and even for today. Leave Continuous Damage and Burst Radius Damage as is, but entire squadrons vanishing as they approach a lone Leander CL is just awful. Even if this is done, I predict that another "halving" will be needed in the future to bring CV Play into balance with surface ships. This will work, and be balanced as well, if the changes above are implemented I think. SOLUTION C: Stop listening to whiny surface ship players that complain they "…can never see an enemy CV, and therefore can't fight vs. such an "unseen enemy"— That's the just way it was, and is. A ship fights vs. an enemy CV's AIRCRAFT, as the enemy CV is hundreds of kilometers away, not lurking on a tiny map, trying to avoid surface detection and destruction by nearby enemy surface ships, as in the game. In all history, only three (3!) CVs are recorded as lost to enemy surface gunfire. If anything, CV players should be whining about the tiny maps. But don't think because I say this that I'm a CV fan boy, or even "enthusiast"— as, so far, I hate CV Play, and plan to run a CV only as a last resort for a battle task, as it's become a waste of my precious gaming time, unless things improve. Obviously, all this needs to be play-tested, but such changes, using existing game mechanics, could be easily incorporated to make Carrier Play more rewarding and enjoyable, while at the same time allow players to use Naval History (somewhat) as a guide for their tactics. OK-- Thoughts, anyone? Trolls need not reply-- we already know what you (don't) think...

Here's my box overview and progress report on Tamiya's USS Enterprise CV6 1/700th scale. Hope you enjoy!

I was wondering what ships could be added new to the WOWS game, and I thought of four possible candidates. I want to know what you want out of these four choices. If we get enough votes, maybe we can get Wargaming to add this ship into WOWS! If you have Ideas for other ships you’d like to see in the game, please let me know! Also, please no spamming! I want honest opinions!

I'm pretty new, and I assumed something about planes attacking but now I'm not sure. When planes are attacking my ship, I notice that little airplane figure that I can move around with my mouse. I'm color blind, but I think it's orange. Am I supposed to aim that towards the attacking planes for better chance at shooting them down or what is that for? And is there a button I should push while aiming it or just point it towards the plane? Thanks

Backstory The Soviet Union actually did consider building an aircraft carriers as a part of their plan to rebuild the Navy ever since its succession of the Tsarist Empire. Their first step of building one was using an incomplete Tsarist warships left abandoned during the Russian Civil War, among them was Izmail along with the damaged Poltava (later Mikhail Frunze). Despite numerous assertive efforts were carried out to rebuild the Navy, the Red Army managed to win its influence and hindered their progresses from the moment a Red Army bureaucrats examined their naval budget and “relocated” the funds whatever the budget list was rendered “redundant” and “lucrative”. Conditions were further worsened during the Great Purge and then placed into a complete halt in R&D when the war broke out. Even after the war, the VMF’s efforts to build an aircraft carrier has been kept in the dark, because the Red Army earned too much credits from the Soviet victory over the Nazi Germany with much pride to the point of denouncing the Navy as an irrelevant and unreliable military power to defend the motherland. But contrary to the popular belief of the USSR is always about land power, Stalin actually has a strong desire to reform the VMF to become a great naval power once more from the ruin like the USN, IJN and RN – as an accomplished naval man. Though his priority for the VMF was building his dreamed battleships – Sovetsky Soyuz-class, battlecruisers, cruisers, destroyers and submarines, he did felt for the need of aircraft carrier for the Navy. But because of Stalin’s big love for big guns, along with the Red Army’s strong influence over the regime, his opinions on aircraft carrier was perplexing. Until when WWII ended, Stalin seriously considering the Navy to possess an aircraft carrier. Unfortunately, the efforts of realizing Stalin’s vision of an ocean-going fleets were short-lived when Stalin died, while Khrushchev came into power and forbid the development of aircraft carrier as he viewed them as on offensive asset that went against his regime’s idea of a strong maritime denial defences. Until when Khrushchev stepped down, aircraft carrier development was finally revived in a form of aviation cruiser. In the alternative timeline, if the nation was in better shape with the damage caused by the Revolution wasn’t too severe, if the Navy managed to convince the government without the Army’s meddling, their proposed aircraft carriers would have been realized. Those CVs’ existences would have actually bring a huge impact on the Soviet shipbuilding industries and would greatly change their courses in history, especially the VMF’s naval doctrine would have become different from what they are now in terms of flexibility in naval assets deployment and power projection. And the Navy would have been a whole again – as a blue-water naval power as well as a part of the Big Seven Naval Powers in the Second World War. Speaking of aircraft carriers, they would serve as mobile naval aviation platforms to project the Navy’s Air Force with much greater flexibility and operation range. Furthermore, they can help provide both offensive and defensive air supports as well as coordinate the fleet strategically more efficient as command ships that could supplement ideally with their flagships which are either a battleships, battlecruisers or cruisers, just like other nations. But, the Soviet aircraft carriers would access to attack aircraft/Sturmoviks and medium-sized aircraft to make them unique from the rest alongside with the German counterparts. More details about Soviet carrier-borne aircraft will be explained further in another dedicated thread, because it is the worst part about the Soviet CV line. Later, I would be as well working on the German CV line. For now, let's get down what the Soviet CV line might look like: Tier IV – Mikhail Frunze (CV conversion) "Brest" This is the first refit proposal for the 4thSevastopol/Gangut-class battleship, Frunze when a fire broke out in the boiler rooms, and this was the Soviet VMF’s first attempt to build an aircraft carrier for the Navy, alongside the unfinished lead ship of the Borodino-class battlecruiser, Izmail, at the same time. Designed to carry up to 50 aircraft. It was made when Washington Naval Treaty came into effect all over the world, although the Soviet Union did not ratified itself into the Treaty. This proposal, along with Izmail CV conversion, were simultaneously cancelled when the Red Army hamstrung the naval budget and “relocated” them to elsewhere. However, unlike Izmail, Frunze was saved from scrap for a several years longer when a 2nd refit proposal was made to modernize Frunze into a battlecruiser before she was eventually scrapped when all modernization projects for unfinished Tsarist-era ships were all cancelled in the mid-30s. Tier V – Izmail (CV conversion) "Astrakhan" Beside Frunze, Izmail was the other candidate for an aircraft carrier conversion. Like Akagi and her ill-fated sister Amagi, she was planned to be converted from a “battlecruiser”*. Other than building a flight deck above the deck, other modifications were also made by installing 8 x 1 – 180mm deck guns, removed half of its total number of 130mm casemate guns, and reduced its belt armor to 76mm. A 100mm/102mm dual-purpose guns were considered too. It was designed to carry up to 50 aircraft, while a total of 35 aircraft was proposed as its practical capacity. Her hangar’s dimension, however, remained a mystery. Same can be said for the 1st Frunze refit proposal. Unfortunately, Izmail was eventually sent to scrap in the mid-30s when the Red Army intervened to examine the naval budget and “relocate” them for a bureaucratic, penny-pinching reason. Tier VI – Project 71a "Smolensk" Project 71a was a design proposed to use a hull of Chapayev-class light cruiser to build into a light aircraft carrier, and this was the first design project officially recognized and considered by the R&D department for an aircraft carrier program. It has a unique funnel design feature akin to the one found on a Japanese aircraft carrier like Akagi. It was designed to carry 20 fighters and 10 torpedo-bombers, in total of 30 aircraft as its practical capacity. But due to its unusually large hangar dimension of its size, it can be possible to accommodate more up to 40 aircraft, beyond its designed capacity. Tier VII – Project 71b "Yaroslavl" No design schematics available for it, but assume this to be an enlarged Project 71a. Due to an enlarged overall dimension than its smaller cousin in a large margins, it is not suitable to be a hull upgrade for Project 71a. It can carry more aircraft than Project 71a, as many as 70 in maximum/battle-ready capacity. In terms of practical capacity, it is recommended to operate not more than 60 aircraft. Attack aircraft of Sturmoviks may be considered, but in a limited numbers due to its given dimensional constraints. Tier VIII – Project 72 “Ulyanovsk” Another aircraft carrier design submitted for the naval development program in between the late-30s and mid-40s alongside Project 71. Its design akin to a British counterpart HMS Illustrious. The design can accommodate up to 62 aircraft depending on the selection of bombers for its air groups. With its wide hangar deck, an optional choice of a medium-sized bomber and attack aircraft/Sturmoviks can be given to consider. Wingspan of a medium bomber must not be more than 20m in width. With its wide flight deck, it can launch an air group of medium bombers effectively. Tier IX – Project 69AV “Aleksandr Nevsky / Admiral Lazarev” – Kronshtadt CV conversion The Project 69AV was an aircraft carrier conversion of the incomplete Kronshtadt-class battlecruiser, which was halted in construction when the war broke out. It was proposed after the WWII to complete Kronshtadt’s construction. This was to be the first Soviet official post-war aircraft carrier. It features an unusually wide hangar not only able to accommodate as many as 76 aircraft in a single deck, but also enabling accommodation of larger aircraft without cramming burden. However, due to its “slender” flight deck and smaller elevator, deploying a larger aircraft such as medium bombers might be a little troublesome. Thus, their effective use could be limited which may result in a smaller air group. Tier X – Project Kostromitinova "Admiral Ushakov" Project was named after a naval architect Kostromitinov who has been studying the incomplete German aircraft carrier Graf Zeppelin’s design schematics for years, which explained how its design was largely based on Graf Zeppelin. Technically, it is a scaled-up Graf Zeppelin with denser defensive firepower and much larger aircraft capacity featuring 2-storey hangar decks with three elevators that can accommodate up to 106 aircraft in total with a wide varieties of aircraft - an unrestricted choice of aircraft class ranging from fighter class to a medium-sized carrier aircraft like Tu-91. This would have been the Soviet counterpart of a true fleet aircraft carrier to the American Midway, the Japanese Hakuryuu, the German Europa and the British Malta. This design, however, is possibly the most heavily-armed of all. This is also the most interesting design among the other proposed aircraft carrier designs in the past, but sadly it was the least known and had the least officially recognition, despite being a post-war design when a need of a fleet aircraft carrier for the VMF was seriously considered. Take note, though. Some of the parameters were modified from the original source just to make a few carriers fit in its tiers in terms of density of defensive AA firepower and increasing hangar dimensions to accommodate more aircraft. And remember, I may not be always right in judgement. But this is the appropriate one I can come with chronologically.

My tactics are mostly developed for Ryujo. CVs have changed yet they remain the same. I still see the same mistakes CV players make now as they did before the update. At this point, my salt to this style of gameplay is lessened enough for me to play "normally". CVs were hated before, CVs are still hated now, and CVs will stay hated afterwards. What makes CVs seem more OP now than they were before? Who knows. The CV skillset was high before but it is much higher now. Communication Do your best to communicate but make sure to focus on the task in front of you Scout Scout either your side or the opposite side Find the weakest side you can find Your eyes are the team's eyes Do your best to not sacrifice your planes Move Set your ship's way points according to what your scouts find and where your team goes or does not go Take it slow and follow the safest side As the side becomes safer, raise your speed when possible One of the safest area's is the enemy spawn if you can get there without being seen Closer you are the faster your attack runs can be Recover Sometimes you are better of waiting than going onto another attack run so let your squads recover for as long as you can from zero Defending Do your best to defend your fleet but focus on your attack run When using the fighter consumable, make sure to drop it after the enemy attack run and a circle and a half in front of your allied ship, this way by the time your fighters can defend your allied ship will be in the circle and ready to counter another enemy attack run Should you be attacked by the enemy CV, go to your minimap and set your way point into a different direction so that you can avoid an hit but focus on your objective before taking control of the ship Should you be attacked by the enemy CV, change squads as many times as you can and use the fighter consumable in front of your ship, this will decimate the enemy(s) attack run (total of four fighter squads in the air is possible in short distance) Attack Find and attack the weakest and solo ships you can, do not attack heavy AA groups of ships Capping Be willing to cap Fight There is no use running from something you can't run from, whether that is enemy speed or gun range You have secondary guns, make use of them Most players won't expect a aircraft carrier to fight back Other I get my good days and my bad days Be fast, find the enemy, take a chance, be willing to cap, be willing to fight, miracles can happen Ryujo Skills & Upgrades