Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'carrier'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Contests and Competitions
    • Events
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Programs Corner
    • Support
  • Off Topic
    • Off-Topic
  • Historical Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
  • Player's Section
    • Team Play
    • Player Modifications
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests

Calendars

  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 43 results

  1. So I play quite a bit of carriers. Since 8.5, I realise I am losing a lot more planes than before (which is good for balance, I guess) but I still am able to do respectable damage (In a tier 8, too!), all throughout the match. I do this by pre-dropping until I have 2 possible attack runs. One is to do damage, the other serves as meat shields. However, that only leaves one drop that I can’t afford to mess up, and lots of flying to do afterwards. So what I propose is to make aircraft squadrons more similar to how they were pre-rework. MECHANICS Basically, take every possible aircraft squadron, and make the total amount of attack runs two. This will make runs more worthwhile. The catch is, that planes from the backup squadron don’t replace ones in your attacking squad if they get shot down, so it’s possible your attacks can be “blunted.” For example, take Lexington’s squad of 9 torpedo bombers, shave one off for a total of 8, and have an attacking flight of 4. This change makes it so you have higher potential alpha, and with more planes in an attack run a higher chance of making a strike, but also the possibility of being completely denied (The damage reduction for an attacking flight may need to be tweaked since 1)There are more planes in the flight and 2)AA is only targeting the attack squad). But if you knew that you would probably lose all of the planes before you could even make a strike, why even go for it? From a surface ships’ perspective, it becomes less of a thousand, guaranteed cuts to a hundred, slightly bigger cuts, but now you have the ability to lessen the initial blow. What happens to the backup squadron, then? Well, while you are making a strike, they will be either immune to damage, or have it heavily reduced, and since they don’t fly down to make an attack, you can gain instant control of them after a strike. There will be two versions of this, if you make a successful strike (i.e. you get off your ordinance) you will immediately gain control of the other squadron and be susceptible to incoming fire. If you don’t make a successful strike, (i.e. they all get shot down before you could make the strike) you get a small window of immunity after taking control of the other squad so you can try to get out of the area (recalling using “F” is disabled during this window). This should make slingshotting impossible or not worth it, as the invincibility window only applies if you lose an attacking flight. A little nitpick, but I believe that all planes should be flying at the level at which they attack, TBs will always fly low (but not enough to avoid flak unless on an attack run), rockets will always be medium height, and DBs will always fly high in the sky so they don’t do that “roller coaster” animation that honestly sickens me, but that isn’t extremely important, just something I had to say. BALANS? Obviously, changes will have to be made for certain carriers. You thought 3 AP dive bombers from the Hakuryu were bad? Try 6. Either the Alpha for the ordinance has to be changed, or the total size of the squadron has to be smaller. As for rocket squadrons, there really isn’t a need for them to be bigger. The total number of attacks should be kept to two, but the size of their attacking flights should be the same, because the damage they can output in DDs (especially Enterprise’s) is already really high. As for the planes themselves, it’s tricky. Increasing the HP of the planes will just make being a bottom tier ship fighting them a nightmare, while leaving it the same means the possibility of being completely dumpstered by higher tier AA. So one possible solution I believe may work is increasing armour when under fire from higher tiers, while decreasing against lower tiers, but not enough to make them effectively equal. NATIONAL FLAVOR? Another thing that can make carriers different from another nation’s carrier is the drop pattern of torpedoes. With an increase in the total number dropped, you can get away with unique patterns. Some patterns I suggest is a line pattern for USN CVs (all the planes are in one row), and more of a rectangle for IJN CVs (Several rows of two torpedoes one after another). Or maybe something else based on historical practices or whatever. The premium CVs can get their unique drop patterns they had pre-rework too, provided they have enough torpedoes to launch in a single attack run. TL;DR Basically, take the current squadrons have them only be able to make two total runs while keeping the squadron size the same.
  2. Battlecruiser_Yavuz

    Midway (2019) Teaser Trailer

    In my opinion, it looks passable so far. Is it going to be the most accurate thing possible? I highly doubt it, especially since it is by Roland Emmerich. Would it hopefully be somewhat entertaining and not a colossal mess? I hope so, though I'm personally waiting for reviews to be published before making any firm judgements about seeing it. I hope the best for this film because WW2 naval films are pretty rare anyways. Maybe Wargaming can partner up with these guys, especially since the game already hosts a few of the participants in this battle (most notably Enterprise and Kaga). More advertising can always help bring more players into this fun game. To those who want some more historical context on the Battle of Midway, these videos below are pretty good for that. They're also pretty exciting to boot:
  3. Don't play them. Yeah, funny. I got that one out there for you so you don't have to put it in here. But here's the funny thing, to me at least. I keep reading on this forum and elsewhere about all these "secret tips" on how to play carriers post 0.8.5 and still kick stern. I go to youtube, do a search for carriers and 0.8.5 and get nothing. I searched the web - I get nothing. Surely those of you possessing this dark knowledge must know other carrier players, who are less than you, need these tips and tricks. Heck, videos would be even better. Since I know nothing, I'm hoping the expert carrier players here will share, so the rest of us may survive these days, weeks ahead. tiafyc
  4. With the rework to CV's and AA I find my aircraft recovery time being more and more important. (yes yes I get resource management) My question is this - Is it even worth uprading. I'm looking at the stats- Attack = +86 hp (4.6%) increase /// Speed +9 (4.4%) increase. However.... Restoration is +7 (10.44%) loss Bombers = +97 hp (4.6%) /// Speed +4 (2%) But again... Restoration is +8 (13.1%) loss Torps are better no question but with the other two... less than 100hp is 1/2 a second under the new AA and the speed is negligable but 7 and 8 more seconds per plane over the course of an entire match? Thats a lot of lost time especially with AA being brutally punishing of even minor mistakes. Am I missing something here becasue to me these "upgrades" seem like alot more like downgrades to me. Seriously asking, I really feel like I must be missing something or interpreting something wrong.
  5. Battlecruiser_Yavuz

    Battle of the Treaty Carriers: Wasp vs Ryujo

    Hello! I thought this would be an interesting discussion. As you guys know, there were interwar treaties that influenced the formation of naval units prior to World War II. From looking online, I see that there were two big carriers whose designs were heavily influenced by treaty standards and tonnage: Ryūjō (Japanese: 龍驤 "Prancing Dragon") was a light aircraft carrier built for the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) during the early 1930s. Small and lightly built in an attempt to exploit a loophole in the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922, she proved to be top-heavy and only marginally stable and was back in the shipyard for modifications to address those issues within a year of completion. USS Wasp (CV-7) was a United States Navy aircraft carrier commissioned in 1940 and lost in action in 1942. She was the eighth ship named USS Wasp, and the sole ship of a class built to use up the remaining tonnage allowed to the U.S. for aircraft carriers under the treaties of the time. XX If you guys can find any more carriers that were heavily influenced by the treaties, feel free to put it in the discussion below. XX These are some starting questions. Feel free to debate and add more meat to the answers: -Who do you guys think made the better "budget" carrier: The United States or Japan? -If the two were to meet on the field of battle (in the ocean, among islands, etc), who do you think would win? -If you had to decide to construct carriers within treaty limits (or exploiting loopholes), would you have constructed either of these two carriers? If so, why? If not, what would you have done instead? Thanks!
  6. Lord_Vakko

    (VIDEO) CVs are broken

    Trying my hardest to carry my team to a victory in Ranked. The enemy carrier is all over me wave after wave. When I finally get my chance to kill him at close range, he turns and sails away taking 0 damage.
  7. Korn_Bread

    Deplorable Potatoes

    Hello possible member! Thank you for showing interest in Deplorable Potatoes. We are a causalish that is about more than World of Warships. We are about "family", an online gaming family. We play all sorts of games together not just Warships, this is just the primary one. We don't look at stats other than amount of battles, and we do not require a tier 10...There are almost no requirements to join! What we do require is: 100 Battles minimum (Only stat requirement) Have a Microphone Be Social Be Respectful Be Active Having a microphone and being social is what makes clan play fun and enjoyable. What's the point of being in a clan and playing with people if you can't talk to each other? Being respectful is just a part of being a human being. To be in any clan you have to be active, however, life happens. Just let people know if you have to take a break or if something comes up. If you're interested join our discord and talk to us! 
  8. StevebDancer

    CV Rework needed.

    I will break this down in to B# for bugs, P# for problems, S# for possible solutions.. These are all for CVs, here we go. -B1 CVs and planes do not reduce viability in cyclones. they stay the same.. (you know how to fix this). -B2 CVs can not tell when a ship hits AA consumable.. we just loose our planes.. -S1 a green area shows up for the ships AA range when they hit their AA consumable. -P1 CVs are dropping fighters everywhere, let me explain I had a CV drop a fighter squadron inside my CV's detection but out side my AA just to spot me, they do that for BBs too, and DDs.. 2nd they drop fighters right in front of my squadron or just out side my fighter squadron to kill my fighters or planes I am flying. This is very annoying.. -S1 when a CV player fly's with in 2-3km of a ally ship and is pointed at the ally. they press fighter squadron key and those fighters act like a catapult fighter for that ship. no dropping out side of that. so they can only be dropped on ally ships. If key is pressed outside of that a error message in chat shows up "must be with in 3 km and pointing at ally to use fighter squadron" -S2 fighter squadron can not spot ships.. -P2 CV being up tiered.. as you can tell by your data those CV run out of planes quick and don't do much damage at all. this must be balanced out some how.. -P3 What is the % of ships that are AA spec'ed. this means you do not have good skills that are used instead of AA skills.. please replace give good skills at tier 3 and 4. -P4 What is the purpose of giving a CV better maneuverability for hall upgrade, it is useless. give it something it can use. -S1 when hall is upgraded make CVs detection drop a bit instead of rudder shift. -S2 give CVs 1 extra plane for each type of squadron instead of rudder shift. -S3 slightly faster replenish of planes of each type of squadron, instead of rudder shift. -B3 Sling shot attacks that by pass most of the damage of ships AA.. where they time when to drop 1 set of bomb then use the invalienability to get close to a ship with good AA to drop on them with out loosing planes. -S1 increase time before ship can go back into a attack run after dropping ordinance would fix this.. -S2 take away the Invalienabiiity after the drop.. -P5 Flack clouds do tons of damage to all planes.. and makes complete walls of flack Which you can't avoid.. Flack clouds either land in front or on your planes.. -S1 all flack clouds explode randomly with in their range.. NOT JUST IN FRONT. -S2 shrink flack clouds so they are smaller then they could be easier to dodge and randomly in range of shell.
  9. If you are piloting dive bombers and you look straight up, it will freeze the screen but the battle will continue on. there is no way to get out of this, the only fix is to leave the battle. this has happened to me multiple times and is quite infuriating as you are forced to leave the battle and get slapped with the pink name for a few matches for "leaving early" how to reproduce: get in a carrier, takeoff with a squad of dive bombers, look straight up. THIS IS A GAME BREAKING BUG.
  10. So I was thinking..... What is so balanced about a ship that can attack with impunity from the complete safety of the edge of the map because it has infinite range in the form of planes? I've been in games with 2 cv's where I was killed in the first 4 minutes of the game because both cv's decided to focus me before any other ship on the enemy team even had me in range and I could not retaliate because both ships were sitting so far back that no one could touch them. And lets be honest, AA is a joke. I was in a pack of other ships and the planes were still getting through. So, how to combat this? Give the planes fuel. What I mean by that is simple. The planes have a range that they are able to fly out, make attack runs and then be able to safely return to the carrier. If they go past the point of no return then the planes end up in the ocean having run out of "fuel". This will reward cv players that stay with their team and have a higher risk of their cv taking damage while punishing those cv's that like to stay back on the edge of the map because their planes won't be making it back hence a longer ready time for the next squadron. Every other ship has a range that they can attack at, why shouldn't cv's? And wasn't that historically accurate? Plane ran out of fuel, it ended up in the ocean. Just a thought.
  11. The abuse that CV(carrier) players have to deal with every game, and I do mean EVERY game, from one or more players is just absurd. Sometimes it's just obnoxious but harmless, with players calling you "sky cancer" but sometimes they step way over the line and get personal and very vicious; constantly harassing and heckling players on their own team. Therefore I want the gaming community to band together and do the reasonable and sane thing. Ban all non-CV classes from the game. Some might think it's a bit extreme, but I say the toxicity has stop. Join me in making the game a better experience for everyone, by eliminating non-carrier classes.
  12. Ok, WG I see you are trying to balance CVs but I feel you are not doing a good job.. I think you have to be more extreme. Here are a few ideas and will make a poll on it.. - 1st fighter squadrons dropped off of planes in flight have to be on ships and they follow that ship for their duration. (fixes issue of planes dropping on enemy DDs like radar.) - 2nd take that old skill you had about planes HP changes per tier of enemy CV. this is how it works: - Option 1 - Takes average tier of ships in match and if it is .75 to 1.24 tier more then CV's tier, the planes get a 10% bonus to health. if more then 1.25 higher then CV's tier it get a 18-22% boost to health. for slower speed and higher AA damages by ships. - Option 2 - Takes average tier of all ships in match and take # - CV tier then multiply it by .165. That number would be bonus health to all planes on CV.. if average is below CV's teir no change. - Option 3 - CV planes or ships in game DPS changes to what planes it is shooting at.. so a T7 ship shoot at a T6 would shoot at a penalty. and a T5 ship shooting at a T6 CV would get a boost.. the farther the tiers away from CV the more penalty or boost. this balances the planes and the ships.. - 3rd reduce number of attacks per squadron to 2 from 3 and take 3rd squardon of HP and add it to the planes of the 1st and 2nd.. - 4th reduce spotting distance of DDs by another 20-30% and no fighter spotting except by ship fighter (meaning no dropping fighters on a spot to continue spotting) - 5th This should be a given if planes are over a person concealed in smoke then the undetected planes can still be heard over the smoke. so they know the planes are waiting for the DD.... - 6th when AA consumable it hit the circle that where the drop will happen will double. this is a benefit for ships with AA and also tells CV driver AA was hit and need to back off or not do as much damage and loose more planes... Because we can not tell when AA is hit or not. also the ship should be green as if the ship dropped a fighter.. - 7th when a plane is shot down in a run to drop bombs/ missles/ torps. That plane is NOT replaced... it is a bonus to the ship for shooting down the plane.. so it might be 1 less bomb/ torp/ rocket or more but for someone who put in the captain skill and/or consumable. it would pay off. - 8th when a plane drops its load then view point slides right up to planes flying over head and that fixes slight shot of invulnerability. - 9th AA Flack puffs are shot in the sectors you have it but they need to explode at different ranges NOT ALWAYS IN FRONT.. as they fly through that zone they explode randomly in the front/ middle/ and far part of zone.. so flack clouds will have depth.. including direct hits on planes(like ships have detonations). will make it easier but detonations of planes can happen.. if you have ideas please type them down and work this out..
  13. How to Play CV Rework Changes: Table of Contents: 1. Introduction. The rework is truly upon us. With such a major change coming to the game, there are probably many people who aren't aware what can be done, how to even play, or even know it's happening. To this end, I have gone over what can be done in the rework a lot, testing ideas from people and even theory crafting my own. I have been the carrier and the ship trying to maximize the potential and exploit the game to a high level in these interactions. I don’t have the patience of LWM to show you the tiny details, so instead I will focus on the overall effect of ships vs carrier, and the players behind them, while also discussing the best ways to combat from either side. Take note that I only spent my time in tier 8-10, against as many actual players I could find and I will be using video examples taken from my twitch to explain everything that I will be talking about here (there are vulgarities in the example videos, you have been warned). If you like the effort put into this, and want to see me in action, follow the channel here. https://www.twitch.tv/pulicat Also note that when I say Ships, I mean non-CV ships. 2. The Carrier Experience. In my time playing the CV’s, I actually had a good time. The gameplay lines up much better with what it’s like playing other classes, the controls and events are fluid, and the visuals are great especially with the new perspective. I’ve seen a lot of complaints from players saying it’s boring, that all you do is just attack over and over the same way. Perhaps they are just people who only play the old carriers, but if they aren’t they should take a second look. You control 1 thing, and use concealment, positioning and accuracy to attack the enemy and avoid damage in return, exactly like every other class. However, the difference is in how you attack. Ships in the game simply throw their shells and torps at each other and whittle down the only HP bar they have. Carriers fight in this way, but they are not fought in this way. The CVs have 3 separate HP bars, the one that’s applied to their hull, their plane reserves, and their plane HP. The plane HP is what you fight to fend off an individual attack, and at most a squadron can use ½ or 2/3 of the maximum strikes before plane risk is too high. Every plane that escapes, no matter it’s health, is a full HP plane later, which brings us to the second HP bar, the carriers reserves. This is probably the closest resemblance you can find to the HP of a normal ship going down over time. The more plane kills you can get, the more you are actually hurting the CV, but it’s important to keep in mind that the CV is regenerating the reserve HP by about 1-2 planes per squadron for every attack it sends out. If the CV player is using all their squads, you will want at least 4-6 plane kills done to every squad in order to outpace the regeneration. That is what the actual hull HP of the carrier is doing, a floating factory that once you finally kill, you put it out of commission for good. This gives the CVs a big advantage against another ship. Overall, I think there will be a portion of players that enjoy the new carriers, like DD players as they play very similar now. Both quick and low alpha damage (so they say), weak against group focus. It makes a lot of sense that WG decided to branch the carrier tech tree off of Destroyers when you think about it like that. 3. The Carrier Balance, IJN vs USN. Feels mostly like brains vs brawn. IJN have less but stronger and faster torps, AP bombs and comparatively slow attack craft with less rockets. Their planes are weaker overall, and the AP bombs suffer to this. USN on the other hand focuses on saturating the target with more in their payload in exchange for less damage. Their attack craft are much faster but the bombers much slower, and all squads more durable. It’s the much more DoT (damage over time) focused of the two, but there are methods for both nations to cripple opponents with DoTs. The Tier 10s are a different matter entirely however. Their deck armor makes it so that the only effective squad to ‘cv snipe’ them with is torpedo planes, which can be dodged. Here is an example of 2 tier 10 CV trying to snipe me from the start of the game. I am completely without allied support, fending for myself. After I take a big hit because I was just sitting still not caring, I start actively countering and they can never finish the job. I end up killing 50 planes. Example: Being CV sniped by 2 enemy carriers. Unfortunately, at other tiers, CV snipe is still possible, but at least unlikely. It’ll take them some time since you are so far away, and your summon fighter and plane fighters make it so an enemy squad can only attack you once before being swarmed down, it’s simply not a viable strategy to winning the game unless the kill is confirmed in 2-3 attacks. 4. Basic Carrier Gameplay. It’s fairly straightforward in terms of controls. You can use WASD for movement, and mouse aiming for fine tuning. It will probably take some time to adjust to the mouse aiming, as you will find it doing it automatically while you're just looking around. If you use right click to lock your guns and look around playing a ship, this same thing works for planes. When attacking another class of ship, it's important to use the correct aircraft for the job. When attacking destroyers, Attack Planes have the easiest time. The damage may not always be great, but keep in mind they're not always going to be trying to dodge only you as you are keeping them spotted. Torpedo Bombers are good for dropping into smoke, but a moving DD will be a very tough target. Dive Bombers are the least useful, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to hit. When attacking cruisers, Attack Planes are once again your best choice. They are quick enough to take less damage within enemy AA auras, have reliable damage, and don't care too much about enemy angling. Dive Bombers can be a good choice as well, especially AP bombs. Stationary cruisers camping islands will be a prime target for DBs. Torpedo Bombers are least effective, as they are slow and dodgable for a cruiser. When attacking battleships, literally everything works. They are not maneuverable enough to dodge attacks well, and can be harassed effectively. 4-1. Starting an Attack Run and the Grey Marker. That grey marker is very important, far beyond just where the attack lines up. The grey marker represents the point at which your planes will achieve full accuracy with their aim during the attack run if you do not debuff the accuracy with moving. Example: Grey Marker Represents Full Aim Note where the grey marker is when I start the attack run, and you will see it lines up with where I get full aim. 4-2. Do Not Move When Starting an Attack Run. This is key. Get in as close as possible to your target with the grey marker lined up, make sure your mouse is centered on it and do not WASD or mouse move and you will achieve full aim in the shortest amount of time, leaving you less exposed in your limited attack run movement. If you happen to overshoot with the marker slightly, you can hold slow down (Skey) and this will not affect your aim negatively, but give you more time to aim. This does expose you to flak however. Example: Don't Move While Aiming Also, if there are a lot of ships with AA, it will affect your aim time. 4-3. Don’t Be Greedy. Most people will probably learn over time, but if you go through with a strike and more than half your planes are yellow HP or less, just send them home. It’s honestly not worth crippling your late game potential if you lose your planes by trying to turn around and get another strike. If you are squad shortening, you can always just launch the same squad and get back there. Your games are long in CVs, be patient and think of the long game. 4-4. Do not bother with pre-emptive on-summon fighter drops. They are better saved for BBs that have used DCP. Tell your BBs to either say they used DCP or use a quick command to ask for AA support. If you see bombers flying around, don’t try to drop a fighter on them. It simply does not engage fast enough and will be wasted. They are also good for yourself in the late game, which may become very cv vs cv. The consumables will fill the gaps of the one for your CV. Example: Dropping fighters on enemy planes doesn't work. 4-5. Using Attack Runs Defensively. In certain situations, you may find use to use the attack run to lower your planes closer to the water. You can duck behind certain islands to avoid enemy AA guns, or even from being spotted entirely. It's important to note that currently you can't cancel an attack run in progress, but you aren't usually locked out of attacking again for very long. So it's possible to attack run to sneak in, exit attack run for your approach, and then start the actual attack run. This was requested to be added in by @MaliceA4Thought. 5. Advanced Carrier Techniques. This is the section I believe most people will be interested in. Over my time playing I tried existing strategies I heard of and even came up with a couple on my own that have potential to be really strong options. 5-1. Hakuryu Stealth Torping and Sequential Dropping. Everyone probably knows about this one by now. With the 8km torps and full conceal, you are able to drop torpedoes 7km away from a target, and turn away holding the S key to never be spotted by him. Though the torps are slow, people still land torpedoes with ships like the Sims or Black. This will be very potent against ships that like to hug islands, bow tanking or are otherwise relatively immobile. Sequential drops are very potent too, as the torps are extremely stealthy. Once you get good at aiming the lead and predicting opponent reaction, you will hit them. And with the spacing on the torps, you may be able to reapply flood after they DCPed one in the first wave, all without losing a single torp bomber. Examples: Stealth Torping. Sequential Dropping 5-2. Squad Shortening. This is one of mine, as far as I know nobody has tried this or talked about it at all. The idea is when you launch a fresh squadron, you immediately drop a payload to send the planes back home. This is best used in 2 situations. At the start of the game, you can shorten your attack plane scouts to half so it’s easier to dodge in the long-range flak bubbles, and to make sure you can launch a full squad of the same type right behind landing the ones you’re on. The applications are limited because, even though you are able to dodge flak easier, continuous AA damage will have less planes to work over. The effect of continuous is best explained in this thread here made by @Edgecaseand @GoldPile. You might be able to get more use out of Last Gasp this way too. 5-3. Forcing DCP. As we all know, a flood is usually an instant DCP for any ship that suffers one. Using the above trick to fly around with 2 torp strikes instead of 3 and having a full squad at home, you can try to dive through heavier AA to get one torp strike on a BB and fly away with Last Gasp. If you flood that BB, he’s going to have to DCP it. Land the rest of your weakened torp planes and launch a full hp squad to do the same thing again. It is nearly impossible to stop a full HP squadron from coming in and attacking once, but it is very possible to stop a second strike from the same group. This method gets around that limitation, and can guarantee anywhere from 30-40s of uninterrupted flood damage, plus two torp plane strikes worth of damage on a BB. And that’s assuming they’re running premium DCP with max cooldown reduction. On top of that, you will barely lose any torp planes. Very viable but the window is short and you must be able to launch enough torp planes to field nearly 2 full squads at one time. Take care of your reserves. Example: DCP Forcing. I have taken the flooding mechanic changes into account for this technique, and have determined it will still be effective and potentially more. 5-4. Abusing Flak Spawns (Plinko Flak). Flak is the deadliest thing to you, obviously, and sometimes the flak walls spawn too long for you to go around. A lot of the time I see this complaint, the planes are flying right at their target, so the flak wall spawns between you and the target forcing you to fly around and mess up your attack run. One thing to note is that the flak spawns in front of you, not always between you and the target. This can be abused, and with the name Plinko you probably already understand. When approaching a target, use boost to go full speed at an angle to the target ship. When the inevitable flak wall spawns, release boost, turn to another angle and boost again as if you were just rolling off the wall to the side. You can adjust how you want to plinko the flak based on how your opponent is maneuvering against you, but it is an extremely reliable way to not only mitigate flak damage, but potentially remove it entirely, including defensive fire. Examples: Plinko ex.1 Plinko ex.2 Plinko ex.3 6. The Ship Experience. The workload here has gone up. Now everything you knew about the game must be considered with carriers. No longer will CVs appear once every 5 or 10 games. It will be common to see at least 1v1, and probably a lot of 2v2 coming right out of the patch, especially with a new carrier line coming out in 0.8.1. Unfortunately most of my experience fighting other ships with carriers around was against bots in PTS. Even with that limited experience, I don't think fighting carriers will be much different as it is with RTS CVs. It can be slightly satisfying when you see the big red damage numbers done to planes, but after a while it became a bit hollow. The CV is still just fighting against a mechanic, not against me directly. As much as I really wish for direct control over my AA so that it's really ME he is fighting, I think this would be too much for a good amount of players to handle without suffering. Now before you start saying that's crazy talk, people should either be able to handle it or be punished, I would agree with you IF there was skill based matchmaking. At least then, the players with lower capabilities would fight people of similar skill only, and what they would or wouldn't be able to do wouldn't be as unfair. I don't find it unreasonable to give some concessions to those players since they are forced to play against really good players. Back on topic to Automated AA however, having the entire interaction with another class be automated is fairly frustrating at times. I can think of a couple unobtrusive ways where a player can have more interaction with the aircraft, and that will be below where I suggest mechanic additions. Overall, carriers and ships interact the same way, it will just be much more frequent now since they will appear in more games. There will be some system shock at first, and I have no doubt that gameplay will settle and be balanced around it over time. Whether I want to be a ship in that gameplay however remains to be seen, and right now it's sitting at a no. 7. Defending Yourself from Airstrikes. Stay near ships with defensive fire if you don’t have one, don’t get engaged by planes when you can’t maneuver much, and be very careful with your DCP. At the start of 0.8.0, a lot of players won’t be experienced yet and you may not notice their effect all that much. They will probably lose a lot of planes doing things they shouldn’t, and be out of reserves for late game. Don’t let that fool you, good carriers will be deadly as ever, and nothing but the longest flak walls, highest continuous damage and most bizarre maneuvering will stop them. Using your defensive fire or catapult planes should not always be used just because you have them active. Saving them for more dangerous squad types, or protecting yourself from follow up attacks while your DCP is down would be better than trying to defensive fire rocket planes as soon as you see them. When Attack Planes are coming for you, their main goal is your soft spots. The biggest one being your superstructure. To describe how they launch rockets, I will use Shokaku as an example. They launch rockets within their elliptical as 2, and then 8, followed by the last 2 in a straight line. This means that broadsiding the incoming attack planes is exactly what they want you to do. Try to show the least amount of profile possible while still keeping them in your sector to fight against them the best. With Torpedo planes, the same can be applied. Show the least amount of profile as possible while maintaining your sector on them. You also want to try to turn towards them if you can, because this will reduce the amount of time the torpedoes are around you and reducing your movement options. If you turn away, it sets up potential for the enemy cv to cross drop you, since torpedoes move slower and they'll box you in longer. With Dive bombers, their preferred angle is with you pointing directly toward or away from them. At least the tech tree ones. Give them as much broadside as possible. 7-1 Beating CVs with the Numbers. What it comes down to now is minimizing the enemy CVs effect on you and the game as much as possible. Any amount of time waste and plane reserve hits you can cause to the enemy are victories. Even if they are small, they all add up, and wasting their time is good since they are focused on damage over time. Remember, even though there will be more players in carriers that you will see often, there will be a balance between good and bad ones, so it may not always be so bad fighting against a carrier. 7-2 DDs vs Carriers. Destroyers will still have to be careful early game, because attack planes can still hurt even if they don't delete you. Try to take a more cautious approach to caps, so as not to be spotted in the open by planes and be attacked by both them and enemy ships. Watch out for torpedo planes assisting in cross dropping your smoke. 7-3 Early Sector Switching. When under attack by a squadron, and you know they will pass over to your other side, try to learn the timing of your sector switch delay to line it up so it switches right when they pass over. This will maximize your sector, and there is no AA loss in switching. It will take some time to get it right, but every little bit will help. 7-4 The Downtier Experience. Be really careful when you are bottom tier against a CV as well. It's really hard to defend yourself alone against strong planes, almost to the point where it seems unfair. I hope WG puts more focus onto this area of balance. The downtier experience To judge whether or not you were successful in fighting off a plane attack, a good rule of thumb would be expecting 3 plane kills and upwards to even have a noticeable effect on his reserves per attack. If the enemy carrier is smart though, he will just land his planes before he loses too much. The best you can expect most of the time is to make sure you only get attacked once by the entire squadron, and try to mitigate the damage from that 1 attack as best you can. 8. Possible Mechanic Additions. One thing that is really strong right now is using the land command for your squadron right after an attack. Your planes disappear so quickly that the enemy can’t really shoot you down. Something that would be good is adding a similar effect of strafing out of a fighter lock. Losing a plane doing so, or taking a lot of damage from AA if you use the land command inside short or medium range AA. This would at least give the ships more of a chance to destroy planes and some punishment or risk to pulling the land maneuver (flying high into the sky sharply) right over enemy AA. I also think that since fires on CV only last 5s, the DCP auto consumable should never activate for them. A player would never use it for that, even if they somehow happened to have 4 fires going, that would not come close to the damage of a normal fire on anything else. Even if there are players that would want the auto use to activate for a single fire, it would just do them more harm than good. In respect to the lack of interaction for ships in fighting aircraft, one thing that would be doable is re-implement ctrl-click aircraft, and have a delay of 3-4 seconds between each time you are able to click to add in a couple bonus ticks of continuous damage. Nothing that will disrupt the balance, but at least add some player action = impact. Another thing that could help with that would be to add a fourth attack mode, being AA. Picture the mode you get for torpedoes, a large cone representing the limits of your aim, and a smaller one showing you where you are aiming within that cone. The smaller cone would increase the damage for any aircraft that are inside it (above it), and the large aim limits would just be your AA auras. This would not only be a better and more interactive system than what I just mentioned above, but this would also be better than the sector system. The smaller aim cone could be 1/4 or even 1/6 of your AA aura, like a slice of pie. You could lock it in place with the key used to activate the sector system now, so you could do other things, or take direct control during an attack to maximize the damage you do to the planes. You yourself fighting a CV while it is attacking you. This isn't quite as far as real control over your AA, but it would line up well with existing gameplay and reduce the automated RNG of your AA that is your entire interaction with another class. By @NCC81701, Have you thought about viability to adding manual control to altitude and AA similar to subs? Say for High altitude drop is less accurate but takes less damage from Short/Mid AA but low altitude attack is more accurate but take more damage from Short/Mid AA. The player ship then have to judge/decide the altitude level of the large caliber AA/flack burst. if it's at the correct altitude it does bonus damage. Cooldown will be present for changing the altitude of both planes and large caliber AA of course. 9. General Thoughts. Overall, I enjoyed my experience playing CVs, the same cannot be said for playing ships against them however. I feel that the gameplay of WoWs is much more strategic and enjoyable without CVs in random battles, and a lot of that is lost with them. When CVs are around, they dominate the no-mans land, and nothing can really contest this. Even if the CV can no longer one shot you, it doesn't change the environment they cause. This will really be felt if WG puts in 2v2 CV matches. If WG happens to read this, I really think you should limit it to 1v1 for at least 0.8.0, and then evaluate the effect from live to consider if upping the amount for 0.8.1 is warranted. I know this will impact the amount of people trying to play CV in 0.8.0 and the queue times, but 2v2 would really put negative opinions in people's minds as they experience it as ships, no matter how balanced you might think it is. Being attacked by a carrier is not something people will enjoy, and doubling that occurrence is risky for tolerance. 10. Thank You. I hope this Guide/Opinion piece was useful to you. I put a lot of work into it over the course of the week, and tried to make it as unbiased and fair as possible. I ask that you share this with people in the game so they too can get a handle on this new gameplay, and if you have questions or want to counterpoint what I’m saying, I’m always glad to respond. You can either comment to this thread or talk to me in Twitch. Also, feel free to argue points made here or by other people commenting, but keep it civil so this thread remains unlocked and open for discussion. Special Thanks to: @HellaCopterRescue for putting up with my long rants and playing Devil’s Advocate, along with helping me test things for video. This guide would not be what it is without his help. @Kousatsu for assistance behind the scenes ensuring this guide was well structured. @Carrier_Hornet for playing CV for me so I could play ships in PTS and guarantee carrier games. @Warlord78 and @Ponymagistrate for reviewing this guide among other things.
  14. Today I started playing T4 CV Langley and still trying to figure it out. After I launch one torp squad and if I press F again, they say they are returning!!? What key do I press to launch multiple torp squads (or any other squad) ? Help!
  15. 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)
  16. One of the often-overlooked changes in the recent-ish patches was the addition of a 6s a relay delay to radar, where anything spotted on radar takes 6s to be lit up to allies to shoot it. Meanwhile, one of the big common complaints with CVs is their ability to spot things easily and effectively, particularly DDs, which rely on stealth instead of health (CV complaint threads are easily more common than the next several most common threads, combined). The extension of this spotting delay to anything planes spot seems to be a logical step. As far as gameplay is concerned, this would give ships more time to react to being spotted, perhaps hiding a citadel a bit better, getting a chance to smoke up, or finding cover before fire starts pouring in. It would also mean the window for firing on targets during the opening spotting run will be less usable, since the CV would actually have to stay for a bit to get spotting damage. Any thoughts?
  17. Please keep in mind that this article is a preview of an upcoming release. All of the statistics here reflect the ship as it was presented during the testing period and are subject to change. A special thanks to Wargaming (specifically NikoPower) for allowing me to play-test this vessel. -EDIT:11.04.2016 - True to the disclaimer above, the Saipan's statistics changed prior to release and after publishing this review. Changes will be reflected in a follow up post, but are listed in the spoiler at the end of the article. The following is aimed at new(ish) players looking to find a little more information about various ships from events, for premium currency or for real-world cash. The goal is to allow players to make an educated decision before parting with their time and money and to find premium vessels that suit their chosen style of play, whether that is competitive, cooperative, or simply for fun. The idea here is to elabourate on information not commonly available through reading statistics and provide some (heavily) biased anecdotal evidence to encourage or dissuade you from making your purchase. The usual disclaimers apply: everyone knows the Matchmaker clearly loves me because I spend money so that's why I occasionally get really good games, not because I have any particular skills of note. Other articles in this series: Available Ships: Atlanta, Atago, Aurora, Ishizuchi, Murmansk Pre Order Ships: Sims, Yubari, Gremyashchy Limited Release Ships: Tirpitz, Fujin, Campbeltown, Warspite, Imperator Nikolai I, Mikhail Kutuzov, Blyskawica, Anshan,Lo Yang, Saipan Gift & Reward Ships: Albany, Arkansas, Iwaki,Tachibana, Kamikaze, Diana, Emden, Marblehead Arpeggio of Blue Steel Ships: Kongo, Myoko Condensed Reading: Mouse's Quick Summary of Premium Ships Without further ado: The United States Navy Light Aircraft Carrier USS Saipan Quick Summary: Equipped with tier 9 aircraft but with only 2/3s the capacity of other Tier 7 CVs. Squadron sizes are odd, with tiny fighter and torpedo attack formations yet an enormous dive bomber squadron. Cost: Went on sale on April 12th for $42.99 including a port slot. One of the first ships in recent memory to be sold with the option of buying her without a bundle. PROs Comes with two load-out options, 3-0-1 and 2-2-0; the only USN CV with the option for two torpedo squadrons. Tier 9 Aircraft with high top speed (178 knots / 155 knots) SKYRAIDERS! Also Corsairs. But AMG, SKYRAIDERS! Massive dive bomber squadron of 8 planes and armed with 1000lb bombs Fast rearm on fighter (20s) and torpedo plane (22s) Good AA DPS. CONs Small hangar capacity of 48 aircraft. Painfully long rearm time for dive bombers (59s) Small fighter & torpedo squadrons. Fighters bleed ammo very quickly. Air Superiority load out is very poorly optimized. No secondaries at all -- completely defenseless at close range against surface ships. AA Armament is short-ranged (2.0km to 3.5km) and limited to personal defense. The long awaited USS Saipan, the first premium Aircraft Carrier in World of Warships. Our resident grumpy cat, Lert will be joining me to provide his insights on the Saipan. This will be a first for these Premium Ship Reviews, but not our first collaborative effort. Hopefully this will provide a different perspective and a bit more information for those looking for a well rounded opinion in regards to this vessel. Like with our Dmitri Donskoi Preview, Lert will have his own boxes (in italics) where he provides commentary on the individual characteristics of the ship before offering his conclusions and verdict. Would I Recommend? Short answer: If you love carriers, yes. If you don't, no. If you don't like carrier game play or if you haven't put a lot of time into carriers, the Saipan is probably not for you. She's a unique ship -- completely intended to be a departure from standard USN CV game play. The novelty alone may be worthwhile, never mind the bonus of finally having a decent ship with which to train your Carrier Captains and take advantage of the skills you've selected so far. For collectors, she's pretty much a must have. She's the first premium CV and her unique squadrons are just icing on the cake. I mean, I'm nerding out because it has one of my favourite planes. Like I said, the only people who will not enjoy this are those that don't like CV game play. And even for someone like myself, I must admit I've warmed up considerably after playing the Saipan and would probably enjoy taking her out every now and then if I acquired her. The Lert Box Do you really need an american CV premie, yeah. Saipan is the only choice. Do you want the ship for historical reasons, sure. She's certainly an interesting premium. Do you want a competitive ship to help tilt the fate of battles in your team's favor? No. Saipan isn't what you're looking for. Maybe someone with more experience in carrier play than me can make her shine, but for a CV noob like me, Saipan isn't the ship that makes me want to play flattops. My wallet will remain closed. It's disappointing, but not entirely unexpected, that the Air Superiority load-out for the Saipan should be so lackluster, performance wise. It sure looks cool though. Recommended Modules: As a tier 7 CV, the Saipan has four module upgrade slots. Air Groups Modification 1 is the best choice for the first slot. This will increase your aircraft gunnery by 10% and is pretty much a no-brainer for most CV Captains. For your second slot, you have a choice based on how you want to proceed. Air Groups Modification 2 will increase your fighter's hit points up to 2407 from 2006 (compared to 1506hp for the Hellcat and 1210 for the A6M5 Zero) and is probably the better choice. Flight Control Modification 1 is nice, but the lightning quick rearm of both fighter and torpedo plane squadrons makes it less optimal than with other USN CVs. Damage Control Modification 1 is your best choice for the third slot -- anything to help keep those fires down. Though generally speaking, if you're taking damage, you're in a lot of trouble anyway and nothing from this third slot is really going to help you much! I opted for Damage Control Modification 2 on the off chance I found myself twice-ablaze. My experience has taught me this nice but it's seldom going to save you. Steering Gears Modification 2 would probably be the nicer choice, dropping her rudder shift from 15.9s to 12.8s. It will really be up to personal preference here. Recommended Consumables: The Saipan can only mount a single consumable, a Damage Control Party. It shouldn't be necessary to upgrade this to the premium version. Her camouflage is the standard you would expect for a tier 7 premium ship, providing a 50% bonus to experience along with the disruption and concealment benefits. Recommended Captain Skills: The Saipan does not benefit much from anti-aircraft or secondary battery skills (having poor range on the former and none of the latter). So it's best to keep with a more orthodox CV build and focus on skills that will increase the performance of your planes. From tier 1, Situational Awareness is best. It will let you know when enemy planes are inbound or when you're about to die to a destroyer that's spotting you. If you intend to use the Air Superiority Build, then you may also enjoy Expert Rear Gunners which will turn your Skyraider squadron into a brutal thug of a formation if your opponents try to shoot it down normally instead of strafing. From tier 2, Torpedo Armament Expertise will reduce the service time of your torpedo bombers down to 16 seconds when combined with the tier 4 Aircraft Servicing Expert (which is insane). From tier 3, reach for Torpedo Acceleration. Yes, even if you intend to largely use the Air Superiority build. Dogfighting Expert never benefits the Saipan because her aircraft will always be same-tier or higher than any other planes she encounters. From tier 4, Aircraft Servicing Expert is your first port of call. 16s torpedo plane rearming! It's nuts. From tier 5, Air Supremacy is your best choice. It makes the Air Superiority build silly (9 bombers!) and it makes your fighter squadrons terrifying for any Hiryu opposite you.
  18. I just wanted to share a screenshot taken from a recent game I played, highlight something that a good CV player should be doing every game, and talk a little bit about what effect that can have on the battle: What you're looking at above is a perfect example of good opening carrier play--just over 1 minute into the battle, my team has a complete picture of where every ship on the enemy team (save their CV) is, and where they are heading. As a destroyer player in particular, this can be a godsend--what I know from this early sweep is that the only enemy radar ship (a Seattle) is not going to have any impact on the C cap, allowing me to play the early push much more aggressively than I might have otherwise. Beyond that, it also told our own Seattle that only one BB was even oriented on C (their North Carolina), so that as long as he could hug the islands which shielded him from fire coming from the center of the map westward, he was also okay to aggressively push into C with me, and let the two friendly battleships behind us know that they could relatively safely turn directly into the cap (and not take their guns out of the battle for several minutes while sailing around the islands in C9-10). The result? We were able to quickly capture C, killing their Harugumo in the process, and just as quickly re-orient toward B. The opposing CV, meanwhile, saw our 3-ship push toward A and immediately launched a rocket attack on our GK there--they had no idea where either of our destroyers were until I opened up on the Harugumo while our Harekaze was capping B. Heck, they had no picture of any of our deployments beyond those ships which spawned near A. The resulting fight over B was intense, but with their team already down a destroyer and trailing in points, it put all the pressure on their side to stop the ticks as quickly as possible--they weren't able to, and this became a relatively easy victory. In large part because our carrier played for the team first, then went after his own damage total. It's the same tactic you see at the beginning of every King of the Sea match, and it's just as effective in random battles. Shout out to @SirOverlord for doing things right, and providing a textbook example of what any CV player should be striving toward.
  19. I get why the hotfix was needed. There were many issues, including the Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free -F Key and a few overpowered carriers. Now, things have gone in the opposite direction. There was obviously a change to the "F" key. Planes are no longer invulnerable. (Which is good!). However -- in most cases -- *all* planes are shot down before they can get out of range. Medium range and short-range flak *melts* planes. There is no way to dodge. Between this and #1 (above), most sorties are suicide missions. Torpedos are nerfed, also. I went from a semi-narrow spread to a wide spread. ...no matter what I did. Now, I'm lucky to get *one* torpedo hit per pass, whereas my Tier 6 carriers could at least get two torpedo hits pre-hotfix. Maybe the carriers were too powerful before, now they are too weak. I feel like I was *finally* getting the hang of everything...but now I can't really play CVs because the planes melt away. I get it...things needed to be balanced. But again...suicide missions do not = balance. My last game, I lost 65 aircraft and only had 23,000 damage to show for it. The games before that, I lost 59 planes and had 5k damage, and before that, lost 47 planes and got 20k damage. In all cases, most of the damage was done with rockets. Torpedo planes can't hit much with the ultra-wide spread. Dive bombers don't survive the AA flak long enough to drop. It's....frustrating. I'm going back to playing other ships for a while. I understand that CVs -- and other ships -- needed to be balanced. And maybe things will be better at the higher tiers. However, I'm not going to get there if I have to continually endure the games that I've just played. </end rant> <edit> Even the planes that complete an attack are shot down now. Nothing survives.
  20. Good day my fellow Captains. Once again it is my pleasure to present to you another entry into my ONNI Recognition Manual. This time around I decided to feature the Tier VIII Premium Carrier, HMS Indomitable (92). Having done a BB and a CB for the first 2 entries I wanted to test my developing skills by having a go at drawing a CV. I have tweaked the format a bit further this time around as well. Compliments to everyones continued input I do believe this is the best looking work yet. And as always, further input is more than welcome. For those curious on the delay of this entry. I wont lie, my OCD flared up quite often in this course of this production. And got me hosed when I was making sections to be symmetrical like a numpty haha That, and I went out of my way to design a set of Sea Hornets to sit on her deck. Just didn't feel correct having a Carrier without Planes sitting on her deck. Besides, I find they give a much needed sense of scale. Adding to the perspective. As an aside, a fact that has been pointed out time and again to me when I had teased Indomitable prior; For those who enjoy Azur Lane, this is the closest ship you have to Lusty in WoWs. *Heavy sigh And as Prim calls her, 'busty lusty' due to the larger hangar space and air wing. Now! For a bit of fluff: -SUPPLEMENTAL- LAID DOWN: 10 NOVEMBER 1937 LAUNCHED: 26 MARCH 1940 SISTERS IN CLASS: ILLUSTRIOUS, FORMIDABLE, VICTORIOUS ORIGINAL AIRCRAFT COMPLEMENT: 22 HAWKER SEA HURRICANE MKIIC, 12 MARTLET MKII(F4F GRUMMAN WILDCAT), 16 FAIREY ALBACORE CREW COMPLEMENT: 1,392 DISTINGUISHING FEATURES: ASYMMETRICAL TEAR DROP PLAN SMOKESTACK AND ISLAND 2 PAIRS OF PILL BOX DUAL PURPOSE SECONDARY BATTERY MOUNTS ON EACH BOW AND QUARTER DESIGNED TO OPERATE 48 AIRCRAFT COMPARED TO HER SISTER SHIPS 36 HAS A RAISED FLIGHT DECK COMPARED TO HER SISTERS. FACILITATING AN ADDITIONAL HANGAR PLACED ABOVE THE ORIGINAL.
  21. hello, sailors I saw we got some free Florins with air supplies and with Daily missions but... ....Without buy any crates in the premium shop, is possible farm 2500 florins to get the bundle Nº3 only with missions inside game? Thx you guys
  22. I have been hearing constant bemoaning on how "Carriers can't be ignored now" and "Carriers are broken", I thought I would finally toss my thoughts into the shark tank. Since the beginning of the game ,you NEEDED to deal with Battleships. Since the beginning of the game, you NEEDED to deal with Destroyers. Since the beginning of the game, you NEEDED to deal with Cruisers. Just so, Carriers NEED to be dealt with and not ignored. Every ship-class should be a persistent threat until it's eliminated. The only way you dealt with Battleships, Destroyers, and Cruisers is to remain hidden or remove the threat. To this affect, the solution to Carrier issues lie in their power projection and ability to reveal the enemy. My solution to the issues plaguing the CV community,lovers and haters alike, are as follows: Reduce the speed of aircraft (realism-killer) -OR- Limit the range of the aircraft by means of fuel; Adding some sort of leash to aircraft, or reducing their mobility, would help reign in their power projection. I personally lean towards the latter. Re-balance AA with Fleet Cooperation in mind. Players who stick together, as in the past, were always protected from, if not immune to, carriers. Meanwhile, Players who went out on their own got sunk. This is a RULE of the game, and should be a constant that is balanced around(with exceptions for destroyers, discussed later). In my opinion, they could incorporate a slightly unrealistic (gasp) mechanic into the game: Force multipliers. Reduce the base effectiveness of all AA, but scale it based on nearby ships; For every allied ship within 8km, increase their AA effectiveness by some sort of constant (eg. 10% DPS) and increase that bonus every 1km closer the allies are, up to 3km (eg. +50% DPS). Add a HARRIED mechanic to aircraft; For every ship within range / firing on a squadron, there should be a harried effect (eg. 20%/2%/5% reduced rate of aiming and 20%/2%/10% increased movement-induced aim disruption, per ship for Torpedo Bombers/Dive Bombers/Attack Craft). Dive Bombers being affected less, Torp Bombers being affected more, and Attack Aircraft being somewhere in the middle, because [insert rantings about speed/altitude/angle of attack/directions of freedom to evade/shock-value of flying into-vs-over a wall of bullets]. This value could vary based on the ship type. This value could possibly scale with time (10%/1%/.5% at start, increasing per second under attack to some max value). Increase torpedo range to 8-10km. If torpedo bombers are going to be completely shut down by teamwork, we could at least let them hold onto their fleet disruption capabilities. That wave of 4 torpedoes might be slow, spread out, and dropped at almost 10km out with instant visibility, but you can't completely ignore it. Make aerial-torpedoes always visible. I'm sorry, but if you see the torpedo plane, you are going to be watching for the torpedo. It's no secret when they drop it, nor what angle they are coming from... unlike destroyers. This will also help offset that added range. And again, if you are out on your own, you should make a Carriers day. RIP. ... Unless you are a Destroyer. In consideration of their Lone-wolf roles, I offer the below changes: Reduce the spotting range of aircraft; Maybe considering earlier example on force multipliers: Larger Ships/groups of ships should negatively impact your detection range, while smaller ships / lone wolves should be damn near impossible to spot. Finally, consider adding a delay to when targets, detected by aircraft, are relayed to allies. Planes didn't have the best radio communication back then, if any. You could even go as far as to only update the mini-map, but not show visually, the detected ships position. Just my two cents from someone who has loved this game since Alpha, yet is constantly watching heavy handed changes chase away the friends I play with.
  23. Here’s how you balance carriers. Carrier squads are supposed to get multiple attacks in. If AA on ships would prevent you from doing so and only allowed two or even one attack otherwise you will start taking serious losses, then AA is already doing its job and reducing carriers down to only a third of how effective they could be. And those carriers who challenge the AA and go for more attacks than the AA would allow will now suffer serious consequences and lose too many planes which will slow down future attacks. This is how the game can give balance with AA and carriers. Carriers can still be useful at least getting one attack when the strongest AA is present and AA can prove useful denying them multiple attacks or start suffering losses that will make it not worth it To instead make it so that you cannot even attack once without losing many planes and forcing you to not attack at all as you know you’ll just lose most of your planes is now taking it too far and gives AA too much power and starts to make carriers useless since now often they wouldn’t be able to attack at all. For a game that’s of course unacceptable Against the better AA, 0.8.0 allowed carriers to attack once and you were forced to not even consider attacking 2 or 3 times. That’s a win for the defenders. But, the AA was so strong that even if you tried to manually fly away you’d still suffer too many losses so you were forced to use recall. To change recall to force you to lose your planes on the retreat makes it so AA can stop you from doing any attacks, which is where it breaks the game. So the balance is: at best AA can only wipe 1 or 2 planes if you attack once and recall. It keeps CVs playable while rewarding those with the strongest AA levels by them forcing carriers to only attack once, recall, not stick around to scout Implement this however you wish, but the recall allowing planes to now fly evasively and now take very little if any damage was one way you pulled it off. If attacking only once (it’s critical carriers are allowed to attack once and recall without serious repercussions) is deemed an issue of “cvs are doing too much damage” then you can tweak damage numbers instead of turning AA into a “you can’t even attack us once without becoming useless this battle” solution Please consider this I don’t mind being bottom 3rd of a team if I feel I’m not denied attacking once even though I’m supposed to be able to attack multiple times Personally it doesn’t seem unreasonable that carriers are on par with BBs on damage output, but maybe that only shows up when AA is not strong enough to reduce you to one attack per flight with immediate recall “or else” One last concern: when multiple ships sail very close together because of a carrier, their combined AA should at best only be able to reduce the carrier to “attack once and recall immediately or you will lose too many planes” (which again they’re being rewarded for combining AA to deny carriers the multiple attacks they’re supposed to get) instead of again making it so you can’t even attack at all. if this means you have to implement an artificial damage cap one squad of planes will be able to receive per second: the maximum damage over time you will allow them to receive so that if they attack once and recall immediately or else, then they’ll lose at most 2 planes, again it’s a win-win for both gamers And finally a possible oversight: when my carrier was on other side of a tiny island, BB on other side, when I launched my planes every one of them would individually die before the next one took off All planes were dead before I was even given control of the squad! I was unable to launch planes at all which felt like an oversight. it should still instead do damage to the whole squad where I’d only lose a couple of planes when the whole squad takes off, not wipe each one individually before the next one even takes off and I never even get to control the squad Thank you for considering this. For the record controlling the planes from the same visual perspective of how you control ships the immersive factor is a blast!
  24. Here is a technical paper I wrote on my feedback for the CARRIER REWORK CAPTAIN SKILLS 8.0.1. I decided to put it in this format to give the best feedback I can. I have not looked at other lists or posts, so there may be redundant items. I don’t expect everyone to find the same bugs as I, have the same experience, or agree with my following suggestions. CV REWORK CAPTAIN SKILLS 8.0.1 FEEDBACK BY Bigs The following is feedback on the CV Captain Skills items found in 8.0.1: As Currently, all aircraft carrier captain skills are working as intended by their description. However, I would like to add that there are some Captain skills that either feel very underwhelming for their cost, or so powerful that they are must haves for their cost (in some cases, they are too cheap for what they do.) Below is a list of the Captain Skills that I would like to highlight for this feedback. I didn't list ALL of the Captain Skills available to be taken as a Carrier Player, only the ones that I feel need to be addressed, or changed. 1. Air Supremacy – “Accelerates aircraft Servicing” - Aircraft Restoration -5% a. This skill is valuable to all carriers and for 1 captain skill point, its balanced for what it does. Grants you a small boost to “generating” new aircraft from the hanger. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 2. Direction Center for Fighters – “when fighter consumable is activated, an additional aircraft is launched” – Number of Aircraft +1 a. I don’t really find this skill to be useful on most carriers…or if at all. It does create a slightly better defense fighter for your carrier, but it doesn’t affect anything else. Coupled with strong Anti-Aircraft capabilities by all carriers, it’s an underwhelming skill for what it does. While it is nice to have the fighters shoot down 1 extra bomber when being attacked, its no more a “filler” skill than anything else...and a poor one at that. b. Now regarding surface ships, this is a valuable skill as-is, and one I would recommend if you are wanting some extra anti-aircraft capabilities since there are a lot of planes flying around. For its value, you get a lot of good defense out of it when you really need that extra protection. c. Please see my suggestions at the end of this feedback. 3. Improved Engine Boost – “Increases the engine boost time for the aircraft carrier’s squadrons” – Engine boost time +10% a. This skill, while useful for speeding up your squadrons, also can help give you more time to slow down your squadrons. It’s a pretty useful skill overall for what it does, but it isn’t so powerful that it’s a “must have”. It’s in a nice place of being a “convenient” skill for some players and a hard pass for others. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 4. Last Gasp – “Completely restores the engine boost for the last attack flight of the aircraft carrier’s planes” – Engine Boost restored to full a. The Last Gasp is a must have ability for carrier’s…its extremely powerful for its points cost given that on your last attack wave, you get instantly refilled on your engine boost allowing you to do a very aggressive attack run at full speed, or you can use the boost to get away out of AA range to safely call these planes home. i. Please see my suggestions at the end of this feedback. 5. Torpedo Acceleration – “Increases the speed of torpedoes launched from both ships and aircraft by reducing torpedo range” – Ship Torpedo Speed +5kt, Aerial Torpedo Speed +5kt, Ship torpedo range -20%, Aerial torpedo range -20% a. This skill has always been useful for carriers in the past, but its also never been a “must have” skill either. It, like Improved Engine Boost, is a convenience skill. Some take it, some don’t. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 6. Improved Engines – “Increases the speed of the carrier’s squadrons” – Squadron speed +2.5% a. This skill is useful, but it isn’t a “must have” skill. There aren’t many other “better” choices at this tier, so while its “balanced” amongst the other tier skills, I feel it doesn’t go enough for the cost. i. Please see my suggestions at the end of this feedback. 7. Adrenaline Rush – “Increases the reload speed of all armaments as the ship’s HP decreases. Increases the speed of the aircraft carrier’s squadrons as the aircrafts HP decreases” – Reload time reduction for all types of armament for each 1% of HP lost -0.2% , Squadron speed increase for each 1% of HP lost +0.2% a. Adrenaline Rush is a very nice skill to have on any aircraft carrier. The reload speed of ship armaments is welcome, along with the speed increase for your aircraft as you lose plane HP. However, it isn’t a “must have” skill, some captains might not like having their aircraft suddenly speed up as they lose HP. I also am not sure if it reduces service time of planes as the carrier gets damaged. This would need to be clarified by Wargaming. If it does, this could be a very powerful skill for its tier. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 8. Survivability Expert – “Increases HP of ship and aircraft, including fighters” – HP for each tier +350 , Aircraft HP for each tier +15 a. Currently given the Anti-Aircraft meta that is going on since this patch. This skill is an absolute must have, and I can see it remaining so for the foreseeable future. That said, for the skill cost, I think its pretty balanced for what you pay. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 9. Aircraft Armor – “Decreases the continuous damage that aircraft take from short-, medium-, and long-range AA defenses” – Continuous damage from short-, medium-, and long-range AA defenses -10% a. Like Survivability Expert, this skill is a “must have” for the foreseeable future. It’s a very handy skill to take on any aircraft carrier, and its points for what you get is handy. Coupled with Survivability Expert, its pretty costly to get both, but you really do need both to have any chance of surviving the current AA meta. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 10. Super Intendent – Increases the capacity of your ship’s consumables. Does not to the consumables of an aircraft carrier’s squadron” – Number of consumables +1 a. This skill is rather pointless to have on an aircraft carrier, but if you really want that extra fighter wave, this skill is for you. i. I do not have suggestions currently, but I don’t believe this skill to be very useful for carriers. It may just have to be a non-carrier only skill. 11. Demolition Expert – “increases the chances of setting fire to the target for the armament carried by ships and aircraft” – Chance of HE shells causing fire on target +2% , Chance of Rockets causing fire on target +1% , Chance of HE bombs causing fire on target +5% a. This skill is rather based on what nation you are taking for carriers. As Japanese, this skill isn’t very useful, unless you have the VIII Kaga premium carrier. However the American’s should always be taking this skill since it buffs up your rockets and your HE bombs, the exception being the VIII Enterprise premium carrier since it has AP bombs. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 12. Sight Stabilization – “improved the aiming time of the aircraft carrier’s planes” – Attack aircraft aiming speed +5% , Torpedo bomber aiming speed +5% , Dive Bomber aiming speed +10% a. This skill is a “must have” since it helps reduce the time it takes to get a “accurate” attack run for all types of squadrons. I would tweak it though so that all types of aircraft get the same speed. i. Please see my suggestions at the end of this feedback. 13. Concealment Expert – “reduces the detectability range of the ship and the aircraft carrier’s squadrons” – Detectability of destroyers -10%, Detectability of cruisers -10%, Detectability of battleships -10%, Detectability of aircraft carriers -10%, Detectability of squadrons -10% a. While this may be a “must have” skill for Destroyers and Cruisers, its questionable on Battleships and Carriers. It is a useful skill since it reduces the detectability of the squadrons, which means that anti-aircraft guns won’t fire on them until they are “spotted”, so by increasing your detectability, you are shortening the amount of time a squadron starts to take incoming fire. I would value sit stabilization over this though. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. BIGS’ SUGGESTIONS: These are my suggestions for the previously discussed Captain Skills. I do not expect people to agree with my suggestions for the below Captain Skills, but hopefully they will start a discussion with Wargaming. 1. Direction Center for Fighters – “when fighter consumable is activated, an additional aircraft is launched” – Number of Aircraft +1 a. Change to: “Direction Command for Fighters – “When fighter consumable is activated, an additional aircraft is launched. Increases the Patrol Fighter consumable radius” – Number of Aircraft for Fighter Consumable +1 , Patrol Fighter consumable radius is increased by 20% i. This recommended change adds a bit more utility to the skill to make it more enticing to aircraft carriers. While it will increase +1 fighter to ship and aircraft carrier fighter consumables (as it currently does), it will also increase the squadron Patrol Fighter consumable radius, bumping it from an average of 3km to 3.6km in radius allowing a higher degree of chance that the Patrol Fighters will engage enemy squadrons. 14. Last Gasp – “Completely restores the engine boost for the last attack flight of the aircraft carrier’s planes” – Engine Boost restored to full a. Change to: “Evasive Maneuvers – “Reduces anti-aircraft damage for attack aircraft that have dropped payload.” Aircraft that have completed their attacks gain a 30% resistance to all anti-aircraft damage while returning to the Carrier. i. As-is, Last Gasp is just too powerful for what it does. It either needs to be moved to Tier 2 and swap out with Improved Engines, or as I suggest, needs to be changed to an AA damage reduction for returning aircraft that have completed their attacks. This is NOT including aircraft recalled by the player using the return key “F” or “F Spam”. Only aircraft that have completed their attack and spent their payload. This would also entice players to attack as much as possible per squadron rather than simply attacking once and returning aka, "F Spam". 15. Improved Engines – “Increases the speed of the carrier’s squadrons” – Squadron speed +2.5% a. Change to: “Improved Engines – “Completely restores the engine boost for the last attack flight of the aircraft carrier’s planes” – Engine Boost restored to full i. I strongly believe that the ability to get “full engine boost” on the last attack wave is just too powerful for its tier, and +2.5% for all squadrons at Tier 2 is just too weak of a skill. I would recommend changing Last Gasp to the “Evasive Maneuvers” skill that I suggested for Tier 1, and change the tier 2 skill, Improved Engines, to perform the same actions that “Last Gasp” does at Tier 1. This would make the skill costlier, which I think would balance it out better points wise. Any higher and it would be too costly for what it does. 16. Sight Stabilization – “improved the aiming time of the aircraft carrier’s planes” – Attack aircraft aiming speed +5% , Torpedo bomber aiming speed +5% , Dive Bomber aiming speed +10% a. Change to: “Sight Stabilization – “improved the aiming time of the aircraft carrier’s planes” – Attack aircraft aiming speed +10% , Torpedo bomber aiming speed +10% , Dive Bomber aiming speed +10% i. This skill, while nice to have as-is, doesn’t feel as useful as it could be for a Tier 10 skill. I would suggest increasing the values to all be 10%.
  25. Here is a technical paper I wrote on my feedback for the CARRIER REWORK HOT FIX 8.0.1. I decided to put it in this format to give the best feedback I can. I have not looked at other lists or posts, so there may be redundant items. I don’t expect everyone to find the same bugs as I, have the same experience, or agree with my following suggestions. CV REWORK HOT FIX 8.0.1 FEEDBACK BY Bigs BUGS: 1) SOUND CUTS OUT RANDOMLY DURING TAKE OFF: This issue appears to have been resolved. I have not had it since the Hot Fix went live. 2) PLANES LOCKED INTO TURNING LEFT OR RIGHT AFTER TAKE OFF: This issue still occurs randomly…The planes will take off either steering hard left or hard right and won’t respond to controls unless you push the corresponding turning key to the direction they are turning automatically. (if they are turning hard left, you must press the "turn left" key in order to regain control, otherwise they will permanently turn left.) 3) DISAPPEARING FLAK CLOUDS STILL CAUSING DAMAGE: There are still instances where flak clouds that have “dispersed” or “ended” still cause maximum damage when flown in the area they were spawned. In other words, you are damaged by invisible flak. 4) HE/AP BOMBS LANDING OUTSIDE RETICLE: In rare occasions when you turn the plane during a dive, the bombs will land outside of the entire bomb reticle. Its as if the sigma or dispersion is set to be higher than what the visual reticle shows. 5) PAYLOADS DISAPPEARING FROM AIRCRAFT IN FLIGHT: Occasionally, aircraft with rockets or bombs will take off but visually will not be carrying any payload. This occurs randomly so it cannot be replicated by the player. I do notice it more when playing ships such as the Saipan, Lexington, and Midway. 6) PLANES RICHOCETING OFF MAP BOARDERS: This is a BIG gameplay issue…I have found that if you fly a squadron into the map boarder, they can almost instantaneously turn around, or as I call it, “Boarder bouncing” This allows a player to attack a ship close to the maps boarder, run into the boarder, turn around almost instantly, and be lined up for another attack rapidly on the same target. Planes should not be able to do this as it can be exploited to the players benefit to set up rapid attacks on a ship. The following is feedback to the Changelog items found in 8.0.1: 1) To reduce the attacking and spotting potential of Attack Aircraft against destroyers in high-tier battles, the number of aircraft in the squadron was changed to 9, and in the attack group to 3. The changes affected the aircraft carriers VIII Lexington, VIII Shokaku, X Midway, X Hakuryu. a. I have found that it is harder to spot destroyers with the reduced squadron size. b. I have found it just as easy to score hits on a destroyer, despite the reduced attack squadron size, but I deal less damage. i. I don’t feel that the damage is mitigated enough to feel “balanced” against attack fighters with the “Tiny Tim” rockets. These rockets take off a substantial amount of destroyer health per attack…I believe that making them perform “over-pen damage only" may help balance them. As-is, they can cripple a destroyer as badly as a penetrating hit from a Battleship AP shell prior to the AP over penetration fix for destroyers. 2) Increased the height which returning aircraft need to reach in order to become invulnerable to AA fire. This will allow ships to fire longer on returning aircraft and will help to counter the tactic in which the player gives the order to the squadron to return immediately after the first attack group’s run (“F” key by default). a. This change has indeed increased the overall effectiveness of AA fire against “recalled” squadrons. i. This does resolve the issue of “spam recall”. b. When a squadron is recalled within a ships AA aura, the recalled squadron can be completely eradicated in most scenarios. i. I feel that while this does resolve the issue of “spam recall” it is a pretty hefty blow to a aircraft carrier player trying to keep their planes from being completely destroyed. In many cases, unless the squadron is flown outside of enemy AA, they will be completely lost when recalled. I think that AA is too powerful in this case since a carrier can rapidly lose all of one type of bomber squadron and unable to field another squadron for a significant amount of time during a game. ii. To be clear, I am not stating this change isn’t necessary, but carriers shouldn’t be harshly punished to the point that it isn’t fun. I believe a more appropriate solution is to have planes return slower if they are recalled when inside enemy flak, or if they pass over enemy flak at high altitude increasing the time it takes to get planes that survived an attack back to the carrier for servicing. 3) Maneuvering among the AA explosions allows you to reduce the damage received from air defense, even while in the AA range of ships with powerful air defense. We redistributed the efficiency of air defense between the constant damage taken and the puffs of damage from explosions - the efficiency was increased for the former and decreased for the latter. This will keep the tactics of dodging explosions still effective, but it will not allow planes to stay too long in the range of air defense without taking significant losses, especially when attacking a formation of ships. a. I feel this change feels a lot better for surface ships defending themselves against aircraft, however, when a carrier with aircraft that are several tiers lower than the surface ship they are attacking (such as a Ryujo attacking a Cleveland), there is almost no hope that the Ryujo planes will even make it to the Cleveland. This is the case for many undertiered aircraft. i. If this change is to remain in effect, carriers should not be matched up against surface ships 2 tiers higher or lower than their carrier’s tier. They should only be matched +1 or -1 of their tier. (i.e. A Tier 8 aircraft will only face T7 or T9 ships.) 4) Changed several features of the Japanese torpedo bombers. Now, if during the preparation for the attack, the attack group maneuvers, your aim will not stabilize (aiming cone stops narrowing). And when maneuvering during an attack run - begins to widen. In order to carry out an effective attack, you need to preemptively choose the line of attack and try not to make last-minute maneuvers. a. I believe this change is a bit too much because it takes the specialty of the Japanese aircraft tree and makes it very difficult to utilize. b. I do agree that it does require players to make a more planned attack instead of last second drops. 5) Reduced the chance of flooding by approximately a third for the Japanese aerial torpedoes in tiers IV-VIII, and by half for German (tier VIII) and Japanese (tier X) aerial torpedoes. a. I feel that this change was completely necessary. 6) Significant changes have affected the alternative plane torpedo module for X Hakuryu.The attack run preparation is now longer, and more difficult - the parameters of the aiming were changed and the angles of the torpedo spread were increased even when aiming is at its most accurate. In addition, the speed of aircraft when returning to the aircraft carrier is reduced and the delay before the start of a new attack is increased. We have significantly changed the characteristics of torpedoes: reduced speed, increased detection radius and arming time. a. While this style of attack was very powerful, I feel that too much of it has changed and the Hakuryu no longer feels like a “torpedo specialist”. I feel that out of all the changes, the reduction of the torpedo speed was unnecessary. If the torpedoes maintained the same speed as before (50kts) and the detection radius was returned back to the prior setting (stealthier version) I would find the other changes actually balance this style of play. i. In short, too much of a nerf was applied to the hakuryu, especially with it now having to face a substantially tougher AA system, and that its aircraft can now be completely wiped out when recalled early. 7) To increase the effectiveness of attacks, we added resistance to AA damage for bombers at the time of readiness to attack (when the aiming indicator turns green). In this phase of the attack, all bombers will receive 30% less damage. a. I find this a welcome change since AA has become extremely powerful in this Hot Fix. b. I would also like this value applied to attacking aircraft that have completed their attack run (dropped their payload) and have broken off to return to the aircraft carrier. c. This damage reduction should not apply to aircraft that still have their payload and have been recalled to the carrier. 8) Bug fixes: the aiming for the stock attack aircraft on the carrier VI Ranger is now similar to the aiming for all American attack aircraft. The characteristics of the basic 'Fighter' consumable for V Emerald are brought to the same value as 'Fighter II' and the minimum speed of the stock Japanese bombers of all tiers does not exceed the minimum speed on the researchable bombers. a. I find that both of these changes are welcome and much needed. 9) If the ship has no 25 mm AA guns, medium-range AA defenses start at 1 km. These ships' AA configuration will now be emphasized if you can't shoot planes inside of a 1km range. a. Ships with this type of layout did need a buff to their protection, but in some cases, such as the X Salem, it creates a rather monstrous AA platform. i. I think that AA guns firing inside of their normal range should have a decrease in efficiency of some type. 10) Short-range AA defenses now include guns up to 30 mm. This change will combine weak medium-range AA defenses with short-range AA defenses, strengthening the latter and removing the zone where the effectiveness of anti-aircraft guns was low. This will affect ships such as, for example, the cruisers Atlanta, Pensacola, Dallas and battleships Colorado and Arizona. a. This is a welcomed change to ships in general and I feel it balances them a bit better against Aircraft. BIGS’ SUGGESTIONS: 1) At Tier 4…there is currently no team play tools available for the carrier player to use to assist an allied surface ship. I would STRONGLY recommend that each T4 bomber squadron gain access to the escort fighter consumable but when they are called into action (activated) they only call in a wave size of 2x fighters. Again, this will allow carriers at T4 a way to protect their allies (which is currently not possible at all) and to get new players a chance to learn the mechanic without A) being absolutely punished by it, and B) not knowing what it does until higher tiers. 2) When a plane squadron is recalled early, all planes that have not dropped their payloads should take normal anti-aircraft damage when climbing to "safe" altitude on their way to proceed back to the carrier. If a plane has attacked (dropped their payload) and breaks off to return back to the carrier, these planes should receive the 30% AA resistance that aircraft get while attacking surface ships (when their attack run reticle turns green). I feel this would reward players for using their planes to attack as much as possible, while punishing those that are attempting to spam the recall action, aka "F Spam".
×