Jump to content
Forum Shutdown - July 28, 2023 Read more... ×
Forum Shutdown - July 28, 2023 Read more... ×

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'carrier'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Contests and Competitions
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • External testing groups
    • Supertest Academy
    • Supertest
    • Clantest
  • ANKER's ANKER Candidate Info
  • ANKER's ANK-A Candidate Info
  • ANKER's ANK-S Candidate info


  • World of Warships Events
  • [C-RED] - Code RED's Events

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 86 results

  1. Why are the Anti Aircraft guns so strong in this game. I try to fly with commander skills that boost my planes survivability against them and those skills are pointless seeing as how I still lose every plane I have. Was making AA stronger the answer to carrier players? Maybe just making the bombs, missiles and torpedoes weaker would have been better than having AA that destroys everything immediately. This really needs to be revisited when it comes to a balance of getting more carriers in the game.
  2. Itnst_Pennys_boat

    Air support without sanctions

    I want to propose to the developers of the game, some sanction for those players who, having carriers during the battle, do not provide any air support to their battle partners. They don't drop a consumable, no AA support, even passing over the convoy several times. They leave their teammates at the mercy of the enemy carrier's attacks. GREETINGS
  3. Itnst_Pennys_boat

    Carrier Aquila

    Hello. I want to express my disappointment about the Italian carrier Aquila. I have almost all the carriers in the game, and the Aquila in particular seems very unbalanced to me. I regretted the purchase. The planes do not resist, even against a single ship. They're slow. Torpedoes fall far apart, close slow. Boat navigation is slow, it has poor concealment. Etc. Please let the developers know. NOTE: If someone wants to comment their disagreement with this opinion. Instead of talking here (attacking), look for me in the game. And we play a game in "division" together, him with the Aquila, and he shows me how good he is this carrier.
  4. Hey guys. I recently watched a few videos posted by the Youtuber The Mighty Jingles drawing attention to how the Graf Zeppelin can dominate matches by utilizing a full secondary build while being escorted by two DDs that take turns smoking up the carrier. I purchased the Graf Zeppelin with the hope that I can put together my own player division to enjoy my own carrier brawling shenanigans. However, I am currently torn over which Tier VIII DDs would be able to best suit the role of carrier smoke escort. In the video below, 2 Tier VIII Siliwangi DDs escort the GZ. I'm assuming this was done by the participants to ensure that the division had access to both hydroacoustic consumables and smoke generator. Conversely debating whether i should consider having my division mates use Tier VIII Kidd DD or perhaps Tier VIII Benson DD? The Kidd has the advantage of having the repair consumable. Whats more important to have in this situation? The Hydroacoustic charges offered by the Siliwangi or repair party offered by the Kidd? Considerations should also be given that the Siliwangi is unable to protect itself against smaller DD and cruiser targets due to her only possessing deep water torps. Any thoughts or recommendations guys?
  5. Greetings When playing CV's and using all bombers (with the exception of the Russian Skip bombers) I can see the white bombsight but when you switch to the green bombsight or pickle it is not visible on the screen. It is past the bottom of the screen and hidden from view. I have to guess when it's time to release and I am not a very good guesser. I am sure this must be a settlings issue and I have tried the settings with no success Any ideas? Thanks in advance .
  6. Something has to be done about these 3 and 4 subs per team. Matches with 3-4 subs and 2 CVs are very common any more. A hard limit of 1 sub and 1 cv needs to come into the game ASAP. Both class have little to no way to interact with them or to do damage to them at while they can inflect damage to your ship.
  7. xtraBlood

    IJN torpedo drop

    Hello, When playing IJN CV's I tend to try to drop my torpedo's as close as possible to guarantee a hit while other people say to drop farther because of the speed and range of the torpedo's. Just want to know if I should start dropping at farther range to conserve planes.
  8. rafael_azuaje

    Hornet QUESTION 11.4

    hello everyone, checking the Hornet in the armory I see a negative change, its aircraft points dropped drastically, I have some screenshots of version 11.3 and now 11.4 where you can see the change. was it a hidden nerf? hopefully not! :( in version 11.3 the Hornet planes had 69 points. now in version 11.4 now it has 54 points, that is, it was a hard blow for the Hornet :(
  9. rafael_azuaje

    Lexington question

    I have a doubt. yes the lexinton was sunk in 1942. because she has better aa and better planes than the hornet and enterprise. the enterprise was never sunk survived WW2 , received many modern upgrades . and in the game it has everything old.
  10. Today I saw a news from wowsblogs, where they say that they are going to nerf Chkalov, Please stop the nerf to PREMIUM Ships, players PAY something already tested by experts, and then people pay monthly what they blast with several nerfs. https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/321 buy premium ships and after paying, they apply nerf, what's the point of paying for it?
  11. Itnst_Pennys_boat

    Carrier 8 Pobeda Ruso

    Hola. Quisiera expresar mi descontento, mi insatisfacción con el CARRIER TIER 8 - POBEDA - RUSO. Es un portaaviones muy mal equilibrado: los aviones no resisten nada; los misiles cazas son muy difíciles de acertar, lentos para lanzar; los torpedos dañan muy poco. Realmente tiene todas las características en contra. Sólo pido si pueden elevar esto a los desarrolladores para ver si lo puede mejorar. GRACIAS.
  12. Issue: This is where you should explain the problem that you're having. CV fighter planes can spot submarines at maximum depth when spawning if the drop point is placed above the sub. Expected Result: Tell us what should be happening. As per https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/general-news/submarines-again/, submarines are undetectable at maximum depth by air. Patrol fighters shouldn't be spotting submarines at maximum depth when spawning. How to Replicate: Give us examples on how to reproduce this bug. Sit at max depth with a submarine and have a CV drop their fighters on you. Screenshots/Replay/Supporting Info: Screenshots and Replays go a long way, so having this ready to go will really help. Replay is attached, see 11:17. Note, the fighters show up after the torpedo planes that drop them leave. My camera wiggles in confusion at this point. 20220326_202049_PGSS108-U190_18_NE_ice_islands.wowsreplay
  13. With support carriers being announced and the general displeasure the playerbase feels about being picked on by CVs I got an idea for a change. While more conceptual than ironed out, I think it has some potential. That is - a mechanic to discourage repeatedly striking the same target. I’d call it “Alertness”. For every second you have a priority sector active against planes your AA gets a cumulative strength increase. Similar to the special battle commands the Hannover and Satsuma have. If you AA hasn’t been active and “priority sectored” in a few minutes the bonus will start to tick down. Ships with defensive AA can give this an instant boost to 1/3rd its max upon activation. Maybe a little overkill, but if you have been struck by a CV 3 times in a row, and had your priority sector active against the planes all 3 times you unlock aa special battle command to instantly shoot down several planes. Unsure if it would be fair or not to let the CV see how much this “Alertness” bar is progressed on enemy ships or not. It could be similar to how you can see battery levels for submarines. If it was not visible and there are multiple carriers it would be a bit unfair for the other CV to be punished for the actions of their ally. You would also be able to slightly build your “Alertness” by priority sectoring Fighters/Air Strikes/ Depth Charge Bombers. A real alert captain could keep this bonus active without even having the CV strike them. This could also be an issue in smaller battles (like ranked), eg. 5v5 or 7v7. But I would argue that carriers shouldn’t be allowed in those smaller battle types to begin with. I also understand that this is a net nerf to carriers, but I think it is warranted. CVs should be considered a high-skill level class. A skilled CV player would be able to mitigate this change. And, attentive captains on the receiving end of attacks would appreciate a tool to defend themselves. A net win in my books.
  14. First off, let me start by saying that I am 2015 WoWs player and a 2009 WOT player, a Navy Veteran(both ship and squadron), a avid fan of history and a gamer that never posts in the forums. The ISSUE: - The current play style for CVs in WoWs is a fall from grace from what it used to be. It can be better it should be better. The SOLUTION: - Bring back the old school real time strategy that CVs incorporated. - Implement realistic turn angles of attack. - Buff AA and increase the penalty for unsafe approaches. The ARGUMENT: - I would like to believe that this game follows some historical record and account, hence the ships history being posted in game. History shows that carriers used multiple squadrons, attack angle and formations. It`s aviation doctrine. - In the life of carriers, they rarely fight alone.. it was usually two or more together. Put two carriers to a game, increase the rewards for shooting down planes. This would stress the importance for TEAMPLAY and strategy. Each ship has roles to play. - Will I chase a submarine for spotting and not be able to defend myself from an attacking DD? The old school and current play style needs to be merged. Does the game even read these posts? Am I the only one here asking for a change?
  15. Itnst_Pennys_boat

    Carrier Lost

    Every day that I play with aircraft carriers, I suffer from not being able to get close to the ships I attack. Anti-aircraft are very powerful, compared to very weak aircraft. To make matters worse, the latest modifications empowered antiaircraft in cruisers and destroyers, and impoverished fighter attacks. Regrettable.
  16. Itnst_Pennys_boat

    Portaaviones / Carriers

    Cada día que juego con portaaviones, sufro el no poder acercarme a los barcos que ataco. Los antiaéreos son poderosísimos, en comparación con aviones muy débiles. Para peor, las últimas modificaciones empoderaron antiaéreos en cruceros y destructores, y empobrecieron los ataques con cazas. Lamentable
  17. I wanted to do a CV for a long time. When I finally got to... I did my part as expected in aiding fleet instead of ignoring them and go about of randomly picking targets like some loner. As I felt from what I saw in fleet battles that winning apart from losing on high seas depends on CV support. I know from battleship experience how bad a threat destroyers can be. I not been in game for a while after CV squadron fighter changes became instant disappointment. No viewing tutorial helps in getting skills to do this terrible change. What was creators thinking in having commander of CV run off among squadron flight crew on attack runs? That is not how CV operates! I can see land base squadron fighters doing solo attack runs like this... not a CV. Problem with this change in squadron fighters is you are too busy caught up in getting it right that you can't at same time be aware of important chat messages or condition of your CV from enemy fleet. As if going blindly into battle. Recently upon returning to game I noticed fewer to near nothing of CV's were used. Yesterday I thought I would try again doing a CV. Near end of game I heard someone say something good about how well we did... only for me afterwards to get wrongfully condemned with Unsporting Conduct where all resources earned were confiscated. Was going to aid one ship against two enemy destroyers not for me to do... along with trying to gun down enemy squadrons?! Game also falsely accuses players of firing on allied ships... when PvE enemy side does not like to lose and will cheat it's fire power stronger than normally allowed. It looks like if you not get a bad rap from other players... it is game that is doing it. People look to feel good in playing a game. Bad enough if your ship is destroyed or game battle is lost.
  18. In light of the fire over CVs and Subs, as well as the lack of game modes, maybe a new game mode can be implemented as a random battle subcategory. You can choose to play regular random battle with all ship categories, or you can choose another random battle option that excludes, CVs, Subs, or even both. Then those who are willing to face CVs and Subs can play with them while those who wish not to play with CVs and Subs can play without them. This can bring back the old strategic gimmicks of WoWS pre-CV while still keeping CVs (and Subs) in the game. Thoughts?
  19. After playing Ryujo for two years now, I can definitely say that the maximum torpedo damage of 6,500 HP is totally incorrect. This needs to be fixed. The absolute maximum torpedo damage on ANY ship in the game is 6,000 HP (rounded off). The actual maximum for Ryujo is 5,97... something. The absolute maximum torpedo damage for Furious is 4,500 HP. This does not count detonations, which could be as high as 60,000 HP damage. Why would WG list Ryujo's max torp damage at 6,500 HP when it knows that it cannot go above 6k on ANY ship in the game? Is this a bug?
  20. Maddau

    Autopilot Astern

    It has seemed more difficult to back up using the autopilot on the map overlap. I have to click very close to the back of the carrier icon, otherwise the autopilot tries to swing me around. This is what it was several months ago, but a few patches ago it was made much easier to plot a course backwards using autopilot, and you could go a reasonable distance before the map tried to swing you around. Is anyone else noticing this? If I'm not just imagining it, I'd like it to go back to being easier to back up and keep your bow toward the incoming ordinance.
  21. Michael_Gary_Scott

    A Fully Loaded F/A-18F Super Hornet

    A photo of an F/A-18F Super Hornet fully loaded with 10 x GBU-32 1,000 pound bombs taken by by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Matt Matlage. Each jet can carry more pounds of bombs than a B-17 Flying Fortress of World War 2 (which I think is between 4,000 to 8,000 pounds from a quick search). An aircraft carrier's load of F-18's attacking an inland target, I am guessing, must match or even beat the destructive power of the mass bombing formations of long ago. With GPS level accuracy (within 5 meters) using JDAMS, even more amazing. Just a random thought.
  22. Because there are now new support skills for cvs, that can boost the effectiveness of the fighter consumable, has anyone had any success using a build like this on Graf Zeppelin? I was looking in the fitting tool and you can increase the fighters range to 3.6 km. Combined that with Zeppelins very fast aircraft means this cv could have the role of supporting teammates by warding off enemy carrier attacks, and then using secondary’s when ships get to close. Could be useful in clan and ranked I imagine Graf Zeppelin players, what are your thoughts?
  23. Please take the poll and then comment if applicable. I notice that a lot of people complaining about CV play and CVs have not/do not play CVs. This poll may be relevant for data and balancing purposes, so take it seriously. Edit: Results and takeaways Game designed for surface ships, planes broke. Most experienced CV players think there needs to be another total rework. There are large differences between how individual ships perform against aircraft and CV counterplay is dependent on teamwork vs an individual, thus is very difficult. Solutions: Most players want better control over their individual AA. Players also want the CV to be more limited in its capability to send and replenish aircraft. Reading and thinking about the comments and results, I recommend 4 things: 1. De-emphasize carrier vs destroyer gameplay. Carriers currently ruin the playstyle of most DDs and are a hard counter to DDs, especially early in game. This makes DD life very difficult. CV vs DD play should be focused more toward hunting and spotting one or the other. I note that I do play both ship types and the interaction is heavily dependent on the skill, pre planning, and team cooperation for both players. I've torpedo'd a lot of CVs, and had a lot of DDs sunk by rockets or spotting. Currently, my best recommendation is to reduce the rocket attack plane squadron size by one attack flight. 2. Emphasize carrier vs carrier gameplay. The two carriers should essentially be dueling for control of the air for most of the match. I know WG did not want to include dogfighting, but this may be a solution. Rocket attack planes for example could be used to intercept torpedo bombers and diver bombers, etc. Rewards should be adjusted so that CVs that engage the enemy CV are fairly compensated for their time and effort, and game mechanics structured to make this both engaging and rewarding. 3. Bottom tier all carriers for the time being. Tier 6 should only fight T6-8, Tier 8 only T9-10, and T10 is stuck in straight T10 matches. 4. Rework AA to make it more complex and involved. Players should be able to see in depth stats about their AA and chose how it targets planes and squadrons.
  24. With the rework looming ever closer, I thought it would be fun to dash any hopes of the rework actually improving the game for whomever reads this. It's not because it doesn't address a few problems with the old, or because it introduces new problems that the old didn't have. It's because Carrier gameplay is the complete antithesis of how most ships work in the game, and no matter how you try to rework them it will never change. What makes them so unfit to be in a game based on ships in an era where their dominance was most prevalent? First lets discuss why the old CVs do not fit. As a note, this is mostly addressing random and ranked battles, and not the higher skill matches of clan battles/tournaments. In those, CVs are actually a good fit, even though it's only if every ship is either specialized for AA or suffering the consequences. Old CVs are an RTS without the busywork of base building etc. There is nothing inherently wrong with RTS gameplay, it can be very fun and it pushes your awareness and reflexes to the limit. However the RTS of CV is a complete failure in WoWs for 3 reasons. A highly reactive, awareness driven and reflexive gameplay does not mesh well with the slower, methodical and long term positional gameplay of the rest of the game. There is no skill based matchmaking (random/ranked) that is pivotal to RTS gameplay. This creates harsh games where one CV player is completely outclassed by another, and essentially locked down from having any real effect on the battle while the other goes on a rampage. The presence of a CV, and it's strength, reduces a lot of options other classes have, such as concealment, flanking, being aggressive etc. A CV usually forces a much more campy, reserved game along with the moans and groans of the players subject to it whether spoken or unspoken. And there really is no debate that old CV is a complete failure in the game. WG struggled trying to balance a class that was meant to have power based on it's real world era effect, but not so powerful that it ruined the experience for other players. Absolute fail on all fronts, from removed manual drops from low tier and stupidly strong high tier with strafes allowing good cvs to dominate weak ones, with some AP bombs that do well in defensive fire because F players. So, what will the rework change? Essentially 3 things. It removes most of the effect of cv vs cv, at least in terms of fighters. There is still some potential with cv sniping maybe. It reduces the awareness and reflexes needed to play, and it will increase the player count because it will be much easier, and it is. Unfortunately this is actually bad for the game because of aforementioned problems. You will still get that sinking feeling of seeing planes pop up on your viewfinder and know that there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop the first strike, and maybe not even 2. They will still force campy games simply because they exist, and low tier will still be hamstrung trash in how ineffectual you can be. And the best part is the more accessible gameplay will result in more games being subject to the forced campy playstyle by a ship with inexhaustible resources in which the only way to fight back is to hopefully not be the one he decides to pick on. Because make no mistake, if that CV wants you dead you are dead. With so many players jumping into their cvs in the hopes to cash in on the fxp when the patch hits, it's always amusing to see a normal player get picked on, deleted or just have their game experience ruined by that cv and to say "oh man I sure can't wait for the rework". Nothing is more sad than the naivete of that comment, because nothing will get better. Your experience in other ships will in fact worsen to the increased population, much like it is now before the patch hits. That is why the rework will fail, not because of the potential for players to enjoy the new gameplay of carriers, but because of the negative impact cvs will have on other ships, always, simply by existing in any form. They are a detriment to the balance of the 3 class triangle. This will be a dark and annoying quarter of 2019 for ships, born of WGs refusal to cut their losses and instead devote a year or more of resources to implement a new gameplay style that does not and can not address the fundamental problem that is a gameplay style of power with impunity results in bad experiences. I remember long ago when someone let us guess what the rework could possibly be, all the while getting a no/not even close to all our guesses. They weren't kidding, nobody could see this coming, because now instead of one cv in the game having the ability to hit whoever while he holds the other cvs hands behind his back, now both cvs are free of eachother and can lord over everything in a match. instead of a fighter counter, a damage race. No bad positioning mistakes to be had like with other classes, that have to take a lot of time to re position in hopes to be effective. Just turn a few times and drop away. Whats that, the last 2 strikes of your group got shot down? That's fine, just fire up another and be right back there within 30-40 seconds. Do yourself a favor. Take a break from WoWs. Find another game to idle your time with while WG tries desperately to rebalance new cv gameplay in a live server, and toss out all their old 'progress' of 3 years out the window. Or play cv yourself. YOU DO NOT want to be a ship in the rework, even with AA, because it probably wont stop you from being hit at least once, and if you're a DD just exit straight to port. Remember, after a cv strikes it has to turn around and wait for the timer to hit again. Thats about a time sink of 15-25 seconds. If you kill the rest of the planes after that first strike instead, that's still only 30-40 till the next full squad. Sure it will be a different type, but i'm sure it will be completely fine getting constantly harassed until you are dead with fires/floods etc. A rollercoaster of fun. Anyway, that was long winded, but the effect of this rework is important to talk about. I for one will spend my time playing another game or just playing CV, because at least if I am the CV I can't have my game ruined by one. See you at the apocalypse.