Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'cvs'.

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
    • 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

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 89 results

  1. Here is my proposal for what a full IJN Tech Tree might look in the future, including premiums ships, some known and some not know. I included images of most of the CVs basing them on real carriers that existed or were started construction but never finished (The only Exception being Hakuryu). Using light carriers for the Alt Support line as they should be and using strike carriers for the Alt Attack line. Hope you like, this is just a visualization and not in any way a gameplay Idea, so that way WG or you people can go creative with each concept to make the unique and different. View Directly https://imgur.com/a/HmWdsnH IJN Visualized Tech Tree.pdf
  2. Both American and British Torpedoes are very slow. They are always out run by even by BBs. All CV Planes are almost always shot down after the first strike as well. The Attack size needs to be increased because the torps are so slow. Both UK and USA CVs squadron always end up getting hardly any hits on Random battles. Also, currently there is no way to avoid AA Flak. The screen goes up and down not the planes. Lingering Flak clouds (not the flak) are shooting down planes as well. Can you tell me why the long range guns and flak are set 100% hitting targets and never misses as well? Does AA really need to be that accurate? That is impossible in Real Life!!! Hp is extremely low on planes. The AA is set so high a squadron of planes can be shot down in one attack. Especially on CV Tiers VII to X and * Superships as well. Remember too if you have many ships near each other the AA turns into a bloody massacre for a squadron it is crazy!!
  3. With the return of operations and ultimate frontier being brought back, as a veteran player who has played the original and I am sure there are others here. Frontier was one of the hardest rivialing defense of naval station being an attrition operation. So allowing tier 8 cvs would allow casual player and give wg a boost in cash as players would buy cvs to play theoretically. @Ahskance @Boggzy
  4. Look not getting to interact with CVs while they can damage surface ships was bad enough. Now the Subs have more health then DDs, better concealment then CVs and they can ping as quickly as 6 seconds. Something has to be done so surface ships can interact with sub more. 1. Double or triple the range of of anti sub planes. 2. Give forward firing depth charges sight. 3. Double the amount of depth charges per depth charges. 4. Double the size of depth charge coverage area 5. Allow Hydro acoustic search to detect subs at any depth inside the ship detection range 6. Limit how quickly subs can ping or give all surface ships more or unlimited damage control party 7. Make damage control party reload quicker We need more ways to interact with subs. For CVs make AA better and make CVs lose health for every plane that gets shot down.
  5. I just had a Fully-Flagged Randoms match with (on each team) 2 Subs, 4 DD's and a CV. So as I made the mistake of getting within 15km of a Cap Circle to support my CL's/DD's in my Thunderer (12km Conceal), I was immediately... 1. Discovered by CV Fighters 2. My "Priority Target" went to 5 3. Began taking HE Fire-Spam from a Sherman behind an island AND (as I was turning to run without firing a shot and ablaze) 4. was Sonar-Pinged twice and had to dodge torps. So, after a thoughtful Cap approach (interposing islands, no shooting... etc) within 5km of my BB's Max Main Battery Range, ALL attempts at Cap Support were ruined literally within 15 seconds and I took 1/3 of my health from things I couldn't see or fight. This was in no way challenging or fun and my skill had no effect on the outcome aside from immediately running and living till match-end, not that it mattered. This was just awful... I have an above-meh Avg.Damage in BB's (got the Badge for 93K Avg) and Thunderer is a great bote (though her dispersion has been questionable of late), but despite my best efforts I spent the entire match running for my life and dodging to a 35K "Victory" because our CV/DD's/Subs were better. Better ASW/AA/Dam.Con/New Support Ships etc. is NOT an answer to this... This is simply and obviously the result of adding unavoidable/undetectable attack forms to a game mostly comprised of ships that have neither. They may be "cool" and a portion of our community enjoys them (all respect), but the same could be said for Satellite Lasers... so why not. CV's and Subs were absolutely a big part of WWII Naval Warfare and their inclusion IS valid and interesting, but so was the Atom Bomb. Please Wargaming, make a "Brawl Mode" with no CV's/Subs so those of us who do not enjoy being fried fish-in-a-barrel can have fun and benefit from hard-earned skills such as Angling, Stealth and Cap Support. Otherwise please start-up the Enola Gay and be done with it. If the game was like this in 2015 I never would have installed it.
  6. Dear WG (or the corporation that you farmed out World of Warships to), Now that we are all tired of watching the 5 second cartoons you made for those of us who play CVs, can we have a real squadron to replace it? After spotting, rocket planes are simply pushed off the deck of the carrier as "dead weight", and rightly so. We need to speed up! Since WG at one time suggested that IJN ships would be outfitted with a squadron of kamikazes, I think the time for that has finally come. I think at least one squadron of 24 planes with low HP, a 100% fire chance, and a minimum of 10,000 damage with a direct hit would be a nice and interesting replacement of the now dead and useless rocket planes. The game should be interesting, not brain dead. Against a destroyer, a kamikaze direct hit should also come with a very high chance of detonation, which would also ignore the Juliet Charlie flag. (Why is that dumb flag even in this game? If my ship detonates, I want to see a spectacular explosion, not the standard puff of smoke! Give me something I can later record and replay as entertainment instead of frying my gpu with little towns and suburbs on hills that have no real purpose in this game. Hell, that's what the 5-10 second cartoon should be about.) Also, I suggest that IJN carriers be equipped with dive bombers that use HE bombs, like the American ones do (and Kaga). Two squadrons of dive bombers (one HE and one AP) with a torpedo squadron or even just HE dive bombers only with torpedo bombers since the AP ones have an extremely low damage output compared to the amount of time invested in flying them. (A BB could fire 24 to 36 or more AP shells in the time it takes to try and do an AP dive bomber attack against massive AA.) Anyway, those are some of my suggestions for replacing the "hated" and now useless rocket planes and keeping CV players from leaving the game. (Less players = less money. Economics 101) I will now leave the door open to all the trolls, haters, vitriol throwers, and character assassins who have come to make this game very unfun. Have at it!
  7. I've been playing CV's since Alpha, I've gone through the RTS, was there just before they changed out of RTS to the rework when there were very few of us still playing CV's due to all of the gimmicks and stripped abilities that were forced onto the class. I remember seeing players driven off of playing CV"s because of these simple "balances" that were tried, that drove people away, they were incremental, nothing all at once but by the time of the rework it had devastated the CV player base. Which I know is where some of the players anti-cv sentiment comes from back when the rework was first done. They were used to not seeing a CV but once in 10 games or so, then CV's were viable again. Player base got interested again, there were real changes like you weren't being reduced to a floating barge anymore barren of planes or any way to influence the match. So more people came back and played. The rebalancing started again because some folks weren't happy, so CV's started losing their damage potential, plane armor, added attack delays, spotting limits, the list continues on. Even here when you read about proposals for CV's there isn't anything positive for CV's it's more about limiting what CV's should be losing then what CV's should be gaining, to make them more fun and enjoyable, to keep their planes alive, better tricks and attacks for example. Why are we struck with our planes locked going straight ahead into enemy flak and losing a flight just because we dropped a torpedo attack? Letting us setup a sharp turn away would be a great thing. Things along this nature I hope wouldn't be that bad to code in? If the ability to manual fire comes in, can I get the ability to encircle the ship and drop from all angles, and all altitudes? There were always counters to counters, it was part of war to try to out think your enemy. Sadly some just want to have someone else punished for them to have fun without consequences. Instead of limiting on how fighters work as a consumable, they need to work better. Especially for trying to help our allies with the Dutch strikes, or helping screen the fleet. I say it's time to stop limiting what a CV can do and look for ways it can help the team as well. There are I'm sure many things we could think of that could be added to CV's or to the odd tier CV's that were supposed to be coming back? If they are still in the system, a bit of updating and addition for either support or just bring them back as limited CV's for a 2 cv game, 1 fleet and 1 CVL/CVE could be very viable. I mean if we can have 10 DD's per game, then 2 CV's shouldn't be an issue. Promote the teamwork for countering what is in the game, I've seen Hallands and Shimie's sailing together to cover each other in Randoms which is wonderful to see (sucks as a CV though ;) ) There is no reason why this couldn't be promoted and advantages given for sailing like this. As it is now, the over lapping flak is murder, it feels like there was a subtle tweak there. CV planes could use some love as well, they've been stripped of their armor on the USN side for their legendary and given bomb upgrades as long as they give up HP. Regen can be a achilleas heel, every CV skipper knows this, and no matter how many times some folks talk about unlimited planes, the regen cycle even maxed out, in a game with serious AAA in it. Will chew through planes like a herd of goats in a field. So let's bring back plane armor, Midway and FDR are supposed to have tough planes. I'm sure your numbers will tell you how many of x planes have been shot down by y. From this end though, since 10.3 it really seems that the planes have become a bit squishy. Which could be like I said the AA or the planes. If we are stuck with the 3 second delay in attack for some reason at least in that time allow the reticle to zoom in much faster then it does so there is some benefit for the CV as well. As I doubt (as much as I wish we could get our DMG back) that we will be able to get the damage reductions removed. Even though so much has been done to CV's since then. If we COULD get our damage reductions removed I would be thrilled to hear this. Though I could be just as happy not having another arbitrary gimmick added to my cv attacks. This is just a small list of everything that CV's have gone through. Most of it honestly for 1 class. So can we please start showing some serious love back for CV's before we run off the player base again with the incremental pile on that's been started on since the rework, and which has never been stopped being called for by a group of the same names ever since? It's easy at times to get caught up in the noise as it gets to loud to remember everything before that noise. So yeah CV's have been nerfed/balanced for YEARS, with very little that's been done to make them more fun. The KM line has recently been balanced, for example for damage ability. When's the last time a CV had serious damage buff? I would say this though. If all of these balances are needed, and are great, then apply them to all ships one month from now. Put it on the splash page of the log in screen! I'm sure no one would mind! That gut reaction and feeling that just ran through your mind and body is all the reason I'm saying it's time to stop please and start reversing this.
  8. SweetBabyRuth

    Russian Bias

    If wargaming wants to keep its Russian bias, the tech tree Russian ships need buffed ASAP! With the changes to the commander skill tree, and the game meta now being shifted to torp boats, A/J line BB sniping and FDRs, short range specialized ships that are can tank a lot of damage a straight up bad. The only viable ship from the Russian navy is well.... Slava, and maybe Slava, oh and Slava. Even Smolensk doesn't really make sense when everything is already outside of 19 kilometers. So WG, if you care so much about your Russian ships, then you probably should buff them, or else there will be no reason to play them... even on the RU servers.
  9. Diddy_Kongs_Quest

    How about a solution....

    Since you have CVs that have infinite planes nearly and British BBs that have no problem destroying your AA builds and secondary builds in mere 2 savlos how about allowing us to be able to fix our modules every "?" amount of seconds depending on the module and the item destroyed. There is no way that British bbs should be able to one salvo all your modules which this game is riddled with Thunderers and HE even at lower tiers. It is cancerous and tiring to basically only viable build is anti-fire duration and chance build. No other build works on bbs with CV spam and British bbs. It is ludicrous, how can it be even remotely ok that you can't specc for anything else without being worried about every single module on your ship being literally invalidated by 2 ships lines? The British BB line and the CV line....it really doesn't make any development balance sense at all. This has ultimately kept me from enjoying ranked battles and any kind of competitive matches because I can't build anything else but against fire and fire chance. My modules break everytime I am hit by something. No recourse, this is beyond frustrating spending time building specific captains for specific functions...I don't even understand how the state of the game is even remotely balanced, and people are seeing this. The player base can see this and are getting tired of it WG. I am pretty sure they are fed up with this foolishness.
  10. ugafan56

    Wind over the deck

    Not sure where to post this. I don't mind CVs so much as the fact they don't have to ACT like CVs. They should not be able to be DIW and still launch. CVs have to have forward motion to create more wind over the deck to increase lift and be able to launch aircraft. There should not be any "hiding behind the rock".
  11. Anyone else here having trouble with the tier 4 CVs? Ive been having a lot of trouble with the slow grind so im wondering if anyone else is having a similar problem or if it is because i just suck. If people have any tips to help that would be wonderful too.
  12. ...getting into carriers. So I finally started tooling around with the two KM carriers that were dumped into my port. All of my battles have been in a training room. Gotta be honest, I just don't see the appeal. However, I'm thinking that CVs could lift up my stats, so why not try it?. I played an old 1990s carrier game for many years (15+) where due to it being a turn-based game you had time to review reports on the state of your squadrons. For example, they would list starting number of planes (12 to 16), shot down planes, and those needing repairs before being operational again. To get maximum return on your strikes you would coordinate your strikes so that both dive and torpedo bombers arrived at the target at the same time. This meant launching the slower torpedo bombers 30 to 60 minutes earlier depending on the distance involved. If the target was close enough, you could also provide fighter escort. In addition every morning at 6 AM when the sun came up you had to look at your number of available fighters and decide how many would be allocated to cap. Here in WOWS, there's none of that. It's like a first shooter game. Pew pew pew! Or am I missing something?
  13. So, @6Xero9 had called out and claimed, they feel CVs are balanced (and feel having this many CVs would be fine). Okay. So, I'd like Wargaming to do a 2-3 week experiment on live. And what is this experiment? Let's have 2-5 CVs per game. To people and those in WG who feel CVs are fine and support their existence, it seems the concerns and points raised to CVs fall onto deaf ears. And time and again, it is touted that people who dislike CVs are in the minority. Let's once and for all prove what's what to the question: Is CV balanced, or not? Now, i'm sure people will backpedal. But I want you to realize... by admission, if a ship type is balanced in relation to power over the rest, then there should be zero reason to treat the class special over the others. Right? Everyone should be able to play their pixel boats without a care in the world, whether he/she sees 4-5 BBs, CA/CLs, DDs, or even CVs. The rest of the classes can have that many, why can't CVs? In the end, let's put your money where your mouth is both WG and supporters of CVs: Gather the numbers and playerbase feedback after this experiment, and let's see what population numbers look like. And it will be very curious for those who not only oppose this simple and straight logic, for those who don't... Please outline why is it that CVs must keep a limit of 1-2, but also are balanced in power as opposed to any other ship type in the game. And please explain why this limit exists if its not for balance reasons. No matter which side you stand on, and if you even fall into that last category... I'm sure what people have to say in defense of both why CVs are balanced or OP will be interesting should this idea get attention. Additional thoughts: How about we let just two CVs in all games? Or the divisioning of two CVs? The reality is, the feedback of the players I doubt would change much.
  14. 07Beast109

    French Cvs

    Has anyone heard any talk about French Carriers, coming in game anytime. Since the French did actually build some CVs
  15. Well you give it the best you can given the circumstances: We were down a few hundred points, three ships to one carrier. I ask two other ships to stay afloat. Meanwhile I'm whittling down the enemy carrier. We are getting so close to winning when I see in chat: "Duhmm" and see one of our team got sunk. This, after we fought and clawed our way back. It was about to be an epic comeback. Epic I tell you. I was less than 20 seconds, maybe 15 from sinking the carrier. Team mate was determine to sink the carrier. Folks - there's almost no other ship in the game that's as dangerous to your ship's help than a carrier alone at the end of a match, fighting to save it's win. I can't comp him now cause the time ran out for comps. But you played well GG and well done victory for your team.
  16. Announcement! Italian Battleships! Yes, they are finally here! A whole new line of ships representing the Nation of Pasta Primavera! Italian battleships fire a unique kind of shell: Semi-armor piercing (SAP). This type of shell has a much greater chance of penetrating armor than a normal HE shell, but not quite as good as a true AP shell. However, the new SAP shells come with a 75% chance of starting a fire! Also, while Italian battleships are not as heavily armored as their contemporaries, they have a top speed of 38 knots, making them quite hard to hit while moving and allowing them to outrun most other battleships. We are proud to introduce Tier V Spaghetti, Tier VI Spaghetti and Meatballs, Tier VII Alfredo, and Tier VIII Alfredo con Pollo. Stay Tuned for More! GAME BALANCE CHANGES BATTLESHIPS AP shells are more skill-demanding for successful use than HE shells, but their efficiency is higher, if used correctly. The updated battleships constitute a relatively novel class in the game since they were almost exclusively used for shore bombardment and sea escort, and most players have been using them to delete other ships such as cruisers in a single salvo. Consequently, the overall damage dealt by this type of armament has become too high. We, therefore, decided to systematically lower the maximum damage of AP shells, but without lowering their penetration. All battleship AP shell damage will be lowered by 30%. We will watch independent performance of the ships and take additional action if needed.
  17. Herr_Reitz

    Bot carriers in PVE are stupid

    Today I rode along with a bot carrier in a PVE match. Which of course means I had already been splashed by the reds. Sort of on purpose. I wanted to see what the carrier did with its planes. Not much really. Flew past red BBs then dropped torps far too close to the target, not once, but three times. IMO, having such a ship playing is really worse than not having it play. Oh, I realize they are there for folks to get the shoot-down credits but seriously, put a little bite into those teeth. By the way... one of the reasons I enjoy playing CVs has to do with the battle view you get. There is not a lot of free-time with a carrier, but wow do you get to see a lot. Far too many players showing broadsides. Folks pushing when they (probably) know better. The clusters are interesting too... as if indecision were a tropical storm that has trapped three or four players together. But back to topic... I for one would like a little bit more "battle awareness" plugged into bot carriers please. What do you think? tia
  18. This is not a rant hating on CVS as an opponent. It is a rant about why I hate TRYING to play CVs. No tutorials or aids to help learn CVs CVs have very very few aids. AND the "aids" they have do no come with a description. For examples, the single biggest challenge DDs have is learning where to launch the torpedos. WG solved that with the white torp box. the indicator changes shades of white to indicate that a player needs to wait before their next attack. The not noticeable countdown timer is *NOT* like any other weapons timer anywhere else in the game. No ability to track how a torp attack does like you can with ship launched torps. Controls are unreliable A click to start the attack run and a click to complete the attack run. A good 30% of the time the UI fails to recognize the second click. As a result, the entire squadron get shot down and no attack is completed AND the previous MINUTE of gameplay has been lost. So much depends on the UI recognizing a click to the tenths of a second. WG get the UI so it does works EVERY TIME. the aim bounces all over the place no matter what i do to the mouse sensitivity The combination of these makes ATTEMPTING to learn CVs frustrating. Furthermore, WG continues to try to encourage CV play. WG if you really want CVs to be more than just a game ruiner - you need to address these issues.
  19. You want to defeat CVs? Sink them with battleship guns and the help of a fellow CV player. 'Nuff said.
  20. Okay, I've really hit my breaking point on people using AA ratings and bringing them up. If you look at the AA ratings, it's such an obscure number with so little meaning you think your AA is one thing yet you slaughter or get slaughtered by planes. So I'm going to give an overly simplified way to get an idea what your going to do to a CV's planes but it will require math on your end (unless I figure out an easy way to do it on a google sheet and/or people are willing to donate cash for the amount of time it will take me to run through every ship, CV, possible setup) Simply put what truly determines if your AA is good is how long planes are in your AA, and how much damage is done every second. It's why Kremlin at tier 10 outperforms Montana at downing planes, and Yamato seems pathetic. longer range is better and obviously, more damage is better, but truth be told you want both. Also, these are a general guideline - not insanely specific numbers (some planes will be faster, slower, more HP, less HP). Tier Speed (km/s) HP per plane 10 .5 km every second 2000 8 .45 km every second 1800 6 .4 km every second 15-1600 4 .35 km every second ~1400 So lets take Benson, tier 8 USN DD and put it against a tier 6 CV. You have the B hull, no flags/skills/modz. Long range is 5.8 km at 77 damage every second, short range is 2 km at 60 damage every second. Tier 6 average is .4 km and 1500 HP on the low end. Your long range AA will fire at them on the way in 14 times at 77 damage, and short range 5 times at 60 - roughly 1378 on the first attack run, just short of knocking a plane down. The C hull while taking away a little from long range and a lot from short range adds 49 DP at 3.5 km, meaning 8 seconds of damage - the overall change being an increase to 1525 - a better chance you down a plane in the first pass. Obviously DFAA (50% more damage) and sectors (varies) increase or decrease these numbers, but that is your rough baseline of what your ship can do against a CV of the tier without you doing anything. For any who want to do all the math for the most specific numbers - aircraft damage = AA Range/([plane speed in knots*2.6854]*1000) * DPS. The first part gets you time in AA, and then you multiply it by DPS number for that range. It's also a good idea of how long till a CV can hit you again - and to track them down by range. The number in the chart are if a CV can maintain maximum speed on planes (usually done on attack runs) - so generally, if a CV is hitting you every 90 seconds and is tier 6 - odds are he's roughly 6-9 grid squares away in the direction of the planes. Basically while there is some map size overlap - takes roughly 10 seconds for plane at a tier to cover a grid square in their tier range at top speed. That little chart is easier, and while not perfect - will give you a far better idea just what your AA can do against a CV than the nonsense port rating ever will.
  21. anonym_Hf93Jbjm9WjT

    Official WG CV poll

    I just recieved a popup inviting me to take part in a poll, asking me questions such as 'Do you like tier 8 CVs", of course I said yes... Anyone else get an in game invitation, recently, for a poll on CV popularity? being polled on whether or not I like CVs, nearly a year since the Rework, is not very reassuring, about the state of the game. I don't think I have ever been polled on dds, cruisers or battleships.
  22. Please note before reading: I understand that this idea may be a but controversial, and I understand that this mechanic will most likely not be implemented. It is just a proposal, so please do not go typing how “this will never be implemented, and cvs are cancer and should be removed.” If you agree to the notice then feel free to move on, if not then I can’t help you. Context: In world war 2, bombs of all kinds were made and used during the many battles both at sea and on land. In WOWS, bombs can ONLY cause damage if they directly hit the target ship. In real life however, in the case of such ships as Yamato and Musashi, bombs could cause damage to a ship even if they didn’t directly hit the vessel. (Even on the wrecks of both ships there is evidence of damage cause by “near misses” where bombs exploded in the water and still caused damage to the ship below the waterline.) What I want to propose is a mechanic where when a carrier’s planes bomb a ship or shoot missiles at a ship, then they have a 1 in 8 chance to cause damage to a ship through near misses. Also, the near miss has a 1 in 20 chance to cause flooding to a ship if the damage is enough. (These numbers are just a temporary value and can be changed if needed, which they most likely will.) As for missiles, they could have a lesser chance to cause damage from near misses. For example, a bomb would have a 1 in 8 chance with a 1 in 20 percent chance for a near miss to cause flooding, while a missile would have a 1 in 10 chance with no chance of the near miss to cause flooding. (Again these values can be changed if they aren’t random enough or could occur too often.) Another thing, each bomb that doesn’t hit the target has its own individual change to cause a near miss, and if needed, the chance of causing damage from a near miss can decrease the further from the target ship a bomb hits. What do you think of my proposal? Do you like it or hate it? Check Yay if you agree, Nay if you don’t, and Meh if you think that there are some changes that could make it better! I’d also love to see a comment explaining why you agree, disagree, or stating what changes you’d like to see! (ALSO please be kind! Remember, Fish are Friends, Not Food!!! 😉)
  23. Like them or not, the community is really torn about CVs. I'm on the hate side, but I think i have a legitimate solution on how to keep them in the game, but make them 1) more rewarding 2) Increased danger 3) strategic in way that benefits all classes. This is my gamification of what I learned from watching a youtube video on the Battle of Midway and the struggles the CVs actually faced at the time. 1) Range Currently there is no range restriction. You can get in a squadron and just fly forever until you fire a few times or get shot down. There is no urgency to using the squad and no detriment to going to the wrong location or just flying forever to find that last DD when the rest of your team is dead. Where you fly should matter, and unplanned random discovery flights are unfair to classes that rely on stealth. The ideal distance would be between 14km - 18km depending on the type of plane used / country. This would become a stat that differentiates the carriers. They have stats now, but they all feel about the same. Range +1 km would also be a good captains skill as long as it's a choice between another valuable stat like faster flying or additional plane in a squad in the 4th tier. 2) Invincibility for average intelligence As long as you aren't a complete idiot, staying alive in a CV is really easy for the first 5 minutes minimum, and many matches it's easy to never even feel threatened in an even match. Decisions should have consequences. The range forces the CVs to move forward to deploy a squad (stay with me CV players). The idea that a CV isn't under threat during a battle is not based on anything but a lack of a realistic mechanic that works. 3) Plans instead of Spam CVs don't have 3 fully geared squads ready to go at any given time. Choices are made in advance. It should be at least as time consuming to attach a torpedo to a plane as it is swap between HE and AP. This also increases the value of pre-selecting the right type of plane to suit your current objective. Now, the CVs benefit from DD spotting more than they prevent DDs from being able to spot. Class balance is returning, and DDs are being given a chance to be DDs. Launching ships requires nothing right now and it shouldn't be so boring. When CVs are maneuvering, you aren't launching planes. Ideally, a squad should be taking off into the wind, but I would accept that it has to be moving at a minimum between 12kps and 18kps to give make launching a squad more meaningful. You can't just sit behind the island and spam from your magical deck of 3 ready to launch squads. There should also be time added when an unused ship needs to be stripped down from one use and converted. 4) In real life, explosions aren't an issue you solve with a signal When prepping for a strike, the CV is most vulnerable due to high-explosives being more exposed to shells, fire and shrapnel. This real life danger isn't represented. Shooting a CV feels like shooting a cinder block that operates separate from it's bombardment. CVs should be more susceptible to damage when struck on the deck with a squad being prepped. Maybe you thought having 40 torpedos on the deck that you might use later is save until one gets hit and a chain reaction kills you for littering your deck with explosives. This only works if there is flight setup time, but just adding arbitrary boring time onto the game feels like it would be arbitrary and boring... Call it redundant. Now, you start with a set amount of planes, and you can queue up their equipment set. Best of all, you can make choices. 5) Strategy and consequences Send all 50 at once for a massive attack, but now you have no planes equipped to be a fighter, so you are extra weak if the other CV comes after you. Might want to have 5 dressed out fighters on standby to defend your ship. Might not want to risk everything as you can the attack would be bigger, but not necessarily more ships sunk. That will be the most challenging gameplay balance. What is the incentive to risking more planes? Maybe you need 10 dive bombers and a 10 fighter escort. This is going to really ramp up CV strategy and create a higher skill gap then someone crosstorping using 1 move over and over again to set damage records, without ever being in danger of running out of ships or someone shooting their boat. If you lose a plane, it's gone and there will not be a magic plane building factory in the CV anymore. This might also help with that nightmare scenario when after a tough battle there is a team that has a DD and say a Cruiser both low on health, and the other has a CV that had 100 planes shot down and can now make a few more to kill the Cruiser with a DB and the DD with rockets... make from magic. If the CV stashed a couple away for an emergency, that's great, but he would have to sacrifice more defense or offense throughout if he doesn't utilize all of his planes earlier when they could have tilted the scales. 6) Fighters as spotters Sure, but they run out of gas and have to fly back, which means if you want them up for more than a few seconds, they have to start close to the CV. no more dropping a fighter on A 10 because a ship has terrible detectability by air and can't shoot the fighter down 12km away. This also would ideally remove the dpm types from crapping out a fighter on their way to flying on magic fuel. if you want a fighter, go for it, It will leave from your deck if you have one queued up, and it will probably die, then it's gone forever. Now they matter and aren't just another way to dump on the DDs trying to play. 7) DPM These changes obviously reduce the frequency of attacks, but they allow for bigger and more complex attacks. Fighters on a BB can get their butts kicked by the 10 that came along, but those 10 will probably get shot down. Bigger attack, bigger risk. 8) The dumbest thing The dumbest thing that is effective on this game is loading a plane, taking off, then immediately firing a third of the arms you loaded into the ocean so those planes will be ready faster... I get it. It's a game. But please remove this. This had to be on the list of nonsense you wanted to get out of the game, but ran out of runway to fix. You just sold a bunch of 'ships' for 25k dubloons... for Christmas. Make some runway, we deserve it and the guys that bought the PR paid for it. Best part is it's not a total overhaul. Rather than boost, you have range, you might consider burning range faster in exchange for boost, but the logic is minimal, the CVs gain more character, the DDs get to play the game again and if you suck... (the best part)... we can kill you without having to take ourselves out of the game to do it. 9) The spotter plane Rarely did a fighter plane circle over AA and take it until they died. CVs would send out spotters. They had a big area to cover, usually flew out like bicycle spokes then cut a few degrees and came back. Less likely to be shot down, but less likely to radio back while in fight. Last knows update when the spotters return to the ship.
  24. https://time.com/5768426/uss-miller-navy/ extract from the article (click to read more in you are interested) "The U.S. Navy announced Sunday that it’s naming an aircraft carrier after World War II hero Mess Attendant 2nd Class Doris Miller, making him the first African-American to have an aircraft carrier named in his or her honor. Miller is noted for his heroics during the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor, when he took control of a machine gun on the U.S.S. West Virginia and fired back at Japanese planes. He later received the Navy Cross for valor, making him the first African-American to receive the honor. The U.S.S Miller, a destroyer escort, was previously named after him. That vessel was decommissioned in 1991. “Doris Miller stood for everything that is good about our nation, and his story deserves to be remembered and repeated wherever our people continue the watch today,” Acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas B. Modly said in a press statement."
  25. Charlie2Pen

    CV vs DD balance

    so I've been playing for four years and took an eight month break to come back and find that CV's have made destroyers completely obsolete. I did my homework and have seen that this has been an issue since the rework just after i stopped playing and has been hot fixed over and over and yet I'm still getting 1 shot by rockets within two minutes of the game starting. if i even look at a flag the wrong way i get 2 fires, broken engine and rudder along with the 3/4ths of my health it hit me for. how is this considered balanced? I know people must get tired of hearing dd players complain but I'm not even a dedicated destroyer player i only have 2 T10 dd's working on my 3rd. i just think there needs to be some compromise, obviously you cant have dds be immune or they go carrier hunting and then that's unbalanced but the game isn't in a healthy spot as it is. this is my first time ever posting a topic, never even commented on one i usually believe in sucking it up and just dealing with it but i really want to know if its just me not being good with dd's and it really isn't that bad, or is this still an issue?