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
    • 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 94 results

  1. Hello Everyone, this is your Ops Guru Lordholland4293, @HyperFish I have completed the cv guide and positioning that you have asked for that covers the Germans, Japanese, Americans, Soviet, and British Carriers. I would like to announce that I am officially pursing an application for the WoWs CC Program, so I can better represent the WoWs Operations Community. I will be streaming twitch tomorrow on April 12, for my birthday and will be hanging in my discord channel if anyone wants to join me and play some ops doing some meme, advance tactics and just have fun. @Ahskance @Boggzy I will be in my discord channel today if you want to talk and want to ask for advice or play some games. https://discord.gg/4xdPdz9v
  2. WG CVs suck and need to be (nerfed to h*ll) "balanced". Thank you. Now for the actual post. One major thing that is currently missing from CV gameplay, that was fun during RTS, is CV vs CV combat. As of now CV gameplay is pretty one sided and bland. Some ideas to improve the situation: 1. Put back odd tier CVs for IJN and USN and Royal Navy. 2. Make a new ful line of CVs for both USN and IJN, they got enough real and developed ships to have 2 lines of CVs each. 3. Make the reload time for the auto DCP much(as in much longer) longer. This will allow for CV vs CV duels to be relevant. 4. CAP Fighters should not be an auto feature. Make them manual, CV vs CV should be more then 1 strike. 5. Improve low tier plane survival, and nerf high tier plane survival. 6. After all these changes make a CV brawl mode, with 1 BB 2 CA/CL and 3 CVs per team. With BBs and Cruisers being bots if human players will not be found. A. The brawl mode would be active during most populous time for the server, to prevent player drain. P.S. first statement is bait.
  3. 6fingeredman

    Sub and CV Spotting

    The recent dev blog has me thinking about spotting mechanics again so here are two ideas I have for subs and cvs. Idea for submarines. Subs should be required to maintain "radio silence" and therefore not report to their teammates positions of the enemy team. If they break radio silence, the red team can intercept and view their position. This could be done through the use of a consumable or command like AA sectoring. Similarly cv planes shouldn't be able to spot unless they "radio in" the position of an enemy ship. In order to "radio in" the planes must maintain visual contact with the enemy. "Radioing" in the position requires the planes to hold a bearing in order to pinpoint it's location thereby lowering it's evasiveness and making it easier to shoot down. Again this could be done through a consumable or command. Limitless spotting is a frustrating and oftentimes one-sided engagement. These ideas are perhaps a nice middle ground.
  4. This is Part one of what will likely be a two-part series on how Wargaming can fix World of Warships. Part one will focus on CV’s and surface ship interaction. Part two will focus on Subs, Superships and cruisers. One of the longest and most contentious interactions spanning multiple variations throughout the history of the game is the CV-Surface ship interaction. After years of testing and adjustments, Wargaming finally threw up their hands and said we give up (And moved on to subs). Well fast forward a year or two and we have a sizeable chunk of data and gameplay history to finally accurately adjust the interactions between these two ship types. Many of the changes may be bold, they may be painful but they are also essential to the health, balance and longevity of this game. So without further delay lets get to it. This is what needs to be changed 1. All continuous damage over time AA values increased by 50% 2. Flack gains .3k range or one second on outgoing planes to negate the range lost when attacking planes enter the AA bubble due to fire delay. 3. Time delay between flak calculating lead and time of explosion is reduced by 50%. Furthermore, flak has a slightly greater dispersion ellipse. With these two values combined. You can no longer dodge flak. However, you may still be able to negate (roughly) up to 25% of full-on flak damage by not getting bullseyed by it. 4. Defensive AA Fire consumable values reduced. Flak damage increase reduced from 300% down to 100%. For nationality flare, High tier US Defensive AA only reduced to 150% increased flak damage. Additionally defensive AA now causes CV ordinance ellipse circle to increase by 50% 5. CV Plane repair consumables removed from the game and replaced with plane recall consumable. The recall consumable has 4 uses. When used it immediately recalls the (2) most damaged planes in the attack squadron. The planes immediately become immune to damage and fly back to the carrier. On a two minute rut. 6. Airplane Speed boost removed from the game. 7. CV plane loadout increased by 50% 8. Attack plane squadron sizes increased by 100% 9. CV plane regeneration speed increased by 50% 10. Minimum Plane turn radius increased by 30% 11. Defensive AA expert achievement required planes shot down increases from 35 to 50. 12. Immunity timer for planes is removed. 13. There is a 5 second delay after dropping ordinance before a squadron can be recalled. 14. There is a 5 second delay after recall before a new squadron call be launched. 15. All ordinance damage values reduced by 25% 16. Skip bombers- Bombs only arm after the second skip. Bombs lose 20% of their speed per skip. 17. Minimum flak ranges reduced to 1.5k. 18. Ship fighter squadrons improved- The consumable now launches 4 6 or 8 planes. The planes now fly an additional 1k further out and in two separate squadrons so as to have a defensive flight on each side of the ship at any time. The fighters will engage attacking planes far enough out as to effect skip bombers before they can drop their ordinance. The effect will be as prior to the CV rework. All ordinance ellipses are increased by 50% for the duration that the fighters are on the attack squadron. The fighters will shoot down planes typical as currently in game. However, after those planes are shot down the fighters remain on the attack squadron for 15 seconds to maintain the ellipse effect. For the attack squadron, upon dropping on the target ship and effectively flying over the ship the second defensive fighter squadron will engage the attack squadron and shoot down an additional 2-4 planes and provide an additional 15 seconds of ellipse effect. If the attack squadron leaves the target ships cap circle, any remaining fighters will remain in the air. Any remaining ellipse effect will be reset to a max of 15 seconds* but no further planes will be shot down. (*Ellipse effect will be in effect any time fighters engage the attacking squadron but the effect time will not begin counting down until the attack squadron is inside the target ships defensive AA ranges.) If the enemy CV drops fighters on defensive fighters, only one defensive fighter squadron will be consumed to combat the cv fighters. The second squadron of defensive fighters will then take over entire ship duties. 19. Priority target no longer reduces non priority target side AA. 20. CV Fighters no longer spot ships for anyone other than the CV, however the minimap will show locations of CV fighter spotted ships. 21. Ships will gain 10% continuous damage for each tier under the opposing CV’s tier. 22. Ships will lose 10% continuous damage for each tier over the opposing CV’s tier 23. For 2 CV’s of different tiers, the tier’s will be combined and divided by 2 for AA adjustment purposes listed above. 24. When a plane drops its ordinance it no longer leaves the squadron and returns to the CV. Instead it stays with the attack squadron until the squadron is recalled. AA prioritizes damage the same to all planes weather they have dropped ordinance or not. 25. Each ordinance dropped by attacking squadrons consumes exactly 1/3 of the total squadrons ordinance regardless of planes in the flight. Meaning each attack squadron can drop up to three times. Larger attack squadron CV’s get a buffer to planes lost before the third drop begins to lose ordinance. This buffer scales for all cv’s to where Soviet CV’s for example get no buffer. Additionally, the hit to ordinance left in the attack flight is reduced only by planes with ordinance being shot down. That means before the first drop, 100% of planes shot down effect the ordinance level of the attacking flight. After the first drop, 1/3rd of the planes will no longer have ordinance and if shot down will not count against further ordinance amounts. (WG programmers will have to work on this one) 26. Anti-aircraft training ability added to the game. This ability gives stacking tiers of AA efficiency to any ship whose AA fires at an enemy CV’s attack squadrons. This ability works similar to BB Manuel secondary battery Aiming. For each second a CV attack squadron is inside the AA bubble of a ship, that ships AA damage over time increases by 1% (2% per second for ships without AA ranges of 4k or more). This effect stacks up to 100% increase to AA damage. If no attack squadrons enter the effected ships AA bubble for 2 minutes, any buff will reduce at a rate of 1% per second 27. Finally, now with Subs done consuming massive programming demands. WG can finally work on player controlled AA. Just like main guns get their aiming views, torps get theirs, and attack planes get theirs. Now WG should get to work on an AA aiming system for the player. This part is under development but the general outline goes like this. You press a number (like 1 for HE shells, 2 for AP shells, 3 for torps, in this example 4 is for the AA view). When in AA view you can still control your ship with the normal keys but your view and as such your aim or bullseye is controlled by your mouse. The center wheel on your mouse is your range finder for focusing your fire on the proper distance of the enemy squadron. When switching to the view it will be focused on the attacking squadron if they are in your AA bubble but the guns will take 1 second to start damaging under manual control. Manuel control can produce up to an additional 50% greater AA damage on attacking squadrons. But just like depth charges, missing your mark greatly reduces the effectiveness. The average player should be able to obtain around a 25% boost to damage over time values from manual firing AA. While flak should be negligible, however removing the additional flak dispersion that was added in Change #3 above for manual fire may be a nice bonus. Well that’s the road map to a bigger better more enjoyable gaming experience in regards to surface ships vs CV’s. Reducing the speed at which CV’s can put out squadrons means they need to take better care and better decisions on the ones they currently have up. Planning for multiple attacks will reward the CV player more than quick drops and recalls. Additionally picking on the same ship over and over will result in greater and greater losses as their AA training will start to add up. This will encourage CV player to find new targets as opposed to griefing the same lone ship or poor AA ship over and over. Anti-aircraft consumables will be worth something again. In the current system, if your flak didn’t down the entire enemy squadron in one massive poof it was almost like what’s the point? Swatting large numbers of planes from the sky on one flak salvo may not happen like before but at least you gain the protection of reducing the attacking planes ability to do significant damage. As for the fighters, well people been saying what’s the point every time they’ve pushed the consumable button for the last few years so that change is long overdue. In closing I’d like to say that I hope you read these changes with an open mind. The CV/Surface ship interaction needs to be improved. These changes I think address a lot of the problems that currently exist. Yes, tweaks will likely need to be made (hopefully not 2 years plus worth of tweaks) but this is the basis for a better future. As I said in the opening. This is only part one of a two part series on “Making Surface Ships Great Again”, or “2023 the Year of the Surface Ship” or whatever you want to call it. I hope you enjoyed, I look forward to the conversation and I’m sure flames. Merry Christmas and all that jazz.
  5. It is well pass time to limit CVs to one per team per match. It is time to limit subs to one per team per match. These matches with 2 CVs need to stop. The matches with 3 subs need to stop. The matches with 2-3 subs and 2 CV per team REALLY needs to STOP! Put a hard limit on these classes per team.
  6. So, today on youtube, most of the WOWS channels are pointing out the problems with CVs and Subs. These videos were dropped hours apart from two different youtubers on two different continents. When the people who do this for a living are saying the game isn't fun anymore maybe something is wrong. We all know the player base is has taken a hit since the introduction of subs, yeah, WG puts out propaganda charts to show everything is fine comrades, but steam shows a different story over the last two months. https://steamcharts.com/app/552990 So, maybe it's time to go back to the drawing board with subs? Maybe CV's as well? Bah who am I kidding, this post will be deleted and I'll be banned from forums, but hey, I did point out what's going on.
  7. Grand_Admiral_Murrel

    CV Torpedo Skills - Give 'em Hell

    Yes, this is a CV thread. I want to keep this thread productive, so please refrain from posting inflammatory comments. That out of the way, let's get to the point: I was misinformed about how to improve my torpedo bombers. I'm not a good CV player. In fact, I'm a pretty terrible CV player. I've played a fair bit of the UK CVs, and purchased the X Max Immelman with coal. I like these ships for their torpedo armaments, which are powerful against big, slow targets like battleships. Naturally, I wanted to take all of the skills and upgrades to improve the performance of the torpedo bombers to make them the best they could be, right? Well, no, not exactly. Let your Uncle Murrel explain. When you look at your CV torpedo bombers in port, you see several values: plane HP, plane speed, torpedo speed, arming distance, etc. This is good and all, but it's kinda deceptive. The key variable that is not shown is arming time. Arming time is what defines torpedo arming distance. The shorter the torpedo arming time, the shorter the torpedo arming distance, the closer they can be dropped to a target. So, let's assume that you want to play the X Malta, the newest CV to be added to the live server. Malta has a powerful torpedo bomber squadron with 35 knot torpedoes and a 470 meter arming distance. Previously, I would have wanted to take the Aerial Torpedoes Modification 1 (slot 3) upgrade and Swift Fish (2-point) skill. Both grant a +5% speed boost. Keeping in mind that the bonuses are multiplicative (not additive), the resultant torpedo speed would be 38.6 knots. So, my torpedoes should hit the target sooner, right? Yes and no; it's complicated. Assuming you want to drop your torpedoes as close to the target as possible, then the answer's no. The arming time is still the same as before, so while the torpedoes do travel through the water faster, that means they have to travel further to arm in the same amount of time. So, the target has the same time to react, but the torpedoes have to be dropped from further away in order to arm. This isn't really an issue, unless you're trying to drop torpedoes close to islands and whatnot. However, the torpedoes will hit your target sooner as you drop your torpedoes further from the target. So, it really depends on how you like to drop your fish. Let's assume you now add the superly-originally-named Torpedo Bomber skill, which reduces torpedo arming distance by 10%. What this actually does is reduce the torpedo arming time by 10%, allowing your torpedoes to be dropped - you guessed it - 10% closer to the target. So, you've equipped the Aerial Torpedoes Modification 1 upgrade, the Swift Fish skill, and the Torpedo Bomber skill. This has to mean your torps are waaaaay better than they were stock, right? LOL nope. In fact, the arming distance is a whole 0.781% better. Literally less than 1%. The thing is, the speed buffs and the torpedo arming distance buff effectively cancel each other out. Sure, the torpedoes are faster and will hit targets that are further away sooner, but the torpedo arming distance is basically unaltered. So, what does this all mean? Well, here's my opinion: the torpedo speed bonuses are not worth it. In fact, they are detrimental. Let's face it, the 35 knot torpedoes found on most CVs are too slow. 38.6 knots with both speed buffs is still too slow. Fast/maneuverable targets will be able to dodge targets with the same ease. Battleships will still get punished (sorry). However, taking the Torpedo Bomber skill alone is, in my opinion, a much better skill. As mentioned above, it allows torpedoes to be dropped 10% closer and enemy ships have 10% less time to react. Do not take the Swift Fish skill or the Aerial Torpedoes Modification 1 upgrade; any other skill and upgrade is a better investment of your skill points and/or credits.
  8. 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
  9. 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!!
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. 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!
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. 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.
  16. 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".
  17. 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.
  18. ...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?
  19. 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.
  20. 07Beast109

    French Cvs

    Has anyone heard any talk about French Carriers, coming in game anytime. Since the French did actually build some CVs
  21. 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.
  22. 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.
  23. 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
  24. 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.
  25. You want to defeat CVs? Sink them with battleship guns and the help of a fellow CV player. 'Nuff said.