Proposed CV and Submarine changes discussion thread

[Jakob Knight]

Something to keep in mind is that these changes are on the same magnitude as the CV Rework, and will change how just about all battles will play out.  We don't know how these changes will work together or with existing game setups, and won't until we see them in action (we can make educated guesses but no big change can be completely predicted).  It is almost certain they will trigger other changes afterwards as the new game environment stabilizes around them, and those could include more additions or subtractions to every type of ship.

 

This is why I am now trying to hold off most doom-and-gloom predictions other than the blatantly obvious points that I think we all are scratching our heads about.  The article doesn't spell out all the changes nor the ripple effect changes, so we can probably expect the year or so following them will be dynamic in how many coconuts WG is going to be juggling at one time.

 

[Nevermore135]

17 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I don't think the HE airstrike is practically useful against subs...so claiming that they can't have ASW planes because of it is either disingenuous or direct evidence of how WG developers don't understand the game at all.

The HE bombs cannot harm a sub at depth, but they do provide an additional ability to saturate the area around a ping marker and catch a sub that is running on the surface to conserve battery. IIRC, one of the changes made in testing was to make the location of the ping marker more random and less precise, so the devs obviously intend for the built-in ambiguity of that system to be a large part of a sub’s defensive capabilities. High tier ships are limited to only two stackable uses of their ASW airstrikes, after all.

The devs obviously overestimated the ability of the HE airstrikes to meaningfully affect submarines, otherwise they wouldn’t have changed their tune regarding how the HE airstrikes were supposedly effective sub countermeasures on their own and given the ships depth charges. I don’t agree at all with the decision to give Dutch CAs standard depth charges, and in fact I believe that all cruisers should have ASW airstrikes in some form. WG should instead balance cruiser ASW by manipulating things like damage per charge, number of charges per drop/number of uses that can be stacked, ASW range, etc.

Edited December 22, 2023 by Nevermore135

[Jakob Knight]

2 minutes ago, Nevermore135 said:

The HE bombs cannot harm a sub at depth, but they do provide an additional ability to saturate the area around a ping marker and catch a sub that is running on the surface to conserve battery. IIRC, one of the changes made in testing was to make the location of the ping marker more random and less precise, so the devs obviously intend for the built-in ambiguity of that system a large part of a sub’s defensive capabilities. High tier ships are limited to only two stackable uses of their ASW airstrikes, after all.

The devs obviously overestimated the ability of the HE airstrikes to meaningfully affect submarines, otherwise they wouldn’t have changed their tune regarding how the HE airstrikes were supposedly effective sub countermeasures on their own and given the ships depth charges. I don’t agree at all with the decision to give Dutch CAs standard depth charges, and in fact I believe that all cruisers should have ASW airstrikes in some form. WG should instead balance cruiser ASW by manipulating things like damage per charge, number of charges per drop/number of uses that can be stacked, ASW range, etc.

I think it has more to do with that giving Dutch Cruisers both ASDC and AS Bombs would give the CA the chance to decoy a prospective target's DFAA by sending in an ASDC that looks about the same on the minimap, or that there is some kind of code conflict in having two different kinds of airstrike consumable on a single ship.  I don't think I ever saw WG state the normal AS Bombs were supposed to work as an ASW weapon, but I may have missed that.  

 

Of course, it might just be a flavor thing, such as why USN paper BBs never got torps or KM ships never got radar.

 

 

[ArIskandir]

36 minutes ago, Nevermore135 said:

I think this has more do do with the fact that the combination of the HE bomb airstrike and ASW airstrike (both of which can be stacked to drop multiple in quick succession) could combine for a very large amount of damage or a very wide “net” against a sub that is “detected” by pinging.

Much more likely it is to keep things simple for players and avoid the confusion of having two different types of Airstrikes... it would be very easy to mistake one for the other and waste the attack by mistake, would be a frequent and infuriating situation... easily prevented by having just one type of Airstrike. I'm fairly sure the whatever potential ASW performance is a non-factor, just the pure gameplay issue of having two similar "keys" doing very different things. 

41 minutes ago, Nevermore135 said:

I think D7P is the only ship in the game that has the combination of both HE and ASW airstrikes.

D7P has never had ASW Airstrikes (unless something changed recently). As a CL she has standard DCs. 

 

[Nevermore135]

5 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said:

I don't think I ever saw WG state the normal AS Bombs were supposed to work as an ASW weapon, but I may have missed that.  

This was the official company line parroted by the CMs whenever complaints about Dutch cruisers’ lack of ASW armament was brought up.

6 minutes ago, Jakob Knight said:

Of course, it might just be a flavor thing, such as why USN paper BBs never got torps or KM ships never got radar.

Honestly, I don’t have a problem with the former, as it’s an example of a “flavor” inspired by historical precedent, i.e. the USN forgoing torpedoes on their larger ships in the years leading up to WWII. Constellation still having torpedos is actually one of the major things about the ship that bugs me (the other being she has the wrong guns), as if the ships were built they probably would have had their torpedoes removed when modernized like USN BBs and CAs.

[Nevermore135]

8 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

Much more likely it is to keep things simple for players and avoid the confusion of having two different types of Airstrikes... it would be very easy to mistake one for the other and waste the attack by mistake, would be a frequent and infuriating situation... easily prevented by having just one type of Airstrike. I'm fairly sure the whatever potential ASW performance is a non-factor, just the pure gameplay issue of having two similar "keys" doing very different things. 

No more easy than selecting the wrong shell type by mistake, or selecting the wrong tactical squadron with the upcoming USN CVs. I can’t really buy this argument. Any halfway competent players would quickly pass this skill check.

8 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

D7P has never had ASW Airstrikes (unless something changed recently). As a CL she has standard DCs. 

Fair enough, I was going off memory. I probably got my wires crossed and equated her always having ASW when other Dutch cruisers didn’t with having airstrikes. And just being a CL shouldn’t feed an expectation for a ship to have standard DCs, as several premium CLs and US and French tech-tree CLs have ASW airstrikes, along with some IJN CLs.

Edited December 22, 2023 by Nevermore135

[ArIskandir]

25 minutes ago, Nevermore135 said:

No more easy than selecting the wrong shell type by mistake, or selecting the wrong tactical squadron with the upcoming USN CVs. I can’t really buy this argument. Any halfway competent players would quickly pass this skill check.

You don't need to convince me, I'm not the game designer... just telling you how those guys think and the guidelines they use when designing. 

[Sailor_Moon]

2 hours ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

Posts cannot be edited after a period of time, as things are now, though.

Oh. Didn't know that. ~-~°('. ' )°~-~

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

1 hour ago, Jakob Knight said:

Something to keep in mind is that these changes are on the same magnitude as the CV Rework, and will change how just about all battles will play out.  We don't know how these changes will work together or with existing game setups, and won't until we see them in action (we can make educated guesses but no big change can be completely predicted).  It is almost certain they will trigger other changes afterwards as the new game environment stabilizes around them, and those could include more additions or subtractions to every type of ship.

 

This is why I am now trying to hold off most doom-and-gloom predictions other than the blatantly obvious points that I think we all are scratching our heads about.  The article doesn't spell out all the changes nor the ripple effect changes, so we can probably expect the year or so following them will be dynamic in how many coconuts WG is going to be juggling at one time.

 

Considering how the CV rework and sub addition has gone...

...the very scope of these changes is cause for some doom and gloom worrying.

If the guys on the stream were nervous...we are even more so.

1 hour ago, Nevermore135 said:

The HE bombs cannot harm a sub at depth, but they do provide an additional ability to saturate the area around a ping marker and catch a sub that is running on the surface to conserve battery. IIRC, one of the changes made in testing was to make the location of the ping marker more random and less precise, so the devs obviously intend for the built-in ambiguity of that system to be a large part of a sub’s defensive capabilities. High tier ships are limited to only two stackable uses of their ASW airstrikes, after all.

The devs obviously overestimated the ability of the HE airstrikes to meaningfully affect submarines, otherwise they wouldn’t have changed their tune regarding how the HE airstrikes were supposedly effective sub countermeasures on their own and given the ships depth charges. I don’t agree at all with the decision to give Dutch CAs standard depth charges, and in fact I believe that all cruisers should have ASW airstrikes in some form. WG should instead balance cruiser ASW by manipulating things like damage per charge, number of charges per drop/number of uses that can be stacked, ASW range, etc.

Dutch air strikes take so long, a sub can just dive and be perfectly safe.

The fact that WG developers didn't understand this and it took over a year of people pointing out the obvious is not a good look.

53 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

You don't need to convince me, I'm not the game designer... just telling you how those guys think and the guidelines they use when designing. 

I'd be happier if you didn't try to explain for other people how third parties think.

You aren't WG staff. Let them speak for themselves, please.

Edited December 22, 2023 by Daniel_Allan_Clark

[ArIskandir]

28 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

You aren't WG staff. Let them speak for themselves, please.

For obvious reasons that's not a thing that's gonna happen any time soon. Having a different perspective than your own might probe useful to expand your comprehesion of a situation. 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

1 minute ago, ArIskandir said:

For obvious reasons that's not a thing that's gonna happen any time soon. Having a different perspective than your own might probe useful to expand your comprehesion of a situation. 

I'd be happy to listen to their perspective...in a format that is free from WG senior leadership and marketing team.

[ArIskandir]

4 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I'd be happy to listen to their perspective...in a format that is free from WG senior leadership and marketing team.

Unless you go for a drink with them or something like that, I very much doubt they'll set for record any declaration that can come back to bite them in the arse. As the saying goes: "You wash the dirty clothes at home". 

And that's not just a WG thing, you won't hear me say "dirty stuff" about my employeer, unless it is some criminal-degree sh!t and I'm going hands on to stop it. 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

16 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

Unless you go for a drink with them or something like that, I very much doubt they'll set for record any declaration that can come back to bite them in the arse. As the saying goes: "You wash the dirty clothes at home". 

And that's not just a WG thing, you won't hear me say "dirty stuff" about my employeer, unless it is some criminal-degree sh!t and I'm going hands on to stop it. 

They seem to have no problem sending out things for record...as long as those statements are untrue.

😉

[OldSchoolGaming_Youtube]

4 hours ago, Nevermore135 said:

I think this has more do do with the fact that the combination of the HE bomb airstrike and ASW airstrike (both of which can be stacked to drop multiple in quick succession) could combine for a very large amount of damage or a very wide “net” against a sub that is “detected” by pinging. I don’t think the devs want these ships to be that effective at saturating an area and counteracting the built-in uncertainty of the ping location markers.

That doesn’t mean it still doesn’t feel bad playing these ships. I think D7P is the only ship in the game that has the combination of both HE and ASW airstrikes.

If thats so, then why do both my Kearsarge and Louisiana have Airplane squadrons with bombs and rockets, AND 10 or 11 km Air ASWs AND Secondarys AND Main guns (thats you can quick switch to while using planes to spot)?

These ships has 4 ways of countering Subs close by and Dutch Heavy Cruisers cant get 2? One of which (HE bombs) cant really be considered a counter to sub players with brains. So ONE counter!? They cant get ONE real counter to subs that dont involve suicide?

I would go out on a limb here and say, WG has not considered this in any way since this would mean the sub captain is a bot and dont know how to submerge when spotted, which about 100 % of sub captains do, unless they are newbs that already spend their battery looking at fishes.

I think a way more logical reason is that Dutch heavy cruisers share ONE THING with most light cruisers that also not getting the plane ASW ... thye sit close to caps and plane ASW just like for Mino, Wooster etc would actually be effective countering subs.

But we can all choose how we want to interpret WGs strange choice of implementing things. (not saying im right here btw, just that this BS is Suss of Epic proportions).

Guess who has the best in game BS Headshot Aimbot Plane ASWs in the game ....? ............... CV Guys that sits parked in top right corner! Why you say....? Hes WGs other protected class and shouldn't have to deal with things like rushing Subs ... just like its to hard to use its damage con ..... (thats are up for a whole minute...) ... also has Tesla Auto pilot so dont really have to do anything with his ship at all...

[Nevermore135]

48 minutes ago, OldSchoolGaming_Youtube said:

If thats so, then why do both my Kearsarge and Louisiana have Airplane squadrons with bombs and rockets, AND 10 or 11 km Air ASWs AND Secondarys AND Main guns (thats you can quick switch to while using planes to spot)?

Because those planes operate under fundamentally different mechanics, and to compare them to the types I was discussing is comparing apples to oranges. Those are tactical squadrons, requiring manual control like CV aircraft, while the HE airstrikes and ASW planes use the same “fire and forget” mechanic that drops their ordinance on an area of the ocean (it’s pretty obvious in hindsight that the former served as a mechanical testbed for the latter). High tier Dutch cruisers can stack two HE airstrikes (GL with the UU can stack 3). Combine that with a hypothetical stack of two ASW airstrikes, and thats a lot of ocean around a ping marker that can be rapidly filled with ordnance. My contention is that this is what the devs are trying to avoid, as they have been careful to make the position of the ping indicator relative to the position of the submarine fairly random.

48 minutes ago, OldSchoolGaming_Youtube said:

I would go out on a limb here and say, WG has not considered this in any way since this would mean the sub captain is a bot and dont know how to submerge when spotted, which about 100 % of sub captains do, unless they are newbs that already spend their battery looking at fishes.

And yet, the official party line from the CMs  on the old NA forums whenever the lack of Dutch ASW was pointed out was that the Dutch lacked ASW because they had those airstrikes. They most definitely appeared to consider that submarine players either wouldn’t or couldn’t (due to poor battery management) dive. It’s flawed reasoning, but that was apparently the reasoning the devs were using to justify their poor design decision.

48 minutes ago, OldSchoolGaming_Youtube said:

I think a way more logical reason is that Dutch heavy cruisers share ONE THING with most light cruisers that also not getting the plane ASW ... thye sit close to caps and plane ASW just like for Mino, Wooster etc would actually be effective countering subs.

Other ships that love to hang around caps like Des Moines and Petropavlovsk (CAs) have ASW airstrikes, while ships like A. Nevsky that excel at range have depth charges. WG’s implementation of one or the other seems pretty arbitrary/inconsistent. The tech-tree CLs that have airstrikes are American, French, and Japanese (excluding Shimanto and Takahashi for some reason). Minotaur and the rest of the ships in the UK CL line have DCs. German CAs have DCs (because hydro, apparently?) and so do Italian CAs for some other dumb reason.

48 minutes ago, OldSchoolGaming_Youtube said:

But we can all choose how we want to interpret WGs strange choice of implementing things. (not saying im right here btw, just that this BS is Suss of Epic proportions).

Indeed. We’re all ultimately speculating upon the limited information available to us as players.

 

Edited December 22, 2023 by Nevermore135

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

51 minutes ago, OldSchoolGaming_Youtube said:

Guess who has the best in game BS Headshot Aimbot Plane ASWs in the game ....? ............... CV Guys that sits parked in top right corner! Why you say....? Hes WGs other protected class and shouldn't have to deal with things like rushing Subs ... just like its to hard to use its damage con ..... (thats are up for a whole minute...) ... also has Tesla Auto pilot so dont really have to do anything with his ship at all...

It's so powerful...I sometimes move my hull TOWARDS subs to help my fleet with ASW...

WG developers really don't understand how ships are used in game.

[OldSchoolGaming_Youtube]

13 minutes ago, Nevermore135 said:

Because those planes operate under fundamentally different mechanics, and to compare them to the types I was discussing is comparing apples to oranges. Those are tactical squadrons, requiring manual control like CV aircraft, while the HE airstrikes and ASW planes use the same “fire and forget” mechanic that drops their ordinance on an area of the ocean (it’s pretty obvious in hindsight that the former served as a mechanical testbed for the latter). High tier Dutch cruisers can stack two HE airstrikes (GL with the UU can stack 3). Combine that with a hypothetical stack of two ASW airstrikes, and thats a lot of ocean around a ping marker that can be rapidly filled with ordinance. My contention is that this is what the devs are trying to avoid, as they have been careful to make the position of the ping indicator relative to the position of the submarine fairly random.

 

Yes but Golden Lions HE bomd strike has like what .... 14-16 seconds delay? And those bombs just do damage at surface or periscope, not at 30 or 60 meters. Time enough for any Sub commander to reach maximum depth. Meanwhile tactical squadrons like Kearsarge and hybrids could circle around bot Sub and keep him permaspotted (if we now assume he just sits there because poor battery management) then when teammates has its fill, go in for the strike and while plane go in for the strike, with what? A 3-4 sec machine gun delay, then he can switch to guns and also get a full wolley of that into him.

So if WG really thinks a Golden would be OP. with 2 long delay strikes on a sub it really shows how little they play their game.

I dont think any ship or class has a problem killing a afk sub.

 

13 minutes ago, Nevermore135 said:

And yet, the official party line from the CMs  on the old NA forums whenever the lack of Dutch ASW was pointed out was that the Dutch lacked ASW because they had those airstrikes. They most definitely appeared to consider that submarine players either wouldn’t or couldn’t (due to poor battery management) dive. It’s flawed reasoning, but that was apparently the reasoning the devs were using to justify their poor design decision.

I wonder then whats the NA Devs reasoning what for not giving Hinden and Venezia plane ASW from beginning?! Sorry not buying their half azzeed excuses any longer, but thats just me.

 

13 minutes ago, Nevermore135 said:

Other ships that love to hang around caps like Des Moines and Petropavlovsk (CAs) have ASW airstrikes, while ships like A. Nevsky that excel at range have depth charges. WG’s implementation of one or the other seems pretty arbitrary/inconsistent. The tech-tree CLs that have airstrikes are American, French, and Japanese (excluding Shimanto and Takahashi for some reason). Minotaur and the rest of the ships in the UK CL line have DCs. German CAs have DCs (because hydro, apparently?) and so do Italian CAs for some other dumb reason.

I bet you 2 cold ones that Nevsky that excel at range will get 12 km plane ASWs long before Golden gets any.

 

13 minutes ago, Nevermore135 said:

 

Indeed. We’re all ultimately speculating upon the limited information available to us as players.

 

As usual, "Limited information" will soon be followed with a couple of "miscommunications". Unfortunately, im colored by WGs stats record when it comes to "Balancing", especially when it comes to their protected classes CVs and Subs and also their history with "Balancing" Russian ships like Khaba torps or Kremlin guns.

But I really wish they are sincere about these changes/nerfs, but already the way the choose to go about it gives me nightmares (rebalancing every mechanic in the game and also adding flashbangs and Sub depths for CV planes. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

12 minutes ago, OldSchoolGaming_Youtube said:

But I really wish they are sincere about these changes/nerfs, but already the way the choose to go about it gives me nightmares (rebalancing every mechanic in the game and also adding flashbangs and Sub depths for CV planes. 

Unfortunately, as we've noticed...WG leadership don't take kindly to CMs sharing the truth.

Until WG senior leadership changes, there will be no change in communication strategy or culture.

[Nevermore135]

5 hours ago, OldSchoolGaming_Youtube said:

Yes but Golden Lions HE bomd strike has like what .... 14-16 seconds delay? And those bombs just do damage at surface or periscope, not at 30 or 60 meters. Time enough for any Sub commander to reach maximum depth. Meanwhile tactical squadrons like Kearsarge and hybrids could circle around bot Sub and keep him permaspotted (if we now assume he just sits there because poor battery management) then when teammates has its fill, go in for the strike and while plane go in for the strike, with what? A 3-4 sec machine gun delay, then he can switch to guns and also get a full wolley of that into him.

So if WG really thinks a Golden would be OP. with 2 long delay strikes on a sub it really shows how little they play their game.

I dont think any ship or class has a problem killing a afk sub

See my earlier comments regarding the NA CM explanations for the lack of Dutch ASW. It’s reasoning based on a flawed premise (as I said, WG seems to overvalue the utility of HE airstrikes against subs), but that is the reasoning that was given. I’ve made it pretty clear in every one of my posts on this matter that I don’t agree with the logic and am not saying it’s a good decision.

5 hours ago, OldSchoolGaming_Youtube said:

I wonder then whats the NA Devs reasoning what for not giving Hinden and Venezia plane ASW from beginning?! Sorry not buying their half azzeed excuses any longer, but thats just me.

I thought my last post made my thoughts on this pretty clear. I don’t see where I implied that I agree with or am willing to defend WG’s reasoning (whatever it is) here.

Edited December 23, 2023 by Nevermore135

[Wolfswetpaws]

4 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

It's so powerful...I sometimes move my hull TOWARDS subs to help my fleet with ASW...

WG developers really don't understand how ships are used in game.

My Erich Loewenhardt strutting its stuff, before it was equipped with Depthcharge Airstrikes.
Video hosted courtesy of @ArIskandir

Submarine fail

 

[MBT808]

7 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

WG developers really don't understand how ships are used in game.

Exactly.

They literally don't play their own game, which has been pointed out so many times its not even funny. Which brings up a fundamental issue with relying on spreadsheet balancing. Numbers can tell you many things, but generally they won't give you the whole story. On paper, something may look okay, but in practice can be something totally different. You also have to look at many, many ships compared to the ship in question to determine how it will generally perform. You also have to consider maps, what gimmicks a ship has, and her tier.

A perfect example of this is California. According to WG, she is "Fine" on the spreadsheet. In practice however, she is considered very under powered and has been in desparate need of buffs for a long time. Ships like Florida and the recently released West Virginia '44 demonstrate just the bad place shes at. For reference, Florida and WV 44 are generally considered balanced premiums. Which means that if their balanced, than California is definitely under performing. WG RU recognized this after the split and made balance changes to her. WoWs Legends also buffed California. So why aren't WG EU/NA buffing her?

Perhaps if they played California, they might have buffed her by now. But alas, calls for buffs for some ships just don't get answered. Even when its abundantly clear that certain ships need help.

[OldSchoolGaming_Youtube]

17 hours ago, Nevermore135 said:

See my earlier comments regarding the NA CM explanations for the lack of Dutch ASW. It’s reasoning based on a flawed premise (as I said, WG seems to overvalue the utility of HE airstrikes against subs), but that is the reasoning that was given. I’ve made it pretty clear in every one of my posts on this matter that I don’t agree with the logic and am not saying it’s a good decision.

I thought my last post made my thoughts on this pretty clear. I don’t see where I implied that I agree with or am willing to defend WG’s reasoning (whatever it is) here.

Im sorry if I impleid that my thoughts were directed at you personally, I did understand that you only conveid their (WGs) explanations.

Im just so frustrated over WGs BS answers to things over the years that makes absolutely no sense and also treating the playerbase like were stupid.

[Jakob Knight]

8 hours ago, OldSchoolGaming_Youtube said:

Im sorry if I impleid that my thoughts were directed at you personally, I did understand that you only conveid their (WGs) explanations.

Im just so frustrated over WGs BS answers to things over the years that makes absolutely no sense and also treating the playerbase like were stupid.

 

One thing that I came to believe after the closure of the Official forums gave me a chance to reflect on it is that it isn't worth it to let WG frustrate you.  They are going to do what they want, regardless of what we say or do, and the removal of the Forums just made that even more set in stone than before.  Getting frustrated over what they do is just hurting yourself and making things worse for only yourself without any chance it will change anything.

 

Best to just go with whatever WG decides to do with their game, adapt to the changes, use them mercilessly within the rules, and remember to enjoy the battles.

 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

1 hour ago, Jakob Knight said:

 

One thing that I came to believe after the closure of the Official forums gave me a chance to reflect on it is that it isn't worth it to let WG frustrate you.  They are going to do what they want, regardless of what we say or do, and the removal of the Forums just made that even more set in stone than before.  Getting frustrated over what they do is just hurting yourself and making things worse for only yourself without any chance it will change anything.

 

Best to just go with whatever WG decides to do with their game, adapt to the changes, use them mercilessly within the rules, and remember to enjoy the battles.

 

Amen.

This also means that rather than getting mad at them...I just laugh at them.

All that seriousness and demands for respect...yeah...it's funny.

[Infidel]

On 12/15/2023 at 6:00 AM, ArIskandir said:

It will be annoying to follow this same topic on multiple threads so I'm opening one for the specific discussion.

Here's the link for those interested: https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/general-news/upcoming-changes-to-aircraft-carriers-and-submarines/

 

So well put.

Eagerly await the "update by the end of February"...

https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/513

Quote

In December 2023 we released an announcement describing the new prototype of possible changes to aircraft carriers and AA.

 

We have been actively working on the prototype inside the studio, and the first major closed testing for it is scheduled for April 16th.

Surprised they missed the April 1st deadline set by management.

Edited March 2 by Infidel
Tried to unspoil the last spolier, but failed. New info (to me).