ChokeMeHardDaddyBondrewd

Eagle is basically a slightly better Audacious. Aka its a T8.5 and not really a supership. If you already have US then there is no need for Eagle

I would suggest going directly to Stratmania or ICC considering you're in Repoi. But if you want help from here you're gonna have to post a replay or two for us to actually pinpoint how you might be able to improve. Or just don't, because most players here are not actually that good, or have misleading knowledge about CVs.

Its a very beneficial change until you run out of bonuses, in which case you'll find it hard to get any blue or red ones. But while you have them, they're very good, and they do indeed give as much XP as you've stated.

I'll make this short and simple for everyone: >Settings >Audio >Sound Preset >Custom >Set Interface Volume to 0 This disables ALL UI sounds, so even sound effects from clicking the battle button will go silent, as well as ammo switching and other UI things.

Her plane speed is actually adequate, she's just inconsistent and thats about it. If we had a consistent auda every carpet strike would do ~20-30k dmg + fires, and the rockets would absolutely obliterate DDs (as though they dont do so already). So in actuality, if you want a consistent Audacious, play FDR. If you just want similar damage output to a consistent Audacious, FDR, Nakhimov, and Immelmann are all consistent damage farmers with Auda output if it were consistent.

LM Auda is not worth it and is only a meme build. Hak and Midway LM's are way better and are the only CV LM's that are worthwhile Please do NOT use Top Tier as a source of knowledge or advice.

Have you seen the Yae Miko and Hu Tao fan songs yet? They’re amazing:

@S4pp3R for me I think you already know: IJN CV

Ok thank goodness, MvR stock is quite the experience

Yea just experiment around, also PLEASE DONT PLAY WITH STOCK PLANES

Banzai!!~~

By 'high level players' do you mean the vocal ones who scream one thing and only one thing ever and aren't even good at CVs or have a decent understanding of them? Probably those, considering they think Nakhimov is the most OP ship in the game. If you want to really know a CV's power level, go ask Stratmania or El2azer or Reimu or literally anyone who's actually A) Good at CVs and who B) Understands CVs. Btw its ranked like this for randoms: Hak = Midway >> Nakhimov = Immelmann > FDR > MvR > Audacious. And smth like this for comp: Hak >>> FDR > Immelmann = Midway (server dependent) > MvR > Nakhimov > Audacious. Hell Nakhimov might not even be remotely good in competitive (CB). Again, RU CV not actually that strong. Just go with the build on the WoWs captain builds page. For once I agree with it: Your choice in slot 3, I wouldn't recommend torp speed unless you're going to get the reduced arming time captain skill. Your choice in slot 4, I personally use APDB HP as torps have much longer access to AA reduction, although it is purely a personal preference. Now slot 5 is the interesting one, if you're confident in your skills, you can actually go for Squadron Consumables Modification 1, which extends the heal duration, fighter duration, and engine cooling duration of your squadrons. In the right hands the Consumables Mod build is absolutely absurd for completely ignoring AA. Do beware though, it is quite the high risk high reward build. Captain skills are as shown in the attached image of the WoWs captain builds document.

Please don’t use top tier’s builds, they are by far tome of the most dented. I could care less about meme builds but top tier is something else man. You don’t even need sight stab on MvR or any CV except Midway for that matter yet he still takes it. I’ll get a build out later after supper for you, but if you want to ask me stuff about CV it’s better to contact me on discord since I don’t come onto forums very often: Pentl#9713

Afaik reverting back to the mechanics of 0.8.5 AA would solve majority of the issues mentioned here actually, although I'm not too sure how the AA was back in that version (it was nerfed for being 'too much' or smth, I only know that this is a relatively sufficient change thanks to El2azer). The other massive thing about AA is that the AA is treated as more of a gimmick, and thus the ship is bad in a different aspect. For example the Dutch cruisers were meant to have good AA, but the range was short to the point its ineffective. Ships like Austin and Worcester, although having decent AA, have poor armour, short range, etc. The 'AA ships' that have been introduced so far have major drawbacks or are just hard to play.

Sorry for the late reply, I don't regularly check forums: You can pick from either of these two builds: 1. 2. I personally use the second one, although I'm considering testing out the first one. The builds are: 1. TB focused - Nakhimov's most viable source of damage is funny people running into torps, and it makes up a large majority of its damage, although they are normally only more viable in the later stages of a match 2. General focused - The more standard, and generally more recommended build. When choosing which one to use just ask yourself if you like the torps more or the skips more. Slot 2 can be changed to SBM1, and slot 3 I would just put as whichever squadron you use most or want to get the most out of. 1. My choice of rocket plane HP is so that all 8 planes can get the strike off even in moderate AA 2. My choice for TBM1 in slot 2 is so that I can start the drop from further away to maximise the use of the AA reduction mechanic that all CVs have when entering an attacking phase *The reason I do not take torp speed is because the arming distance will be extended further, making the already situational torps more situational, whilst also giving the enemy more leeway. Another reason being I would rather have more arming time for the aforementioned reason