Carriers are too strong on defense

Well after a few minutes of reading i am pretty confused on why this much noise over a simple issue.Since this is going to be noticed anyway by Devs and they will nerf them.But where to nerf them is in their anti sub stats,they should have second to none since we all know,none of the carriers at that era had any form of anti sub warfare and just had a flock of destroyers around and carriers frankly were beefy since it took some moderate damage to take down so their HP can be pardoned,but the AA value i think is dead on since those behemoths were water AA positions,and the ship def,well that is also in need to be brought down since on those carriers AAs were main weaponry of choice since carriers themselves were the "in the back" type of ship,so i hope that was a significant enough of a argument for this discussion.

Onto another one,guys you do realize those carriers are virtually pointless to use in offense,they truly cant do anything significant in order to win you a naval war.They are melee and unlike DDs they are ranged which makes dispatching subs easier still,especially if the sub is stationary,plus range is all mighty factor of naval warfare,if a shell doesn't reach it's target it ain't good.

To add to that insulting others makes it sound like this post is more about some random complaining about things few players care about.( no offense this is what it looks like) But arguing doesn't prove a point,if a post sucks in terms of point it makes,then leave it aside and focus on the main ones.The "move on" is in another way said"Chill the devs aren't dumb,they will fix it,last time i checked there isn't anything OP other then these CVs.So guys if your going to continue arguing about who's right and who 'in terms of their view of this then this in entirety should be deleted.

This what i had to say on this whole matter,both the CVs and this whole thread.

ever heard of the USS Lexington? It was a battleship that was converted to a carrier, it never had its big guns removed, only relocated

nice scathing comment only 15 months late. u really like to dig up old dead threads dont you

injinji wrote:

[E]ver heard of the USS Lexington? It was a battleship that was converted to a carrier, it never had its big guns removed, only relocated[.]

First, as originally designed, the USS Lexington and her sister, the USS Saratoga, were 1920s vintage battlecruisers, not battleships. Subject to the terms of 1920s naval reduction treaties, the U.S. Navy had the choice of scrapping them or converting their partially completed hulls to another purpose. The Lex and Sara were completed as aircraft carriers on the modified battlecruiser hulls, minus almost 10,000 tons of plate armor and their originally designed 16-inch guns. They were completed at roughly 36,000 tons gross tonnage ---- the heaviest American carriers built to date -- including eight 8-inch guns in four twin turrets. Those were the largest defensive guns -- cruiser-size guns -- ever included on an American carrier. They were not battleship-size guns: 14, 15 or 16-inch naval rifles.