Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Seabad

Gamebreaking bug with fighters

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2
[BOTES]
Member
94 posts
3,501 battles

I'm going to keep this brief,

 

internationally CV players are disappearing, part of this is due to bugged fighters who don't CANCEL MOVEMENT TO FIGHT OTHER FIGHTERS. Why even program them like this?

if>engaged = true, movement = cancel

 

Done. This is super basic and the fact that this technical error with fighters even exists is embarassing for the programmers.

 

Also Ryujo fighters are OP vs independance fighters. Utterly OP. You literally cannot beat 3x fighters infact most of the time 1v1 6v4 fighter fights the ryujo beats the independance fighters without assistance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,634 posts
4,639 battles

Because it's not actually that easy to disengage in real life. Total War (after Rome) does not have it down pat here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

Also Ryujo fighters are OP vs independance fighters. Utterly OP. You literally cannot beat 3x fighters infact most of the time 1v1 6v4 fighter fights the ryujo beats the independance fighters without assistance.

 

Me every time someone declares that US fighters are utterly useless against JP ones:

 

SIRsMRn.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,725 posts

The one you reported as bug, that is intentional since November 4 0.5.1.0 update. See patch note here.

 

  • The logic for fighters' behavior has been improved. Now, when fighters attack other fighters, the squadron being attacked will automatically counterattack and will not abandon the dogfight until it runs out of ammunition.

 

^ This is the rule of engagement for the fighters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
295 posts
501 battles

How so?

 

because rule #1 of dogfight: never run away after you've start a dogfight.

 

second, you will lost every plane if you try to run because you are a easy target (if it's real life).

 

but I've found a bug (don't know if it's fixed now), if you do strafe run (mid run) and get engaged, you will get stuck at the end of the strafe and can't kill the enemy, that means a stucked squadron without fighting power 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,043 posts
4,300 battles

 

because rule #1 of dogfight: never run away after you've start a dogfight.

 

second, you will lost every plane if you try to run because you are a easy target (if it's real life).

 

 

depends on the pilot and the plane. if you have altitude advantage(gravitational potential energy) + thrust advantage + pilot skill, you can easily escape an impending dogfight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2
[BOTES]
Member
94 posts
3,501 battles

The one you reported as bug, that is intentional since November 4 0.5.1.0 update. See patch note here.

 

 

^ This is the rule of engagement for the fighters.

 

This is not what I was talking about, I mean after you do a strafing run your fighters do nothing and just die uselessly because they aren't actually shooting back.

So yeah that is a bug, because they're showing they're engaged on the UI but they're actually stuck between moving and coming out of a strafing run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2
[BOTES]
Member
94 posts
3,501 battles

 

Me every time someone declares that US fighters are utterly useless against JP ones:

 

 

At tier 6 their performance is appaling. Tier 6 USN fighters need a buff and/or an extra squadron.

Don't believe me? Go on the USA WG forums and see for yourself, there's 5 front page threads about how bad the balance between USN and IJN CVs are especially at tiers 6, 7 and 8.

 

Compounding with IJN having more balanced loadouts and stronger fighters the USN carriers are weaksauce and *anyone* who denies this is catagorically wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

At tier 6 their performance is appaling. Tier 6 USN fighters need a buff and/or an extra squadron.

Don't believe me? Go on the USA WG forums and see for yourself, there's 5 front page threads about how bad the balance between USN and IJN CVs are especially at tiers 6, 7 and 8.

 

Compounding with IJN having more balanced loadouts and stronger fighters the USN carriers are weaksauce and *anyone* who denies this is catagorically wrong.

 

At tier VI, US fighters are equally as strong as the JP ones.

Likewise both carriers have 12 active fighters at any given time. (Aerial Superiority loadout)

Likewise both carriers' strike strength is heavily weakened.

 

Indie has it's single dive bomber squadron that will usually deal 2k - 7k damage on a same tier BB.

Ryuujou has a dive bomber and a torpedo bomber squadron, which will most of the time lose 1-2 planes before attacking

to any V+ BB.

Not to mention what'll happen to them if the BB was playing smart and turned away way before the bombers get into range.

 

So what you have is the Indie with consistent damage and Ryuujou with occasion torpedo hits on un-aware "herp derp" players.

 

So basically you have two tier VI CVs that are pretty much evenly balanced while on tier IV and V both Langley and Bogue have a much

easier time to obliterate the enemy air wing and dealing some damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,725 posts

 

This is not what I was talking about, I mean after you do a strafing run your fighters do nothing and just die uselessly because they aren't actually shooting back.

So yeah that is a bug, because they're showing they're engaged on the UI but they're actually stuck between moving and coming out of a strafing run.

 

That's much clearer now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2
[BOTES]
Member
94 posts
3,501 battles

 

At tier VI, US fighters are equally as strong as the JP ones.

Likewise both carriers have 12 active fighters at any given time. (Aerial Superiority loadout)

Likewise both carriers' strike strength is heavily weakened.

 

Indie has it's single dive bomber squadron that will usually deal 2k - 7k damage on a same tier BB.

Ryuujou has a dive bomber and a torpedo bomber squadron, which will most of the time lose 1-2 planes before attacking

to any V+ BB.

Not to mention what'll happen to them if the BB was playing smart and turned away way before the bombers get into range.

 

So what you have is the Indie with consistent damage and Ryuujou with occasion torpedo hits on un-aware "herp derp" players.

 

So basically you have two tier VI CVs that are pretty much evenly balanced while on tier IV and V both Langley and Bogue have a much

easier time to obliterate the enemy air wing and dealing some damage.

 

Point by point;

IJN air superiority loadout gives them a torp squad and dive bombers + 3 squads of fighters. That's why it's unbalanced. This particular loadout has more battlefield impact. Plus your comment about IJN and USN fighters being equal at unit strengths of 12 in a fight predicates that USN uses their air sup. loadout which then eliminates most of their ability to impact the battlefield. On top of that anecdotally I have witnessed ryujo squadrons eat USN ones in even fights, which isn't balanced either. One side should not completely dominate the other and losses *should* be almost even until the last plane goes down. Then IJN get 11 more planes as well to cap it off. So no I reject your assertion that they're equally strong because with more planes available and higher base speed the IJN fighters are supposed to lose committed engagements which simply doesn't happen.

 

Losing planes on the way in occurs for both factions, the target dodging bombing runs also is a factor either vessel is exposed and as an outside factor beyond the control of the debate these points are moot.

 

What we do indeed have is every ryujo I play against running the 3/1/1 loadout wrecking my shit effortlessly and then bombing my team mates because the ryujo is OP.

 

The ryujo is OP. You are catagorically and demonstrably wrong. I've seen a lot of people say its OK to have weak USN carriers at earlier tiers because "its made up for in tiers 9 and 10" as if that even makes sense. All it does is suggest that WG can't into balance and that the USN carriers are a mind-numbing grind of contrarian losses due to an ingrained belief that suffering now is worth the payoff later - even though all it takes is another bogus patch from WG to completely break USN t9 and t10 and then all that work was for nothing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,634 posts
4,639 battles

American fighters will trump Japanese fighters of equal tier most of the time. Statically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,043 posts
4,300 battles

yeah ryujo outmatches indy just like lexington outmatches shokaku. that's WG's sense of balance for you. what's new?

Edited by Deicide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,043 posts
4,300 battles

well let's start another CV debate

 

 

Indie has it's single dive bomber squadron that will usually deal 2k - 7k damage on a same tier BB.

Ryuujou has a dive bomber and a torpedo bomber squadron, which will most of the time lose 1-2 planes before attacking

to any V+ BB.

Not to mention what'll happen to them if the BB was playing smart and turned away way before the bombers get into range.

 

So IJN dive bombers lose planes while USN ones doesn't? Also have you seen the manual dropping reticle of the IJN dive bombers? They are extremely small and in the hands of experienced players they will guarantee 100% hit rate 100% fire, in big targets you can even specifically target a less damaged section for more HE damage.

 

Point by point;

IJN air superiority loadout gives them a torp squad and dive bombers + 3 squads of fighters. That's why it's unbalanced. This particular loadout has more battlefield impact. Plus your comment about IJN and USN fighters being equal at unit strengths of 12 in a fight predicates that USN uses their air sup. loadout which then eliminates most of their ability to impact the battlefield. On top of that anecdotally I have witnessed ryujo squadrons eat USN ones in even fights, which isn't balanced either. One side should not completely dominate the other and losses *should* be almost even until the last plane goes down. Then IJN get 11 more planes as well to cap it off. So no I reject your assertion that they're equally strong because with more planes available and higher base speed the IJN fighters are supposed to lose committed engagements which simply doesn't happen.

 

Losing planes on the way in occurs for both factions, the target dodging bombing runs also is a factor either vessel is exposed and as an outside factor beyond the control of the debate these points are moot.

 

What we do indeed have is every ryujo I play against running the 3/1/1 loadout wrecking my shit effortlessly and then bombing my team mates because the ryujo is OP.

 

The ryujo is OP. You are catagorically and demonstrably wrong. I've seen a lot of people say its OK to have weak USN carriers at earlier tiers because "its made up for in tiers 9 and 10" as if that even makes sense. All it does is suggest that WG can't into balance and that the USN carriers are a mind-numbing grind of contrarian losses due to an ingrained belief that suffering now is worth the payoff later - even though all it takes is another bogus patch from WG to completely break USN t9 and t10 and then all that work was for nothing.

 

 

There is no real balance between the 2 nation's cv. More experienced CV players have been complaining here ever since we have 2 CV, giving suggestion but to no avail. The thing is, the guys up there(the blues), they always see things balanced, even those things WG admitted are not and subsequently changed; and they will always be adamant about things being balanced and no real good feedback reaches the devs--devs never listen to ordinary cash cows like us.

 

So, my friend, that's how the world works. Give up, clench your fist and close your eyes. Play the game or move on.

 

Edited by Deicide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,634 posts
4,639 battles

The thing is, the guys up there(the blues), they always see things balanced, even those things WG admitted are not and subsequently changed; and they will always be adamant about things being balanced and no real good feedback reaches the devs--devs never listen to ordinary cash cows like us.

 

And how, pray tell, do you know this? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2
[BOTES]
Member
94 posts
3,501 battles

 

There is no real balance between the 2 nation's cv. More experienced CV players have been complaining here ever since we have 2 CV, giving suggestion but to no avail. The thing is, the guys up there(the blues), they always see things balanced, even those things WG admitted are not and subsequently changed; and they will always be adamant about things being balanced and no real good feedback reaches the devs--devs never listen to ordinary cash cows like us.

 

So, my friend, that's how the world works. Give up, clench your fist and close your eyes. Play the game or move on.

 

 

I'm literally only playing this game to gain experience with carriers - because EVE online is switching their current carrier fighter mechanics over to be like WOWS'.

 

I do somewhat enjoy playing the other classes but carriers are the #1 reason I am here.

 

I do believe in throwing some $ at a game I've enjoyed even if it was free to play but (and this is a very big but) how can I spend money on a game that isn't fair?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4,888 posts
9,936 battles

 

I do believe in throwing some $ at a game I've enjoyed even if it was free to play but (and this is a very big but) how can I spend money on a game that isn't fair?

 

I also believe the same way as you, but we need to give developer some time, i hope that every bit of comment we give can help developer improving the game (but most likely not lol)

 

Anyways i did pay some money to this game and i hope developer will get the game right at some point :D:D:D

Edited by MeloMelonSoda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

Point by point;

IJN air superiority loadout gives them a torp squad and dive bombers + 3 squads of fighters. That's why it's unbalanced. This particular loadout has more battlefield impact.

 

No, it doesn't.

Again, any tier V BB will shoot down 1-2 of the DBs before they can drop their bombs, and BB that is actively maneuvering away from the DBs is likely to shoot down 3-4.

Meanwhile the US DBs lose 1 DB to a tier V-VI BB and 2-3 to a tier VII BB. (Good luck dive bombing a tier VII BB with the JP DBs)

 

Meanwhile the same goes for the JP TBs, they're squishy as cake.

If a lonely Kongou player actually uses the focus aim for AA guns the squadron will lose 1-2 aircraft prior to the attack run.

Unless of course the squadron launches it's torpedoes from longer range, in which case even a Arkansas will dodge everything.

 

The only time it gives you an edge over the US Aerial Superiority loadout is when you're attacking an herp derp player.

I.e. the really stupid kind of player that has no situational awareness and loves to eat a full torpedo salvo.

Congratulations, you're relying on your target doing something stupid...

 

 Plus your comment about IJN and USN fighters being equal at unit strengths of 12 in a fight predicates that USN uses their air sup. loadout which then eliminates most of their ability to impact the battlefield. On top of that anecdotally I have witnessed ryujo squadrons eat USN ones in even fights, which isn't balanced either. One side should not completely dominate the other and losses *should* be almost even until the last plane goes down. Then IJN get 11 more planes as well to cap it off. So no I reject your assertion that they're equally strong because with more planes available and higher base speed the IJN fighters are supposed to lose committed engagements which simply doesn't happen.

 

Survivability and damage equalise each other and US fighters have a larger loadout to stay in the air for longer periods of time

while the JP fighters have to return to the carrier more often.

 

JMcOIY6.png

 

Meanwhile the 11 more planes are to counter those regularly lost to AA fire.

Heck, a random DD with focused AA is likely to shoot a JP fighter or bomber out of the skies, and that's

without using the AA hulls.

 

So IJN dive bombers lose planes while USN ones doesn't?

 

Read - think- post.

 

I wrote that US DBs lose less aircrafts even when the target does everything in it's control to counter the bombers.

I.e. even if the target focuses it's AA and turns away from the bombers to increase the time the bombers are inside the target's

AA area before the drop.

 

 Also have you seen the manual dropping reticle of the IJN dive bombers?

They are extremely small and in the hands of experienced players they will guarantee 100% hit rate 100% fire,

in big targets you can even specifically target a less damaged section for more HE damage.

 

So? The US DB's bomb circle is small enough to guarantee 4-6 hits unless the CV player fails at targeting or

the CV "RTS" controls derp out.

Edited by Retia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2
[BOTES]
Member
94 posts
3,501 battles

(edited)

 

If you have a dispute with a warning/name change etc, take it up with support, not on the forums.

Post Edited, User Warned

~lengxv6

 

p.s. Thank you for reporting yourself, made it easy to find this post!

Edited by lengxv6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,043 posts
4,300 battles

 

No, it doesn't.

Again, any tier V BB will shoot down 1-2 of the DBs before they can drop their bombs, and BB that is actively maneuvering away from the DBs is likely to shoot down 3-4.

Meanwhile the US DBs lose 1 DB to a tier V-VI BB and 2-3 to a tier VII BB. (Good luck dive bombing a tier VII BB with the JP DBs)

 

Meanwhile the same goes for the JP TBs, they're squishy as cake.

If a lonely Kongou player actually uses the focus aim for AA guns the squadron will lose 1-2 aircraft prior to the attack run.

Unless of course the squadron launches it's torpedoes from longer range, in which case even a Arkansas will dodge everything.

 

The only time it gives you an edge over the US Aerial Superiority loadout is when you're attacking an herp derp player.

I.e. the really stupid kind of player that has no situational awareness and loves to eat a full torpedo salvo.

Congratulations, you're relying on your target doing something stupid...

 

 

Survivability and damage equalise each other and US fighters have a larger loadout to stay in the air for longer periods of time

while the JP fighters have to return to the carrier more often.

 

 

 

This block quote reeks of inexperience and honestly, every of your comment is now sounding so biased and loses credibility every post. 311 ryujo will always be superior to its counterpart. stop downplaying the power of IJN torpedo bombers. even a single run of them can outdamage your whole damage output using only dive bombers. I have never, ever had problem droppping 3 with minimum of 2 torps to kongo regardless if they maneuver or not. I see you don't really have much experience in torpedo bombing. There are a lot of ways to minimzie damage to your bombers.

 

In the end, the point was a ryujo 311 can hold off indy's fighter setup and deal significant amount of surface damage before their bombers die, then at the end of the game, which ship do you think gave more team contribution? the indy that tickled BBs exclusively with 10k-20k damage and specialized in air superiority but failed to hold off the enemy or the ryujo that did 40-70k damage?

 

 

 

 

Heck, a random DD with focused AA is likely to shoot a JP fighter or bomber out of the skies, and that's

without using the AA hulls.

 

 

Read - think- post.

 

I wrote that US DBs lose less aircrafts even when the target does everything in it's control to counter the bombers.

I.e. even if the target focuses it's AA and turns away from the bombers to increase the time the bombers are inside the target's

AA area before the drop.

 

 

So? The US DB's bomb circle is small enough to guarantee 4-6 hits unless the CV player fails at targeting or

the CV "RTS" controls derp out.

 

"I wrote that US DBs lose less aircrafts" -- wutt. this one's pretty dumb, absolutely, so there's like a magic coating to USN dive bombers that gives them less chance of being hit? what you probably meant to say is the probability of the whole squadron surviving/more planes and doing a successful drop is higher for the USN dive bombers b/c they have more plane/squad. otherwise, it's really dumb sounding.

and so? my point was with a reticle so accurate, even 1 surviving plane in the squadron is 100% hit and fire. I've been enjoying the dive bomber changes by WG actually: USN's defense penetrating dive bombers and IJN's sniping dive bombers. and, honestly, 4-6 hits? more like 3 average hits, lets be honest here, I also play USN CV and I know bull when I smell it.

 

One day I hope you come and play the IJN CVs so we can lessen the chance of biased feedback.

Edited by Deicide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
2,500 posts
1,535 battles

-snip-

 

Ah... isn't it fun when people run out of arguments and instead try to discredit a person rather than trying to argue in a reasonable way?

I'd suggest listening to this, some wise words in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×