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

american cv play like a shit ARE SHURE THAT'S NO NEED REBALANCE?

62 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

207
[STEIN]
Member
1,452 posts
2,950 battles

If they could make the UI elements click-through, that'd be great.

 

Murdered my squadrons on several occasions because I couldn't move them in time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
109
[REPOI]
Super Tester
1,062 posts
11,416 battles

If they could make the UI elements click-through, that'd be great.

 

Murdered my squadrons on several occasions because I couldn't move them in time.

 

Don't remind me. That is one of the few things that actually made me a bit salty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
136
Member
784 posts
4,856 battles

Considering the tone of the main post, not really. 

 

I could only wish that the devs would comment a bit on the situation about CVs other than the planned UI.

 

If they could make the UI elements click-through, that'd be great.

 

Murdered my squadrons on several occasions because I couldn't move them in time.

 

Any UI improvement is definitely welcome.
If it weren't for my fondness for a lot of retro games, I seriously doubt I'd be able to stand CV UI as long as I have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,191
[TDA]
Super Tester
4,806 posts
5,682 battles

They should just remove USN CVs from the game. Its broken beyond repair.

Any buffs and the weeaboos will cry.

 

Weaboo tears best tears 2k16
Edited by RalphTheTheatreCat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,199 posts
3,263 battles

They should just remove USN CVs from the game. Its broken beyond repair.

Any buffs and the weeaboos will cry.

 

Lol, remember when Minekaze was nerfed ? The tears were insane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,191
[TDA]
Super Tester
4,806 posts
5,682 battles

And its still better than most destroyers..................apart from seal clubbing umikaze which relies on lack of knowledge rather than any game mechanics

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[BOTES]
Member
108 posts
4,005 battles

 

Was that BB burned down already? just like HE, bombs deal 0 damage if the section is already fully blackened. I never got sub 2000 except on 1 hit on a saturated module. It's always 7k+ on BBs.

 

On a side note, Shchors and Chapayev can be citadelled using dive bombers.

 

So.. because it functions like HE it doesn't do damage to BURNED sections of ships, but it can Citpen some ships because it's no AP? They surely do have some AP value, it's just obscure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
123
[STGGC]
Member
936 posts

 

So.. because it functions like HE it doesn't do damage to BURNED sections of ships, but it can Citpen some ships because it's no AP? They surely do have some AP value, it's just obscure.

 

though not sure if enough to actually penetrate through the citadel cuz all that distraction in the superstructure. 

 

But yea, I'm yet to see bombs hit the citadel. I've never seen that happen (not even with the 1000 pound bomb). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
109
[REPOI]
Super Tester
1,062 posts
11,416 battles

 

So.. because it functions like HE it doesn't do damage to BURNED sections of ships, but it can Citpen some ships because it's no AP? They surely do have some AP value, it's just obscure.

 

No, thats not what I mean.

 

To deal 0 damage with bombs (HE), the section either needs to be completely blackened OR the HE fails to penetrate (BBs with high deck armor can cause this).

 

In addition, HE projectiles also have very low penetration values, which is why citadel hits with HE are normally rare. Examples are the Hashidate, Kuma, Tenryu, and Yubari (poor armor above the machinery). I knew about Shchors from 2 weeks back, but only found out about chapayev 2 days ago. These ships have bad enough armor above the engine/machinery sections that they can get citadelled by even HE (bombs).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
109
[REPOI]
Super Tester
1,062 posts
11,416 battles

 

though not sure if enough to actually penetrate through the citadel cuz all that distraction in the superstructure. 

 

But yea, I'm yet to see bombs hit the citadel. I've never seen that happen (not even with the 1000 pound bomb). 

Try using a Langley/Bogue and dropping on Tenryus/Kumas/Yubaris. You need to land the bomb right on the smokestacks. It WILL deal full damage (5400 or 7500).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
123
[STGGC]
Member
936 posts

so the citadel hit is so obscure it doesnt count as a citadel hit but it did hit the citadel dealing full damage

 

o-oh....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
109
[REPOI]
Super Tester
1,062 posts
11,416 battles

so the citadel hit is so obscure it doesnt count as a citadel hit but it did hit the citadel dealing full damage

 

o-oh....

 

Yes. The bomb hit icon will pop up instead, but the damage numbers are there. No way a bomb deals 5400 without it being a citadel (had a lucky drop on a tenryu dealing 10800 damage with 2 bombs. Guy lost nearly 2/3s of his health).

 

Bomb cits are super rare, and they don't really pop up on higher tiers. I am not sure if Pensacola has this problem or not (I usually torp them).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
109
[REPOI]
Super Tester
1,062 posts
11,416 battles

(no wonder i dealt 32k on the colorado)

 

Dealing 32k on a Colorado using 3 stacked 1000 lb DBs is doable. I highly doubt BBs can be citted by bombs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[BOTES]
Member
108 posts
4,005 battles

So I just had a great game vs a taiho, why are these ships allowed 12 torps per flight? Plus two fighter squads?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
570 posts
3,063 battles

 

Lol, remember when Minekaze was nerfed ? The tears were insane

 

that DD was a little op , still pretty good 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
109
[REPOI]
Super Tester
1,062 posts
11,416 battles

So I just had a great game vs a taiho, why are these ships allowed 12 torps per flight? Plus two fighter squads?

 

Because it's a T9. The Essex gets a fighter to go with a Lex's worth of strike package.

 

There is a huge jump in power from T8 to T9.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
69 posts
2,225 battles

For me, playing CV should be more about attacking enemy ships & yet many times I face both US & IJN fighter load outs that shut me out of the game to a degree. I believe no CV should be able to fly more than 2 squadrons of fighters at one time.

 

In any US CV I've played so far, I try to stick with using DBs as they can avoid enemy fighters easier. Even with skills & upgrades my Independence fighters get smashed by Hiryu or Ranger.

 

 Hardly play any CV games these days as it's not much fun.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[BOTES]
Member
108 posts
4,005 battles

 

Because it's a T9. The Essex gets a fighter to go with a Lex's worth of strike package.

 

There is a huge jump in power from T8 to T9.

 

That's not really a valid thing to say. So they 7 squadrons vs the essex's 6. Assuming 15 pt captain thats 10 fighters vs essex's 7 meaning a very high chance of winning every dogfight. This isn't a whine, I wupped his team a new one. I just want to know the logic behind this once extra planes/squadron are included. I'm sure someone with the interest to could easily math this out and see which ship is 'objectively' better including when factored for AA and squadron count compared to raw damage output and speeds/hp of each line.

 

Since we know that IJN and USN planes fighters are within 6% killrate of each other (as of old stats) I'm just wondering a few things. Because WG can't reasonably expect that even an AS essex with 3/0/2 would have enough raw firepower and coverage to stop a strike taiho with its 2/3/2 when factoring for 15 point captains. You'd be talking about 21 fighters spread over 3 squadrons compared to 20 fighters over 4 squadrons for an equivalent number of planes on a taiho.

 

I really think that Taiho should only have 1 fighter in strike, same with shkk. Giving AS essex 4 squadrons for 28 planes + 14 for bombers vs strike taihos 10/12/10 for an equal number of planes but condensed in to a smaller number of squadrons. Even assuming BEST CASE SCENARIO where AS essex engages all of his fighters each pass it wouldn't matter since they can be ripped off TB/DB or just blown off with strafe.

 

Furthermore strafe should be nerfed so it functions like other planes, if you strafe you dump 100% of your ammo and the squadron can't fight any more.

Edited by Seabad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[BOTES]
Member
108 posts
4,005 battles

For me, playing CV should be more about attacking enemy ships & yet many times I face both US & IJN fighter load outs that shut me out of the game to a degree. I believe no CV should be able to fly more than 2 squadrons of fighters at one time.

 

In any US CV I've played so far, I try to stick with using DBs as they can avoid enemy fighters easier. Even with skills & upgrades my Independence fighters get smashed by Hiryu or Ranger.

 

 Hardly play any CV games these days as it's not much fun.

 

 

You don't really expect to achieve much as a t6 vs t7 do you? What game do you think you're playing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
136
Member
784 posts
4,856 battles

 

-snip-

 

Imo, fighter strafes is one of the few skill dependent abilities a CV captain should know in order to overcome some certain disadvantages to some extent. Not exactly good, but it's one of the necessary things for balancing even if I myself don't approve of it much(Planes firing my ammo lasorz!). In the scenario of an AS Essex vs Strike Taiho, it is working as intended for the AS Essex to not be able to cover ALL the potential threats the Taiho squadrons pose. Of course, with good enough fleet movement and good CV judgement, those 3 FT squadrons the Essex will have will be 'enough' to shut down the Taiho strike squadrons. But that won't happen without good use of strafing. Chances that the Taiho will still outdamage the Essex are still high, but 'should' be offset by the scouting the Essex is able to do by courtesy of Air Superiority. But that should be a given anytime someone chooses a loadout.

 

From personal experience, having a good AS CV captain as an ally that covers the fleet really well isn't a common sight. Just as making work of strike loadouts and doing effective damage to the enemy team with the expense of air superiority and late game scouting, AS CV will have their own difficulty of making work with the AS loadouts and managing to shut down the potential enemy CV threat and ruling the skies to provide scouting intelligence. IMO the problem comes from the lack of rewards of being a support CV and clearing the skies and spotting with planes. Some of the people I know that play AS loadouts just do it because it sucks being shut down by another AS CV when they play a Strike loadout, and the cycle continues. It results with some AS CV captains just opting to 1v1 the enemy CV rather than a supportive role of air cover and scouting.

 

Sadly, if you do go with the 100% ammo loss, it raises the skill bar of strafe usage resulting in more players opting for the click and forget. Personally, I agree with the proposition but it doesn't look good in hindsight.

 

I'm all for more versatile loadouts for both nations if ever they implement it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
857
[LEAK]
Senior Moderator
3,837 posts
2,602 battles

Try using a Langley/Bogue and dropping on Tenryus/Kumas/Yubaris. You need to land the bomb right on the smokestacks. It WILL deal full damage (5400 or 7500).

 

Not quite. You actually have to hit the deck.

3ru1qjs.jpg

 

The reason being, the citadel on these low tier cruisers are not protected by multiple layers of armor like in later ships, it's only protected by a thin deck and the citadel module is directly behind it. As long as you penetrate the deck (or hull if from the side), you hit the citadel. Which is why it's actually possible to get citadel hits using HE in low tiers, and by extension bombs as well (even though it gives no citadel ribbon). On more protected ships, it's impossible for HE to hit the citadel because it would detonate on impact on the outermost layer of armor before even reaching the citadel, regardless of how thin each layer of armor is. This applies to the 1000lb bombs too.

 

Had you hit the smoke stacks, you'll just damage the superstructure and deal 1/3 of your bomb damage instead.

 

 

To deal 0 damage with bombs (HE), the section either needs to be completely blackened OR the HE fails to penetrate (BBs with high deck armor can cause this).

 

This is a frequent misconception, which prompted me to post a thread detailing it on NA forums. It is very unlikely due to damage saturation and more likely due to hit to external module or non-penetration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
109
[REPOI]
Super Tester
1,062 posts
11,416 battles

 

-snip-

Ah, I knew something seemed off. Thanks for the explanation. Another TIL for me in terms of how armor models work and how I forgot that the smokestacks were part of the superstructure.

 

I forgot to mention that hitting the external modules directly (main turret, AA guns, etc) can result in them being disabled completely, but your bomb deals 0 damage.

 

That's not really a valid thing to say. So they 7 squadrons vs the essex's 6. Assuming 15 pt captain thats 10 fighters vs essex's 7 meaning a very high chance of winning every dogfight. This isn't a whine, I wupped his team a new one. I just want to know the logic behind this once extra planes/squadron are included. I'm sure someone with the interest to could easily math this out and see which ship is 'objectively' better including when factored for AA and squadron count compared to raw damage output and speeds/hp of each line.

 

Since we know that IJN and USN planes fighters are within 6% killrate of each other (as of old stats) I'm just wondering a few things. Because WG can't reasonably expect that even an AS essex with 3/0/2 would have enough raw firepower and coverage to stop a strike taiho with its 2/3/2 when factoring for 15 point captains. You'd be talking about 21 fighters spread over 3 squadrons compared to 20 fighters over 4 squadrons for an equivalent number of planes on a taiho.

 

I really think that Taiho should only have 1 fighter in strike, same with shkk. Giving AS essex 4 squadrons for 28 planes + 14 for bombers vs strike taihos 10/12/10 for an equal number of planes but condensed in to a smaller number of squadrons. Even assuming BEST CASE SCENARIO where AS essex engages all of his fighters each pass it wouldn't matter since they can be ripped off TB/DB or just blown off with strafe.

 

Furthermore strafe should be nerfed so it functions like other planes, if you strafe you dump 100% of your ammo and the squadron can't fight any more.

 

Seabad, I do not run AS, so I have no idea. I usually strafe using my 1 fighter to put pressure on HIS fighters so my bombers get free passage for 10-20 seconds (which is enough). There is a reason why I run strike and not AS on USN. I try to win by outdamaging him (this usually works).

 

Also, Seabad, Taiho has 322, NOT 422. An AS Taiho has 15 planes spread over 3 squads.

 

Objectively, AS Taiho is weaker in the air than AS Essex is, but retains respectable striking power. The AS Essex absolutely shuts down AS Taiho when it comes to air battles, but 2 DBs are NOT enough. USN AS loadouts are viewed as "useless" (a view that I am inclined to agree with) due to their very low relative damage potential.

 

I know USN CVs are in a worse spot than IJN is right now, with how fighter lock mechanics and how DB RNG work, but we have to play with the cards that we are dealt, and for me, it is to run strike. Running 211 on Essex burned me once already by its lack of carry ability (stock grind), so I stuck with 113 for carry power. Remember: If played well, USN can outdamage IJN.

Edited by stratmania

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,040 posts
1,492 battles

Air superiority skill should be removed, as it greatly benefits loadouts with more squads, and we all know which line has that.

 

The future of CV looks really grim right now. I feel like WG has given up on balancing CV altogether, almost like WoT SPG situation where they left it like that for years before actually realizing it's broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
109
[REPOI]
Super Tester
1,062 posts
11,416 battles

Air superiority skill should be removed, as it greatly benefits loadouts with more squads, and we all know which line has that.

 

I cannot help but agree with this. The difference is quite noticable with smaller and plentiful squads (Saipan, IJN AS loadouts).

 

The future of CV looks really grim right now. I feel like WG has given up on balancing CV altogether, almost like WoT SPG situation where they left it like that for years before actually realizing it's broken.

 

I really don't feel like commenting on this part, since I do not have the WG plans for CVs in the future, but I would hold my judgement for just a bit longer. I enjoy CV gameplay at its core, and so I will simply try to adapt if changes come.

Share this post


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

×