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

USS Carrier damage too low?

USS Carrier change needed?  

16 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you agree with what i listen below?

    • Yes, absolutely! :D
      12
    • No, it's already balance bro, git gud!
      5

8 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
2 posts
1,059 battles

Hello!


I look for what community think about USS Carrier.
To me, its relatively weak, why?
1. Only stock flight control is useful (most situation) which mean USS will always have less plane in air.

2. Unfair service time (example : 38 seconds for USS, 16 seconds IJN for reloading) & for replacing wiped squadron (IJN somewhere 30, and USS above 70 seconds!) even though the squad size difference only 2 planes!
3. Huge average damage difference, IJN always win.

 

Here what i think to match number of aircraft in air againts IJN
Bogue :           AS (2FT 1DB)           S (1FT 1TB 1DB)

Independece: AS (2FT 1TB 1DB)    S (1FT 1TB 2DB)

Ranger :         AS (2FT 1TB 1DB)    S (1FT 1TB 2DB)
*Can't tell anymore from here, not played above Ranger yet :/  

 

If you want know more what i think for higher tier:
Lexington:     AS (2FT 1TB 1DB)     S (1FT 1TB 2DB)

Essex:           AS (3FT 1TB 1DB)     S (1FT 2TB 2DB)

Midway:         AS (3FT 1TB 1DB)    S (1FT 2TB 2DB)

 

 

 

So the main idea the USS always atleast 1 squadron of each type, without losing a single type, make upgrading flight control useful.

And make the service time only 50% higher than IJN, since it's 6 vs 4

Making 2 TB in S loadout for tier V-VIII is broken (except for Essex and Midway to match Taiho & Hakuryu S loadout), so putting 1DB is more balanced, thus in reality the US always prefer DB. (correct me if i am wrong)

 

Don't tell me to "git gud in USS!" , i know it but take a look at my stats, i am not pro but good enough as cv player :)


1481097784996.jpg.

1481097814362.jpg

1481097946517.jpg

1481097957024.jpg

 

So what do you guys think, do USS need to be balance? (especially about flight control)

Thank you :D

 

Edited by proaliahmadrz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,056 posts
9,007 battles

I think change 013 to 112 is better you can cover yourself and friendly team

 

Its not just that, a 112 will ensure better consistency, which is very valuable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
39 posts

ranger and Lexington needs buff at their stock loadouts and they should remove the +1 planes skills . they even make IJN carriers OP.. Too Op!

Edited by FloatingCoffin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
2 posts
1,696 battles

I main CV's on the JPN side and have taken on so many USN Cv's (Curse the SAIPAIN users) and i have just started out on the USN CV T4.

 

The difference from the JPN and the USN Cv's are easy to spot for me, the JPN CV's are heavier on the bombers while the USN CV's are just flat out all over the place with an advantage in Dogfights only and only get stronger in T7-10. Now that there are more DD's on the sea, their has been a spike in AA for all ships which makes it much harder for CV's to attack with their bombers and is more of a intimidation contest by trying to size each other up for about 5 minutes before anything happens. In the games i have played during X-mas and New Years i have found a crazy amount of "Seal Captains" with 5 (JPN) or 6 (USN) planes in their squads making the game really annoying for both me and my team, I suggest a new search method with Captain skills to even it out.

 

USN CV's are too under powered in the T4-6 and having a spike in their status from T7-10 is odd, USN CV T4 has weak planes all around and die too quickly to AA fire with only 5 fighters and a replacement of 2 fighters make it to useless in a longer match. T4 JPN CV has more planes then the USN T4 CV over all and more squads making it harder for the USN CV to defend their team as they only have 1 more squad to watch out for.

 

The CV mods for both sides are too different, the JPN can have up to 3 fighter squads while the USN can only have 1 of each type or just go full bomber with no fighter support while the JPN can have 1-2 fighter squads and an even amount of bombers.

 

I suggest an update for the CV is needed. The German CV idea is a good place to start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
49 posts
6,861 battles

Bogue :           AS (2FT 1DB)           S (1FT 1TB 1DB)

Independece: AS (2FT 1TB 1DB)    S (1FT 1TB 2DB)

Ranger :         AS (2FT 1TB 1DB)    S (1FT 1TB 2DB)

 

Bogue DB are bad, with only 28 total plane, I will rather like 110 than 111.

I'm sealclub with this ship. 111, trying to flood or set fire damage other ship is not easy, and enemy AA and fighters will have more time to eliminate your plane, and hard to control 3 squad. And 28 total plane, and too much (3) squad, a lot of lost.

 

Independence... 4x6 (24) , if they're melt only one more full plane for each squad.

211 too powerful, RIP IJN, striked to death at first minutes. 202 or 210 = maybe would be good.

112, too powerful too. Striked to death at first minutes. 013 for 'S' maybe good.

Ryujo captain will be forced to use 311.

111 for basic strike, fair, if servicing time or each one plane is equal.

For this time, I'm feel 111 already my good setting for now, very good.

 

Ranger AS 211?. RIP IJN, 312 underpowered (they just have tier 6 TB) Striked to death.

You know, Ranger full commskill, full upgrade, full necessary flag use 202 (nowadays set) vs Saipan with same condition with 301, RIP saipan, 36 fighters vs 27 fighters? And 211? NO! Ranger will got +20% from dogfight lol, higher plane tier will not save Saipan14 vs 12 fighters.

Im my mind, my idea is 210, but will not fair too, RIP Ranger lmao.

But if USN rearm time same as IJN, it's would be good with 210 plan or 202 nowadays. With same base servicing time or each one plane.

112, good idea.

Ranger have worst avg players stats in game nowadays, with lowest win rate. (SEA)

 

Lexington:     AS (2FT 1TB 1DB)     S (1FT 1TB 2DB)

Essex:           AS (3FT 1TB 1DB)     S (1FT 2TB 2DB)

Midway:         AS (3FT 1TB 1DB)    S (1FT 2TB 2DB)

 

Lexington, seems good.

 

Essex, Midway not good, please no 2 TB. 2x6 TB in one battle = overpowered.

What about 303 for AS set? 311 seems good too.

 

113 'S' good enough for Essex, no need to change but IDK what must be in Midway? 114? Lol.

Essex, Midway have superior plane reserve than IJN.

Equal servicing time for each one plane enough for this 'Strike' thing.

 

For today set, just equal servicing time = balance, maybe.

IDK, WG more know what is the real 'balance', and we're waiting...

 

PS : Not played T9 above yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×