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

Reason Why I Hate the US CV Changes

22 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
153 posts
3,490 battles

ok so first up i have always played AS in my us CV's and i did quite well in my lexington playing this but since this patch they have removed all variety from US Carrier gameplay and japanese carriers are still much better yet in the real world as the war dragged on the us carriers were 10000 times better than anything the japanese could field eg the midway but you have to balance them i know now the lexington as it stands now is horrible and there is no variety in us carrier gameplay what about those of us that liked to deny the enemy the chance to strike and dont like TB's maybe even giving us AS back with AP dive bombers not a rant just a post on what i dont like about them and how we can fix it /make US Carriers actually good again and have a variety and point to exist in this game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
153 posts
3,490 battles

idk with the ijn cvs maybe leave them the way they are but surely there has to be a better way of doing the US cvs and giving the player variety i enjoyed the as role and really disappointing that the way I chose to play was taken away from me without consultation or a choice but honestly there is no real reason to play us cvs over ijn anymore in ww2 towards the end the us had better aircraft,engines, aa, FCR, RDF, Damage control Teams, yet there is nothing the us carriers in game have over the ijn ones Ill Use the Unryu Class Carrier with the 1994 Set up had a Total Capacity of 53 Aircraft 20 Fighters 27 Strike Craft and 6 Recon Planes Compared to the Essex Class Carrier 90-100 Aircraft in WW2 and The Midway Class Carrier up to 130 in 1940s-1950s now of course if you put them in historically tier 8 9 and 10 us cvs would dominate the hell out of the IJN and you have to have balance but as i have stated there is nothing going for the us cvs now how is a good and balanced way to give US Cv's a purpose and reason to play them 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,056 posts
8,987 battles

Can you please add punctuation? Its really hard to read your arguments. You sound like someone regurgitating something without any structure.

 

Secondly... You finally got me curious, but I seriously doubt you actually "did well" using the AS loadouts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
153 posts
3,490 battles
20 minutes ago, Onlinegamer said:

Because you always played AS loadout, didnt you?? :cap_popcorn:

yeah i did hahaha well the play i played was deny enemy strikes and use my dive bombers to my advantage 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
153 posts
3,490 battles
39 minutes ago, stratmania said:

Can you please add punctuation? Its really hard to read your arguments. You sound like someone regurgitating something without any structure.

 

Secondly... You finally got me curious, but I seriously doubt you actually "did well" using the AS loadouts. 

well 70-80k damage is well to me also next time sure 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,056 posts
8,987 battles
19 minutes ago, unknownaussie said:

well 70-80k damage is well to me also next time sure 

Thats a far cry from what your stats say you do. I'm very sure you can do far more with 112 than 202.

 

Secondly, measuring how well you do in an AS loadout by damage dealt should already be a red flag. 

Edited by stratmania

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,224 battles
15 hours ago, unknownaussie said:

ok so first up i have always played AS in my us CV's and i did quite well in my lexington playing this but since this patch they have removed all variety from US Carrier gameplay and japanese carriers are still much better yet in the real world as the war dragged on the us carriers were 10000 times better than anything the japanese could field eg the midway but you have to balance them i know now the lexington as it stands now is horrible and there is no variety in us carrier gameplay what about those of us that liked to deny the enemy the chance to strike and dont like TB's maybe even giving us AS back with AP dive bombers not a rant just a post on what i dont like about them and how we can fix it /make US Carriers actually good again and have a variety and point to exist in this game

1. You know why people hate USN AS loadout? They can shoot down planes and gain air superiority but often fail to stop enemy CV from dealing damage, and fail to spot, thus losing the game due to enemy CV does teamwork.

2. "IRL" Yeah yeah yeah IRL. IRL DD don’t get to sneak up to 6km of enemy ships undetected, fire don’t sink ships, and naval warfare does not include ramming an island and use it as cover.

And FYI, IJN was ahead of USN in terms of air carrier development, they stopped construction of large surface gun ship earlier, start featuring car-div earlier, put armored flight deck carrier into service earlier. USN’s advantage is their huge production capabilities and superior aircraft. That is why IJN CVs match USN CVs with earlier date of design and design concepts. Shokaku (which historically should match Essex class) is paired with Lexington, Taiho (an armored flight deck carrier which USN only featured since USS Midway post war) gets to fight Essex.

3. USN CV has more planes per squad but less squads, thus specialized loadout will deviate from the all-rounder one more than IJN CVs do, making it hard to balance, and specialized loadout of USN CV often frustrate their surface teammates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MEGA]
Member
4,563 posts
17,557 battles
1 hour ago, HMS_Swiftsure_08 said:

2. "IRL" Yeah yeah yeah IRL. IRL DD don’t get to sneak up to 6km of enemy ships undetected, fire don’t sink ships, and naval warfare does not include ramming an island and use it as cover.

 

operation ten–go(which failed pretty )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,844 battles

Lol IRL Fire can sink a Warships

 

Russian Battleship Borodino sunk, when Uncontrolable Fire on deck reach her secondary magazine - causing Chain of Detonation

According to Admiral Beaty, 3 of the Battlecruiser lacked Antiflash protection that resulted in Fire started by incoming shells to reach the powder magazines

on more modern era Iranian Frigate Sahand sunk after heavy strike left her heavily aflame, dead in the water - after burning for hours, fire finaly reach her magazine and finish her off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,340 posts
8,832 battles
On 12/3/2017 at 11:57 PM, stratmania said:

Secondly, measuring how well you do in an AS loadout by damage dealt should already be a red flag. 

It irks me when I see USN AS CV players using their fighters to escort their DBs, leaving the rest of their team to fend for themselves.

Not saying that the OP does it, but it goes to show the mentality of some of the players. They don't understand the purpose of playing AS.

And the main purpose of playing AS - protecting your team from airstrikes - that can done by simply not queuing as a CV in the first place.

Edited by Thyaliad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,224 battles
9 minutes ago, humusz said:

Lol IRL Fire can sink a Warships

 

Russian Battleship Borodino sunk, when Uncontrolable Fire on deck reach her secondary magazine - causing Chain of Detonation

According to Admiral Beaty, 3 of the Battlecruiser lacked Antiflash protection that resulted in Fire started by incoming shells to reach the powder magazines

on more modern era Iranian Frigate Sahand sunk after heavy strike left her heavily aflame, dead in the water - after burning for hours, fire finaly reach her magazine and finish her off

I know fire can cause detonation and thus sunk ships, but not in the same way WoWs fire works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,844 battles
7 minutes ago, HMS_Swiftsure_08 said:

I know fire can cause detonation and thus sunk ships, but not in the same way WoWs fire works.

I did say IRL doesn it ? 

 

anyway when your ships sunk by fire in WoW, well you can pretend that you ship damage control and crew destroyed or killed as your HP ticked down

and when it tick to 0, the fire reach the magazine and BOOM 

 

but you dont get detonation medal

Edited by humusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,486 posts
4 minutes ago, humusz said:

Lol IRL Fire can sink a Warships

 

Russian Battleship Borodino sunk, when Uncontrolable Fire on deck reach her secondary magazine - causing Chain of Detonation

According to Admiral Beaty, 3 of the Battlecruiser lacked Antiflash protection that resulted in Fire started by incoming shells to reach the powder magazines

on more modern era Iranian Frigate Sahand sunk after heavy strike left her heavily aflame, dead in the water - after burning for hours, fire finaly reach her magazine and finish her off

 

Well, for the British battlecruiser problem, it was more a combination of unstable cordite, & the unhealthy practices of leaving doors open inside turrets, magazines & powder rooms ( to try & speed up firing) , & the practice of stacking shells & cordite next to those open doors, as well as the inadequate flash protection,...

 

Ordrazz

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,844 battles
17 minutes ago, Ordrazz said:

 

Well, for the British battlecruiser problem, it was more a combination of unstable cordite, & the unhealthy practices of leaving doors open inside turrets, magazines & powder rooms ( to try & speed up firing) , & the practice of stacking shells & cordite next to those open doors, as well as the inadequate flash protection,...

 

Ordrazz

 

 

given enough time though, uncontroloble fire can cooked up munition behind door or walls

Especialy in ships that covered with metal. you can find story how fires burn tables, clothes without direct contact.

There is a stories my dad told me (he works at shipping industry), some singaporean freighter carrying coal was burned. and the survivor cling to the stern of the ships at the other end. being slowly cooked off

The deck is heat up, melting their shoes sole, wooden tables got burn after a while, they need to step on corpse of other people to not get cooked. if you touched the hot steel wall or deck your skin will burn and stick to it

the ship basicly turned into frying pan before they decided to brave themself burned their hand into railling and jump to ocean

 

the story points were, ships without damage control can sunk no matter what protection she have. due to Thermal conduction

HMS Sheffield is one of the case when the damage, passes ship damage control capabilities. causing uncontrolable fire to almost reach sea dart magazine a decision that made captain opt for abandoning the ships

the one that keep ships afloat on combat were always sailors on board
 

Edited by humusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
153 posts
3,490 battles
15 hours ago, Thyaliad said:

It irks me when I see USN AS CV players using their fighters to escort their DBs, leaving the rest of their team to fend for themselves.

Not saying that the OP does it, but it goes to show the mentality of some of the players. They don't understand the purpose of playing AS.

And the main purpose of playing AS - protecting your team from airstrikes - that can done by simply not queuing as a CV in the first place.

see thats not what i do i use my fighters to take down bombers going for enemy ships or take out the enemy fighters so i can strike freely maybe im just playing wrong but thats how i enjoyed playing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,011 posts
7,430 battles
On 12/4/2017 at 2:13 AM, unknownaussie said:

what about those of us that liked to deny the enemy the chance to strike

 

I have to say that was an efficient strategy, ie deny the enemy CV strikes. I guess your team would have loved you, but unfortunately shooting down planes was not rewarded very well. In my case, I palyed IJN CV’s now and again, but basically stopped playing US CV’s.

About US CV’s being 10,000 times better in real life, that’s very much debatable. At the beginning of the war, when there were a lot of well trained Japanese pilots, the Empire did very well, the US was pretty much fighting a delaying action, there were not many victories. But later in the war, Japan was unable to replace pilots, planes or carriers. Japan went down, the US ascended, later in the way. But that’s a lot more factors than the quality of the CV’s, remember, the CV’s are just a platform for planes to operate.

That aside, WG has to achieve some kind of balance without making all ships too similar. At the same tier, all ships have to have a fighting chance. Maybe WG looked at the numbers of IJN and US carriers and had to acknoledge that people don’t grind up the US CV’s as much.

Share this post


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

×