Jump to content


USN CV loadout buffs(?) - Discussion & Review

carriers usn ijn

  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

Personator #1 Posted 30 April 2017 - 10:00 AM

    Captain

  • WoWS Wiki Editor
  • In AlfaTesters
    Beta Testers

  • 5,492
  • Member since:
    12-03-2014

**This will be 3-post long regarding USN CVs due to forum limitations**

 

In Update 0.5.3, carriers had a major overhaul in rebalancing, particularly USN CVs.

Patch Notes 

 

As it is noted, Midway and Essex assault setups were changed from 1/2/2 -> 1/1/3

 

Lexington, however, was changed from 2/1/1 -> 1/1/1.

 

Now, before I get into my discussion, I'd like to show the detailed loadouts of all the USN CVs (in the tech tree).

 

As shown here, there are drastic minimal changes between the USN CVs from tier to tier unlike any other line in the game.  1/1/1... 1/1/1... 1/1/1... 


Dynamic gameplay working as intended

 

Sarcasm aside, let's move on.


 
Current progress on all ship lines

Game OST -- Replay Ctrl Change -- Relaxing Time


Personator #2 Posted 30 April 2017 - 10:01 AM

    Captain

  • WoWS Wiki Editor
  • In AlfaTesters
    Beta Testers

  • 5,492
  • Member since:
    12-03-2014

First, I'm going to talk about the stock loadout of USN CVs.

 

When players move on to Bogue from the Langley, they lose the 1 dive bomber squadron and are given two extra loadout options - fighter (air superiority) or bomber (strike) loadouts. The major issue here is that it these two ships look like they should be reversed in tiers, as Langley actually has more planes (30 full upgrade) and a better stock loadout than Bogue (28). Additionally, while Langley was originally only 1/1/0 for stock, it is now given 1/1/1.

 

Players being forced to go to the (what I consider) downgrade and original loadout seems very illogical. No ship line in the game has so far done this. It's equivalent to a BB or cruiser getting less guns (same caliber, same damage) than its preceding tier, or a DD getting less torps (same speed, same damage) than its preceding tier. (The transition from Shiratsuyu to Akizuki is an exception & is still new - also, Akizuki gets better guns than Shiratsuyu to make up for the lack of torps). The Bogue does not have anything to make up for the loss of the dive bomber, other than maybe the new loadout options. However, neither are very appealing, as 2/0/1 cannot really focus much in the way of destroying ships and 0/1/1 puts you at risk of being easily shut down by the enemy CV. With that said, I think Bogue should be given 1/1/1.

 

Now, if Bogue were to be given 1/1/1, then the break in this trend should happen earlier sometime in the USN CV line. It would start from tier 4 and end at tier 8. The IJN have constant changes for their loadouts from tier to tier, and thus the USN should get more changes throughout the line as well to compensate. 

IJN CVs 

 

As seen here, the only 2 CVs in the entire IJN CV line with the exact same loadouts are the Hiryuu & the Shoukaku. In the USN CV line, the Langley, Independence, Ranger, and Lexington all have the exact same stock loadout. A tier 8 CV should not have the same loadout as a tier 4 CV. Houshou does not share Shoukaku's 1/2/2. Additionally, since Shoukaku has 2 DB squadrons whereas Houshou does not, that means that in terms of balancing factor & compensation for Lexington, Lexy should get 1 more DB squadron, no?


 
Current progress on all ship lines

Game OST -- Replay Ctrl Change -- Relaxing Time


Personator #3 Posted 30 April 2017 - 10:02 AM

    Captain

  • WoWS Wiki Editor
  • In AlfaTesters
    Beta Testers

  • 5,492
  • Member since:
    12-03-2014

Secondly, bomber (suicide) loadouts for USN CVs.

 

The USN all have 0 fighters for their bomber loadout from tiers 5-8, putting them at a severe disadvantage when facing an IJN CV with strike loadout. Shoukaku has a total of 8 fighters for her bomber loadout, where as Lexington is stuck with 0. Furthermore, the USN do not get fighters in their bomber loadouts until tier 9. I think this should be changed so that USN should at least get compensation with a bomber loadout. 

 

My concluding thoughts for changes to USN (the next spoiler below)

 

My proposed changes to USN CVs 

 

  1. Langley - kept as is because it's fine.
     
  2. Bogue - this keeps in line the 3 squadron rule and makes it noob friendly. Also, it'll be the only CV to have the "suicide" bomber loadout, as the next few CVs will have fighters to make even more noob-friendly.
     
  3. Independence - Here, the first fighter squad is added to the bomber loadout, while keeping the 1/1/1 stock loadout. Also, note that the fighter squad does not get an extra squadron, whereas the bomber loadout does. This is to promote bombing the enemy rather than trying to fight for air supremacy.
     
  4. Ranger - Same as Independence, and finally there's an extra bomber for the fighter loadout. This will keep on until Essex.
     
  5. Lexington - It gets the first 2/1/1 stock loadout, as USN will require that extra fighter to stay relevant. Bomber loadout is also given an extra dive bomber, starting the first 5 squad rule.
     
  6. Essex - finally given the first 3-fighter squad fighter loadout. Again, the extra squadron comes later than the bomber loadouts.
     
  7. Midway - Given 2/1/2 to promote "stock loadout is good" meta again (jk not really). Midway will be kept as is as well, as she will give the truest sense of balancing between your loadouts, and which seems the most favorable. 

 

I keep the 5-squad cap rule on USN CVs because, quite frankly, they'd be OP if given more than 5. However, letting the 5-squad rule hit earlier would be a minor buff to these CVs, and my changes would promote bomber loadout more than fighter loadout. Additionally, I wanted to give Lexington something to compensate for the loss it had back in update 0.5.3.

 

Thoughts?


 
Current progress on all ship lines

Game OST -- Replay Ctrl Change -- Relaxing Time


pyantoryng #4 Posted 30 April 2017 - 11:03 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Alpha Tester

  • 1,853
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

Wouldn't having four squads put a significant strain on the Independence's meager reserve of 37...or you plan for it to be expanded to the overload capacity of 45-48 as some of the ships in its class IRL do?

 

In your projection, 24 planes out leaves only 13 as spares with the current 37-strong Independence hangar...leaving 4 planes to spare for each type...with the USN DB bias gives the final plane to be DB, making spares 4/4/5. Meaning, you are back to the tier 4 Langley-level reserve-wise, while with 3 squads you will have at least one full squad of replacement for each type plus one dive bomber for USN DB bias. Bogue already had the option for 3-squad setups as it is so I guess it's moot to argue any further on that end. Remember, that the tier 6 spot used to be taken by Saipan with 40 planes stock and 48 upgraded, with the option to use four squads (1/2/1, but that's a day long gone) as its final upgrade.

 

Why must USN be gimped in the reserve front along with all the gimps that it get in their early tier?



Show_Me_Your_Cits #5 Posted 30 April 2017 - 11:12 AM

    Lieutenant Commander

  • Members

  • 2,005
  • Member since:
    07-13-2015
To be honest, Essex needs 2/1/2 as stock as well, and USN strike loadouts should be 2/2/2 for Essex and Midway. AA has gotten much better and people already have to deal with the OP ship deleter named Hak, so I doubt it would be as much of a problem as it used to be. There's no reason why the IJN should be the only line to have their cake and eat it too. 
Muh 1337 stets. 

X15 #6 Posted 30 April 2017 - 01:49 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Members

  • 1,639
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

Shoukaku has 2/2/2 not 1/2/2 by the way.

The double torpedo squadrons should be removed from IJN CVs as well. Give them a big squad like Kaga's to make up for it.

 

But giving strike USN another fighter would make them less of a plane farm to strike IJN. 

 



danredda1616 #7 Posted 30 April 2017 - 02:04 PM

    Ensign

  • Supertester
  • In AlfaTesters

  • 973
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

Here is how you balance CVs - Remove the difference in squad sizes, and make 1 higher DPS, lower health and the other more health, lower dps. Done.

 

Or remove air supremacy commander skill. Biggest problem with squad sizes is the Air Supremacy skill - 25% increase in power for IJN CVs, but only a ~16% increase in power for USN CVs.


༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ GIVE KITAKAMI PLEASE!!!

Ships Collected: 200/211

Ships Missing (Gold = unobtainable/reward): Tachibana Lima, Iwaki Alpha, Eastern Dragon, Tone, Akizuki, Kitakami, Marblehead Lima, Flint, Black, Midway, Diana Lima


Carrier_Lexington #8 Posted 30 April 2017 - 03:33 PM

    Ensign

  • Members

  • 1,061
  • Member since:
    12-25-2014

I agree with a lot of what you say...

 

Except, for Dive Bomber Strike configurations to be viable, the USN dive-bombers have to get smaller hit-circles.

 

I mean, why does the IJN get more accurate Torp spread AND Dive Bombers when the USN gets the less-accurate of both?


"Heresy!"


Personator #9 Posted 30 April 2017 - 07:02 PM

    Captain

  • WoWS Wiki Editor
  • In AlfaTesters
    Beta Testers

  • 5,492
  • Member since:
    12-03-2014

View Postdanredda1616, on 30 April 2017 - 06:04 AM, said:

Here is how you balance CVs - Remove the difference in squad sizes, and make 1 higher DPS, lower health and the other more health, lower dps. Done.

 

Or remove air supremacy commander skill. Biggest problem with squad sizes is the Air Supremacy skill - 25% increase in power for IJN CVs, but only a ~16% increase in power for USN CVs.

 

I'll agree that that's the best way to balance them, but it doesn't seem like WG wants to change to that anytime soon. Thus I'm working with what I have ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

View PostCarrier_Lexington, on 30 April 2017 - 07:33 AM, said:

I agree with a lot of what you say...

 

Except, for Dive Bomber Strike configurations to be viable, the USN dive-bombers have to get smaller hit-circles.

 

I mean, why does the IJN get more accurate Torp spread AND Dive Bombers when the USN gets the less-accurate of both?

 

Yeah, they need slightly smaller dive bomber circles for more viable damage. However, their torp spread is already very good for 6-torpedo spreads compared to IJN; IJN is a large spread for 4 torps.

 

View PostX15, on 30 April 2017 - 05:49 AM, said:

Shoukaku has 2/2/2 not 1/2/2 by the way.

The double torpedo squadrons should be removed from IJN CVs as well. Give them a big squad like Kaga's to make up for it.

 

But giving strike USN another fighter would make them less of a plane farm to strike IJN. 

 

 

No, it's 1/2/2. Also, that's the point of giving strike USN another fighter. Another note is that strike USN can't protect their own team while simultaneously attacking, which is what IJN can do. It's just outright unfair and unbalanced.

 

View Postpyantoryng, on 30 April 2017 - 03:03 AM, said:

Wouldn't having four squads put a significant strain on the Independence's meager reserve of 37...or you plan for it to be expanded to the overload capacity of 45-48 as some of the ships in its class IRL do?

 

In your projection, 24 planes out leaves only 13 as spares with the current 37-strong Independence hangar...leaving 4 planes to spare for each type...with the USN DB bias gives the final plane to be DB, making spares 4/4/5. Meaning, you are back to the tier 4 Langley-level reserve-wise, while with 3 squads you will have at least one full squad of replacement for each type plus one dive bomber for USN DB bias. Bogue already had the option for 3-squad setups as it is so I guess it's moot to argue any further on that end. Remember, that the tier 6 spot used to be taken by Saipan with 40 planes stock and 48 upgraded, with the option to use four squads (1/2/1, but that's a day long gone) as its final upgrade.

 

Why must USN be gimped in the reserve front along with all the gimps that it get in their early tier?

 

I plan on buffing the USN CVs to compensate for their extra squads.

 

Bogue will have 36 (maybe 42) planes (so she would have 1 full squads' worth in reserve for each squad, while Langley has only 2/3's squad's worth reserve for each squad)

 

Independence will have 48 (same thing with Bogue)

 

Ranger seems fine as is... she may need a minor buff. 

 

Lexington and Essex won't need increased reserves. They can work with the new squad loadouts fine imo


 
Current progress on all ship lines

Game OST -- Replay Ctrl Change -- Relaxing Time


pyantoryng #10 Posted 30 April 2017 - 07:35 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Alpha Tester

  • 1,853
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

I don't think that magically increasing Bogue to 36 as opposed to the Independence-class's historically-based capacity going up to over 40 is going to be easily approved nor accepted. Besides, Zuiho only has 30 without any upgrade available, which apparently is the reason why Independence got bumped up a tier and the Bogue came into existence in the first place.

 

...but it is too late to return the Independence to tier 5 as there is no replacement for the tier 6 slot...yet.



The_Big_Red_1 #11 Posted 30 April 2017 - 08:53 PM

    Ensign

  • Alpha Tester

  • 1,122
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012

View PostPersonator, on 30 April 2017 - 11:02 AM, said:

 

I'll agree that that's the best way to balance them, but it doesn't seem like WG wants to change to that anytime soon. Thus I'm working with what I have ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

 

Yeah, they need slightly smaller dive bomber circles for more viable damage. However, their torp spread is already very good for 6-torpedo spreads compared to IJN; IJN is a large spread for 4 torps.

 

 

No, it's 1/2/2. Also, that's the point of giving strike USN another fighter. Another note is that strike USN can't protect their own team while simultaneously attacking, which is what IJN can do. It's just outright unfair and unbalanced.

 

 

I plan on buffing the USN CVs to compensate for their extra squads.

 

Bogue will have 36 (maybe 42) planes (so she would have 1 full squads' worth in reserve for each squad, while Langley has only 2/3's squad's worth reserve for each squad)

 

Independence will have 48 (same thing with Bogue)

 

Ranger seems fine as is... she may need a minor buff. 

 

Lexington and Essex won't need increased reserves. They can work with the new squad loadouts fine imo

 

overpowered as fuk shokaku has 2/2/2 in its strike config loadout btw and it pisses me to know what strike lex does op as fuk shokaku can do better

The_Big_Red_1 #12 Posted 30 April 2017 - 09:30 PM

    Ensign

  • Alpha Tester

  • 1,122
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
not to mention ijn carriers have shorter reload times for their planes





Also tagged with carriers, usn, ijn

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users