Jump to content

MattttChris

Members
  • Content count

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    5127
  • Clan

    [PIZZA]

Community Reputation

14 Neutral

About MattttChris

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Birthday 04/15/1997
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

266 profile views
  1. WG dev blog response to Midway nerfs

    I completely agree with you. However WG seems to be only interested in making sure that the IJN CVs are balanced and good. It is also to have the goal of grinding (The Midway) to be good and not crap. If the T10 isn't god, why would people even grind it?
  2. WG dev blog response to Midway nerfs

    Midway has received about 4 nerfs to its 1 buff
  3. Hello all hope you're having a good day, I do not mean for this to cause drama, but rather discussion and informing people. Please keep all comments civil and on topic so they don't close this down. WG just threw this out on the Dev blog. When the post says: "This was prefaced by statistical dip displayed by Hakuryu on 3 out of 4 regional servers." It is only partly true. Every server except RU had fine winrates for the Midway and Hak. RU was the only one that was out of wack, but drastically out of wack. This is also a slap in the face becasue the Midway was slightly statistically better on 3 out of the 4 servers for a few months, while the Hak has been better for a year or more now. Secondly, the Midway had many many more games played than the Hak in this period. This doesn't necessarily mean that the Midway needed nerfs it just means that it was more played. This is probably because people were actually excited to play a tech tree USN CV because it wasn't crap compared to the IJN counter part. Remember causation doesn't equal correlation. Now comes the statistical evidence to refute WGs claim. The current Midway fighters and TB do not balance against the Hak's. Using no commander skills or modules. Only the most upgraded planes. In air Fighters: In air the 2 squadrons of 6 Midway T9 fighters have 840 DPS and 22,920 HP. In air the 3 squadrons of 4 Hak T10 fighters have 1044 DPS and 24,360 HP. TB: In air the 2 squadrons of 6 Midway T8 TB have 118,404 total torpedo damage and 20,520 HP In air the 3 squadrons of 4 Hak T10 TB have 102,804 total torpedo damage and 25,320 HP Total planes in hangar Fighters: 35 Midway T9 fighters have 2450 DPS and 66,850 HP. 30 Hak T10 fighters have 3045 DPS and 60,900 HP. TB: 40 Midway T8 TB have 394,680 total torpedo damage and 68,400 HP 40 Hak T10 TB have 342,680 total torpedo damage and 84,400 HP What all these numbers mean is that in the air the Hak will always have far better DPS and HP on their fighters. Couple that with having another squadron and better air speed than the Midway, and the Midway gets crushed. Can confirm from experience. Yes in the long run the Hak loses out on total HP of fighters, but it rarely matters because a Hak will normally win more fights because of its additional squadron and superior DPS and HP in air. The T8 TB are inferior in every way to the IJN except in damage. This is because USN torps do more damage, however with T10 AA you usually lose half a squadron going in. Since the Hak's TB have so much more speed and HP they rarely lose as many planes. Usually the Hak will do more damage with torpedoes than the Midway despite the Midways on paper advantages. If the Midway received Its T10 fighters and T9 TB the numbers would be extremely close. If requested I can give the numbers for that. The dev blog post says "The Japanese carrier was losing to her counterpart both in the air and by surface ship damage averages." Well now the Midway doesn't have a air or surface ship damage advantage over its Japanese counterpart, the Hak is clearly better. Tl;dr There is no way the current T10 CVs are balance. 2 weeks of stats cannot affirm that. Numerically there is no way the ships are balanced. To balance them T10 fighters and T9 TB on the Midway would get the job done.
  4. First off I want you to know I'm a huge fan of the Midway. I have been on her and she is awesome! But I'm removing my biases from this to make the game better by getting the Midway buffs, while nerfing her slightly. I know it sucks to have a lower hangar capacity but the thing is with how AA and carriers work ATM having the Hak and the Midway with 100+ planes would casue a lot of strife. Only the legendary CV rework is done I want her back to 130+ but for the way things are now its just not fair
  5. Holy crap man thank you for the feedback! I never thought of dogfighter! Dang you right. Yeah I threw that in there because people [edited] about lower tier fighters so much. While yes I don't think nerfing the Midway below its historical hangar amount is a good idea, its really the only idea. If you buff the Hak (with its much better rearm times) to more planes it would be a mess and the surface ships would be very mad.
  6. Well they're equal in fighter number. If the Midway player plays smart than they should win. The Hak has extra squads because that 2 less fighters adds up over time
  7. Yes I posted this a few hours ago on the subreddit, little traction. Let's hope I can get the ball rolling here. I just want good balance
  8. True but with attributes that make each line unique, little qwirks here and there. I have said before there's no way to balance a 1v1 if the two variables are different. The equation that is CVs requires more variables, I.E. Brit CV line
  9. Yes yes I spent a long time on this because I'm tired of the stupid crap people think of and I want good fun balance
  10. Guys please try and push this up. I really don't want any more silly changes done to the USN Cv line, but I know there's and imbalance so I made a very fair and good way to streamline the T10 CV balance I spent hours on this lol
  11. Hello all I hope you're having a good day today. I am going to be blunt. I am tired of seeing posts about this topic that are just so stupid and biased. The communities collective goal should be to have all balanced ships and none OP and none awful and lame. So here is the real fix to the balance issue on a CV to CV bases. This doesn't cover CV vs surface ships in detail, but should reduce strike power of each CV to make surface ships happy while being good for CV players. With out further ado, The real fix to Midway vs Hak Theoretically with perfect damage numbers and just with Air Supremely, Aircraft Servicing Expert, and Torpedo Armament Expertise no upgrades. Also using the Haks air control group 1 Current Hak: 29 Fighters, 43 TB, 28 DB Current Midway: 45 Fighters, 45 TB, 46 DB As you can see the Midway definitely has a huge upper hand over the Hak due to the hanger. I seek to fix this issue while making sure both CVs are unique and balanced. To begin both carriers have to have a hanger size of 100 and only 1 Flight control if the Midway gets 1 Aircraft Planes and Hangar Composition Fighters Midway should have 35 tier 9ish fighters total. (5 groups total of 7 planes: 13,370 HP per squadron, 490 DPS per squadron. 66,850 HP Total, 2450 DPS Total) A placebo should be put in place. A new WG special fighter should be put in. The F4F-U should be given a rename, and given the tier 10 label to stop [edited] about lower tier planes. Hak should have 35 tier 10 fighters (7 groups total of 5 planes per squadron: 10,150 HP per squad, 435 DPS per squad. 71,020 HP total, 3045 DPS total) Hak would get a whole 2 groups more than Midway. In the long run the Hak has higher overall damage and HP, and with the extra 2 squads this should balance well. Torpedo Bombers Midway should have 30 Tier 8 Torp bombers total (5 groups with 6 planes: 59,202 DMG per squad, 11,970 HP per squad, 296,010 total DMG, 59,850 HP total) Hak should have about 36 Torp bombers (9 groups with 4 planes: 34,268 DMG per squad, 8440 HP per squad, 308,412 DMG total, 75,960 HP Total) Dive Bombers Midway 35 DB (5 groups total 7 planes each squadron) AP Dive Bombers should be reworked. RNG is stupid and should only be there for nice surprises, not big FUs. AP dive bombers should be reworked to provide reliable consistent AP pens, and rarely give citadels as nice surprises. The AP Bombs should only pen BBs and CVs and always overpen Cruisers and DDs. Hak 29 DB (5.8 groups total 5 planes each squadron) Re Arm Times With Air Supremely, Aircraft Servicing Expert, and Torpedo Armament Expertise no upgrades. The Midway has stupidly long reload times. This is to counter what Midway players used to do. They used to make strikes and then let their planes get shot down for faster rearm so the planes wouldn't have to fly back. This was possible with the large hanger the Midway has, however with my proposed new 65 strike planes vs the old 91 I think a change can be made. In patch 0.5.2 a penalty for losing a full squadron was implemented. IJN CVs get a x3 penalty for rearm times, while USN gets x2. Well the x2 for USN CVs might be glitched, they currently get an average of x2.5 penalty for each plane type (x2.55 for fighters, x2.45 for TB and x2.5 for DB). The proposed x2 penalty would be way too low, I personally propose a reduced reload by about 5-6s across the board with the current x2.5 penalty except unified, this would make the ship much more fun and the player wouldn't be sitting and not playing for so long. The Hak currently has replane and rearm times of Fighters: 5 Planes at roughly 67s for losing a full squadron; roughly 22s for a rearm Torp Bombers: 4 Planes at roughly 53s for losing a full squadron; roughly 17s for a rearm Dive Bombers: 5 Planes at roughly 80s for losing a full squadron; roughly 26s for a rearm The Midway currently has full replane and rearm times of Fighters: 7 Planes at roughly 98s for losing a full squadron; roughly 38s for a rearm Torp Bombers: 6 planes at roughly 78s for losing a full squadron; roughly 32s for a rearm Dive Bombers: 7 planes at roughly 108s for losing a full squadron; roughly 43s for a rearm The Hak has fine rearm times currently. However the Midways are too long. Proposed change for the Midway Fighters: 7 Fighter Planes at 83s for losing a full squadron; 33s for a rearm. This would still give the Hak with its faster fighters an advantage to balance its weaker fighters. The Hak would have a roughly 11 second advantage over the Midway still for a rearm. This 16s and 11s difference respectively is much more comfortable than the current 31s and 16s difference between the two. This means it takes 4.65s for the Midway to rearm each plane, while the Hak does each plane in 4.46s. This also allows fighters to get in the fight faster and help the surface ships Torpedo bombers: 6 Planes at 68s for losing a full squadron; 27s for a rearm. This would give the Hak a rearm advantage of 10s. This means it takes 4.5s for the Midway to rearm a plane, while the Hak does it in 4.25s. Dive Bombers: 7 Planes at 93 for losing a full squadron; 37s for a rearm. Hak would have an advantage of 11s. This means it takes 5.2857s for the Midway to rearm a plane, while the Hak does it in 5.2s. **Tl;dr Midway: 100 planes of 35 T9ish Fighters, 30 T8 TB, 35 T10DB and slightly reduced rearm time of about 5-6 seconds and squadron loss penalty of x2.5. Hak: 100 planes of 35 T10 Fighters, 35 T10 TB, 30 T10 DB. Only 1 flight control group.**
  12. Hello all I hope you're having a good day today. I am going to be blunt. I am tired of seeing posts about this topic that are just so stupid and biased. The communities collective goal should be to have all balanced ships and none OP and none awful and lame. So here is the real fix to the balance issue on a CV to CV bases. This doesn't cover CV vs surface ships in detail, but should reduce strike power of each CV to make surface ships happy while being good for CV players. With out further ado, The real fix to Midway vs Hak Theoretically with perfect damage numbers and just with Air Supremely, Aircraft Servicing Expert, and Torpedo Armament Expertise no upgrades. Also using the Haks air control group 1 Current Hak: 29 Fighters, 43 TB, 28 DB Current Midway: 45 Fighters, 45 TB, 46 DB As you can see the Midway definitely has a huge upper hand over the Hak due to the hanger. I seek to fix this issue while making sure both CVs are unique and balanced. To begin both carriers have to have a hanger size of 100 and only 1 Flight control if the Midway gets 1 Aircraft Planes and Hangar Composition Fighters Midway should have 35 tier 9ish fighters total. (5 groups total of 7 planes: 13,370 HP per squadron, 490 DPS per squadron. 66,850 HP Total, 2450 DPS Total) A placebo should be put in place. A new WG special fighter should be put in. The F4F-U should be given a rename, and given the tier 10 label to stop [edited] about lower tier planes. Hak should have 35 tier 10 fighters (7 groups total of 5 planes per squadron: 10,150 HP per squad, 435 DPS per squad. 71,020 HP total, 3045 DPS total) Hak would get a whole 2 groups more than Midway. In the long run the Hak has higher overall damage and HP, and with the extra 2 squads this should balance well. Torpedo Bombers Midway should have 30 Tier 8 Torp bombers total (5 groups with 6 planes: 59,202 DMG per squad, 11,970 HP per squad, 296,010 total DMG, 59,850 HP total) Hak should have about 36 Torp bombers (9 groups with 4 planes: 34,268 DMG per squad, 8440 HP per squad, 308,412 DMG total, 75,960 HP Total) Dive Bombers Midway 35 DB (5 groups total 7 planes each squadron) AP Dive Bombers should be reworked. RNG is stupid and should only be there for nice surprises, not big FUs. AP dive bombers should be reworked to provide reliable consistent AP pens, and rarely give citadels as nice surprises. The AP Bombs should only pen BBs and CVs and always overpen Cruisers and DDs. Hak 29 DB (5.8 groups total 5 planes each squadron) Re Arm Times With Air Supremely, Aircraft Servicing Expert, and Torpedo Armament Expertise no upgrades. The Midway has stupidly long reload times. This is to counter what Midway players used to do. They used to make strikes and then let their planes get shot down for faster rearm so the planes wouldn't have to fly back. This was possible with the large hanger the Midway has, however with my proposed new 65 strike planes vs the old 91 I think a change can be made. In patch 0.5.2 a penalty for losing a full squadron was implemented. IJN CVs get a x3 penalty for rearm times, while USN gets x2. Well the x2 for USN CVs might be glitched, they currently get an average of x2.5 penalty for each plane type (x2.55 for fighters, x2.45 for TB and x2.5 for DB). The proposed x2 penalty would be way too low, I personally propose a reduced reload by about 5-6s across the board with the current x2.5 penalty except unified, this would make the ship much more fun and the player wouldn't be sitting and not playing for so long. The Hak currently has replane and rearm times of Fighters: 5 Planes at roughly 67s for losing a full squadron; roughly 22s for a rearm Torp Bombers: 4 Planes at roughly 53s for losing a full squadron; roughly 17s for a rearm Dive Bombers: 5 Planes at roughly 80s for losing a full squadron; roughly 26s for a rearm The Midway currently has full replane and rearm times of Fighters: 7 Planes at roughly 98s for losing a full squadron; roughly 38s for a rearm Torp Bombers: 6 planes at roughly 78s for losing a full squadron; roughly 32s for a rearm Dive Bombers: 7 planes at roughly 108s for losing a full squadron; roughly 43s for a rearm The Hak has fine rearm times currently. However the Midways are too long. Proposed change for the Midway Fighters: 7 Fighter Planes at 83s for losing a full squadron; 33s for a rearm. This would still give the Hak with its faster fighters an advantage to balance its weaker fighters. The Hak would have a roughly 11 second advantage over the Midway still for a rearm. This 16s and 11s difference respectively is much more comfortable than the current 31s and 16s difference between the two. This means it takes 4.65s for the Midway to rearm each plane, while the Hak does each plane in 4.46s. This also allows fighters to get in the fight faster and help the surface ships Torpedo bombers: 6 Planes at 68s for losing a full squadron; 27s for a rearm. This would give the Hak a rearm advantage of 10s. This means it takes 4.5s for the Midway to rearm a plane, while the Hak does it in 4.25s. Dive Bombers: 7 Planes at 93 for losing a full squadron; 37s for a rearm. Hak would have an advantage of 11s. This means it takes 5.2857s for the Midway to rearm a plane, while the Hak does it in 5.2s. **Tl;dr Midway: 100 planes of 35 T9ish Fighters, 30 T8 TB, 35 T10DB and slightly reduced rearm time of about 5-6 seconds and squadron loss penalty of x2.5. Hak: 100 planes of 35 T10 Fighters, 35 T10 TB, 30 T10 DB. Only 1 flight control group.**
  13. What? What makes you say that?
  14. I'm having a huge bug where my FPS will drop from 75 to 12 when I command my planes to move. WG pls help
  15. USN CVs will always be junk. As soon as they're not they get nerfed into the ground
×