Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Aircraft Carrier'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Contests and Competitions
    • Events
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Programs Corner
    • Support
  • Off Topic
    • Off-Topic
  • Historical Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
  • Player's Section
    • Team Play
    • Player Modifications
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests

Calendars

  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 14 results

  1. I wanted to share my review of the model kit for the HMS Ark Royal. I think model kit building is a fun hobby and getting drowned out by digital media and games. This was my first model build in 10 plus years and it's been a great experience and a refreshing hobby from my usual games and movies. Anyways, here's the review, hope you enjoy! https://youtu.be/hvKG4TNcC8U I also recently finished the 1989 Batmobile, Typhoon and Gato Class submarines, 1/700 Battleship Scharnhorst, and finishing up Akagi with Azure Lane inspired camo scheme! Let me know which videos you'd like to see next!
  2. Battlecruiser_Yavuz

    Midway (2019) Teaser Trailer

    In my opinion, it looks passable so far. Is it going to be the most accurate thing possible? I highly doubt it, especially since it is by Roland Emmerich. Would it hopefully be somewhat entertaining and not a colossal mess? I hope so, though I'm personally waiting for reviews to be published before making any firm judgements about seeing it. I hope the best for this film because WW2 naval films are pretty rare anyways. Maybe Wargaming can partner up with these guys, especially since the game already hosts a few of the participants in this battle (most notably Enterprise and Kaga). More advertising can always help bring more players into this fun game. To those who want some more historical context on the Battle of Midway, these videos below are pretty good for that. They're also pretty exciting to boot:
  3. MakersMike

    Air defense question

    I'm pretty new, and I assumed something about planes attacking but now I'm not sure. When planes are attacking my ship, I notice that little airplane figure that I can move around with my mouse. I'm color blind, but I think it's orange. Am I supposed to aim that towards the attacking planes for better chance at shooting them down or what is that for? And is there a button I should push while aiming it or just point it towards the plane? Thanks
  4. In my last post on this subject (CV Play) the CV Rework was just coming out, and I said I'd keep an open mind, and try it out for awhile, then see how it went. Well, here's my take pm it, at this point (6 Apr 19): The current Update to Carrier Play has caused quite a few players I know personally, as well as others I chat with during matches to simply refuse further CV Play, and many former CV players have even sold-off their carriers in disgust. I have tried to keep an open mind, hoping further "fixes" will make CV Play viable and enjoyable, but so far, have found it to be neither, and in fact, an extremely annoying WASTE of my precious gaming time, particularly when my Tier VIII CV is pitted vs. Tier IX and X ships—even a single, lone CL wipes out my planes before they can drop a single bomb. The CV aircraft flight model continues to be "jerky" (due to the time compression needed) and overall, CV Play has become increasingly "unrealistic" with each new "fix", causing some players resort to unrealistic "work-arounds" to "game the system" --departing even further from logic and historical practice so as to succeed in the faulty CV Play system. Although with practice, I will no doubt develop the proper technique for accurate aerial attacks-- while losing most or all of my attacking squadron by the end of my 2nd pass-- in its current state, I doubt I will ever find CV Play "enjoyable," much less "rewarding" and thus, will avoid it, keeping a token CV for "Spotting" tasks and little else. I have so far resisted selling-off my last CV in disgust, and have not enjoyed even a single mission yet. HOWEVER— aside from a much-needed toning down the fantastic hyper-lethality of AA in general, with some minor "fixes" using existing game mechanics, some of the more frustrating aspects of Carrier Play for both carrier and surface combatant players might be alleviated, as follows: SUGGESTION #1: British Dive Bombers should be allowed to carry, at minimum, 500-lb/230 kg bombs, and ideally, 1,000-lb/500 kg and heavier bombs, just as they did in real life. No aviation force would ever seek to attack armored warships with piddly little 250-lb General Purpose bombs, though they may have been adequate vs. small craft (E-boats, F-lighters, armed trawlers) and coastal freighters-- 500 lb bombs were the rule vs. smaller combatants, such as frigates and destroyers, and were the minimum vs. armored warships. E.g., in a 1944 attack, Fairey Barracudas attacked the battleship Tirpitz with with 1,600 lb (730 kg) and 500 lb (230 kg) bombs, scoring 14 direct hits, which even so, only put the Tirpitz out of action for 8 weeks. Had they used mere 250-lb bombs to which the game currently limits them, there likely would've been no significant damage whatsoever. [Note that of 42 attacking Barracudas, only ONE was lost to enemy AA-- a far cry from the uber-hyper-collossal lethality of AA as it currently exists, and I'm primarily a surface ship operator, and yet I'm embarrassed by just how unbelievably lethal even my little Leander's AA is-- enemy planes just melt away and do nothing, and I've removed all my AA builds, upgrades, and skills-- they're no longer needed, and I pretty much ignore attacking planes.] SUGGESTION #2: Have the ENTIRE attack aircraft squadron, whether Torpedo, Dive Bomber, or Rocket Aircraft launch its ordnance near-simultaneously with the "Squadron Leader" (the central aircraft on the screen the carrier player "flies"). When the player hits his mouse key to "launch ordnance", remaining aircraft of the flight also launch their ordnance, but with a delay of, say, 0.1 seconds to 5 seconds. This will prevent unrealistic "robotic perfection" in the resulting bomb or torpedo pattern that surface ship players used to complain about. In the same manner, the Squadron Leader's (center aircraft) places its strike at the exact center of the "crosshairs" (or torpedo arc), subject to normal "dispersion", and remaining aircraft of the squadron launch their ordnance subject to dispersion from that point, as well possibly a short time delay, just as a volley of warship shells deviates within its "Maximum Dispersion" ellipse already. This is already included in the game mechanics, I believe, but it should be able to be "improved" via certain "Captain Skills" and/or via ship "Upgrades" (see further below). E.g., for dive bombers, bombs other attacking aircraft would have a similar "dispersion" within the "ellipse" that appears on the aiming diagram the player uses, and torpedoes deviate a few mils left or right (randomly) from the "center" of their assigned point in torpedo squadron formation. I.e., torpedoes would also have a "dispersion" of a few mils, left or right, and in time of drop, for each torpedo the squadron successfully drops. Thus, mass torpedo drops will have an appearance similar to a volley of shells, with each individual torpedo deviating slightly, at random, within the Maximum Dispersion parameters for the ship/squadron, just as in real life, and as surface ship shells do already. This would eliminate the unrealistic (and silly) game mechanism that allows only 1 or 2 bombs/torpedoes to "launch" from an entire flight of 4 to 8 aircraft, while the remaining aircraft of the squadron do nothing but fly along as targets, waiting their turn on the next target pass (which is utterly unrealistic, and NEVER done in combat). But it would also prevent the target ship from being overwhelmed with huge numbers of "un-dodgeable" torpedoes or bombs, as many will certainly miss, unless the attacking player is very lucky (as per warship volleys now). So— having the entire squadron attack at once, but with a slightly varying "time of drop" by say, 0.1 to 5 seconds after the "Leader" aircraft (reduced by certain "Crew Skills", as well instituting a "Maximum Dispersion" variance for torpedoes, etc.), targeted ships won't be overwhelmed by a concentrated "perfect" swarm of torpedoes, especially as they "shoot holes" into the attacking formation, and carrier aircraft will be far less exposed to the (already excessively lethal) ship AA defenses, but make attacks like their historical counterparts did, and with similar results.As a starting point, I suggest that the "mil dispersion" for Torpedo Aircraft be placed at +/-10 mils dispersion for early (Tier IV) carrier planes, and reduced slightly for each carrier tier above that, i.e., +/-8 mils @ Tier VI, 7 mils @ Tier VIII, and +/-6 mils @ Tier X, to reflect improved aiming equipment, torpedoes, aircraft, and training of torpedo pilots as the war progressed. Note that this mil dispersion is from each individual plane's position in the FORMATION, not from the Squadron Leader's aim point, as torpedo planes attacked in an on-line formation, spaced at intervals of 50 to 100 meters or more, ensuring a wide "spread" to increase the possibility of a hit for the squadron as a whole. Note that this also assured that it was virtually impossible for every torpedo, or even most of the torpedoes in the squadron's "volley" to hit the target, as many would automatically miss, depending on the target ship's relative course and subsequent reaction. [A "mil" (short for "milliradian) is a measure of angle, typically used in ballistics, i.e., a minute fraction of a circle. Easy to look up, if you're unfamiliar.]kills such as "Basic Firing Training" and "Advanced Firing Training" could be modified to give air squadrons a tighter Maximum Dispersion pattern, by, say, 2 mils each, as well as a "tighter" ordnance drop time relative to the Squadron Leader, say, by 1 second each. Thus a Tier VIII torpedo squadron with both Basic and Advanced firing training would improve its Maximum Dispersion to +/-6 mils, left or right, and drop their torpedoes within 0.0 to 3 seconds of the Squadron Leader's torpedo. For Dive Bombers, the Maximum Dispersion ellipse (that already exists) could be reduced in a similar manner, by say 5 mils "tighter" for both Basic and Advanced Firing Training, each. Thus, a dive bomber squadron with both skills would have its Maximum Dispersion ellipse reduced by 10 mils width and length. [A "mil" (short for "milliradian") is a measure of angle used in ballistics , surveying, etc. I.e., a tiny fractional "slice", if you will, of a circle. Easy to look up if you're unfamiliar.] "Sight Stabilization" Skill would remain as-is; "Aiming Systems Modification-1" might be extended to include reduced aircraft ordnance Maximum Dispersion as well. Later-war (Tier VIII and X) aircraft should be able to attack from higher up, and at much faster airspeeds, as improved torpedoes obviated the need for very low, very slow torpedo drops to prevent destruction of the torpedo. SUGGESTION #3: Aircraft Spotting of Surface Ships— THE PROBLEM: Aircraft are able to spot an enemy ship, so that other ships can fire upon it too easily and in real time, and yet, the range for aircraft spotting of an enemy ship is so limited that a flight of planes often loses sight of its target between passes. Currently, aircraft not only reveal far too much information to allied players, enabling any enemy ship they spot to be fired upon by all; they are also often taken under intense AA fire without even being able to spot the enemy ship that is firing upon them. DISCUSSION: Carrier aircraft of the period were totally unable to provide more than an enemy ship type and rough location and course to distant stations, and typically were, at most, in radio contact only with their own ship's Combat Information Center, assuming it was even in radio range, and long-range radios of the day were often Morse Code key sets, not voice comms, and the enemy ship type and course reported was typically vague at best, and more than not, inaccurate. So as to go undetected, attack aircraft typically flew on "radio listening silence" until commencing their attack, could not communicate with other ships in real time, and went silent again for their return to their carrier, so as to not reveal its location. SOLUTION: To reflect this and improve Aircraft Spotting of Ships, non-spotter aircraft should be able to see enemy surface ships well before they enter the enemy's AA zone— but unable to pass anything more than that ship's type and location for at least 6-12 seconds afterward. Thus, non-spotter, attack aircraft and fighters should UNABLE to spot targets spot enemy ships in real time as if they were a surface ship—they could only reveal an enemy ship's basic type (not name), and only on the Mini Map. Sighting of surface ships by non-spotter aircraft should provide a player's allies ONLY a "shaded red/dashed red" outline of an enemy ship on the Mini Map ONLY, in exactly the same way an enemy ship obscured by bad weather, or spotted by others beyond one's ship's sighting range is currently shown on the Mini Map. Such "spotting" should be revealed to friendly players only after a slight delay— of say, 6 to 10 seconds, to reflect the time required for an aircraft's "home" ship to pass enemy location data to other friendly ships. Spotting Aircraft Use and aspects would continue unchanged. PROBLEM: Overly Lethal AA's Severe Impact on Game Balance: AA is so lethal now that I pretty much ignore incoming planes unless they're from a Tier X CV. The rest just "evaporate" and even if they hit me, they do about as much damage as an 8-inch shell strike, and torp hits virtually never flood. When operating a CV, I suffer from having my planes wiped out on approach to higher-tier and even sometimes to lower-tier ships. My planes are often "surprised" by hidden enemy ships and downed before they can escapey, even with Engine Boost and calling for Fighters to help absorb attacks. Such hyper-lethal AA guarantees that I can never even make it into the upper half of scorers on my team, and am almost always at or close to the bottom. SOLUTION A: Have dual-purpose guns (e.g., Atlanta's 5" guns; the 105mm dual-purpose guns of Prinz Eugen or Tirpitz; 100mm guns of Akizuki…) either fire upon surface targets, or vs. aerial targets, BUT NOT BOTH at the same time. The player must choose, or let the ship's AI decide— When under aerial attack, it fires all guns vs. attacking aircraft, or at least all guns on the "Priority AA" Side, unless the player chooses otherwise, by clicking on a surface target. Medium and Short-range AA guns, of course, would continue to defend the ship, as usual. SOLUTION B: Halve the Hit Probability of all ships— Really now, Continuous Damage Ph's of 88% and 95% (Tier VIII) and 100% (Tier X) are ridiculous for that era, and even for today. Leave Continuous Damage and Burst Radius Damage as is, but entire squadrons vanishing as they approach a lone Leander CL is just awful. Even if this is done, I predict that another "halving" will be needed in the future to bring CV Play into balance with surface ships. This will work, and be balanced as well, if the changes above are implemented I think. SOLUTION C: Stop listening to whiny surface ship players that complain they "…can never see an enemy CV, and therefore can't fight vs. such an "unseen enemy"— That's the just way it was, and is. A ship fights vs. an enemy CV's AIRCRAFT, as the enemy CV is hundreds of kilometers away, not lurking on a tiny map, trying to avoid surface detection and destruction by nearby enemy surface ships, as in the game. In all history, only three (3!) CVs are recorded as lost to enemy surface gunfire. If anything, CV players should be whining about the tiny maps. But don't think because I say this that I'm a CV fan boy, or even "enthusiast"— as, so far, I hate CV Play, and plan to run a CV only as a last resort for a battle task, as it's become a waste of my precious gaming time, unless things improve. Obviously, all this needs to be play-tested, but such changes, using existing game mechanics, could be easily incorporated to make Carrier Play more rewarding and enjoyable, while at the same time allow players to use Naval History (somewhat) as a guide for their tactics. OK-- Thoughts, anyone? Trolls need not reply-- we already know what you (don't) think...
  5. Battlecruiser_Yavuz

    Battle of the Treaty Carriers: Wasp vs Ryujo

    Hello! I thought this would be an interesting discussion. As you guys know, there were interwar treaties that influenced the formation of naval units prior to World War II. From looking online, I see that there were two big carriers whose designs were heavily influenced by treaty standards and tonnage: Ryūjō (Japanese: 龍驤 "Prancing Dragon") was a light aircraft carrier built for the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) during the early 1930s. Small and lightly built in an attempt to exploit a loophole in the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922, she proved to be top-heavy and only marginally stable and was back in the shipyard for modifications to address those issues within a year of completion. USS Wasp (CV-7) was a United States Navy aircraft carrier commissioned in 1940 and lost in action in 1942. She was the eighth ship named USS Wasp, and the sole ship of a class built to use up the remaining tonnage allowed to the U.S. for aircraft carriers under the treaties of the time. XX If you guys can find any more carriers that were heavily influenced by the treaties, feel free to put it in the discussion below. XX These are some starting questions. Feel free to debate and add more meat to the answers: -Who do you guys think made the better "budget" carrier: The United States or Japan? -If the two were to meet on the field of battle (in the ocean, among islands, etc), who do you think would win? -If you had to decide to construct carriers within treaty limits (or exploiting loopholes), would you have constructed either of these two carriers? If so, why? If not, what would you have done instead? Thanks!
  6. My tactics are mostly developed for Ryujo. CVs have changed yet they remain the same. I still see the same mistakes CV players make now as they did before the update. At this point, my salt to this style of gameplay is lessened enough for me to play "normally". CVs were hated before, CVs are still hated now, and CVs will stay hated afterwards. What makes CVs seem more OP now than they were before? Who knows. The CV skillset was high before but it is much higher now. Communication Do your best to communicate but make sure to focus on the task in front of you Scout Scout either your side or the opposite side Find the weakest side you can find Your eyes are the team's eyes Do your best to not sacrifice your planes Move Set your ship's way points according to what your scouts find and where your team goes or does not go Take it slow and follow the safest side As the side becomes safer, raise your speed when possible One of the safest area's is the enemy spawn if you can get there without being seen Closer you are the faster your attack runs can be Recover Sometimes you are better of waiting than going onto another attack run so let your squads recover for as long as you can from zero Defending Do your best to defend your fleet but focus on your attack run When using the fighter consumable, make sure to drop it after the enemy attack run and a circle and a half in front of your allied ship, this way by the time your fighters can defend your allied ship will be in the circle and ready to counter another enemy attack run Should you be attacked by the enemy CV, go to your minimap and set your way point into a different direction so that you can avoid an hit but focus on your objective before taking control of the ship Should you be attacked by the enemy CV, change squads as many times as you can and use the fighter consumable in front of your ship, this will decimate the enemy(s) attack run (total of four fighter squads in the air is possible in short distance) Attack Find and attack the weakest and solo ships you can, do not attack heavy AA groups of ships Capping Be willing to cap Fight There is no use running from something you can't run from, whether that is enemy speed or gun range You have secondary guns, make use of them Most players won't expect a aircraft carrier to fight back Other I get my good days and my bad days Be fast, find the enemy, take a chance, be willing to cap, be willing to fight, miracles can happen Ryujo Skills & Upgrades
  7. So I know that people are going to get angry at me and tell me CV's should be garbadge and be removed, but I'm going to say this anyway Tier 8 carriers, when uptiered to tier 10, are woefully underpowered. There. I said it. Let the angry comments and negativity flow! All kidding aside, I feel that tier 8 carriers are in a good spot at their tier. At tier 8, I feel that most carriers are in a pretty good spot with some even being borderline overpowered. Sure you can have a CV focus you down if you're alone, but usually you won't do a huge amount of damage or get an absurd number of kills (in my experience). There can be exceptions, *cough American CVs cough*, but for the most part, carriers are not as rewarding as surface ships are. However, notice that I said they were fine at tier 8. When these ships are uptiered, it's a nightmare! Now I am not saying that tier 10 ships shredding planes is a bad thing, I've gone full AA builds on my Des memes myself, but it would be fine if there was about 3 or 4 tier 10 ships as you can try and avoid them and wait for ships to isolate themselves from the rest of the pack. But the constant matchmaking I often have is that the entire enemy team is filled to the brim with tier 10. In that situation, the best you can hope for is to maybe get some chip damage on enemies while having all of your aircraft lost at the first half of the battle. In something like the saipan, where your aircraft replenish slowly, you have to rely on getting your armament on target while being sure you will be completely deplaned. That's why I consider it the weakest aircraft carrier in the entire game as of now. In short, I feel that tier 8 carriers are so underpowered for the constant tier 10 matchmaking they are faced with. But I want to keep this positive so I wanted to give a few suggestions to any of the dev's who might be listening. After all, we should try and give feedback to help make things better. My first idea is the most straightforward. Make it harder for the matchmaker to uptier carriers. Heck, maybe make it harder for some other ships to be uptiered like cossack and z-39. Other ships which have heavy problems with being bottom tier. Maybe after a certain time, the matchmaker allows these ships to go into tier 10 battles just like tier 10 double cv games were solved. My second idea was a little bit more risky. Nerfing the AA of tier 10 ships to tier 8 aircraft. Not tier 10 aircraft, tier 8, ok? Good. As I said this is a bit more risky since this could be exploited by unicums and statpadders alike so I am not sure about this option. Finally, my last idea was to give tier 8 carriers planes a little more health. This isn't the best idea either and is pretty much here just for the rule of threes. This could be easily exploited by sealclubbers who could slaughter enemies without fear of taking heavy damage. Anyways, these are my thoughts on this. I may be wrong about some things so I would love feedback from others. I don't want carrier's to be broken or horribly unfun to play as or against. I do want to see this rework succeed. I hope this layed out my, and other's, issues to those who were willing to read this gigantic vomit of text. Have a great day out there wherever you are! (And please don't get me started on AP bombs vs HE bombs. That's a topic for another day)
  8. LittleWhiteMouse

    Premium Ship Review: Kaga

    The following is a review of Kaga, a ship kindly provided to me by Wargaming. This is the release version of the vessel and these stats are current as of June 1st, 2017.The awkward teenager. Quick Summary: An enormous carrier with specialized dive bomber and torpedo bomber squadron attack modes. Her fighters are not up to snuff.Cost: $43.99 USD including a port slot.Patch and Date Written: May 17th to May 30th, 2017. Patch 0.6.5 to 0.6.5.1. Closest in-Game Contemporary Hiryu, Tier VII Japanese Aircraft CarrierDegree of Similarity:Clone / Sister-Ship / Related Class / Similar Role / Unique Kaga is only superficially similar to a stock Hiryu. At least then Kaga shares Hiryu's fighters, torpedo planes and dive bombers. However, all of Kaga's strike aircraft have unique ordnance, strike patterns and squadron sizes. The physical ship itself shares very little with the other carriers, with her hull based on that of a battleship. PROs Large hit point pool. Well protected citadel, including anti-torpedo bulges. Specialized large dive bomber squadrons with super-accurate drops. Specialized, large torpedo plane squadrons with a special drop pattern. Enormous carrier capacity of 85 planes. Excellent (and optimized) Flight Control Group of 2-2-1, allowing her to use and abuse two torpedo squadrons at the same time. CONs Huge target with large, soft areas that are easy for any HE shell to penetrate. Her impressive looking secondary compliment is more for show. Fighter groups are only tier VI, making them the underdog in almost any match-up. Poor damage potential from her aerial bombs. Her larger flight groups lead to longer reload times for her strike aircraft. Only modest AA power. She turns as like a one legged cow. She's about as fast too. Very easy to spot. Enormous aerial detection range and a large surface detection range too. Kaga is a beast and she looks the part. This carrier is absolutely enormous and she looks armed to the teeth with huge aircraft squadrons cluttering her decks and massive, heavy-cruiser sized defensive batteries. Tack on all of the history behind the vessel and what's not to love? In World of Warships, she's a very interesting aircraft carrier and worth taking a closer look, even if you're not a fan of the ship type. OptionsKaga has the option of using two different Flight Control groups, divided between 1-1-3 squadrons and 2-2-1 squadrons between fighters, torpedo planes and dive bombers respectively. For the first Flight Control group, the hangar capacity is divided between 11 fighters, 21 torpedo planes and 53 dive bombers. The second splits the hangar capacity with 28 fighters, 43 torpedo planes and 14 dive bombers. Consumables:Damage Control Party Module Upgrades: Four slots, standard aircraft carrier upgrades. Premium Camouflage: Tier VI+ Standard. This provides 50% bonus experience gains, 3% reduction in surface detection and 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. For upgrades, I would select the following: In your first slot, take Air Groups Modification 1. Your secondaries and AA guns aren't good enough to be worth hurting your fighters any further. In your second slot, you have a choice. Flight Control Modification 1 is probably considered optimal. Kaga's larger strike air groups have almost a 30s reload time between waves and this will reduce them down by about four seconds. Alternatively, you can try and make your fighters a credible threat by using Air Groups Modiifcation 2. Understand that if you go this route, it's an uphill battle. Your fighters alone aren't likely to win you air supremacy that wasn't already gift wrapped for you by your opponent selecting a Strike-Ranger. In your third slot, take Damage Control System Modification 1. This will get your anti-torpedo protection up to 24% which is quite nice for a carrier. And in your final slot, take Damage Control System Modification 2. You will come under attack and you will suffer fires and floods. It's possible this last module will be the difference between surviving or not. Besides, nothing can really help Kaga pretend to be nimble, so don't kid yourself that the other mods will do you any service. Air Groups Aircraft Types: Mitsubishi A6M2 fighter, Nakajima B5N2 torpedo plane, Aichi D3A1 dive bomber Flight Control Groups: One fighter, one torpedo plane and three dive bombers (1-1-3) or two fighter, two torpedo plane, one dive bomber (2-2-1) Base Squadron Sizes: Four fighters, Six Torpedo Planes, Six Dive Bombers Hangar Capacity: 85 Like Saipan before her, Kaga has some unique features where her air groups are concerned. Fighters Kaga uses tier VI A6M2 "Zero" fighters. These are the exact same fighters you first unlock on the tier VI Ryujo and use again with the stock tier VII Hiryu. They even come in the same squadron size of four fighters which can be upgraded to five if you take the Air Supremacy skill. With mirrored matchmaking between carriers, these fighters have an immediate disadvantage over most other fighters you will encounter. Proper use of the strafe mechanics is key to doing the most damage possible. This will buy your strike aircraft time to do their job. You'll hemorrhage fighters quickly in most cases and eat through even Kaga's substantial reserves. So long as this is used to make strikes to the betterment of your team, the losses are acceptable. It can be worthwhile to freely offer up your fighters to lock down those of your enemy to give your bombers a clear attack run -- with Kaga, this is often all that's needed. More than any other carrier, Kaga benefits from the skill, Dogfighting Expert. It's rare that she will ever face same-tier fighter squadrons, and this provides a ready boost to their (in)efficiency. While this won't give her close to parity in performance with A6M5s or Hellcats (never mind Corsairs), it will give them a bit more attack power to help draw out fights. A6M2 Zeroes hound a Ranger's TBF Avengers. Dive Bombers There are several odd points about Kaga's dive bombers. Superficially, they share the same baseline stats as Ryujo's tier VI D3A1s. This includes hit point total and speed, but the similarities end there. Kaga organizes her dive bombers in squadrons of six planes instead of the usual four found on standard IJN Carriers. Their turn around time in the hangar is 31 seconds up from 19 seconds for Hiryu's dive bombers. In addition, they use a different armament. Kaga's D3A1s are armed with the Type 99 N6 Mod 1 bomb. Compared to those found on Hiryu, they have less armour penetration, a smaller blast-size, reduced fire chance and, most crucial of all, they do less damage. All of these drawbacks are compensated by having an dispersion radius nearly half that of normal IJN dive bomber squadrons and could be closely compared to that from Saipan's. Unlike the American premium, Kaga can tighten this further with a manual drop, landing nearly all of her bombs with pin point accuracy. Properly aimed, you can guarantee all of her bombs will strike a target. This is very necessary as her bombs only do 858 damage per hit (or less on saturated targets). An upgraded squadron with seven planes is only going to put out a maximum of 6006 damage with their strikes which is a far cry from the destroyer-busting salvos from Saipan. With a manual drop, it's unlikely that more than a single fire will be lit as they will all cluster on a single section and most ships will laugh off this kind of damage. It's only through the use of multiple dive bomber squadrons that Kaga can stack any substantial amount of damage and it's not easy going. Moreover, it's often not worth the effort of trying to land these pinpoint strikes and this, in turn, diminishes the value of the 1-1-3 control group. I've found that it's not really necessary to manually drop Kaga's dive bombers. I will spend little more time with them than to align their approach vector along the long-axis of the ship and let them auto drop. This will not result in as many hits overall, but it is more likely to spread fires across multiple sections of the ship. This in turn taxes the Damage Control Party of my target and sets up follow up attacks with torpedo planes quite nicely Overall, Kaga's dive bombers are interesting but they're not the weapon of choice for maximizing damage with this vessel and they largely play a secondary or follow up role. Blast radius of the dive-bombers from tier VII carriers with a reference-Mahan for scale. Kaga is the least likely to detonate targets she strikes with bombs as hits must be grouped quite precisely over top of the magazines to set them off. Other carriers need only land them within the same postal code to have a chance at damaging a whole number of modules. Torpedo Planes Once more, Kaga borrows from Ryujo with the B5N2 torpedo plane. In this case this isn't acting at a disadvantage to Hiryu as both carriers use this aircraft. Immediately players will notice that Kaga's squadron size for her torpedo planes is enormous, comparable to the six-plane squadrons of USN carriers. Their reload time is 29 seconds compared to 21 seconds for Hiryu's squadron of four, but is far in advance of Ranger's 41 seconds. This even compares well to Saipan's 22 second rearmament with her Skyraiders. Taken in isolation, Kaga can turn around more torpedo bombers faster than any of the other tier VII carriers. The large squadron size also comes with the option with the 2-2-1 load-out to operate two squadrons simultaneously (with 31 reserve bombers!), opening up all sorts of brutal meta play. Kaga's torpedoes travel at 48 knots compared to the 35 knots of Hiryu's torpedoes with only a minor sacrifice of 400m worth of range, bringing their reach down to a 3km. This all comes without sacrificing damage which is obscene. Kaga's torpedo drop takes a unique pattern. Rather than dropping line abreast, the formation of six planes drops in two lines, one in front of the other. Each line has three fish. The torpedoes released closest to the target are spread further apart. The second line is more tightly packed -- akin to the initial spacing of USN aerial dropped torpedoes. Casualties taken from Kaga's torpedo planes removes aircraft from this second line first, diminishing the tighter cluster. Like all IJN torpedo aircraft, their torpedoes take a convergent path on a manual drop. The net of this drop is quite different from the usual pattern players are used to evading. By playing with the range of the attack and overlapping salvos, different combinations can be used depending on the target. The wide spread of advanced torpedoes can be ignored in favour of focusing on emphasizing the narrow spread that drops behind. These drops at near point blank range can see players panic to avoid the wide-spread fish only to expose themselves to the cluster coming in behind. The variations are many, especially when doubled up with a second squadron for a cross drop, bullet-hell nightmare that will make for some great YouTube montages. Kaga's torpedo planes allow her to assassinate most surface vessels outright through either a combination of overwhelming damage or a mix of direct assault and damage over time effects. She can afford to attack targets that other carriers might not brave grace of her deep plane reserves. Approximate size of manual torpedo drop spreads at minimum arming range for Ranger (left) and Kaga (right). Both carriers have comparable widths at this range, but Kaga's will converge the further her torpedoes run while Ranger's will diverge over distance. Reference-Mahan used for scale. Load Outs Given the ridiculous strengths of Kaga's torpedo bombers, her 2-2-1 build is optimal. A single torpedo hit against most targets will do more damage than an entire squadron of dive bombers. This build also gives her more fighters to work with to help unstick her attack planes from enemy bandits. The carrier-snipe potential from this build is very real and anyone facing a Kaga should be wary of misplacing Kaga's torpedo plane squadrons lest they find themselves ambushed. So while air superiority is difficult for this carrier to achieve, she can wrest it away by going for the source of enemy aircraft with alarming ease. Firepower Secondary Battery: Ten 200mm guns in single casemate mounts, sixteen 127mm 8x2 turrets. On paper, Kaga appears to carry more firepower than the mid tier IJN Heavy Cruisers. It would be a mistake to expect too much out of these weapons. First of all, they are divided into port and port and starboard batteries, giving her a maximum broadside of five 200mm guns and eight 127mm guns. Second, their fire angles preclude all of the guns from engaging a target in her forward aspect until they're 45º off her bow (or 30º off her stern). Third, their range is limited to 4.5km. And finally, Kaga is an aircraft carrier. She's not built to trade fire with surface ships. While it may be tempting to toss a secondary-specialized Captain in her, it's your funeral. Short of a low health, Soviet destroyer being stupid enough to stray into gun range, your secondaries aren't going to get a whole lot of exercise. Attempts to do so often end hilariously and with a sad trombone sound effect. Manoeuvrability Top Speed: 28.0 knotsTurning Radius: 1080mRudder Shift: 14.4s Maximum Turn Rate: 2.69º per second. Kaga doesn't do anything particularly fast. Her top speed isn't impressive and this leaves her dangerously vulnerable if one flank collapses. When it comes to agility, whole generations live and die before she can manage to turn herself 90º, never mind coming full about. DurabilityHit Points: 51,000Maximum Protection: 19mm + 76mm + 152mm Min Bow & Deck Armour: 19mm extremities, 21mm flight deckTorpedo Damage Reduction: 22% Kaga has an enormous hit point pool for a tier VII carrier, which she deserves given the size of her. Being built on a battleship hull, her layers of protection around her citadel are quite formidable. Her citadel itself has 76mm of protection and is almost entirely submerged. At medium to close ranges, one must also punch through 152mm armoured belt and 19mm anti-torpedo bulges. While this won't turn away battleship shells, it does provide a reasonable obstacle for cruisers and destroyers, giving Kaga some survivability in such encounters, so long as they're kept brief. The downside is that all of this armour around her citadel is made largely irrelevant when it comes to high explosive attacks. Kaga is enormous and most of that upper structure right to her deck is easily penetrated by any high explosive shells she's likely to face. It's almost impossible to miss her once you start shooting and her tall silhouette makes a tempting target. Her torpedo damage reduction isn't great, but at least she has some. Not every carrier can boast that. This can save her from flooding damage and frustrate would-be carrier snipers. Secondary batteries exchange between Kaga and Dunkerque. Don't try this at home. Concealment & Camouflage Base Surface Detection Range: 12.6km Air Detection Range: 13.6 km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 10.3km Minimum Aerial Detection Range: 11.4km Kaga makes Großer Kurfurst look like a modest design. This ship be huge. Specifically, Kaga is very tall. Her flight deck is almost at the same height as the top of Yamato's rangefinders. Yeah. She's that big. This comes with some understandable complications. Aside from just being easier to hit, she's also very easy to spot. Kaga has a larger aerial detection range than she does a surface detection range. Stray float planes and wandering enemy fighters are likely to uncover her at inopportune times. This makes taking an aggressive position filled with more risk than it might in a Hiryu or Saipan, for example, especially given her less than exemplary speed and agility. Once Kaga is detected by surface vessels, disengaging is all but impossible. She doesn't have the speed or stealth to open up the distance and, short of sinking her pursuers, she can only hope to make use of island cover to make her escape. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Battery Calibers: 127mm / 25mmAA Umbrella Ranges: 5.0km / 3.1kmAA DPS per Aura: 81 / 70 Kaga's anti-aircraft armament isn't up to the task of keeping her safe. To be fair, it's only slightly behind that of Hiryu, but even being up to par with that CV wouldn't be anything worth bragging about. Kaga's fighter cover is really necessary to keep her safe from enemy attack, taxing her already over burdened (and up tiered) fighters even more. This makes Air Groups Modification 2 look even more appealing to provide her fighters with improved endurance to continue to harass and shoot down approaching attack planes. Given her large aerial detection range, you can expect to be sniffed out early and for many opponents to try their luck at taking you out with a snipe. Worse, her large aerial detection range far exceeds even the maximum upgraded range of her AA batteries, necessitating the use of fighters to search for and clear out spotters to keep enemy surface ships from trying their luck with a long ranged pot shot or two. How to Increase your Joy The commander skills needed to optimize Kaga aren't anything special. Her AA power and secondaries aren't really worth spending skill points into to try and emphasize. This leaves us with a focus of skills to improve her aircraft performance and rearmament times -- skills that mesh well with most of the other IJN carriers, making Kaga a decent training ship once the minimums have been selected. As usual, we'll be racing to select a top tier skill first before doubling back. To this end, we'll be selecting one skill from each tier for our first 10pts spent. Start with Aircraft Servicing Expert -- Kaga's reload timer with her strike aircraft is quite long compared to other IJN Carriers. Follow this up with Torpedo Acceleration at the next tier. This will drop your effective range of your torpedo planes to 2.4km but it will increase the speed of your torpedoes to 53 knots which is hilarious. Next, take Torpedo Armaments Expertise. Finally, take Air Supremacy. Now we can double back through the lines. For your 11th point, take Dogfighting Expert. Few carriers benefit from this skill as enormously as Kaga does with her tier VI fighters. With that, your fighter squadrons are now a credible threat to a stock Hiryu and a mismanaged Saipan. From this point, you can take skills to taste. I would strongly recommend taking Concealment Expert with your next 4 skill points -- Kaga gets spotted often and this can really help mitigate that. If you choose to live dangerously (or decide that being spotted is a forgone conclusion), you can elect to take Basic and Advanced Fire Training to prop up her modest levels of flak and pretend that her secondaries are a serious threat -- which they aren't. Skills like Expert Rear Gunner and High Alert are great follow up choices for the more serious minded. She's hyooj. Overall Impressions Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / Extreme Carrier game play is largely unforgiving as a rule. That said, Kaga is about as suitable for a new player as any aircraft carrier is likely to be outside of tier IV. She's very auto-drop friendly and she can land a large number of bomb and torpedo hits, even if you don't know how to manually aim. In the hands of an expert, Kaga is easy-mode on a whole new level. I dread seeing the damage totals this thing will spit out when the veterans get a hold of her. She offers so much control of damage-over-time effects and high alpha strikes. The biggest hurdle will be proper management of her under-performing fighters while ensuring that her own strike craft deliver their payloads quickly and efficiently. Mouse's Summary: How did this get past testing in this form? The 2-2-1 load out is disgusting. The only real challenge with her is managing her under-strength fighter squadrons. The rest is easy mode. I'm sorry, Ranger. I am so sorry. Kaga is very powerful. Maybe too powerful. I get how Wargaming might considered her balanced. Her fighters, even when fully specialized, will never be match for her contemporaries. Kaga's strike squadrons take a long time to reload. Her dive bombers don't hit especially hard and, when manual dropped, aren't likely to set more than a single fire. She is awkward and she is slow to respond. She is clumsy. She's easily spotted even when she thinks she's being subtle and sneaky. And, of course, Kaga has really big guns that will only get her into trouble if she tries to flaunt them. I am getting high school flashbacks. This all goes towards making her 2-2-1 build acceptable at a cursory glance, which it really shouldn't be. I am not expecting the population at large to dominate with Kaga. Her performance is locked behind a skill wall. However, I do think attention needs to be justly placed on her potential. Facing off against a competently captained Kaga will be a nightmare. I had some serious open-Beta Midway flashbacks during my play-test sessions. It felt cruel how easy it was to stack floods, set up cross drops and largely abuse surface ships. I cringe to think why Wargaming decided this game play was unacceptable for Midway, yet perfectly cromulent for Kaga, especially when under performing ships like Ranger go without. Yet, Kaga won't paint any potatoes purple. She doesn't come with training wheels. Waste time setting up attacks and your team will melt around you. Botch a carrier snipe and you'll pay for it. Choose the wrong target and your planes will evaporate before placing their drop. Mishandle your fighters against a Saipan or HIryu and you'll be on your back foot from the word go. Kaga is easily a contender for the best carrier at her tier. She's hands down better than Ranger. On the attack, she's better than Saipan or Hiryu, but she's weaker than both defensively in terms of her fighters and also the vulnerability of the carrier herself. Is she overpowered? She definitely has facets -- or rather, one facet, that smacks of such. Would I Recommend? I should preface this with the following: Kaga isn't likely to convert any new carrier players to the fold. If you haven't enjoyed playing carriers before, I don't think she'll win you over. While the attack patterns of her dive bombers and torpedo planes are interesting, they are not some miracle fix to the disparate game play between carriers and surface vessels. For PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? Very yes. Kaga can carry a PVE-match. Her damage output with the proper build is ridiculous. Snipe the enemy Kaga then farm damage at will. Her repair costs are just shy of a 34,000 credits while she'll gross between 75,000 to 100,000 easily on a decent match. For Random Battle Grinding This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. I could easily recommend Kaga to grind up through Random Battles, with the one provision that she only makes a suitable trainer for commanders with at least 10pts invested in aircraft carrier skills. Without these, she really struggles against anything short of a Strike Ranger. For Competitive Gaming:Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. In competitive environments, a well commanded Kaga is a potential nightmare for the enemy team and a strong contender for one of the best carriers at her tier. In the hands of an expert, she can delete enemy ships at will. For Collectors:If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. Kaga has an extensive history, including her famous end at the Battle of Midway. For World of Warships players, she also represents the first IJN carrier premium, which is something in of itself. She's also the second carrier premium ever. For Fun Factor:Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? I generally dislike carrier game play so it was hard for me to enjoy my time with Kaga. Take that with the necessary pinch of salt. I didn't find anything particularly compelling about playing her. What's the Final Verdict?How would the ship rate on an Angry YouTuber scale of Garbage - Meh - Gud - Overpowered? GARBAGE- Grossly uncompetitive and badly in need of buffs.Mehbote - Average ship. Has strengths and weaknesses. Doesn't need buffs to be viable, but certainly not advantageous.Gudbote - A strong ship that has obvious competitive strengths and unique features that make it very appealing.OVERPOWERED - A ship with very clear advantages over all of its competitors and unbalancing the game with its inclusion.
  9. Please keep in mind that this article is a preview of an upcoming release. All of the statistics here reflect the ship as it was presented during the testing period and are subject to change. A special thanks to Wargaming (specifically NikoPower) for allowing me to play-test this vessel. -EDIT:11.04.2016 - True to the disclaimer above, the Saipan's statistics changed prior to release and after publishing this review. Changes will be reflected in a follow up post, but are listed in the spoiler at the end of the article. The following is aimed at new(ish) players looking to find a little more information about various ships from events, for premium currency or for real-world cash. The goal is to allow players to make an educated decision before parting with their time and money and to find premium vessels that suit their chosen style of play, whether that is competitive, cooperative, or simply for fun. The idea here is to elabourate on information not commonly available through reading statistics and provide some (heavily) biased anecdotal evidence to encourage or dissuade you from making your purchase. The usual disclaimers apply: everyone knows the Matchmaker clearly loves me because I spend money so that's why I occasionally get really good games, not because I have any particular skills of note. Other articles in this series: Available Ships: Atlanta, Atago, Aurora, Ishizuchi, Murmansk Pre Order Ships: Sims, Yubari, Gremyashchy Limited Release Ships: Tirpitz, Fujin, Campbeltown, Warspite, Imperator Nikolai I, Mikhail Kutuzov, Blyskawica, Anshan,Lo Yang, Saipan Gift & Reward Ships: Albany, Arkansas, Iwaki,Tachibana, Kamikaze, Diana, Emden, Marblehead Arpeggio of Blue Steel Ships: Kongo, Myoko Condensed Reading: Mouse's Quick Summary of Premium Ships Without further ado: The United States Navy Light Aircraft Carrier USS Saipan Quick Summary: Equipped with tier 9 aircraft but with only 2/3s the capacity of other Tier 7 CVs. Squadron sizes are odd, with tiny fighter and torpedo attack formations yet an enormous dive bomber squadron. Cost: Went on sale on April 12th for $42.99 including a port slot. One of the first ships in recent memory to be sold with the option of buying her without a bundle. PROs Comes with two load-out options, 3-0-1 and 2-2-0; the only USN CV with the option for two torpedo squadrons. Tier 9 Aircraft with high top speed (178 knots / 155 knots) SKYRAIDERS! Also Corsairs. But AMG, SKYRAIDERS! Massive dive bomber squadron of 8 planes and armed with 1000lb bombs Fast rearm on fighter (20s) and torpedo plane (22s) Good AA DPS. CONs Small hangar capacity of 48 aircraft. Painfully long rearm time for dive bombers (59s) Small fighter & torpedo squadrons. Fighters bleed ammo very quickly. Air Superiority load out is very poorly optimized. No secondaries at all -- completely defenseless at close range against surface ships. AA Armament is short-ranged (2.0km to 3.5km) and limited to personal defense. The long awaited USS Saipan, the first premium Aircraft Carrier in World of Warships. Our resident grumpy cat, Lert will be joining me to provide his insights on the Saipan. This will be a first for these Premium Ship Reviews, but not our first collaborative effort. Hopefully this will provide a different perspective and a bit more information for those looking for a well rounded opinion in regards to this vessel. Like with our Dmitri Donskoi Preview, Lert will have his own boxes (in italics) where he provides commentary on the individual characteristics of the ship before offering his conclusions and verdict. Would I Recommend? Short answer: If you love carriers, yes. If you don't, no. If you don't like carrier game play or if you haven't put a lot of time into carriers, the Saipan is probably not for you. She's a unique ship -- completely intended to be a departure from standard USN CV game play. The novelty alone may be worthwhile, never mind the bonus of finally having a decent ship with which to train your Carrier Captains and take advantage of the skills you've selected so far. For collectors, she's pretty much a must have. She's the first premium CV and her unique squadrons are just icing on the cake. I mean, I'm nerding out because it has one of my favourite planes. Like I said, the only people who will not enjoy this are those that don't like CV game play. And even for someone like myself, I must admit I've warmed up considerably after playing the Saipan and would probably enjoy taking her out every now and then if I acquired her. The Lert Box Do you really need an american CV premie, yeah. Saipan is the only choice. Do you want the ship for historical reasons, sure. She's certainly an interesting premium. Do you want a competitive ship to help tilt the fate of battles in your team's favor? No. Saipan isn't what you're looking for. Maybe someone with more experience in carrier play than me can make her shine, but for a CV noob like me, Saipan isn't the ship that makes me want to play flattops. My wallet will remain closed. It's disappointing, but not entirely unexpected, that the Air Superiority load-out for the Saipan should be so lackluster, performance wise. It sure looks cool though. Recommended Modules: As a tier 7 CV, the Saipan has four module upgrade slots. Air Groups Modification 1 is the best choice for the first slot. This will increase your aircraft gunnery by 10% and is pretty much a no-brainer for most CV Captains. For your second slot, you have a choice based on how you want to proceed. Air Groups Modification 2 will increase your fighter's hit points up to 2407 from 2006 (compared to 1506hp for the Hellcat and 1210 for the A6M5 Zero) and is probably the better choice. Flight Control Modification 1 is nice, but the lightning quick rearm of both fighter and torpedo plane squadrons makes it less optimal than with other USN CVs. Damage Control Modification 1 is your best choice for the third slot -- anything to help keep those fires down. Though generally speaking, if you're taking damage, you're in a lot of trouble anyway and nothing from this third slot is really going to help you much! I opted for Damage Control Modification 2 on the off chance I found myself twice-ablaze. My experience has taught me this nice but it's seldom going to save you. Steering Gears Modification 2 would probably be the nicer choice, dropping her rudder shift from 15.9s to 12.8s. It will really be up to personal preference here. Recommended Consumables: The Saipan can only mount a single consumable, a Damage Control Party. It shouldn't be necessary to upgrade this to the premium version. Her camouflage is the standard you would expect for a tier 7 premium ship, providing a 50% bonus to experience along with the disruption and concealment benefits. Recommended Captain Skills: The Saipan does not benefit much from anti-aircraft or secondary battery skills (having poor range on the former and none of the latter). So it's best to keep with a more orthodox CV build and focus on skills that will increase the performance of your planes. From tier 1, Situational Awareness is best. It will let you know when enemy planes are inbound or when you're about to die to a destroyer that's spotting you. If you intend to use the Air Superiority Build, then you may also enjoy Expert Rear Gunners which will turn your Skyraider squadron into a brutal thug of a formation if your opponents try to shoot it down normally instead of strafing. From tier 2, Torpedo Armament Expertise will reduce the service time of your torpedo bombers down to 16 seconds when combined with the tier 4 Aircraft Servicing Expert (which is insane). From tier 3, reach for Torpedo Acceleration. Yes, even if you intend to largely use the Air Superiority build. Dogfighting Expert never benefits the Saipan because her aircraft will always be same-tier or higher than any other planes she encounters. From tier 4, Aircraft Servicing Expert is your first port of call. 16s torpedo plane rearming! It's nuts. From tier 5, Air Supremacy is your best choice. It makes the Air Superiority build silly (9 bombers!) and it makes your fighter squadrons terrifying for any Hiryu opposite you.
  10. Welcome to part three of my review of Saipan, Enterprise, Kaga and Graf Zeppelin. Since patch 0.8.2, Wargaming considers these ships finalized (barring the occasional bug fix). There's a lot of redundancy in reviewing four carriers one after the other, so to mitigate this, I've decided to evaluate them all at the same time. Rather than a single monumental article, I have broken this up into sections, releasing one a new part every week or so. After an introduction, I covered the torpedo bombers from these four carriers. This week, I'll be looking at their attack aircraft. Here's the series so far. Part One: Introduction Part Two: Torpedo Bombers Part Three: Attack Aircraft (this article!) Basic Parameters So let's start by covering the essentials. Unlike with torpedo bombers, all attack aircraft are spotted at 10km by aircraft or ships. This can be modified as low as 8.1km with all bonuses stacked. Their durability is more varied, however: I'm still trying to reconcile that Seafires are considered more durable than Hellcats, Corsairs or Bearcats. On the whole, attack aircraft are much more fragile than torpedo or dive bombers. They don't benefit very much on their own from the 7.5% health bonus provided by the Attack Aircraft Modification 2 upgrade, with only Implacable and Saipan gaining more than base 120hp provided by the Survivability Expert skill. Still, the two abilities do stack for a more tidy sum, but I couldn't recommend choosing the upgrade over improving Dive Bombers or Torpedo Bombers, depending on the ship in question. Speed Initial aircraft speeds. These can be modified with the Improved Engines and Adrenaline Rush commander skills. These values are important as they form the basis of the speeds of the ship's respective fighter consumables. Summoned fighters travel at the same speed as a boosted attack aircraft. So Graf Zeppelin and Implacable's fighters move at 183kts, for example. From these values you can figure out if your aircraft can outrun pursuing planes. Attack aircraft are generally faster than their dive bomber and torpedo bomber counterparts, but there is a notable exception. Graf Zeppelin's Me-155As are appallingly slow compared to her Ta-152s which manage 181 knots base. Attack aircraft do lack a long-lasting boost. While dive bombers and torpedo bombers enjoy up to 20s worth of extra power to slow or accelerate, attack aircraft only have 5 seconds initially (this can be improved to 6.05s with the Improved Engine Boost commander skill in combination with the Aircraft Engines Modification 1 upgrade). Furthermore, the engine boost on attack aircraft isn't as efficient, providing less speed and slow effects than those on dive bombers and torpedo bombers. However, this is countered by a much faster recharge time and far more responsive acceleration and braking power when this is used. Lastly, while engaging on attack runs, an attack aircraft's boost works at full efficiency. Speed matters so much for an aircraft carrier's planes, moreso than durability. If a plane is fast enough and they have a long enough attack-run time, they can outright negate the threat of flak bursts. In addition, speed also reduces exposure to sustained damage from AA mounts. Finally, speed means there's less travel time both to and from the target, allowing a carrier player to deliver more attacks over time. A given aircraft (and squadron) needs only be "durable enough" to reduce casualties. Anything beyond that is merely wasted window dressing. Contrarily, more speed is always useful. Agility Like with torpedo bombers, a given aircraft's agility is not linked directly to their given speed and is set based upon internal, hidden parameters. Thus while Graf Zeppelin and Implacable's attack aircraft share the same speed, they have different turning radii and thus different rates of rotation. Like torpedo bombers if you want your aircraft to turn faster, slow down. This (greatly!) increases their rate of turn. Measured in degrees per second. The boosted rates of turn had to be estimated because the boost for attack aircraft doesn't last long enough for a complete 360º rotation. Estimations were made by extrapolating the ratio of Enterprise and Graf Zeppelin's attack aircraft turn time data and those of bomber and torpedo bombers. Standard turning radii for tier 8 attack aircraft. When slowed, their radii shrink down to roughly 70% of the values listed here. When boosted, they appeared to balloon up to approximately 180% of these values. Individual Plane Summary Enterprise's Hellcats are, hands down, the most agile of the tier VIII attack aircraft ,combining good speed with a tight turning radius and a ridiculously fast rate of turn. They have modest durability. Graf Zeppelin's Me-155As, while agile, are painfully slow and very fragile. Kaga's Zeroes has a modest rate of turn and turning radius but struggles where her top speed is concerned. They are also very fragile. Saipan's Bearcats have an excellent top speed, a modest rate of turn but an enormous turning radius. They are very tough. If I had to pick a "best individual plane", speed and durability wins the day here with Saipan's F8F Bearcats taking first prize. I don't think particularly high on turning radius and agility -- they're nice to have, but aircraft survivability and travel time mean so much more. Unless the aircraft handled like a there was a hole in their right wing, agility doesn't mean much. Ranking all of the attack planes on their base stats alone at tier VIII we get the following: Saipan's F8F Bearcats Lexington's F4U1 Corsairs Enterprise's F6F Hellcats Shokaku's N1K2 Shiden Kai Implacable's Seafires Kaga's A6M5 Zeroes Graf Zeppelin's Me-155As Our premium ships have some of the best and worst individual aircraft. Ordnance The rockets of the tier VIII carriers are a diverse lot. This is the first time we see larger rockets, including the infamous Tiny Tims. Rockets are effectively a form of HE shell, fired in a massed salvo over a (relatively) small area. The shape of this area and the number of rockets fired change from aircraft to aircraft. Kaga fires a small number of light rockets at a tiny, round target marker. Enterprise fires half again as many at a marker that's wider than it is tall. Graf Zeppelin flips this shape 90º with a very long, yet narrow marker. Her rockets are enormous and much harder hitting. Saipan shares the heavier damage output of Graf Zeppelin and fires fewer rockets still. Her marker is longer than it is wide, but it isn't as narrow as Graf Zeppelin's. One of the key factors dictating what attack aircraft can successfully engage is the penetration value of their rockets. To this end, it's important to keep the following structural armour thresholds in mind: 25mm or less - All superstructures, all destroyers, all light cruisers, any non-American or non-German heavy cruisers, all battleships below tier VIII+. 27mm - As above but now including German and American tier VIII+ heavy cruisers. 32mm - As above but now including all tier VIII+ battleships. 35mm to 60mm - As above but now including many reinforced areas of deck and upper hull of many ships but excluding extended belts which can be as much as 100mm or more. Note this list does not include areas such as belt armour, conning towers or turrets which are often in excess of 100mm. Aircraft carriers are also excluded because they're weird and should be looked at on a case by case basis (I'll get into this more when I cover the CV hulls in a later article). To this end we can thus separate rockets into two distinct categories: Low Penetration Rockets - These have less than 32mm of penetration and are only really effective against lightly armoured ships. They can be used to directly damage superstructures of most ships they face in a pinch, however. High Penetration Rockets - These have 32mm of penetration or greater and can safely engage almost any target they face. The penetration values of rockets largely dictates how effective they can be -- even above and beyond the number of rockets fired, their fire chance or damage per hit. If there's a range of targets they simply cannot engage, their utility drops considerably. Summary Saipan's Bearcats have excellent damage, penetration and fire settings per hit. They carry only three rockets and their aiming marker isn't especially precise and favours attacks running down the length of the ship. Enterprise's Hellcats have poor damage, penetration and abysmal fire setting per hit. Individually, they don't carry a lot of rockets Her aim marker facilitates side-on attacks. Kaga's Zeroes have the worst potential damage output per plane. Their penetration is low and so is their fire chance. They fire a very small number of rockets but their aiming marker is precise and isn't as penalized from launching at odd angles. Graf Zeppelin's Me-155As have excellent damage, penetration and fire setting per hit. She fires a small number of rockets and she needs to attack along the length of a ship to have a chance for her long aim market to land hits. The tech-tree attack aircraft share a similar variety of targeting markers. Shokaku andKaga's markers are comparable, as are Lexington's HVAR and Tiny Tims to Enterprise and Saipan respectively. Implacable's Seafires have a longer reticule than it is wide but not to the same exaggerated degree as Graf Zeppelin. Squadron & Attack Flight Details Once again, it's nomenclature time! Squadron: The group of aircraft that flies together. The player spends most of their time controlling squadrons. Attack Flight: The portion of the squadron which separates to attack an enemy target. Hangar Capacity: The maximum number of aircraft that can be stored on the carrier’s flight deck. Attack Flights Let's hop up from individual aircraft to the next largest functional unit: the Attack Flight. This varies per carrier and dictates the size of their strike package. Shokaku - 3 aircraft for 18 rockets per attack. Kaga - 2 aircraft for 8 rockets per attack. Lexington (HVAR) - 3 aircraft for 24 rockets (!) per attack. Lexington (Tiny Tim) - 3 aircraft for 6 rockets per attack. Saipan - 2 aircraft for 6 rockets per attack. Enterprise - 3 aircraft for 18 rockets per attack. Graf Zeppelin - 2 aircraft for 6 rockets per attack. Implacable - 2 aircraft for 20 rockets per attack. As you can see, this creates wildly different strike potentials between the carriers. The raw damage potential per attack run works out to the following (in order): 48,000 damage - Lexington (HVAR) 47,000 damage - Implacable 39,600 damage - Shokaku 35,600 damage - Graf Zeppelin 34,200 damage - Enterprise 32,400 damage - Saipan, Lexington (Tiny Tim) 17,600 damage - Kaga While all four premium carriers are in the bottom half of this spread, keep their penetration values also in mind. Saipan and Graf Zeppelin's rockets can damage even large targets while Implacable and Shokaku cannot. Lexington's HVARs set the bar really high, admittedly. Potential damage is curbed not only by penetration but by accuracy as well. Depending on target size, the angle at which you engage a target can change results enormously. For example, when engaging a stationary Reference Mahan™ in the Training Rooms, the Tiny Tim rockets off Saipan and Lexington generated contrasting results from one another despite launching the same ordnance with identical (or near enough) target markers. Saipan landed more parallel hits but Lexington landed more perpendicular. This is largely owing to small sample sizes (only 10 attack runs per carrier, per aspect) but it shows the kind of RNG trolling that can and will happen when firing rockets, especially against small targets. The only rockets I would call reasonably accurate are the HVAR off Lexington's Corsairs and Enterprise's own Hellcats. Both CVs can land an alarming number of hits provided they attack broadside on. However they have the worst aim time and they don't respond well to constant adjustments during aiming. The aim time of the various attack aircraft varies considerably, with the large Tiny Tim rockets ironically being easiest to lock onto a small, fast moving target. The swarms of rockets off of Enterprise, Implacable or Lexington when she uses HVAR that are oh-so devastating against destroyers are the most difficult to aim at twitchy, stealthy lolibotes.[ This brings up the issue of trying to attack agile and stealthy targets with rockets. For all of their apparent design to engage destroyers, attack aircraft are some of the least suited to sniffing them out and engaging them at close ranges. There isn't enough attack time on attack aircraft to make significant course adjustments against a destroyer that is stealthed with its AA disabled. This will necessitate making a second or even a third pass to line up on the target and it's not likely that the aim marker will be perfectly settled if the destroyer is attempting to go evasive. In this regard, dive bombers are much better. Attack Runs and Flak Generally speaking, attack aircraft are immune to flak explosions while performing their attack runs. There's no need to wiggle and dodge flak bursts while on your final approach. Now I say generally because in testing, very occasionally I would get clipped by a flak cloud but it was so rare that I could never predict why and how it was occurring without any discerned pattern. Do note you are not safe from flak when coming out of an attack run. This is why it's so often preferable to drop any excess planes from your squadron before entering high flak-volume areas. Squadrons Squadron sizes vary enormously. These are arguably more important on rocket aircraft given the attrition rate of these planes over the more durable torpedo and dive bombers. Shokaku - 9 aircraft (3 attack flights) Kaga - 8 aircraft (4 attack flights) Lexington - 9 aircraft (3 attack flights) Saipan - 6 aircraft (3 attack flights) Enterprise - 12 aircraft (!) (4 attack flights) Graf Zeppelin - 8 aircraft (4 attack flights) Implacable - 6 aircraft (3 attack flights) Enterprise really stands out here in the same way Kaga did with torpedo bombers: she simply has so many. Unlike the fragility of the Japanese planes, Enterprise's attack planes are doubling up with not only a lot of aircraft but a fair chunk of health too, having more than half again as many effective hit points within the squadron as the other premium carriers. The size of Enterprise's squadrons come with the same disadvatange it did for Kaga: it makes it harder to avoid flak bursts. For Enterprise (and indeed, for all carriers), it's advised to send unneeded portions of the squadron back to the carrier pre-emptively by having them drop ordnance just after launching. This will save on casualties later. Carrier Capacity Finally before we get to my overall feels for these aircraft, let's touch base on the "unlimited" number of planes each of these carriers can deploy. Enterprise is the hands-down winner here. Though she starts with fewer than Kaga, she regenerates aircraft almost at a 2:1 rate to her Japanese premium counterpart and almost 5:2 compared to Saipan. If you spammed nothing but attack aircraft on Enterprise (because you don't like winning), you could throw away as many as 47 Hellcats over a 20 minute game, not including her deployed fighters (which are also Hellcats). Seriously, spam the blighters -- you're going to have to try in order to lose them all. This is Enterprise's theme -- her fighters are meant to be her strength after all. Flight Control Modification 1 from the 5th upgrade slot is all but a must-have on all carriers for the increased carrier capacity. Summary Kaga's Zeroes surprisingly do not come in the same large squadrons and attack flights as her bombers and torpedo planes. They are very fragile with poor hitting power. She starts with a fair number of them but not-so many that you could confidently throw them away. Saipan's Bearcats come in small, nimble flights and squadrons, perfect for evading flak. The number of attacks per aircraft more than make up for this deficiency. Despite the lack of numbers, her flights and squadrons are comparable in durability to most of the other CVs. Furthermore, they have excellent reaction time for attacking targets suddenly, with quick aim and prep time, but properly setup, they will generate a lot of hits. Enterprise's Hellcats come in monster-sized squadrons. She has deep reserves and can recover aircraft losses quickly. Not only that, but her aircraft (and thus her squadrons) are reasonably tough too. On the downside, it takes them a long time to setup for an attack run and for their aim to settle. Their accuracy is questionable, though. Graf Zeppelin's Me-155As share Kaga's fragility but with improved striking power. The small number of rockets and elongated aim marker limits the number of hits she can land against wary targets. Overall Impressions Attack Aircraft take a back seat to Torpedo Bombers and Dive Bombers in the current meta. Among the premiums, even with "good" Attack Aircraft like those on Saipan and Enterprise, they're often idle until a preferred plane type is depleted. This is a shame in Enterprise's case as she's definitely built to specialize in her fighters, but they just don't have the punch needed to be a universal plane type. The other problem, really, is that for most carriers, dive bombers perform better in the anti-destroyer role than attack aircraft do. Individual hits are meatier. Aiming them is often easier, especially for destroyers that have their AA guns disabled which are trying to hide from the CV. The short attack window and long aim time of some of the rocket types just makes this worse. For the amount of time spent trying to repeatedly line up a rocket attack, you could have a follow up dive bomber strike already on the way. Still, when there's a proper target available, rockets can be a reasonable choice, especially for finishing off low-health targets in a hurry, or just being handy for having a reserve of fighter consumables still to deploy on your own carrier when someone's trying to snipe you. Kaga - A6M5 Zeroes Fragile individual aircraft and fragile flights and squadrons too. Her Zeroes are exceedingly squishy. She doesn't have the exhaustive reserves here either, though they are deeper than normal. Not all that impressive agility wise either with a meh top speed, turning radius and rate of turn. Her striking power is poor with a tiny number of rockets fired and unimpressive damage, penetration and fire chance. Failing marks all around. Kaga's Zeroes suck monkey-butt. They are, hands down, the worst attack aircraft tier VIII and by not a small margin either. Pick a trait and they are average at best and more often than not towards the bottom half (if not at THE bottom). You don't want to have to resort to these if you can help it. Saipan - F8F Bearcats Tough planes. They're surprisingly not operating at a tremendous deficit, durability wise, in terms of their squadrons and attack flights. She lacks reserves, though, and her regeneration is painfully slow. Great top speed and surprisingly agile despite that. Excellent prep and aim time on her rockets. Her rockets are individually excellent but she doesn't fire many of them to guarantee hits against small targets. Still, any hit you do land are going to be pretty meaty and are worth lobbing at destroyers just because. Excellent weapons to finish off low-health targets or to try and tax their Damage Control Party. The only thing that could have made Saipan's Bearcats any better would be the option to swap between Tiny Tims and HVAR rockets the way Lexington can. This lack of versatility doesn't hurt much overall, though. Saipan has arguably some of the best attack aircraft at tier VIII, combining durability, speed and striking power. The only draw back is that you don't get enough and when you start taking losses, you can find yourself quickly deplaned. Beware of fighters. Enterprise - F6F Hellcats Reasonable durability per plane for an attack aircraft. Her enormous attack flights and squadrons exaggerate their apparent durability. Large squadrons are more vulnerable to flak, however, but Enterprise has the reserves to muscle through losses like it was a non-issue. Still, the squads are ridiculously agile with a decent top speed. Shed a few aircraft with by dumping ordnance early and you can correct that squadron size issue. Side on attacks are a must to guarantee hits. You will get a lot of them if you do this. Make sure you attack from a long way out -- it takes a long time for her aim marker to settle. Unfortunately her rockets don't do a lot of damage, start many fires or have much in the way of penetration either. If you can't land a large number of hits, the attack isn't worth it. Enterprise is ostensibly the premium carrier meant to specialize with her Hellcats. They are good attack aircraft. It's just a shame attack aircraft aren't all they're cracked up to be. Their interactions versus destroyers was nerfed heavily and this feels readily apparent when sailing this CV. These should be a selling feature for Enterprise. But how can you get excited over a selling feature that's been nerfed to the point of near irrelevance? Graf Zeppelin - Me-155A Fragile planes, fragile flight, fragile squadron and not a whole lot of reserves. Her planes are painfully slow but they handle nicely at least. Their striking power is pretty good though. It's unfortunate that their aim marker and the small number of rockets they fire makes hitting destroyers so difficult. Oh well. When you do land hits, your targets are going to feel it. I'm not going to lie -- I find Graf Zeppelin's rocket aircraft to be pretty crappy, to be honest. They're not Kaga-bad, at least. For a ship that lacks HE bombs, I would have preferred to see a swarm of a small number of destroyer killers but I'll take baby Tiny Tims. At least they're not Japanese. Summary The big question is this: "Should attack aircraft form up part of my regular plane rotation?" The answer isn't simple but it largely boils down to this: How good are you with your dive bombers and torpedo planes? The better you are with these two types of aircraft, the less you'll ever need to take out attack aircraft. Attack aircraft were meant to counter destroyers but they haven't performed as well in this task since early on in the CV-rework. This task has largely been taken over by dive bombers. Still, there are some attack aircraft with some merits. Saipan has arguably the best rocket aircraft of the tier VIII carriers with Lexington coming in second and Enterprise third. I wish that was something to get excited over, but it's at the point now that a carrier could have crap attack aircraft and I wouldn't count that as much of a flaw. This simply speaks to how much better dive bombers and torpedo bombers are at the moment in the current meta Mouse's Ranking of the Tier VIII Attack Aircraft Saipan Lexington Enterprise Implacable Graf Zeppelin Shokaku Kaga Winner, winner. Conclusion I am so glad I decided to split these reviews up in parts. Now, I should be doing dive bombers next, but with the bug(?) that's affecting dive bomber accuracy still kinda being up in the air, I'm not sure when this next part will be out. I'll have to speak to the devs before I commit to publishing an article like this if everything's simply going to be changed when patch 0.8.3 rolls around. This may necessitate skipping dive bombers for now and covering the hulls of the four carriers next article instead. This article ran longer than I wanted (there was a lot of testing which slowed me down) and it's being published a few days later than promised. I'd expect the next part late next week or early the week after. Hopefully this whole project will be done by early May. Thanks for reading!
  11. My tactics are mostly developed for Ryujo so it can be harder to use on other aircraft carriers. My proof is in my videos. Aircraft carriers take a lot of time to learn and play. These are my tactics that help me make use of everything that an aircraft carrier can do and should do but most won't do. Speed and patience is everything and hopefully these tactics can help you. World of Warships 7 Basic Tips https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/common/git-gud/ Communication Do your best to say everything you do If someone ask for AA support, reply with anything If they hate you, they will hate you. Do your best to not dwell on it Scout Find the enemy with your dive bombers You can choose to attack them but do not have your dive bombers rearm Find the weakest spot you can find Your eyes are the team's eyes Move While your dive bombers scout, set your ship's way points according to what they find and where your team goes Any movement is better than no movement Defend Defend yourself until you know or expect where the enemy fighters and bombers will be Defend your torpedo bombers to the best of your ability Defend the fleet to the best of your ability Do not let your fighters die carelessly Shadow After your dive bombers find or attack the enemy, have them stay in a safe range from AA and keep them spotted If enemy fighters attack, lead them as far as possible so that your torpedo bombers are safe Attack Attack the weakest spot as fast as you can Once the enemy fleet is able to stay spotted without use of your dive bombers, attack with everything you got Recover Faster your ship moves, faster you recover, faster you rearm, faster you attack Cap Faster you clear an area, faster it is safe, faster you cap Fight If you are spotted by an enemy within concealment range, you are already dead There is no use running from something you can't run from, whether that is enemy speed or gun range You have secondary guns, make use of them Most players won't expect a aircraft carrier to fight back You are the decoy, most ships will almost always shoot a CV when they see it, those seconds or minutes you live is extra time for your team to potentially fight back Miracles can happen, I have 26 total secondary kills with Ryujo Other I get my good days and my bad days Ryujo Skills & Upgrades
  12. I'm in a clan "DEMI" wich offers -14% of the cost of researchable ships which is applied to all tiers , It's applied to all warships except for Aircraft Carriers , this problem appeared after the 0.8.0 update , I have screenshots if you want a proof , please check this out , I'll purchase the ship with it's real price after posting this ticket , and looking forward to get back the 14% after u re-look at it . Best wishes , Ghost_Castle
  13. I am wondering if we should have premium super submarines like IJN I-400 that can launch attack (torpedoes) planes and dive bombers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-400-class_submarine
  14. ShinaMashiro

    Saipan and Balancing

    Dear Wargaming, This is an old topic, but I believe the Saipan needs rebalancing. With the near invincible planes, her bombers and torp planes can stay near ships for hours. And with the captain skill, she gets 4 tier 9 planes per squadron, like strafing doesn't even work against her planes, and you always get the bad end of a strafe. How do you counter that?
×