Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'aircraft'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Surveys
  • General WoWS Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Team Play
    • Support
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Player Modifications
  • Support
  • 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
  • Support


  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Found 75 results

  1. USS Ranger should be REPLACED !!!!

    The USS Ranger was definitely put into the game for very good reasons, but she is frankly UGLY and I think we should get a little sexier ship in the gameplay that few people have seen or heard of before!! Enter, USS Wasp: the forgotten warrior !!!!!!!! USS Wasp (CV-7) 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. As a reduced-size version of the Yorktown-class aircraft carrier hull, Wasp was more vulnerable than other United States aircraft carriers available at the opening of hostilities. Wasp was initially employed in the Atlantic campaign, where Axis naval forces were perceived as less capable of inflicting decisive damage. After supporting the occupation of Iceland in 1941, Wasp joined the British Home Fleet in April 1942 and twice ferried British fighter aircraft to Malta. Wasp was then transferred to the Pacific in June 1942 to replace losses at the battles of Coral Sea and Midway. After supporting the invasion of Guadalcanal, Wasp was sunk by the Japanese submarine I-19 on 15 September 1942. Wasp is just much sexier, has same displacement, same speed, same flight group size, same AA strength, and can be configured in the matchmaking system to perform just like Ranger. I think this would be a good change for the game and give players something new to play with!!! Any thoughts from my fellow wargamers???
  2. First I would like to introduce myself. My name is John Daley, ( known as JedMad within the Game ). I am a disabled Vietnam Veteran, having served in the United States Navy during the 70's. My Grandfather and Great Uncles all served during WW2 and My uncles all served in the post war years throughout the Korean and Vietnam conflicts and the cold war. I grew up listening to tales from my grandfather and his brothers of the naval engagements that they experienced during WW2. That is probably why I also became a Naval historian of that period and have researched extensively every single Naval engagement during WW2 including naval engagements such as took place in the English channel between German MTB's vs British MTB's, Destroyers, and aircraft, Wolf pack attacks on convoy, all the way up to the Huge battles in and around Leyte Gulf in 1944. I have been playing Naval war-gaming since the 1970's when I and some friends would take our waterline models of ships with our calculators and tape measures, and commandeer a local parking lot every Sunday in Norfolk, Virginia and spend Hours and Hours re-fighting naval engagements. With the advent of computers I never lost my passion for the game. When I saw that you were releasing World of Warships I was pleasantly surprised at the Quality of the Game as well as the detail you have worked into the actual game play. As a pure gunnery/torpedo game World of Warships is unsurpassed. I also feel that there is some room of improvement however. That is why I have taken the time to present my views on how the game might be improved. I dearly hope that you will take the time to consider my thoughts on this subject. I enjoy everything about the game except for one thing. Carrier Play, I feel, needs to be re-assessed. I used to really enjoy playing Carrier's...until they introduced the strafing element into the game play. I do believe that the strafing element could be a useful tool for the above average player but I think that the idea that a single squadron of 4 to 7 planes could NEVER have had the ability to take out an entire strike group of several squadrons of Torpedo, Dive bombers and their fighter escort in one single pass. Historically, getting a jump on an enemy strike could disrupt any attack in progress but think about this for a minute. Could that single fighter squadron actually totally wipe out a large strike group that quickly? As an example of what I am talking about, If there is someone sending out a Japanese strike, of 2 TB squadrons ( 8 Planes ), 2 Dive bomber squadrons ( 8 to 10 planes ) escorted by 2 fighter squadrons ( a further 8 to 10 planes ), equaling a total of 24 to 28 aircraft or an American strike, group consisting of 1 Torpedo squadron ( 6 planes ) 2 dive bomber squadrons ( 12 to 14 planes ) escorted by 1 or 2 fighter squadrons ( 12 to 14 planes ), totaling 30 to 34 aircraft, and they are attacked by a single fighter squadron of between 4 to 7 fighters how could those few fighters actually destroy ALL of the strike group in one pass, especially if that strike group is escorted by fighter squadrons? My contention is that if you assume that every attacking fighter can shoot down one aircraft on that first pass, that would leave a large portion of that strike intact. If the strike group has No fighter escort it should take several passes to enable a single fighter squadron to wipe out all of the opposing torpedo and dive bombers. If on the other hand the strike group ARE escorted by fighters you must assume that, after that first pass, which would only take out only a small percentage of the attack group and any escorting fighters, the remaining escort fighters would then engage the attacking fighters to allow at least some of the attack group to proceed on their way to their targets. In conclusion, I believe that there has to be a serious re-work of how effective STRAFING works within the game. At the lower tiers of play, where strafing is disabled, Carrier play is MUCH more enjoyable but that quickly disappears as you begin to play the higher tiers. I like the way that escorting fighters would engage any attacking fighters before the attacking fighters could get to the strike groups at the lower levels of play. At the higher tiers where strafing is allowed escorting fighters have NO chance to engage attacking fighters unless you MANUALLY attack the incoming fighters long before they get anywhere near your strike group. I have heard all the arguments against changing the current way strafing is employed within the Game and I realize that this IS a Game, and doesn't necessarily reflect actual historical data on this subject. I believe, however, that once you have included Carriers into what was primarily a Naval gunnery and torpedo game, you should at least make Carrier play at least as effective, as far as the damage you can achieve, as when playing a straight gunnery/torpedo format. I know that to most players and big gun enthusiasts this issue may seem like a minor detail within the game, but if you want to keep a semblance accuracy involving The Aircraft Carrier's role in History you must admit that Carriers gradually supplanted big guns as the Capital ship to this very day. Carrier Play, as it currently stands, when you consider the High effectiveness of AA values as well as the way strafing is set up currently, almost NEVER enables a Carrier driver to achieve the kind of damage scores as can any other ship type within the game. Those of us who have achieved some success driving carriers would love see some modifications to how carrier play is currently configured. I hope that you will consider seriously what I have proposed. I feel that correcting this issue would only improve the game and make it more enjoyable for everyone else. Please address this problem.
  3. Aircraft trump Ships

    "Air power rests at the apex of the first triad of victory, for it combines mobility, flexibility, and initiative." Aircraft will beat ships. Always. World of Warships could be "World of Warships and Airplanes". I'm ranting, I know but a warship game with planes as the most powerful is a bit contradictory. :) The balance of having few Carriers was a good idea. My thanks to the dev team! End of rant.
  4. Aircraft hack or bad bug.

    I was just playing a tier 6 carrier and the enemy fighter squadron killed my fighters almost instantly, then the same fighter squadron killed both bomber and torp bomber squadrons in 2 SECONDS! At the same time! That is one a second! He was the same tier and my carrier is fully leveled. Captain has 7 or 8 points leveled. Even when I am torn apart by a tier 8 it takes longer to die. Also, no ships/AA were in range. Looks like you should add a report function for hacking. Currently, I had to report him as a poor player.
  5. CV Captains know they can move their ships right? How many times does a CV have to deal with an enemy DD that gets a little bit too friendly alone because they refused to move their ship before they realize there's an easy solution to the problem? I know i'm just venting some of my frustration out here, but really guys? Youre gonna refuse to just tap W at the beginning of the match, before your fighters even come off cooldown to launch, and then you have the audacity to crapbricks at your team when a DD rolls around in spawn looking for a free kill and your tasty hull is sitting there? Sorry mate, but i'm not the one who needs to be put on blast for you not rotating with the team. We're all here at the points trying to cap them or kill the enemy, idk why you're still all the way back there sucking your toes for no reason. Even moving forward and getting closer is beneficial to you and the team! You rotate away from the easy pickings zone, get a little closer to the fight and you cut precious seconds off the time that your planes have to make when returning to your ship! Youre closer to the group, safer, youre not as easy to predict your location, AND youre able to be useful to the fight. It's literally a plus for everyone to just move from spawn and try to keep around the team as much as you can. Look, Im not asking you to be up with the cruisers or get in BB firing range. That's too close to the fight. But what I'm humbly requesting is that you try to micromanage your ship and just try to keep close enough for us to protect you AND win the match, because we cant to both when youre sitting afk in the spawn area because you couldnt be asked to move a little bit. Dont put the rest of the team on blast because you dont know how to use the W key. video-1517101013.mp4
  6. Shouldn’t CV aircraft have a definite fighter flight time? Or does it already? Extra flight time is fine for CVs due to external tanks. Spotter planes and fighter aircraft launched from ships have time/fuel limits. Why don’t Cv aircraft?
  7. Over the last few days, I've discussed three different types of surface ships--cruisers, destroyers, battleships. Now, let's look at the final, and most powerful of these: The aircraft carrier. Aircraft carriers made battleships obsolete and changed naval warfare; if you are driving a flattop, you can even change a game you're in. Your strike planes can deal more damage than a salvo from a BB's main guns--if you know what you're doing. In the game, there are only two nations with full carrier lines: The United States and Imperial Japan. Let's look at their attributes: USN: Fewer but larger squadrons meaning dealing more damage per strike, better dive bombers that have the option of equipping AP bombs to deal more damage to battleships, some of the best fighters in the game. IJN: Squadrons are smaller but there are more of them, meaning you can spread your power out over the map. Torpedo bombers are some of the best in the game. Loadouts offer more flexibility. Honorable mention: Graf Zeppelin. Comes either with all dive bombers or all torpedo bombers (and some fighters) and has super mean secondaries. I don't know much about it; if someone knows more about it, please explain. Now, time for the ins and outs of the class: Pros: You have the most powerful ship in the game, being able to strike anything anywhere on the map, anytime in the game. Being in top-down view gives you the best view in the battle. If played properly, you can inflict untold amounts of damage in a single battle. In fact, the world damage record was set in a Midway. Cons: Your aircraft are vulnerable to anti-aircraft fire and fighter from enemy ships. That, and you have a limited number of them; make every strike count. You are a vulnerable target subject to attack from other aircraft and from ships, so stay with the pack if you can (unless you're in a Graf Zeppelin, Midway, or Kaga, which have beast secondaries.) In addition, early tier carriers have poor maneuverability and speed characteristics, so plan ahead where you're going to go. If you have no more aircraft, you are a sitting duck. Now, gameplay tips. This is a unique one, as you control not so much the ship, but it's aircraft. However, here are a few things you need to know: Target ships that are alone, low on health, or under fire from your friends. Learn the ships that have good AA, and learn to avoid them early in the game. Set a course with the autopilot before the battle starts by pressing "M" and click in your waypoints. Don't hesitate to change it or use your WASD hacks if need be. Also, stay with the pack whenever possible. If there is another aircraft carrier on your team, try to coordinate actions if possible. And if you are out of aircraft, you are not out of options. Charge forward and hope your secondaries earn their pay. Speaking of secondaries, do not underestimate them. You might not have much, but they're still effective. My first ever kill in an aircraft carrier was a DD with my secondaries. Use co-op a lot to get the hang of manual bomb and torpedo drops, and learn how to strafe. It'll be a long process, but, as Leigh Anne Tuohy said in "The Blind Side," "You can thank me later." Priority targets: Battleships, other aircraft carriers, destroyers, anything that has poor AA. Well, that's it for my new player's guides. If you have anything gameplay-related that I should do something on, please shout it out in the comments below. As always, thank you, and good luck, captains!
  8. New CV Captains? Need to Learn Manual Drops? Only have 3 minutes?! This video is for you!
  9. General Feedback

    I think the aircraft performance and general play need to be looked at. The airplanes act more like high performance jets or UFO's than WW2 aircraft. Their turn rates, climb rates, and tactics are very unrealistic. One example is torpedo bombers - they would never fly in a f ship line abreast formation to employ their torps - maybe a 2 ship wedge or vic formation with the second element staggered behind them - but what you have now is totally unrealistic. In addition after employing their torps a real airplane would probably overfly their target due to turn performance limitations and would be more susceptible to AAA fire. As a reference point an airplane with 1 16 degree per second turn rate ( a modern jet fighter) would take 11 seconds to make 180 degree turn. WOW aircraft make these turns in about 2 seconds without any loss of airspeed - which the laws of physics would say is not possible without an afterburner.
  10. Good day to all reading, I have a lil scenario to present to you. Being an American CV, I am sending a torpedo squadron to broadside an Iron Duke with over 3/4 health that's being shot at from at least 11km away by a CV. I think I'm cool so I use manual drop as close as possible (I know that there is a short portion of the green engagement zone that the torpedoes don't drop in, so I aim to engage the Iron Duke in a way that the torpedo icons appear on the map as it hits him). After dropping the torpedoes I watch his health go down thrice in a row and 1/4 torpedoes drift by that had missed but don't receive any ribbons. Keep in mind that those 4 torpedo bombers made it home and that their were no citadel hits. At the end of the match I only had caused 15k damage (torps do 9k each). Unfortunately I wasn't recording and have had this happen a couple times. Anyone else have this issue?
  11. With the opportunity to respec commanders for free this weekend, I am trying to figure out once and for all if it's wort hit to have Direction Center for Catapult Aircraft on the North Carolina. I have seen it recommended on a number of sites and it seems so completely lackluster, even for a 1-point investment. For spotting aircraft it's almost totally useless, for fighters it's only marginally useful for a very brief period. Opinions?
  12. Hosho Aircraft

    I was playing 2 Hosho v Hosho games where our fighters engaged with no AA around, I have aircraft servicing expert on my captain (the only ability that affects this fight in a major way) +5% HP and Airgroup Modifications 1 +10% AVG DMG and none of the fights had Aireal Superiority on the commander so it should be a close and even fight, but both fights ended up in a 0-4 or 0-3 in their favor, is one of the modifications or commander abilities bugged and if not the aircraft need to be reworked to include less RNG especially if being a CV means being tactical.
  13. So a few of the questions that me and a lot of my friends have been talking about. #1: How to make RN Carriers Unique. #2: How to fix the Graf Zepplin. #3: How to add a 2nd CV Tree? _____________________________________________________________ So a few quick answers and thoughts. - First the Graf Zeppling. Looking at German Dive bombers (Historically) I came up with a very interesting and fun answer to the problem. Mixed multi-bomb payloads. So let's say we take a standard (Used historically) bomb load for the JU-87. 1 x SC250 (250kg) 4 x SC50 (50kg) So why not let this be a bomb load? Maybe even mix the AP/HE bombs. So a 250kg AP bomb. and 4 50kg HE Bombs. This gives the Dive Bombers 1 bomb that can hit and damage larger ships pretty well. And a number of smaller bombs that can explode, knock out AA Mounts. Set fires. And if dropping on a DD give a kind of "shot gun" pattern. The only reason that I can see this not being a great ideal is that MAY be a bit to much math. I mean that WOULD be a lot of bomb drop positions. This of coarse can be used for some other Carriers also. (Maybe the 1 Italian Premium CV that will make its way into the game) Maybe the French Premium CV? ______________________________________________________________ As far as a matter of RN Carriers or a 2nd Tree. (Maybe for a Escort Carrier tree) - As anyone ever thought about the Ideal of some CV's that are allowed to use there "Secondaries" Manually? I mean its not like a lot of CV's have overpowered Secondary guns. The only ships it would be useful against would be DD's. Or maybe heavily wounded Cruisers. Maybe this is not a great ideal for the RN Carriers but I feel like short (3-4 ship) Escort CV's might be a good ideal.
  14. My British CV Lineup Idea

    Hey guys, I've been thinking about this topic the last few days and wanted to put it out there, even though we are on the verge of the British BBs being released. Here is my idea for the lineup of a full British CV line. I welcome any feedback or comments and suggestions on how WG could balance RN CVs in relation to their U.S. and Japanese counterparts. I'm not that big of a CV player myself, but the British CVs could be something interesting and different compared to the only 2 nations that have CV lines in the game right now. Tier IV - Argus Tier V - Eagle or Hermes (leaning towards Hermes myself) Tier VI - Furious Tier VII - Illustrious Tier VIII - Ark Royal Tier IX - Implacable Tier X - Malta or Audacious
  15. The tutorial doesn't go in great detail. I am new to this game. I am using a IV tier Cruiser. It has a plane on it. I know I press T to launch it. Does the plane automatically attack the enemy on its own. The help says to press ALT hold + left mouse button. Does that assign the ship for it to be attacked by the aircraft? Do I have to continue holding it till the plane finishes? There is no info on it. Thank you!
  16. Aircraft carriers

    When an aircraft carriers is destroyed and it still has planes in the air you should be able to control them are you trying to say that the Pilots are stupid and that they need flight control guidance from the ship
  17. Rain, sure they can fly. Cyclone? Unlikely - and if they did their effectiveness needs to be cut WAAAAAAaaayyyyyy back... It's not well... reasonable - for TB and DB to come screaming down on you in a cyclone then not appear until they're like "indicated 2.x km" which means they're right on top of you, drop and laugh all the way back to the carrier. If they are not receiving the same kind of visibility punishments as the surface ships then they need it. If they are then something needs done about making them visible to surface ships. tia fyc
  18. I've now seen this three times in the last few days. Competing against another CV and suddenly ALL that CV's Aircraft show up, not one squadron at a time - ALL OF THEM. How is this done? Anyone? Help is most appreciated. I just got blown out of the water by 4 squadrons of torps and 2 squadrons of Bombers - and I had already shot down his 2 squadrons of fighters. Very Much Thanks in advance.
  19. A Shout Out to all CV Players

    Last night I was having really off night. missing strafes, torpedo drops, rng hating my bombers, no floods, ect ect. So bad in fact that I actually benched my Ranger for my Saipan. Rather than going into detail; in one game against a well played T7 IJN CV that I felt useless (good stats but not "Good" stats). My allies and reds were badmouthing the Saipan as a CV. The red CV piped in and made my night with some kind words about my game play. I just wanted to pass along the good feelings. As a BB main I can say with absolute certainty that everyone knows every CV player does their best and even when it is not enough we understand. Just keep at it and good games will come and even become more frequent with more practice.
  20. I was watching my torpedo planes attacking an aircraft carrier in a Co-op battle. The enemy carrier's fighters engaged my aircraft who were firing back. The carrier was destroyed by gunfire from another ship. The game ended at that point (the carrier was the enemy's last ship) but I could hear the machine guns still firing even after I returned to the port screen.
  21. Aircraft and multiple Carriers

    When a Mission includes multiple Carriers and one carrier is sunk, the aircraft become lost; would be nice to be able to recover and service those aircraft on any remaining friendly carriers providing there is deck space to do so. This would be the actual course of events so why not replicate for the game? Losing a carrier would not necessitate the loss of all aircraft for the friendly side.
  22. Aircraft

    Though in general I do enjoy the game and think that a good bit of it reflects things historically I would like to point out and possibly get some clarification about certain issues I have. It appears to me that whoever designed the game thought 2 dimensionally (which works for surface ships) but when you add fighters into the mix it doesn't add up. Most fighters (and even dive bombers until they make their bombing run) would stay at a high enough altitude that surface ships either couldn't hit them or couldn't be very accurate about it. This, in fact, was the entire reason dive bombing was created--stay at a high altitude above the AA guns and dive at the last moment to drop a bomb. Ignoring this fact makes the Carriers less powerful in the game than they were historically in my opinion. All that being said I do enjoy it and will continue playing. Thanks for listening.
  23. ​I know its going to be difficult for players to grasp the idea of choosing any three ships for a Division but to allow for 2 carriers in one division must be scary. I would like to hear what others think of letting two Carriers be in one Division, to allow for the team talk option to be more useful. The next point is going to be a killer. In the same division, using the same countries' ships, could one carrier send their planes to re-arm and re-fuel on the second carrier? To extend coverage or to resupply the other carrier's lost planes from one to another. Example: I am going to be sunk, so I order my aircraft, in flight, to the other Carrier to resupply their flights, to the starting level. No more than that second Carrier could have had. Thank you for your responses.

    Seems to me that there are a lot of abandoned aircraft when a carrier sinks. When will the surviving aircraft carrier be able to rescue these survivors and put them back into the battle instead of leaving them to die? If a carrier sinks and there is a surviving carrier, the surviving squadrons/planes should pop up on the surviving carrier's page to accept them or decline. If accepted, the survivors become part of the air arm of that carrier. Should be relatively simple fix and extend the play of carriers....especially at lower levels... Enjoy! Former Navy guy! Jon
  25. British CVs: Slow but tough?

    When I imagine British CV aircraft, I imagine slow, tough little biplanes that get a survivability bonus against AAA partially due to their slowness throwing-off the flak predictors of enemy AAA guns, with very fast, good fighters as a support. I expect British fighters to significantly out-perform the current American and Japanese fighters, due to their widespread use of Hispano 20mm cannons, which were far better at taking down air targets quickly than .50 caliber machine guns. One downside I see of British fighters is the need to land and reload more commonly, as the Hispano cannons could not carry as much ammo as the .50 cal MGs could (due to the increased size of the projectile being fired). British aircraft I would expect: VTs (Torpedo Bombers): Fairey Swordfish: Tough-as-nails, slow old biplane dive/torpedo bomber that was obsolete by the time the war began. Still went on to sink the Bismark, however. Fairey Albacore: An updated version of the Swordfish that was faster and could still dual-purpose as a dive bomber or torpedo bomber. Fairey Barracuda (Mk I, II, and V): The first successful full-metal monoplane design made by Fairey, the Barracuda was difficult to take-off due to its ungainly characteristics on the ground, and early versions had a poor climb rate. Later versions had an enhanced powerplant, increasing their speed and climb rate and their payload capacity to 2,000 lbs. Like the Albacore and Swordfish, the Barracuda was a TBR (Torpedo/Bomber/Reconnaissance) aircraft, so it dual-purposed as both dive bomber and torpedo bomber. TBF Avenger: The British received several American TBF-1 Avenger aircraft later in the war, which were tougher, faster, and had better climbing characteristics than the Fairey Barracuda. Often carried better ordnance, but, interestingly, they often served cooperatively, that is, RN carriers that carried Avengers often also carried Barracudas. Fairey Spearfish (Prototype): The Fairey Spearfish was a prototype torpedo/dive bomber designed to operate off of the planned Malta class carriers. It had a much better powerplant, an internal weapons bay (finally), and carried 4 .50 cals, 2 forward-firing in the wings and 2 in a remote-controlled barbette behind the cockpit. It was better than the Barracuda in almost all respects, despite being significantly larger. (This would go with a premium Malta-class carrier) Blackburn Firebrand (produced, never saw combat)- The Blackburn Firebrand was a monoplane, single-engine strike aircraft capable of carrying both torpedoes and bombs. Westland Wyvern- This was a turpo-prop multi-purpose strike aircraft capable of carrying and delivering torpedoes as well as bombs and rockets. Would make a suitable fighter as well. VBs (Dive Bombers): (see VTs) Also, the USN F4U-D Corsair VFs (Carrier-Fighters): Fairey Firefly- A powerful full-metal monoplane fighter capable of carrying 4x 20mm Hispano autocannons Fairy Flycatcher- A single seat biplane fighter suitable for tier IV Hawker Sea Hurricane- A good tier V, the Sea Hurricane carried 20mm Hispanos, but limited ammunition Supermarine Seafire (Mk I, II, V, XII, 24)- The Supermarine Seafire was the modification of the famous Supermarine Spitfire designed to fly off of carriers. The later modifications (XII and 24) became very powerful, as they were fitted with the more powerful Griffon powerplants. Mustang Mk. 1A: Not sure where this would fit, but the Mustang Mk.1A took the climb rate and speed of the Mustang and buffed it with the power of the British 20mm Hispano autocannon. Powerful fighter. Westland Wyvern: (see VTs) Supermarine Attacker- A jet-powered rendition of the experimental Supermarine Spiteful. Very powerful, very fast.