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
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 17 results

  1. This is a huge change. With the squadron consumable upgrade in slot 5, this will allow a patrol time of almost 2 min (112.5 s to be exact), and effectively instant interceptions for 105 s. The skill is now well worth the 4 points. The 10 point "full interceptor build" will be very strong in T8 and T10 competitive game modes, and possibly even in random games. Kudos to WG for making a viable alternative for those who seek a more defensive role for carriers.
  2. Since I love the idea of a support carrier focused more on protecting my teammates than dealing damage, I tried a full interceptor build (all four of the support skills along with Squadron Consumables Mod 1) on Audacious in random battles during 10.0. I ended up switching back to a more standard (for me) damage mitigation and accuracy skills before the end of the free skill resets with 10.1. I've kept an American 19 point captain with the full interceptor build, however, for use in ranked and eventually clan battles. I made good use of this full interceptor captain in this last ranked season, and I saw on YouTube that @Ahskance (a much better CV player than me ) preferred this as well for ranked. With the smaller number of friendly ships to protect, you can make it work, and it is very powerful against FDRs, which are fairly common in competitive. What cripples the use of the full interceptor build in random is the -25% patrol times that is the penalty of the 4 point Enhanced Reaction skill. With the Squadron Consumables Mod 1 in slot 5, the longest you can keep the Interceptors on station is 67 seconds, the first ~7 seconds of which are warm up time, where they won't shoot anything down. Without the SCM1 in slot 5, you are limited to 45 seconds patrol time, with, again 7 seconds of that for warm up when you first call them to patrol. I've found that I'm more effective in random battles using SCM1 along with the 1 point Search and Destroy skill as well as the 2 point Patrol Group Leader skill at preventing strikes against my teammates due to the 90 s patrol times this allows. I've shot down more planes on average using this configuration as well, since the red CV is less likely to wait out the patrol fighters, and more willing to hazard sending his planes into the fighters for a strike in the hopes of recalling his surviving planes before my fighters shoot them down. Unless Wargaming wants the full interceptor/support CV to be limited to competitive modes, they need to eliminate or significantly reduce the -25% action time of the fighter/interceptor consumable that is attached to Enhanced Reactions. A 25% penalty is a high price to pay for any 4 point skill. Alternatively, they could leave ER as is and move it down to a 3 point skill, while moving Interceptors back up to the 4 point skill where it started and adding a buff that prolongs the patrol time if you select interceptors, effectively cancelling the -25% penalty on ER. ER is a great skill, and makes fighters work they way I always wanted them to, but the negatives outweigh the power of the skill except in ranked and (I'm assuming) clan battles.
  3. Michael_Gary_Scott

    A Fully Loaded F/A-18F Super Hornet

    A photo of an F/A-18F Super Hornet fully loaded with 10 x GBU-32 1,000 pound bombs taken by by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Matt Matlage. Each jet can carry more pounds of bombs than a B-17 Flying Fortress of World War 2 (which I think is between 4,000 to 8,000 pounds from a quick search). An aircraft carrier's load of F-18's attacking an inland target, I am guessing, must match or even beat the destructive power of the mass bombing formations of long ago. With GPS level accuracy (within 5 meters) using JDAMS, even more amazing. Just a random thought.
  4. It was either sheer luck or applied skill that turned this game around. Playing a ranked match on Northern Waters in Silver League we make a comeback from being triple capped.
  5. Background: I watched the video linked in this thread and got thru about 2.5 pages of the typical back and forth about aircraft carriers being part of the game. WG: You need to pay attention to this video - General Game Discussion - World of Warships official forum The video makes some good points about the evolution of the game, and the successes and failures of the CV rework. However, in spite of his claims to report just "the facts" the CC who made the video gets at least one concept about the AA mechanics wrong: both AA DPM and flak puffs remain at full strength when they overlap. WG considered diminishing the AA DPM as more ship's AA auras overlapped, but ultimately left them at full strength when they botched the implementation during one of the patches. I'd also argue that his assumption that it is easier to be a expert CV player vs any other class is also incorrect based on my own experience. I've found the easiest class to rack up big damage and experience numbers in is battleships, and it is not even close. The skill floor to be an effective high tier CV player is quite high. The skill floor for CVs is artificially low at tier 4, which is done in order to get players into the class. Currently, I think the MVR is more effective than the other T10 classes of carrier when you combine her AP bombs, AP rockets, each type of her aircraft having repair, and her stealthy fighter auras. I'm confident WG will eventually get her balanced correctly. I expect nerfs to MVR before the next clan battle season. Thesis: If you are going to have a naval combat FPS set in the early to middle 20th century, CVs must be in the game, and they should be an effective and powerful class for a skilled player. WG made the correct choice by including carriers in World of Warships. Players, especially players that have been around since before their inception, need to accept that they are not going away. I started playing in April of 2019, so how carriers played before the rework is not something I have experience with. I play all classes, and am looking forward to submarines when they come to the game as well. I enjoy playing my Midway (currently the only CV in my port) and I enjoy what carriers add to the game when I play all of my other ships as well. However, I have make deliberate choices in my ship selection, captain skills, and upgrades which greatly contribute to this enjoyment. Here are a few things you can do if you want to be more effective at countering air attacks during the game: 1.) Prioritize playing ships with powerful AA. The irony of making a video about how CVs are too powerful while highlighting play in a BB with one of the worst AA capabilities at her tier should not be lost on anyone. Play the Halland, Minotaur, Worchester, Texas, or any of the other ships who specialize in AA if you really hate being bombed. If you choose a ship or line who has weak AA, learn how to play around that weakness (e.g. play close to allied ships to stack your AA auras). You pay a price in some other aspect of gameplay to sail a powerful AA ship, so you should expect to pay a price in battle if you choose a ship with weak AA because you find some other feature of that class enjoyable (like having 9 x 18" rifles at T9). 2.) If you play a BB or heavy cruiser, always take AAM1 in slot 1. These are the classes whose main batteries do not contribute to AA. Also consider taking it for CLs and DDs whose main battery doesn't contribute to AA (French DDs come to mind, though I'm sure there are more). As the video correctly points out, you cannot repair damaged AA guns. Once they are knocked out, you lose the corresponding AA DPM output for the rest of the battle. Your main battery almost always is repairable if it gets knocked out (I'd estimate 90+% of the time). All things considered, buffing the survivability of AA is more important than your main battery. 2.1) Don't forget about AAM2 in slot 6 for high tier ships. While this is not as much of a no brainer as AAM1 and there may be other better choices for slot 6, this is a powerful upgrade you have at your disposal for boosting your AA. It is not just for secondary build German BBs. 2.2) AAGM1 in slot 3 isn't bad, but the other upgrades that compete with it in slot 3 make it hard to choose. WG should buff this if they want more players to take it, or move it to slot 2. 3.) Invest in AA captain skills. Even a ship with a strong base AA rating (like Des Moines) can benefit greatly from these. BFT is the best example, and I choose it on almost all ships where I don't take AAM2, or which don't have an effective AA consumable or some other method of escaping from concerted carrier attack (like smoke). 3.1) The captain skill changes WG is working on look promising, with one major exception. AFT used to allow you to increase the range of your AA auras. WG should bring back something similar as a 4 point cruiser only skill. To rule out stealth AA, however, it should only be effective out to the ship's spotting range from air. For example: Expert AA Gunner would include an increase of the range of all AA auras 10% with the outer aura expansion being limited to the ship's detection range by air. 4.) Take advantage of available AA consumables. Pick DFAA over speed boost (DFAA over hydro is admittedly a much a harder sell). Pick catapult fighters over spotting plane. Do this especially if you choose not to invest any captain skills in AA. 4.1) Catapult fighters need to be more effective, especially at higher tiers. I'd say it is possible to avoid a red ship's catapult fighters which I am attacking about 30 - 40% of the time when I play CV. There should not be any trick to using this consumable. If you attack a BB with 3 catapult fighters in the air before you drop your ordinance, you should lose 3 planes from your squadron every time. With the consumable lasting only 60 s, you should not have to get your planes in the air any earlier than ordinance being dropped on your ship. If you anticipate the air attack enough to get your fighters up 10 s or so before your ship is struck, they should shoot down the planes before the attack, not after. Whatever WG needs to do to simplify this consumable to make it more automatic (which I believe is the intent of the consumable in the first place), they should. 4.2) Any ship with a catapult should have the option of carrying fighters. WG recently started to make this choice available for some higher tier ships. They should make this a universal choice on every ship with catapult aircraft. 5.) The best way to learn to counter CV play is by learning to play a CV. Pick a line and grind it up to at least T8. Your play in every other class will benefit. Summary: CVs are here to stay. You can be effective in countering them if you choose to. If you choose not to, you should not be surprised when you are victimized by them. Moreover, if you choose not to, and then you complain about how game wrecking CVs are to the WoWs community, you have no credibility on the subject.
  6. ***PLEASE READ BEFORE VOTING*** Ok looke this poll isn't to ascertain if you liked the old CV style or not but am asking for its general functionality. I understand RTS CV is really OP but I want to gather information about what players prefer because I want to try to make a case to WG about this. RTS wasn't perfect but it was more functional and more playable than whatever we got. I fly planes IRL and its easier than this crap of a play style we now have. I understand its an arcade and not a Simulation anymore but I want the old game I love back. Where a random kitakami would show up in the wild and kill both your team and the enemy because holy crap it was crazy. I want a game that is more simulation-based. I'm open to suggestions on how we can improve CV battles as a whole not revert them to RTS. But I think something needs to be done to fix this nightmare of a game style CVs has become. Even if its the same you control a squadron but they all dive as one but its easier to lose planes. Not Battleships can launch an entire fighter squadron. What WG fails to realize is that this game has become more an action game with life like elements vs a decent game like it used to be. Spotter planes had weapons but were useless in a dogfight but could somewhat do something. Not have 4 planes in the air fighting Kates and Vals like they own the skies. I was in an Atlanta the other day and I got bombed like crazy I remember when cruisers were feared by CVs not another target. Also rockets really? I would have liked it better if we had manned fighters where we could chase and shoot down enemy planes. Remember please take the poll as a way of improvement not bias because one is better than the other
  7. BB63Hawaii

    Im sick of it.

    Im sick and tired of it. Ive played WOWS for almost 4 years. Rank 1 is always a goal of mine, but tier 10 is just too much. Its the same stuff every season, the [edited] ships that are over powered are always played. A cv turns any good player into an average one. The system demotes players who do the right things but do not get damage. Ive ranked out multiple times, but tier 10 is just crazy now. I dont find it fun anymore, I only like the lower tiers without as much gimmicks. I also think that 1v1 and 3v3 rank is much more realistic for players who dont play in clans. It was a lot of fun with less ships, you have more influence over a game. I get that its a team game but they need to separate clan battles and rank for individual players. I dont care for being burned to death by two smolensks, a haragumo and two thunderers while i worry about slava ap angles from 20k. Then cv detonates. Nightmare fuel. I dont know if anyone else feels the same way, but its just so frustrating. I think im done with rank, too much stress. Time for a change...
  8. Aircraft carriers are extremely underpowered. There aircraft are weak in both armor/HP, accuracy, and armament. The armor of aircraft is non-existent. There health pool is very low as well. Ship AA is easily able to destroy a squadron of fighters before a single attack is launched when multiple ships are together and only one attack can be launched when a ship is by itself. Destroyers are the only reliable target for carriers as they have a low AA defense, but are nimble enough for 90-100% of the attack to miss, and the 10% of the time that if does hit, typical damage is around 700 for rocket attack planes, 900 for dive bombers, and 1000 tor torpedo planes. For armament I will start with Torpedo planes. Why are carriers the only class of ship with an arming distance on there torpedoes, Destroyers can launch torpedoes onto the deck of another ship and kill them instantly, while CV torpedoes deal 1,400 damage and maybe a flood on a cruiser. The same torpedo on a destroyer of the same tier does 11,733 damage, while the carrier torpedoes do 5,567 (Ranger compared to Farragut) in fact the tier 2 destroyer the Sampson's torpedoes do 5,900 damage stock. The dive bombers do the most damage with 9,200, but there accuracy leaves mush to be desired. From a fully "zoomed in" attack from bow to stern, 2/3 bombs will hit. the 3rd bomb is teleported outside the aiming circle and is dropped in the water, regardless of the circle being inside the ship. rocket attack planes are fast, low HP and are very inaccurate. This is realistic as they are dumb fire rockets. and I have only one complaint at that is the arming timer, why must I wait to fire my rockets? I wish Wargaming would buff carriers and/or nerf AA.
  9. So - when they deleted the section for player tech tree suggestions without warning, those familiar with my previous thread will notice that my last one of these got nuked with it. Insult to injury that I had lost a considerable amount of work because my primaries and backups were lost before that and figured 'well at least I have the forum thread'. So between that and any proposals lost in that as well - I basically am going to be rebuilding it all ground up from memory. Odds are this specific thread will not be as insane as the other with like 8 reserved posts broken out for each nation/grouping. It's going to have the proposed line/lines, aircraft, and maybe some bits on ordnance and the like, but after the last time - I'm likely going to save anything more detailed to specific threads like say one on the 'USN Conversion Branch' and then post the links with the info here as a 'for further reading' as opposed to this being something of a brief (for me anyway) overview. But my stance has not changed - where I can, I'm going to create full tech trees with ships actually built, planned, or proposed resorting to fiction only when I need to fill a gap and generally only one or at most 2 ships, and I'm going to stay as close to history as I can. There will however be one difference - in the previous iteration I tried to work around what Wargaming had in game already and not have too many problems of duplicates that need a year added (like WV) or tier shifting, or moving/deleting ships. But after Ark Royal and the recent release of German CV's of which exactly 1 historical ship made it to the line, 1 seems like it may be another version of GZ, the obvious needed fictional tier 10 and the seeming use of 'Flightdeck Cruisers' - the literal translation of what the seeming bases for the Rhein are in which they are actually armed cruisers with a flight deck for limited aerial operation's (cruiser first, aerial platform second in design, why the German's differentiated them from Graf Zeppelin because that was a pure CV and these were hybrids), I'm throwing that rule out the window this time. Because Ark Royal deserves a spot in the tech tree, and if Wargaming wants to have a line of pure German Fantasy and hybrids they can go ahead I want one using the actual ships they designed and in cases started working on converting to CV's. USN Name/Tier Purpose built Conversion Escort 4 Langley 5 Commencement Bay Sangamon 6 Ranger Independence Bouge 7 Yorktown Alaska Class Conv. 8 Essex Lexington Casablanca 9 Midway Iowa Class Conversion 10 Forrestal (Axial) Montana Class Conv. Saipan Type CVL Notes: Bouge - The ship may need a speed buff, it may not. The end design is to primarily be the CV equivalent of a DD that while it will still have weapons to use on other ships (rockets/bombs) it's main goal would be ASW with a secondary of Anti-DD (as they are very much like subs in-game), with the idea being that their impact will be low enough to not require 1-1 MM. Independence - Originally moved it to tier 5, I'm not thrilled at the idea of CVL vs Fleet CV's (a sticking point I've had with Ryujo vs Ranger) - however I've decided to forgo my original T6 suggestion which was the Pre-Saipan conversion of Baltimore class CA that honestly would have looked like a smaller version of Alaska Conversion ('Hawaii class' working name) and Iowa Class (Kentucky/Illinois working name) - which aesthetically looked similar to the Essex class in ways. Forrestal - Because I know some people will freak out, and Wargaming may try and quote the 'no angled decks/super carriers' line from years ago I am not suggesting the as built Forrestal Class CV's that are the first modern Supercarriers by definition (the term 'supercarrier previously was used to describe other CV's such as I think it was Ark Royal when it was built if not one of the other UK ones) but instead the design tey were originally meant to be built too - which did not include an angled deck, and in fact does not quite meet the definitions of a Super carrier, and is basically a bigger and badder Midway. IJN Name/Tier Purpose Built Conversion CVE/L 4 Hosho 5 Ryujo Zuiho Kaiyo 6 Soryu Shinyo Taiyo 7 Hiryu Junyo Ryuho 8 Shokaku Akagi 9 Taiho Modified Tosa Class Chitose 10 Hakuryu Shinano Ibuki Conv Notes: Not included - Possible mini-split from Soryu to Unryu (7) and Ikoma (8) back in to Taiho. Otherwise premiums. Ibuki/Chitose - Basically Ibuki wins out at top due to armour, but may need modification or to swap with Chitose due to lack of DP guns. 'Modified Tosa' - simple version - think super Kaga. Newer 203 mm guns, better AA, etc. UK Name/Tier 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Germany Name/Tier Main Line Other ships/line 4 Rhein 5 Weser 6 Elbe 7 ??? 8 Europa Conv Wargaming GZ Alt 9 GZ Alteration 10 Richthofen or ship x Notes: Weser - Before anyone reads me the riot act on this I've reevaluated the ships even since the other day. Yeah - it goes 32 knots vs Elbe/Jade's 22 because we've never fudged speed numbers for balance. Elbe can carry more planes in the larger hanger, has more DP guns and AA, higher displacement so more HP, etc. Even De Grasse conversion beats it on weapons and planes, though maybe losses in HP. ??? - Yeah, at the moment, I have no idea what to do at tier 7 for the moment. I don't want to use the hybrid designs, I don't want to move Elbe/Jade to tier 7 to add De Grasse or put De Grasse over Elbe/Jade (though that may inevitably happen), not sure I want to go to a second fake (possibly 3rd if Wargaming insists on tier 4 ). GZ Alt - It'd likely take the Strasser name intended for Hull B. Based on the plan to remove GZ's 15 cm guns during construction, and instead add additional 10.5 cm guns in sponsons just below the flight deck. However it was passed on because of how far along GZ was and cost and delays having to undo and redo work were too high. Aircraft: Bf 109 (B, E, G), Fw 190, Ta 152, Me 410, Ju 88, Ju-87 (C,E) Link to 2019 discussion of Commonwealth, French, and Pan-American lines (Italian proposal as well by Pheonix_jz bottom of page 2) - basics to be copied over here later. https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/199822-some-other-cvs-france-commonwealth-pan-america-more-discussion-than-suggestion/ Yes this is largely incomplete at the moment I'm posting it, will update it later with UK ships, planes for other nations and possibly broken out to tier/type of plane - at the moment want to just have it up/saved as well as to just generally take a break, maybe sleep. To say nothing of the other lines to potentially add.
  10. captain_fearless

    Where are the other carriers?

    When are we gonna get the rest of the carriers after half of the Japanese and American cv tech tree were snapped away? I wanna see an alternate cv line, maybe one that ditches rocket planes and instead has improved bombs or have better plane regeneration. I don’t wanna see them come back as premium ships does any body heard any news on this?
  11. G'day all, Just curious as I have not heard or read about this before...despite archive searching and talking to mates. I assume it is uncommon to shoot down Allied planes though I am curious if it had happened to anyone else or it's more common than expected ? I apologies in advance if this has been covered before. Happy Hunting! o7 cheers Mort
  12. Wargaming, give us the night-capable, all-weather torpedo bomber we deserve!
  13. Just a quick little question do different countries aircraft have different turn times(how quickly they turn)
  14. ELOFan

    I am excited!

    I miss my Independence, Bogue and Zuiho but thank you for giving me the Ranger. :) I know I have to rebuy Hosho to get Ryujo and I played smart move by saving my commanders by placing in reserve. I am excited to relearn to play CV's I first going to go play against bots it will give me time to master by practicing how get better control of aircraft. But still I miss my other carriers so I will leave this song here. :(
  15. So during my quest for USS Midway, I couldn't help but notice something. Granted it's not news, but has really only gotten me thinking about it recently. Throughout both CV lines, each Carrier gets it's aircraft at it's same tier. This holds true for both lines until Tier IX. USN Aircraft hit a wall and stop progressing for a full tier at Essex. Tier VIII Fighters and TB, with only DB retaining tier. Taiho retains all Tier IX Aircraft when maxed out. Then, at my dream ship Midway, the fighters progress one tier up to IX, the TB stay at VIII, and only the DB retain their tier. Hakuryu's aircraft all retain their tier. Why? What is the thought process behind under-tiering USN Aircraft at top tier? Also, how much does it actually affect the performance of said aircraft? Something in the back of my mind says it's to counteract the larger flight sizes, but I'm not sure. I can live with Essex having only Tier VIII TB. But why does Midway have to as well? The only USN CV to have Tier IX TB is Saipan. Why does Midway only allowed Tier VIII TBM's when it could, and in my opinion should have access to Tier IX Douglas Skyraiders. If performance is not that much affected by tier, then I could almost see having Tier IX vs Tier X fighters because of the Dogfighting Expert captain skill. But the TB? Really looks handicapped to me. Maybe a bit too much. I don't want it to sound like I'm complaining, but it doesn't make much sense to me.
  16. anonym_auUiRfWCi1jI

    Main & Other Gun Operations

    This animation has always made me feel warm and fuzzy inside, watching the rudimentary function of a main gun. Though a simple concept to grasp, the actual workings are much more involved, from the communication between top and magazine below, shell selection, power selection, quantities, down to the actual pivot of the turret, elevation of the gun, and fine tuning for adjusted fire. Ordnance being my specialty, the shear quantity of powder stored on a war vessel is mind-boggling, not to mention the tonnage of various shells, from main gun, secondary weapons, small arms, and other ordnance. I'm interested to see other submissions, actual pics, and related material to give this community a greater appreciation for what World of Warships is about. Anti-Aircraft - Rather than create an additional thread, I thought I'd just stick these two images in to show loading of AA clips and where they were distributed from. http://www.navweaps...._Alaska_pic.jpg Crewmen feeding four-round HE-T/SD ammunition clips on USS Alaska CB-1 in 1945 U.S. Historical Center Photograph K-3740 http://www.navweaps....passing_pic.jpg Crewmen passing 40 mm HE-I-T/SD rounds on USS Alaska CB-1 in 1945 The clip that holds the rounds together can just be seen at the base of the cartridges The rounds with green tips directly behind the crewman are HE-T/SD ammunition U.S. Historical Center Photograph 80-G-K-3733 Reference Link http://www.navweaps....4cm-56_mk12.htm Comments? Other submissions?