Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags '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
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Player Gatherings and Events
    • 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
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Master Archive
    • The Pigeon's Nest
    • Closed Beta Test Archive
    • Alpha Test Archive
    • For Development and Publisher Only
    • QA AUTO
    • Contests and Community Events
    • Super Test
    • Newcomer's Forum
    • Contest Entries
    • Questions and Answers
    • Contest Entries
    • New Captains
    • Guías y Estrategias
    • Task Force 58
    • Livestream Ideas and Feedback
    • Árboles Tecnológicos
    • Fan Art and Community Creations
    • Community Created Events and Contests
    • Community Staging Ground
    • Forum Reorg 2.0 Archive
    • Noticias y Anuncios

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Discord


Twitter


Website URL


Instagram


YouTube


Twitch


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 69 results

  1. Well tonight there were four red dds, three of them div'd. A Kidd, Akizuki and Oland. Which left the fourth one, a Z46 free to roam. I notified the team the DDs would try to push through the team to me then keep going. They were not, later verified, the original proposers of the concept. But indeed, they stuck to the plan. Full tilt from the start, they pushed hard to break through. I was in my Graf Z. Man our team was so good, so very good. Once they saw what I had suggested was happening, they bound together as a frickin' team. As many had projected too... as the threesome was held at bay they had no dd force on our east side of the map - we had two. Our team, in the words of one player, said, "Wow the whole east side just melted". At the end of the match, we lost four ships - they lost eleven. I finished sixth, no kills, a tad under 60K dmg dealt. I really enjoy matches that truly come together. Thanks everyone!!!
  2. Okay, quick reading through the stuff for the most recent update. Looking at collections, missions and I realize I'm missing something. I see no second camo color options for carriers. I see no second flag for carriers. I think there are other things for dds/cruisers/bbs which are not listed for carriers. Were these options supplied in other missions already over? Halp! tia fyc
  3. 07Beast109

    French Cvs

    Has anyone heard any talk about French Carriers, coming in game anytime. Since the French did actually build some CVs
  4. Felipe_1982

    FDR embargo has fallen?

    Hello, FDR has her embargo fall? Richtofen too? I know Richtofen will hit our shores on 08/05/2020... But already? I see ST doing matchs today...
  5. Well you give it the best you can given the circumstances: We were down a few hundred points, three ships to one carrier. I ask two other ships to stay afloat. Meanwhile I'm whittling down the enemy carrier. We are getting so close to winning when I see in chat: "Duhmm" and see one of our team got sunk. This, after we fought and clawed our way back. It was about to be an epic comeback. Epic I tell you. I was less than 20 seconds, maybe 15 from sinking the carrier. Team mate was determine to sink the carrier. Folks - there's almost no other ship in the game that's as dangerous to your ship's help than a carrier alone at the end of a match, fighting to save it's win. I can't comp him now cause the time ran out for comps. But you played well GG and well done victory for your team.
  6. Eisennagel

    Type 076 Hybrid Carrier

    Lets start with some brave or foolish soul in China decided to leak the Chinese Navy RFP to its subcontractors into Chinese social media, and which people promptly moved to Western social media. No doubt he will be promptly be re-educated when time comes. The RFP is a heavily modified LHD, probably Type 075 based, but has an EMALs for UAV, features IEP and gas turbines. Western media has caught on it quickly. I would link to H. I. Sutton's Forbes article as he tends to make better sense and analysis. https://www.forbes.com/sites/hisutton/2020/07/23/stealth-uavs-could-arm-chinas-type-076-assault-carrier/#61597b516f3d I have some forming thoughts about it but don't have enough information and cross opinions to get a more solid picture and write about it.
  7. Today I experienced two issues with the carrier UI. Irked me to say the least. Team mate had messaged me in chat, telling me to get back, but A) It didn't register with me and B) I hear that command key so often I think I've switched off any response to it. I had marked out a triangular route using the map. Towards the border, a 90 degree south turn for a bit then another oh, 120 maybe, so I would be heading back toward my starting area. Instead it ran full long, deep into the border, putting me broadside to two reds (Yamato and another cruiser). My fault of course for not paying infinite attention to the ship's position as well as following chat, but I was rather busy. At this point in the game, maybe a third into it, I'd made 45K damage, was whole, not any damage to me. I could have easily finished off the Yam as well as the cruiser. But oh no - stuck into the border like a dart in a dartboard, only too late did I discover, too late to do anything about it other than get sunk. So yes, "totally" my fault but dang what I wouldn't do for a warning on the border like I get warnings for islands. If there is one, I got nothing. You guys ever have this happen to you? BTW, I watched the replay - it does not show the route being mapped. Kind of a bummer for replay use. The second issue was those flight assigned fighter escort aircraft. The stupid key (T calls them in) showed I had one flight available for my torpedo bombers. No amount of pressing the key would call them in... I even tried the ESC key then return to the game fix (which sometimes straightens out UI issues) but no luck. So the counter was wrong or something with the UI. Just mentioning both to see if you have any experience with either. tia.
  8. Kengen

    Some love to Zeppelin

    there is a lot of comments about the graff zeppelin, how about some love for this carrier? more damage with the bombs please :C that carrier cost a fortune and in my opinion, is not worth the money..
  9. Olá galera, O Shōkaku era o meu sonho de consumo, lutei muito para juntar os 11.500.000 créditos pra comprá-lo, e agora descobri que basta participar de umas 5 batalhas aleatórias seguidas com ele e eu fico falido, sem créditos nem pra os serviços e munição, e tenho que me capitalizar jogando com o Ryūjō, que pode ser de nível VI, mas ganha mais créditos do que gasta. Então, isso acontece com algum de vocês? No que eu estou errando?
  10. I've been playing the dogs out of Kaga for the past few weeks. Trying to get better. I have a good number of matches in her (148), 1502AD and avg DR of 2.0. Average, maybe slightly below. Damaged caused to reds at 8.1M. So so. But I can tell this morning, just starting today, the AAA(AA) is freaking insane. My average damage to ships is 54,777. In a Tier X (ix and x with a bismarck, nc and myself as the lone t8's) I earned a whopping 28K damage to ships. The Halland when built is exceedingly OP in the AA business. Exceedingly. Rockets and dive bombers? Forget them, vaporized. Torp bombers can approach for one drop, that's it. In contrast to normal Kaga business, I found I was losing planes during the TB run. Everywhere I went to attack my planes were obliterated. So... May I suggest you dive into your spreadsheet data to see just how OP the AA is on ships like Halland? They are almost untouchable by air. One would think attack planes, which can travel faster, would at least be able to reach the ship. Nope. Alternatively, I'm suggesting (again) you revise carrier tiers to play from the top down, so that T8 will see 8/7, T6 sees 6/5 and T4 sees 4/3. Cause T10 carriers are outrageously expensive to play (I have all of them) but hey, they are always top tier, right? Maybe just some buffs to Kaga's planes, otherwise? It's going to be very interesting to see how the German carriers play this game with AAA(AA) against ships like the Halland. tia
  11. This is NOT a pick on CV rant. I am having fun playing the class. I hope this post will help other CV players understand this class. OK I am new to CVs and I am going to talk about my experiences as I progress. Remember this is my experiences and may not be the same as others. I have found the Japanese and American Tier 4 carriers to play alike. I do not have enough battles in the British to give a opinion at this time. I found the damage done so far is light compared to other ship classes I have played. I played co-op battles to get a feel of targeting before I played some randoms. I was doing 15 k of damage and 30 k plus as a high. This is certainly due to my lack of game experience with this class atm. I will say that I had out performed other carriers in the same game from both sides most of the time. This may be due to the players of tier 4 Cvs being new to the class. Hard to tell at this time. I had gotten the tier 6 Ranger. Here I am playing still with the basic aircraft and have only 3 battles in the CV. I have found that some of the BBs AA are so strong they are shooting down every plane without me being able to launch and attack. The BBs were isolated from other ships, tier 8 and were the only ship that was AAing my planes. All three battles were in Co-Op. I will add further info as I play more battles. At this point I intend going to go up the American CV line. Please express your experiences as well. If any one would offer any suggestions on how to play CVs, please any thing helps. I am getting help from my clans CV players as well :)
  12. 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?
  13. I ask CV players, do you think the best CV players in game get the most salt. The bad one just play tier 4 CV. Do you roll your eyes when players say CV are easy and have everlasting fighters. Do you love the salt playing a CV. Because it always are fault win or lose. CV mains do you feel like your in your own click, the other players just don't understand us. Do you love troll ships? Well subs be the new troll. If so well you play it.
  14. Ever since the removal of Prime-Number Aircraft Carriers from both the US and IJN, I've been kind of sad that alot of that progress was lost, with some love going for them as well. I was always a fan of the Essex Aircraft Carrier, and to lose it after the Rework really made me sad. SO I thought, hey, what about a Re-Introduction? Similarly of how current Tech Trees branch off for sub-types, I was thinking the same thing for the Carriers. Currently, besides a single exception, US focuses on HE Dive Bombers and Multi-Torpedo Drops and a choice of Tiny Tims or what is essentially Throw-Enough-crap-At-The-Wall. The IJN focuses on Duo-Torpedo Drops with solid AP Dive Bombers and a single, narrow spread of solid Rockets. For the new Tech Tree branches, my idea is simple. The USN bombers stick with their usual Triple-Drop for Torps and Dive bombers, three planes with one Torp/Bomb each, the rockets stay as the crap-At-The-Wall version (No Tiny Tim option) and invest heavily in their AP Dive Bombers, like they do for the HE in the current tree. The IJN would do the opposite, Few rockets that hit hard, Torpedo Bombers in drops of three or more, and HE Dive Bombers. The Dive Bombers would probably be Duo-Planes per attacking flight with Two Bombs per plane, to keep their Duo-Theme like they have from the current Tech tree with their Torpedo bombers. The Biggest thing would have to be the Tiers of these ships, and since this is an re-introduction, old ships would stay the same Tier (Aside from a couple differences because of WGs rework changes) Starting at Tier 5: USN Bogue / IJN Zuiho Tier 7: USN Independence / IJN Hiryu Tier 9: USN Essex / IJN Taiho (Tier 10 is maybe for me since this was the old Prime Numbers Aircraft Carriers being introduced, but if I WERE to go ahead with Tier 10s, I'd probably swap T9 Essex for USN Yorktown and put Essex at T10. Same for Taiho, IJN Taiho going Tier 10 and the T9 being replaced with Kaga's sister ship, Akagi. Personally, I'd love to see IJN Akagi come out, which I am hopeful for, seeing as many sister ship pairings are already in the game, Such as Eugen and Hipper, Bismark and Tirpitz, the North Carolina-Class Battleships, Jean Bart and Richelieu, and even Warspite and Queen Elizabeth.)
  15. Herr_Reitz

    Carriers ASW Tips

    Hullo all, New to the whole sub thing. Somewhat familiar with carriers. I am finding, unless I catch a sub on the surface, my carriers have no offensive/defensive abilities for use against submarines. I must be missing something here, right? What tips do you have to sink 'em using your carrier, other than the possibility of ramming. TIA!
  16. Back when the carrier rework happened, Wargaming stated that the odd carriers would be taken out of the tech trees, but could return. The motivation behind this post is to start a conversation about what ways we could add these carriers back in a supporting role. Warning: This is a hybrid request/conversation/rant/essay by me about bringing carriers Back and improved that not everybody will hate on but still being somewhat powerful. So my idea would be bringing back the odd carriers and arming them with support aircraft and support consumables. Basically instead of Attack, Torpedo, and bomber aircraft, we get Smoke “bomber”, Depth charge bombers, and consumable dropping “bombers”. Now smoke bomber aircraft are self explanatory, but they drop smoke canisters that act like destroyer smokes, and smoke a area for a period of time. Depth charge Bombers would drop depth charges to help destroy submarines, like destroyers and light cruisers can do in the submarine test servers. Now what do consumable bombers do ? You might ask. They drop consumable parcels instead of bombs. This is probably the main aircraft of these Support carriers. The consumable has to be dropped on a allied ship, like a bomb or rocket, and give that ally a randomly selected consumable their ship has equipped. The reason this is powerful and can turn the tide of a battle is it can sustain a battleship or heavy cruiser with repair party consumables to the point of allowing a small task force with a support carrier to win a game against a 4 man squad of Mushashis if they work together well enough. Now what about patrol fighters ? Well we give these support carriers a buffed fighter consumable that escorts an allied ship that it is dropped on, similarly to the ship borne fighter consumable. Now what about national differences ? Well we tackle this like fleet carriers. American aircraft are just versatile, Japanese support aircraft carriers drop recon aircraft instead of patrol fighters for their consumable. And Britain, if they ever would get this, would get their merchant aircraft carriers, in the form of consumable bombers that drop 1 of each type of consumable equipped on an allied ship. Germany doesn't get anything until they get a proper fleet carrier tree. And balance between teams? I propose support carriers be added as separate from fleet carriers as their own class. They are considered less powerful than a fleet carrier and are matched with a fleet carrier on their own team so there is a 1:1 ratio of carrier borne power on the teams. So either green team gets 1 fleet carrier and 1 support carrier vs 1 fleet carrier and 1 support carrier or 2 support carriers vs 2 support carriers. Research: I propose that these aircraft carriers are placed horizontally next to the fleet carriers at rank 6/VI and so they are behind a basic Carrier skill wall to prevent widespread groups of noobs dropping smoke on their allies at spawn. Reason for these to exist ?: I believe these carriers could not only give meaning to the odd carriers that were dropped but these support carriers could also help the lives of other ship classes, destroyers could actually get damage instead of having to drop smoke for allies or deal with the soon to drop submarines, designated team players like me (I like being useful by defending battleships from carriers with my Dallas) could get a new and gimmicky class of support ship, carrier players that don’t want to be hated for playing a cool class could get a new and less hated version of it, and players who want to help turn the tide of a battle without direct combat could finally support their allies. For those who think “WHERE IN THE WORLD IS THE BALANCE” I say, you still depend on your allies to win, and you don’t have direct power over the battle, but if your team communicates you could have a sweeping amount of influence over the game. Premiums: (Yes, I had to add this to it to make it remotely possible) Shinano, the Yamato hull aircraft carrier. The proposition that has repeatedly been put up in suggestions as a T10 Premium but fails because of the fact it was a transport carrier instead of a fleet carrier. We could solve this by having her as a specialty support carrier that has the depth charge bombers and smoke bombers, but instead of consumable bombers, she can land a squadron of her planes on other allied carriers to refill their hanger of combat aircraft. (The aircraft would be split between the respective aircraft carrier’s aircraft classes.) The reason for this is because she carried aircraft in a transport hanger, not a combat hanger. This could be good reason for shinano being able to land her aircraft on other carriers. Or she could have the normal IJN carrier aircraft and have support capabilities to make her more versatile I end my essay here, please talk out this idea in the (comments? I think) and keep it civilized. And if anyone would kindly do some more research on the real world classes of support carriers and suggest them please do, but please credit me for the basic format/system I have put forward and the national specialties. (The actual idea of an alternate line was stated when they removed the odd tiers, and they mentioned firefighting and smoke planes.)(I spent 3 Hours working on this.) If you would like to learn about where I got the idea, Wikipedia merchant aircraft carriers (where I got the idea for the consumable aircraft and British specialty), the PB4Y/ B24 ( American long range bomber and maritime patrol aircraft, the PB4Y actually used depth charges and gave me the idea for the depth charge bombers.) and google the M-10 Smoke tank (a smoke tank used by the USAAF to drop a smokescreen in combat.) Just a excerpt from wikipedia on MAC's or merchant aircraft carriers. A merchant aircraft carrier (also known as a MAC) was a limited-purpose aircraft carrier operated under British and Dutch civilian registry during World War II. MACs were adapted by adding a flight deck to a bulk grain ship or oil tanker enabling it to operate anti-submarine aircraft in support of Allied convoys during the Battle of the Atlantic. Despite their quasi-military function, MACs retained their mercantile status, continued to carry cargo and operated under civilian command. MACs began entering service in May 1943 and although originally intended as an interim measure pending the introduction of escort carriers, they remained operational until the end of the war in Europe.
  17. Gods_Eyes

    The only issue with CVs:

    This is World of Warships. Not World of Airplanes. Am I playing as a pilot, or a boat captain? Specifically all spotting ability needs to be removed from airplanes, including attack planes and torpedo bombers. Everything. Zero spotting ability. Allow me to explain: I just played a tier 6 match with two carriers working together. The first located and perma spotted the destroyers sitting BEHIND friendly AA cruisers(no issue here right). The second came in with rockets and killed the destroyers. If two carriers are banned from divisions, they should currently be banned from having 2 in a match together. Their ability to spot and work together with focus fire is unparalleled. However, this highlights the most important balance issue with CV. They can spot with planes. The ship itself is a tall ship, and should have super buffed spotting ability. Give the CV itself the ability to see concealed destroyers 8km away, but the planes need to have ZERO ability to spot at all. This would balance the game play to put it on par with a battleship. To draw a parallel: A Montana can shoot anywhere on the map. I devastating strike derpy players in the first 2 minutes of matches, easy. Despite having similar ability to strike anywhere on the map, The Montana Cannot Spot 25km Away. So let's take a step back. Saying the planes shouldn't be able to spot anything would be MUCH more balanced than the current iteration of carriers, but it's not perfect. So what would be? Here's some ideas: 1) Create "no spotting" zones within (about) 2km of all islands, where destroyers cannot be spotted by carriers whatsoever. 2) Penalize missed drops. If the Hakurya wants to drop some of his torpedos on an island to save planes, those planes should instantly explode when neither of their torpedos hit an enemy target. I hate that I have to game the system and drop bombers to stay relevant as a CV driver. It works around AA in a cheating way. ~ I love playing carrier. Recently regrinding the IJN destroyer line for research bureau, and it has become extremely apparent how big of a balance issue carriers have right now. Destroyers (ESPECIALLY AT THE LOWER TIERS) are irrelevant against Good carrier players. Yes, I can still use my destroyer in a relevant way occasionally, but that is ONLY against carrier players that have no idea how to play. As it stands, the carrier is a radar boat with 40km radar. 12km radar itself should be removed from the game, so tell me, how balanced do you think 40km radar is??
  18. The following is a review of Indomitable, the tier VIII British Aircraft Carrier. This ship was provided to me for free by Wargaming for review purposes. To the best of my knowledge, the statistics discussed in this review are current as of patch 0.9.0. Please be aware that her performance may change in the future. Well, this won't be popular. Seriously, what a way to tank my readership numbers -- reviewing an aircraft carrier of all things. I can already hear the furious keyboard mashing of the rework-haters preparing to repeat oft-rehearsed mantras and soundbites. Well, whether social media likes it or not, Indomitable is a premium that Wargaming is charging money for and it should be reviewed. Players should have access to as much accurate information about her as possible. So here I am. Don't hate the facts. Hate the feels. Welcome to 2020, everyone! Quick Summary: A carpet-bombing nightmare. Her planes are super fast and super tough but she gets so few of them. The game play is quick, monotonous and heavily RNG based. PROS Armoured flight deck. Her aircraft are very fast. Enormous aircraft health pools. Her bombers are very easy to use. Bombers are good at starting fires. Accelerated reset timers after attack runs, allowing for faster repeat-strikes. Very fast patrol fighters, excellent at intercepting enemy air groups. CONS Enormous, high-water citadel. No torpedo planes whatsoever. Tiny hangar capacity and slow regeneration of aircraft. Strike groups are very small and easily wiped out when caught by flak or fighters. Low agility on aircraft. They're only fast in a straight line. Her bombers have very poor energy retention. Low penetration on bombs and rockets limits their ability to stack direct damage. Success is heavily RNG based, banking on fires to burn down targets or a good drop pattern to pulverize destroyers. You can setup everything correctly and still fail. Overview Skill Floor: Simple / CASUAL / Challenging/ Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low/ MODERATE/ High/ Extreme Indomitable isn't terribly complex -- she's arguably one of the easiest aircraft carriers in the game to learn. If she could automatically avoid flak, fighters and negate the effects of AA, I'd give her a "simple" rating but she's not quite there. There's not much else to Indomitable beyond proper target selection. Few of the high-skill CV tricks work here. Indomitable has a shorter immunity window than other carriers so sling-shotting provides less returns that it would for other carriers. Fast recall doesn't work either. This limits "high skill play" to pre-dropping planes and knowing which ships you can damage directly with her low-penetration attacks. Options Ship Consumables Aircraft carrier consumables are fixed and activate automatically. Indomitable's Damage Control Party is activated anytime she takes critical damage. This includes taking floods, being set on fire, taking critical damage to her steering gears or engines. This is active for 60 seconds with a 90 second reset timer. It has unlimited charges. Her CAP Fighters (combat air patrol fighters) are activated anytime Indomitable is spotted. Once launched, these will patrol for TEN MINUTES (600s) if they're not destroyed or they aren't required to intercept. The four fighters (five with the Direction Center for Fighters commander skill) orbit Indomitable at a range of 1km and engage enemy aircraft that slip within 3km of their current position. Each aircraft is capable of shooting down a single plane. This consumable has four charges and a 40s reset timer. Aircraft Consumables Indomitable's two squadrons each have consumables with her fighters being slightly improved to compensate for the lack of torpedo bombers. The Engine Cooling consumable restores the carrier's boost meter to full over the course of five seconds. In addition, while it's active, boosting will not drain the meter. Each squadron has two charges and they reset over 80 seconds. Indomitable's Patrol Fighters come with an extra charge compared to most of the other tier VIII carriers. She starts with four charges instead of three. This gives Indomitable a total of eight charges compared to the nine the other carriers enjoy. These fighters fight on station for 60 seconds with a five second reset timer after the planes depart. Upgrades Take Air Groups Modification 1 in your first slot to accelerate aircraft return & recovery time. Next, take Aircraft Engines Modification 1 to give you more boost time. You have a choice in slot three. Attack Aircraft Modification 1 will give you an additional 2 seconds of time to fire your rockets in an attack run. If you patently hate your rockets (or don't see an additional 2 seconds as useful), then AA Guns Modification 1 should be your fallback. You have the choice between increasing the hit points of your attack aircraft or bombers here. Pick whichever one you're more reliant upon. I personally prefer Bombers Modification 2 over Attack Aircraft Modification 2. Let's not kid ourselves: Flight Control Modification 1 is hella important for a carrier with such limited hangar capacity as Indomitable. Concealment System Modification 1 will help keep your carrier alive (somewhat), but Indomitable's surface detection isn't so appalling that she needs much help. Commander Skills I'd like to be able to tell you that you should take a unique, Indomitable-only commander build but it's really not necessary. Focus on aircraft survivability skills primarily, increasing boost time, regeneration time, health and protection versus AA power. After that, do whatever. Demolition Expert is probably the only must-have that you might otherwise skip on some carriers. Camouflage Indomitable comes with Type 10 Camouflage providing the standard bonuses for a tier VIII premium: 3% reduction to surface detection. 4% increase to enemy dispersion. 10% reduction to post-battle service costs. 50% increase to experience earned. Provided you've completed the necessary collections, you have two palette options for Indomitable. This is the alternate camouflage colours. Both are nice. The Planes Indomitable's most telling trait isn't what she can do, but rather what she can't. She does not have access to any torpedo bombers and is thus entirely reliant upon her attack aircraft and bombers to carry the day. The former are pretty forgettable, leaving most of the heavy lifting to Indomitable's bombers. For a ship with already pared down game play options, having success largely stacked onto the shoulders of a single aircraft type makes for hella-dull game play. Like more than a few recent ships, Indomitable's fortunes are tied directly to her matchmaking. I cannot stress this enough: She lacks penetration. The more well armoured her opponents, the more reliant she is upon RNG to stack hits on the few squishy areas that remain or to start fires. This has the potential to severely limits her damage output. There's a world of difference between nearly every hit causing damage and only a choice few. At her core, Indomitable is little different than an HE-spamming heavy cruiser or British battleship. Her preferred means of damage comes from landing penetrating hits, but in a pinch, fires will do. She manages this by fast-cycling her aircraft. Indomitable greatly reduces travel times compared to her contemporaries, taxing Damage Control Parties and repeat-striking exposed ships until they are burned or bombed to death. Her preferred targets are the squishy and the battleships. The former she can hurt directly, the latter she can burn. However, she is deathly allergic to strong, combined AA auras. Thus, most cruisers are off the menu, making Indomitable's already limited gameplay incredibly myopic. Burning battleships leads to three things: big numbers, Witherer medals and lots of raging in chat. This kind of triple-stacked positive reinforcement will all but guarantee that most Indomitable players will ignore objectives, dismiss targets of importance and focus instead upon farming battleship tears. What else did you expect from a demented Sky-Conqueror? Hangar Capacity Attack Aircraft Capacity: 12 Aircraft Attack Aircraft Regeneration: 115s per Bomber Capacity: 8 Aircraft Bomber Regeneration: 117s per Indomitable's hangar is ... well, crappy to say the least. The only positive here is that she holds more aircraft than she otherwise should. With her squadrons a mere four bombers and six attack aircraft in size, I would expect her to house six bombers and nine attack aircraft in her hangar if she conformed to CV norms. However, Wargaming "balanced" her by letting her carry double the size of her squadrons instead. Indomitable's aircraft regeneration is painfully slow to boot. This isn't a terribly forgiving aircraft when it comes to mistakes. At best, she can regenerate a maximum of 11 of each aircraft type over the course of a twenty-minute match and that's only the theoretical maximum. In practice count assume you're getting one aircraft of each type back every two minutes provided you're using both types regularly. There's no way in Hell any of these carriers will reach their theoretical maximum capacity. Regeneration of aircraft only occurs when there's empty room in the hangar. The moment the hangar is full, typically from returning aircraft, regeneration stops and any remaining progress is lost. Bombers Aircraft Type: de Havilland Sea Hornet Ordnance: Six 250lb general purpose bomb Group Size: Four aircraft per squadron with two aircraft per attack flight Hit Points: 2,590hp per Aircraft Min/Cruising/Boosted Speed: 157kts/182kts/217kts Easy to Use, Easy to Praise Indomitable's bombers are amazing. They are fast. They are tough. Her bomb aiming reticule isn't punitive with a short and forgiving aim-time. She dumps a ton of ordnance allowing her to land big alpha strikes or ensure a hit on even a small target. She's capable of starting multiple fires per run. It doesn't take five years for her bombs to drop either. British carpet-bombers are little more than over-glorified rocket aircraft in terms of their ease of use. Indomitable may not have torpedoes, but her bombers pretty much make up for this lack -- they truly are excellent. Let's start with the basics. This is what she uses to aim: Photoshop composite showing the size and shape of Indomitable's fully aimed bomb reticule. Aircraft are moving from the bottom of the screen to the top. Reference-Mahan™ for scale. Indomitable drops twelve bombs over this small area and it takes no time at all for this marker to settle to the narrowest aim. Bomb drop times are about 3.5 seconds, so this necessitates quite a bit of lead. However, if you can predict ship movements properly, it's possible to score multiple hits even on a Just-Dodging™ lolibote or cruiser. They've a very gentle learning curve which makes it easy to score some big numbers provided you pick the right targets. All of Indomitable's bombers have a reduced recovery period. This allows her to launch repeat strikes faster than most of her contemporaries, however it makes her remaining planes more vulnerable to AA fire after the drop. It should be noted that Indomitable, like Implacable, cannot fast-recall her bombers immediately after an attack. The ease of use continues with the aircraft's survivability. These things are fast and they're tough. With full upgrades, it's possible to get their hit points just shy of 3,000hp (and exceed it with the new legendary commander). These aircraft can literally outrun some of the fighters they come up against, making them capable of leading them on merry chases forever and a day. Similarly, their high speed and durability trivializes modest AA defenses and get through with few (if any) casualties. Indomitable's bombers are tough as nails, but it pays to invest in every health upgrade you can afford to give them. These aircraft will be your mainstay damage dealers, so do everything you can to keep them intact. Complications I only have two general areas of complaint with Indomitable's bombers -- penetration and their agility. I'll start with the latter mostly because it was a Hell of a lot of work to isolate. Agility wise, Idomitable's bombers are great in a straight line. However, they're as awkward and uncoordinated as Wargaming's PR and marketing departments. Indomitable's bombers require a RIDICULOUS amount of room to come about. While boosted, their turning circle radius is a whopping 1,700m! Even at normal speed, it isn't much better requiring 1,200m. The aircraft are slow to respond to commands and feel sluggish compared to the American or Implacable's bombers. These are not winning any agility prizes. No, I don't know why so many aircraft had similar agility. Lexington and Enterprise make sense (they're the same aircraft, after all) but the others? No clue. Happy coincidence, I guess. If you elect to make follow up attack runs with Indomitable's bombers, don't try and turn about immediately. Power through the ship's AA bubble before you begin coming about. It's ridiculously easy to overshoot targets with Indomitable's bombers. Her agility woes continue, though. While it looks like she shares parity with Graf Zeppelin's Ta-152s, this isn't the case. The German bombers are faster, having both a higher boosted speed (+40kts vs the +35kts of Indomitable's bombers) and better energy preservation besides. Graf Zeppelin (and most, if not all other carriers) can ride and flutter their throttle to extend the use of their plane's boost consumable. When Indomitable let's go of the W-key, her planes bleed all of the extra speed like they hit a brick wall. What energy preservation? Deceleration from boosted speed is a linear-loss. The longer aircraft can preserve speed, the better. The consumable has 20 seconds of active time and a 40 second reset timer. These both can be increased by 10% with an upgrade. Players may flutter the boost-power, stretching out its duration. Indomitable can't do this at all, losing everything almost instantly. Even her Attack Aircraft preserve speed better. Lert recklessly took his finger off the boost button while playtesting Indomitable's bombers. I wish I could take credit for this one, but this is all Chobittsu. As for Indomitable's HE bomb penetration, it's not terrible. It's simply not high enough to make it a universal threat against all targets. When she's top tier, the monstrous potential of what could have been is unleashed -- there are few ships at tiers VI and VII that have protection schemes to defend against 32mm of penetration. Indomitable wrecks all comers with her fast-cycling planes. Against tier VIII+ battleships and carrier, Indomitable's HE penetration starts feeling sub-standard. Shatters abound and her alpha-strike potential plummets. Neither of these two issues damns Indomitable's bombers. They're merely minor complications. 32mm of penetration is PRETTY good, but it's not good enough to hurt everything she comes across. I've left the AP bomb comparison out of this as their damage output is hella wonky, with impressive citadel hits, the occasional penetration or horrible over-penetration damage. HE bombs by contrast are pretty reliable in terms of their binary -- either a penetrating hit or the bomb shatters for zero damage until saturation kicks in. The Genuine Problem So let's recap: Indomitable has fast, tough planes. They're not especially agile and they don't preserve speed very well. Furthermore, Indomitable can't afford to take many losses -- she doesn't have the regeneration to recoup from mistakes being made. Screw up against flak, fighters or misjudge the potency of an AA-wall and you're in trouble. Finally, they do good direct damage against tier VI and VII targets, but struggle against tier VIII+ battleships and some aircraft carriers. In short, Indomitable's bombers over-perform against lower-tiered targets but they fall back into an unhealthy behaviour against higher tiered enemies. With AA power increasing, higher-tiered cruisers are generally off the menu. She can't afford running the gauntlet of taking even one or two casualties per attack run. Thus, Indomitable's design encourages players to focus on stacking fires against isolated, modest-AA defended battleships -- namely Japanese and German designs though any will do if there's a lack of available targets. Fire resistance cuts these values in half against tier X targets and by roughly 1/4 against tier VI targets. Indomitable tends to average 1-2 fires per attack-flight drop against most battleships. This game play is infuriating to suffer. Her bombers can outrun many fighters and outlast modest AA fire coming from a single battleship. A target 25km away will face repeat strikes from even a single flight every 50 seconds -- those fires will begin to stack and there's little to nothing they can do to stop it. They can't hide. They can't run. Their only hope is to be rescued by fighters fast enough to catch Indomitable's bombers and this isn't guaranteed or to find themselves under the combined AA umbrella of several allies. To the Indomitable player, the damage numbers this generates are incredibly rewarding. Big numbers. Lots of medals. All but guaranteed kills. Fun and Engaging 101. Why hunt cruisers and destroyers when battleships are such easy farms? Yes, Indomitable's bombers are capable of wrecking cruisers. Yes, they're perfectly suitable for nuking lolibotes, but why bother when you can Sky-Conqueror your way to the top of the experience pile? Sure, you might win more if you actually helped out your team and took out targets that mattered, but that's not going to help you average over 100k to 200k damage every match, now will it? Summary: Indomitable's bombers are powerful, versatile, fast and deadly. It's too bad all you're going to use them for is farming fire damage off battleships. Attack Aircraft Aircraft Type: de Havilland Sea Hornet Ordnance: Eight RP-3 60lb HE No1 Mk1 per aircraft Group Size: Six aircraft per squadron with two aircraft per attack flight Hit Points: 2,100hp per Aircraft Min/Cruising/Boosted Speed: 158kts/188kts/228kts I don't like Indomitable's attack aircraft. Well, I don't like attack aircraft in general and while I'm sure that bias carries over here, Indomitable's aircraft feel of poor quality compared to her bombers. They're fast, sure -- and that's probably the best thing about them. They have other positive traits, such as a good health pool, faster reset-timer between attacks and a decent fire-chance per rocket hit. However, we still need to be aware of Indomitable's lack of torpedo planes. Unlike her bombers, Indomitable's attack aircraft don't take up any of the slack. They don't exactly need to given the general cancerous awesomeness of her bombers. ("I'm sorry, son, you have cancer. The awesome kind of cancer.") And that's really the problem: most of the jobs you would delegate to attack aircraft are performed better by Indomitable's bombers. Thus Indomitable's rockets lack purpose. The only reason to take them out is when you're running low on bombers. Let's look at these aircraft in more detail: Survivability I'm not going to lie -- the survivability of Indomitable's Attack Aircraft is pretty damn good. This shouldn't be any surprise after her bombers. She hasless exposure time to damaging effects and more health to tank through it. While this doesn't make her aircraft invincible by any means, it does all but guarantee that her planes will survive long enough to deliver an attack provided you don't drive into a flak explosion or fighter swarm. It's the speed of her aircraft that are the real superstars. At 188kts cruising speed, she covers 5km every 10 seconds. This accelerates not only her ability to deliver strikes but also to return the limited number of aircraft to which she has access. Indomitable's Sea Hornets have the same hit point pool as Implacable's Seafires which doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, but whatever. Indomitable has not only the fastest attack aircraft at tier VIII, but some of the fastest attack aircraft in the whole game. The same problems that plagued her bombers are repeated here. She doesn't have the reserves to tough-out taking sustained casualties. As resilient as her individual aircraft are, every loss hurts. Indomitable has an absolute maximum of twenty-five (25) attack aircraft to play with over the course of the game with more realistic numbers sitting closer around sixteen to twenty depending on frequency of use and game duration. Losing a mere eight aircraft in quick succession severely limits her ability to deliver-repeat strikes without a pronounced wait on aircraft return times. Her attack aircraft agility sucks too but it isn't as much of a disparity gap as it was with her bombers: Unlike ships, if you want to improve both the rate of turn and turning radius for aircraft, hit the brakes. With her airbrakes, Indomitable's Attack Aircraft have a 30.6º/s rotation rate and 790m turning radius. Don't boost -- that just makes everything worse. The horrible agility and twitchy aim marker makes lining up shots with Indomitable's rockets difficult unless you start VERY far out. Any kind of manoeuvring will throw off your lead Indomitable's attack aircraft have a very short recovery timer after a run. This allows Indomitable to make repeat-attacks faster than her contemporaries, however it limits the range of her sling-shot immunity from AA fire. In addition, her Sea Hornets cannot make a fast-recall like other attack aircraft. Ordnance As controversial as rockets are, Indomitable's are pretty forgettable. Their individual damage values are decent and their fire chance per hit is good. However, their flight fires only a modest 16 per salvo limiting their effectiveness. It's not that these weapons are terrible, they're simply average while those of many other aircraft carriers are much better or at least more interesting. On paper, the stats of Indomitable's individual rockets are pretty good. Comparison of the tech-tree carrier rocket-ordnance including the shape of their attack reticle. Comparison of the premium carrier rocket-ordnance and the shape of their attack reticles. Protecting the Lolibotes Indomitable's rockets were nerfed repeatedly over the course of her development to limit their effectiveness against destroyers. They had their damage reduced and dispersion worsened. Only half of Indomitable's rockets will ever land towards the center of the target marker, greatly limiting the maximum amount of damage possible in a single run unless hitting a chunktacular-sized vessel. Photoshop composite showing the size and shape of Indomitable's fully aimed rocket reticle. Aircraft are moving from the bottom of the screen to the top. Reference-Mahan™ for scale. The orientation of this aiming reticle makes it harder to land hits against small targets like destroyers compared to the perpendicular drop pattern of American FFAR and HVAR rockets. The 27mm of penetration on Indomitable's rockets repeats her improved performance parameters against tier VI and tier VII targets of all types. When Indomitable is top tier, there isn't anything her rockets are incapable of preying upon, delivering reliable damage against cruisers and battleships and supplementing her bombers well. When facing tier VIII+ ships, the number of targets reduces. In theory, she should still be quite effective against cruisers and some carriers, however, the level of anti-aircraft firepower from most of these ships at tier VIII+ precludes them from being viable targets until the very end of a match. If these ships absolutely must die, then certain her rockets are preferable to use over her more valuable bombers -- the larger effective health pool of six rocket planes versus four bombers will tough out AA better, but the casualties will cost Indomitable dear. While not essential for putting down the hurt on most vessels, higher penetration allows for more damage to a greater range of targets. With Indomitable's rocket penetration being kinda meh, it puts more of a burden on her bombers to carry her performance when dealing with high-tier battleships. Against ideal, soft targets, her damage caps out at 11,088hp per attack assuming they all hit and penetrate... which they won't. Effective fire resistance of most target ships will reduce the odds of stacking blazes. Indomitable's rockets are a poor choice for starting fires unless you can make repeat strikes. It's only against targets with very weak AA power where this is even remotely feasible. These are yet even more reasons that Indomitable's rockets should generally be relegated to pounding soft targets. Summary: Indomitable's rockets are okay. They feel pretty good when she's top tier. Make sure to use and abuse them when tier VI and VII targets are present as this takes some much needed strain off her bombers. Just remember: Her bombers are better and will do the same job more effectively. Fighters It's not uncommon for ships to use different types of aircraft for Combat Air Patrol (carrier defense) and Patrol fighters (summoned by squadrons). All of the tier VIII American carriers use Corsairs for CAP while they use a mix of Corsairs, Hellcats and Bearcats for patrol summons between Lexington, Enterprise and Saipan respectively. Indomitable is no different, making use of the same Seafires as Implacable for CAP and recruiting a wave of Sea Hornets for patrol duties. The latter are MUCH faster -- some of the fastest fighters in the game while the former are some of the slowest CAP fighters at tier VIII. Thankfully you can all but guarantee that whatever planes are coming towards your carrier will fly right into your Seafires so their speed is less of an issue. Indomitable uses Implacable's Seafires for her combat air patrol defense around the carrier. These orbit at a range of 1km around the ship and engage enemy aircraft that slip within 3km of their position. The flight size can be modified by taking the Direction Center for Fighters skill. Indomitable starts with four charges of CAP fighters but you may increase this to five if you take Superintendent (but why would you?). Nothing can outrun Indomitable's summoned Patrol Fighters. Once they lock on, casualties are all but guaranteed. Praying to RNGesus Indomitable is the great equalizer. Forget skill -- it will only take you so far with this ship. The layers of RNG are stacked pretty high with her performance. While timing and target selection matter, you can do everything right and still do poorly because your rockets scattered oddly or you didn't set that fire when it was optimal to do so. Fires and dispersion make all of the difference in Indomitable -- it's what separates a good game from a poor showing. You'll need between five and eight permanent fires to score a Witherer's medal -- that's five to eight fires pushed past an enemy battleship's Damage Control Party. If the numbers aren't coming up, there's not much you can do to stack damage quickly against higher tiered battleships. Similarly, bad bomb or rocket scattering can make even a perfectly lined shot fall flat. Conversely, a well timed triple (or quadruple!) fire and suddenly you're a rockstar. This is why I rag on Indomitable's low penetration and also why I say this ship patently over-performs when facing a glut of tier VI and VII targets. Lower-tier AA power largely doesn't matter, but more importantly she can partially bypass RNGesus. She's no longer reliant upon fires for her damage totals and can stack the hurt directly. I would have gladly traded some of Indomitable's alpha-strike and fire setting potential for better penetration or more accurate drops. It would have taken some of the lottery-feels out of her successes. This is what's so infuriating about playing with and against Indomitable. You're forever hoping RNG screws over your opponent. You don't need to get good in Indomitable, you just need to get lucky. The Ship Carrier hulls aren't worth noting until they're being shot at. There's really only one carrier currently in the game that rewards you for taking control of the hull and that's Graf Zeppelin. For every other CV in the game, the hull is just where your planes are stored. It's a box of hit points you try to keep as close to the action as possible while remaining hidden. Durability Hit Points: 51,400hp Maximum Citadel Protection: 114mm belt Minimum Hull Armour: 19mm to 21mm Flight Deck Armour: 25mm to 76mm Torpedo Damage Reduction: 28% Aircraft carriers are not known for their durability. British carriers have an marked flaw with their high-water citadels. Indomitable's citadel pokes up well over the waterline with a noticeable 'hump' beneath her conning tower. Taking hits to her machine spaces is tragically commonplace, even from incidental pot-shots. It's not all doom and gloom, however. Indomitable has good anti-torpedo defense for a carrier. She also boasts an armoured flight deck. The latter element provides some immunity to HE attacks and can ricochet poorly aimed (or poorly dispersed) long range AP fire. This only applies to the central part of the deck, however. Her bow and stern are still highly vulnerable to both HE and large caliber AP shell over-matching. Still, it's nice to see this historical element do it's job versus HE bomb attacks, allowing Indomitable to shrug off sniping attempts from dive bombers. Except AP bombs. Oh lordy, does she hate AP bombs. Damage over time (DoT) effects have very little impact on aircraft carriers and Indomitable is no exception. This is in part due to their long-duration, automatically deploying Damage Control Party which activates the moment critical damage is done and provides a 60 second immunity window. In addition, fires and floods simply don't last as long as they do on other types of ships and deal less damage. Maximum Fire Damage per Ship Type: Destroyers & Cruisers: 9% over 30 seconds. Graf Spee: 13.5% over 45 seconds. Battleships & Large Cruisers: 18% over 60 seconds. Aircraft Carriers: 2% over 5 seconds. Maximum Flood Damage per Ship Type: Destroyers & Cruisers: 10% over 40 seconds. Graf Spee: 15% over 40 seconds. Battleships & Large Cruisers: 20% over 40 seconds. Aircraft Carriers: 7.5% over 30 seconds. Thus attempting to stack DoTs to bring down a carrier is a fool's errand, really. Even if you do get past their Damage Control Party, the returns just really aren't worthwhile. This was ostensibly designed to mitigate the effectiveness of aircraft carriers sniping one another. The result of this is to make direct damage the only effective way of sinking the ship itself. Indomitable is super squishy. The best thing about her protection scheme is her armoured deck which can shrug off HE hits that avoid striking its extremities. However, her enormous, high-water citadel means that it's always (ALWAYS) worth a battleship's time to fire Hail Mary shots from across the map at her if she's spotted. Heavy cruisers should do the same. Citadel hits from the extremes of range are painfully commonplace. Agility Top Speed: 30.5kts Listed Turning Radius: 970m Rudder Shift Time: 13.0s 4/4 Engine Speed Rotation Rate: 3.2º/s Well, this section's going to be hella brief. Aircraft carrier agility is a cruel joke. They can barely manage to maintain 2/3s of their forward momentum when you touch their rudder. The only thing that's ever considered good about their agility is their top speed. Indomitable is downright mediocre in this regard, barely managing to exceed 30 knots. Running away means sailing straight lines or risk being overtaken by even the pedestrian velocities of some of the tier VIII battleships. It's not like her autopilot is going to do her any favours either. They're all pretty terrible but Kaga gets the special loser-points for being so slow. I do get a laugh that Indomitable can turn inside her own aircraft. Refrigerator Base Surface Detection: 13.5km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 10.61km Air Detection Range: 10.58km Indomitable's surface detection range is decidedly average for a tier VIII carrier though her aerial detection is a bit on the high side. That "Minimum Surface Detection Range" is a pipe dream -- you're not going to use Concealment System Modification 1 so Indomitable's surface concealment tends to cap out at around 11.79km Secondaries Secondary Battery: Sixteen 113mm/45 rifles in 8x2 turrets with four on each side of the ship. Her turrets are not superfiring and arranged on platform-wings jutting out from the front and rear of the flight deck. Graf Zeppelin, this carrier is not. Indomitable's secondaries are a mere afterthought. These dual purpose weapons work better as anti-aircraft mounts than anti-surface weapons and they don't win any prizes for the former. I took her out and tried to have her sink a stationary Reference-Mahan™ at a range of 4km with secondary fire only. It took over 230 shells fired (that's two and a half minutes worth of shooting) to sink the darned thing and that's largely owing to some lucky fires. Don't waste your time with these. If you squint, you can make out the secondaries fore and aft on their isolated platforms. Unless a target is completely broadside, you're not bringing all four turrets onto a target. Indomitable has an 8° blindspot directly forward and an 18º blindspot to the rear where an enemy ship can sit with impunity. Anti-Aircraft Defense Flak Bursts: Four for 1,330 damage per blast. Long Ranged AA: ~88dps at 5.8km Medium Ranged AA: ~228dps at 3.5km Short Ranged AA: ~366dps at 2.0km I kinda wanted to rag on Indomitable for her AA not being up to scratch, but looking at the numbers, she's alright'. Indomitable's AA firepower is based around point defense, with the majority of her AA limited to engaging aircraft just before or during an ordnance launch. This isn't ideal -- I'd prefer to see a lot more teeth in her 3.5km batteries as per Implacable but whatever. Ranking wise, I'd put her tied with Graf Zeppelin overall which is just ahead of Saipan, Shokaku and Kaga. Most of Indomitable's AA defense comes from her multitude of 20mm Oerlikon mounts. Seriously, those things are scattered everywhere. It's pretty impressive. Aircraft Carrier Summary I've got to give Indomitable's hull failing marks. The carrier's purpose is to keep out of harm's way and cycle aircraft. Indomitable isn't terrible at the former -- she doesn't win any prizes, though. She's pretty darned awful at the latter. Unremarkable AA power, agility and concealment. Below average durability due to high vulnerability to AP citadel hits. Her armoured deck is nice but it rarely comes into play short of being attacked by other carriers or long-range HE spam. Hangar capacity is stupid-small with very long aircraft recovery times. Laughable secondaries. Final Evaluation I was expecting this ship to be released with patch 0.8.2. The early rework was Hell for me. Not only was I trying to familiarize myself with the new CV systems, I was trying to make myself expert on Indomitable on a short time frame. I put in over 100 games in this ship between patches 0.8.0 and 0.8.0.3. This was when the changes to AA power and aircraft performance were almost constant. I fully expected Indomitable to be released with the British Aircraft Carrier tech-tree; if not with Hermes, Glorious and Implacable in patch 0.8.1, then surely with Audacious in patch 0.8.2. There was never enough time. But those deadlines came and went. More changes occurred and the data I had collected faded to frustrating obsolescence. Indomitable was hit with a few small evolutionary changes for patch 0.8.3 and I put in almost another 100 games, updating my notes. This was especially hard to do with my health struggles at the time, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't behind the curve with the carrier rework. And then nothing happened. Indomitable disappeared. She went back into the vault even as the rework continued. What followed was a series of dramatic changes to her performance but with no follow-up testing. Indomitable lost one of her most defining features -- the ability to have her aircraft exceed 250 knots. I didn't get to play test her through this. Anti-aircraft firepower became ridiculously powerful only to see-saw back towards a much more modest state we have currently. I didn't get to play test her through these changes either. Indomitable was placed upon the back burner. Ark Royal ended up being released instead -- a much better and more interesting premium carrier in my opinion. Indomitable made a reappearance late in 2019, hidden among all the fuss and fluff of the then upcoming (and highly anticipated with much positivity!) Puerto Rico build. I still didn't get to play test her during this time and expressed some pretty firm concerns that she might have lost her pizazz. Y'see, with all of the games I had played with her previously, I had actually found some enjoyment in the rampant fire-setting sadism that Indomitable provided. Looking back, I think this might have been some abusive transference. I was in pain. Keeping track of the CV rework was similarly a pain. So, sharing the hurt around seems entirely in character and reasonable. The kinder, gentler and more fluffy Mouse of today doesn't do that. I don't need to farm Witherer medals in Indomitable anymore -- the hurt has gone away. I don't need to terrorize poor destroyers and battleships with her planes to spread hate for the CV rework. I have Ark Royal for that. Whatever charms Indomitable once held have long since faded. She's pretty boring to play. Don't get me wrong -- she can generate the numbers so long as you're okay with farming useless damage off battleships. Getting those big numbers, farming Witherer medals and hoovering up the hate in chat is amusing too. But she's definitely not a great performer. I think Wargaming is understandably gun-shy about releasing a carrier premium that's anywhere close to "good" these days. Graf Zeppelin is never allowed to be good ever again and Indomitable stands proudly beside that train wreck as a whole bucket-load of meh. At least both of them are interesting design concepts, I'll give 'em that much. There's always a chance that if Indomitable under-performs that she'll get buffed in the future, but I don't honestly see that coming in any significant way. Here we are almost a year after my testing of Indomitable began, near unto the one year anniversary of the CV-rework. I wish I could go back and tell myself to go lie down and take a few months off. The final product that Indomitable became isn't worth the attention. I'm not sure the rework is either. Would I Recommend? Generally speaking? No, if only because Ark Royal is a thing. Not only does the tier VI premium come at a lower price point, she's much more interesting and fun to play. It's a shame because Indomitable looks gorgeous. The potential is also there but in practice her game play is so repetitive and infuriating. Indomitable is arguably the weakest (or at least, the most inconsistent) of the tier VIII premium carriers. As a co-op boat, she's an especially poor choice. It takes time to stack fires -- time is at a premium in such encounters. Conclusion Thank you all so much for reading. The next reviews will be short and sweet, each covering the new Pan Asian clones Wukong, Bajie and Siliwangi. Look for them soon!
  19. So, let's start with CV's purpose / role in Old RTS CV's Vs. New direct control CV's Their roles have not changed. Not convinced? Old RTS CV's roles were to: Spot ships, Take out ships that are alone away from the main AA bubble(s), Use fighters to combat the enemy CV. ... notice how there's no difference between then and now? Here's the thing. World of Warships is meant to be a team game. Carriers punish you for not being a part of the team and part of the AA bubble. Here is my Idea for CV's: Bring back the RTS-style of CV's. Keep the NEW style of AA. Re-add the Def. AA having the 300% drop spread. In addition, bring back the old style of limited planes, the old style of multiple aircraft squadrons in the air, the full drop, and controllable fighters. As for flak, it will be very visible from the heads-down POV, mainly as a black quarter-circle every once in a while from the target ship's point of origin, causing you to avoid flak like you do now with skill. Ships with the fighter consumable, when the fighters "activate", they follow the attacking squadron even into the high-air, making CV players re-consider their attacks even more. Benefits: In the current tiers, the T4 is a little more forgiving to new players, as many ships of that tier don't have dedicated AA armaments Causes CV players to be a little more careful when approaching AA bubbles, as their planes will take a HUGE amount of damage if they aren't careful, making them less effective in the long run. Reinforces the idea that this is a TEAM game, not a "I'm a spec-ops ship that can tank hits and dish out damage" kind of game that everyone seems to be thinking it is. Personally, I wish we never digressed from the RTS CV era, but I believe that this new AA system (the ability to target multiple squadrons at once without penalty) the RTS should be able to come back and make the CV a unique class again.
  20. As title suggests, what's your idea on how CVs should operate?
  21. The hunt of HMS Splendid and HMS Spartan, both nuclear-powered submarines on Argentine aircraft carrier ARA Veinticinco de Mayo during the Falklands War. (Fun Fact: ARA Veinticinco de Mayo is formerly HMS Venerable, a Colossus-class WW2 carrier) After seeing this latest video from Mark Felton, I feel more excited for submarines to come to WoWS.
  22. How to Play CV Rework Changes: Table of Contents: 1. Introduction. The rework is truly upon us. With such a major change coming to the game, there are probably many people who aren't aware what can be done, how to even play, or even know it's happening. To this end, I have gone over what can be done in the rework a lot, testing ideas from people and even theory crafting my own. I have been the carrier and the ship trying to maximize the potential and exploit the game to a high level in these interactions. I don’t have the patience of LWM to show you the tiny details, so instead I will focus on the overall effect of ships vs carrier, and the players behind them, while also discussing the best ways to combat from either side. Take note that I only spent my time in tier 8-10, against as many actual players I could find and I will be using video examples taken from my twitch to explain everything that I will be talking about here (there are vulgarities in the example videos, you have been warned). If you like the effort put into this, and want to see me in action, follow the channel here. https://www.twitch.tv/pulicat Also note that when I say Ships, I mean non-CV ships. 2. The Carrier Experience. In my time playing the CV’s, I actually had a good time. The gameplay lines up much better with what it’s like playing other classes, the controls and events are fluid, and the visuals are great especially with the new perspective. I’ve seen a lot of complaints from players saying it’s boring, that all you do is just attack over and over the same way. Perhaps they are just people who only play the old carriers, but if they aren’t they should take a second look. You control 1 thing, and use concealment, positioning and accuracy to attack the enemy and avoid damage in return, exactly like every other class. However, the difference is in how you attack. Ships in the game simply throw their shells and torps at each other and whittle down the only HP bar they have. Carriers fight in this way, but they are not fought in this way. The CVs have 3 separate HP bars, the one that’s applied to their hull, their plane reserves, and their plane HP. The plane HP is what you fight to fend off an individual attack, and at most a squadron can use ½ or 2/3 of the maximum strikes before plane risk is too high. Every plane that escapes, no matter it’s health, is a full HP plane later, which brings us to the second HP bar, the carriers reserves. This is probably the closest resemblance you can find to the HP of a normal ship going down over time. The more plane kills you can get, the more you are actually hurting the CV, but it’s important to keep in mind that the CV is regenerating the reserve HP by about 1-2 planes per squadron for every attack it sends out. If the CV player is using all their squads, you will want at least 4-6 plane kills done to every squad in order to outpace the regeneration. That is what the actual hull HP of the carrier is doing, a floating factory that once you finally kill, you put it out of commission for good. This gives the CVs a big advantage against another ship. Overall, I think there will be a portion of players that enjoy the new carriers, like DD players as they play very similar now. Both quick and low alpha damage (so they say), weak against group focus. It makes a lot of sense that WG decided to branch the carrier tech tree off of Destroyers when you think about it like that. 3. The Carrier Balance, IJN vs USN. Feels mostly like brains vs brawn. IJN have less but stronger and faster torps, AP bombs and comparatively slow attack craft with less rockets. Their planes are weaker overall, and the AP bombs suffer to this. USN on the other hand focuses on saturating the target with more in their payload in exchange for less damage. Their attack craft are much faster but the bombers much slower, and all squads more durable. It’s the much more DoT (damage over time) focused of the two, but there are methods for both nations to cripple opponents with DoTs. The Tier 10s are a different matter entirely however. Their deck armor makes it so that the only effective squad to ‘cv snipe’ them with is torpedo planes, which can be dodged. Here is an example of 2 tier 10 CV trying to snipe me from the start of the game. I am completely without allied support, fending for myself. After I take a big hit because I was just sitting still not caring, I start actively countering and they can never finish the job. I end up killing 50 planes. Example: Being CV sniped by 2 enemy carriers. Unfortunately, at other tiers, CV snipe is still possible, but at least unlikely. It’ll take them some time since you are so far away, and your summon fighter and plane fighters make it so an enemy squad can only attack you once before being swarmed down, it’s simply not a viable strategy to winning the game unless the kill is confirmed in 2-3 attacks. 4. Basic Carrier Gameplay. It’s fairly straightforward in terms of controls. You can use WASD for movement, and mouse aiming for fine tuning. It will probably take some time to adjust to the mouse aiming, as you will find it doing it automatically while you're just looking around. If you use right click to lock your guns and look around playing a ship, this same thing works for planes. When attacking another class of ship, it's important to use the correct aircraft for the job. When attacking destroyers, Attack Planes have the easiest time. The damage may not always be great, but keep in mind they're not always going to be trying to dodge only you as you are keeping them spotted. Torpedo Bombers are good for dropping into smoke, but a moving DD will be a very tough target. Dive Bombers are the least useful, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to hit. When attacking cruisers, Attack Planes are once again your best choice. They are quick enough to take less damage within enemy AA auras, have reliable damage, and don't care too much about enemy angling. Dive Bombers can be a good choice as well, especially AP bombs. Stationary cruisers camping islands will be a prime target for DBs. Torpedo Bombers are least effective, as they are slow and dodgable for a cruiser. When attacking battleships, literally everything works. They are not maneuverable enough to dodge attacks well, and can be harassed effectively. 4-1. Starting an Attack Run and the Grey Marker. That grey marker is very important, far beyond just where the attack lines up. The grey marker represents the point at which your planes will achieve full accuracy with their aim during the attack run if you do not debuff the accuracy with moving. Example: Grey Marker Represents Full Aim Note where the grey marker is when I start the attack run, and you will see it lines up with where I get full aim. 4-2. Do Not Move When Starting an Attack Run. This is key. Get in as close as possible to your target with the grey marker lined up, make sure your mouse is centered on it and do not WASD or mouse move and you will achieve full aim in the shortest amount of time, leaving you less exposed in your limited attack run movement. If you happen to overshoot with the marker slightly, you can hold slow down (Skey) and this will not affect your aim negatively, but give you more time to aim. This does expose you to flak however. Example: Don't Move While Aiming Also, if there are a lot of ships with AA, it will affect your aim time. 4-3. Don’t Be Greedy. Most people will probably learn over time, but if you go through with a strike and more than half your planes are yellow HP or less, just send them home. It’s honestly not worth crippling your late game potential if you lose your planes by trying to turn around and get another strike. If you are squad shortening, you can always just launch the same squad and get back there. Your games are long in CVs, be patient and think of the long game. 4-4. Do not bother with pre-emptive on-summon fighter drops. They are better saved for BBs that have used DCP. Tell your BBs to either say they used DCP or use a quick command to ask for AA support. If you see bombers flying around, don’t try to drop a fighter on them. It simply does not engage fast enough and will be wasted. They are also good for yourself in the late game, which may become very cv vs cv. The consumables will fill the gaps of the one for your CV. Example: Dropping fighters on enemy planes doesn't work. 4-5. Using Attack Runs Defensively. In certain situations, you may find use to use the attack run to lower your planes closer to the water. You can duck behind certain islands to avoid enemy AA guns, or even from being spotted entirely. It's important to note that currently you can't cancel an attack run in progress, but you aren't usually locked out of attacking again for very long. So it's possible to attack run to sneak in, exit attack run for your approach, and then start the actual attack run. This was requested to be added in by @MaliceA4Thought. 5. Advanced Carrier Techniques. This is the section I believe most people will be interested in. Over my time playing I tried existing strategies I heard of and even came up with a couple on my own that have potential to be really strong options. 5-1. Hakuryu Stealth Torping and Sequential Dropping. Everyone probably knows about this one by now. With the 8km torps and full conceal, you are able to drop torpedoes 7km away from a target, and turn away holding the S key to never be spotted by him. Though the torps are slow, people still land torpedoes with ships like the Sims or Black. This will be very potent against ships that like to hug islands, bow tanking or are otherwise relatively immobile. Sequential drops are very potent too, as the torps are extremely stealthy. Once you get good at aiming the lead and predicting opponent reaction, you will hit them. And with the spacing on the torps, you may be able to reapply flood after they DCPed one in the first wave, all without losing a single torp bomber. Examples: Stealth Torping. Sequential Dropping 5-2. Squad Shortening. This is one of mine, as far as I know nobody has tried this or talked about it at all. The idea is when you launch a fresh squadron, you immediately drop a payload to send the planes back home. This is best used in 2 situations. At the start of the game, you can shorten your attack plane scouts to half so it’s easier to dodge in the long-range flak bubbles, and to make sure you can launch a full squad of the same type right behind landing the ones you’re on. The applications are limited because, even though you are able to dodge flak easier, continuous AA damage will have less planes to work over. The effect of continuous is best explained in this thread here made by @Edgecaseand @GoldPile. You might be able to get more use out of Last Gasp this way too. 5-3. Forcing DCP. As we all know, a flood is usually an instant DCP for any ship that suffers one. Using the above trick to fly around with 2 torp strikes instead of 3 and having a full squad at home, you can try to dive through heavier AA to get one torp strike on a BB and fly away with Last Gasp. If you flood that BB, he’s going to have to DCP it. Land the rest of your weakened torp planes and launch a full hp squad to do the same thing again. It is nearly impossible to stop a full HP squadron from coming in and attacking once, but it is very possible to stop a second strike from the same group. This method gets around that limitation, and can guarantee anywhere from 30-40s of uninterrupted flood damage, plus two torp plane strikes worth of damage on a BB. And that’s assuming they’re running premium DCP with max cooldown reduction. On top of that, you will barely lose any torp planes. Very viable but the window is short and you must be able to launch enough torp planes to field nearly 2 full squads at one time. Take care of your reserves. Example: DCP Forcing. I have taken the flooding mechanic changes into account for this technique, and have determined it will still be effective and potentially more. 5-4. Abusing Flak Spawns (Plinko Flak). Flak is the deadliest thing to you, obviously, and sometimes the flak walls spawn too long for you to go around. A lot of the time I see this complaint, the planes are flying right at their target, so the flak wall spawns between you and the target forcing you to fly around and mess up your attack run. One thing to note is that the flak spawns in front of you, not always between you and the target. This can be abused, and with the name Plinko you probably already understand. When approaching a target, use boost to go full speed at an angle to the target ship. When the inevitable flak wall spawns, release boost, turn to another angle and boost again as if you were just rolling off the wall to the side. You can adjust how you want to plinko the flak based on how your opponent is maneuvering against you, but it is an extremely reliable way to not only mitigate flak damage, but potentially remove it entirely, including defensive fire. Examples: Plinko ex.1 Plinko ex.2 Plinko ex.3 6. The Ship Experience. The workload here has gone up. Now everything you knew about the game must be considered with carriers. No longer will CVs appear once every 5 or 10 games. It will be common to see at least 1v1, and probably a lot of 2v2 coming right out of the patch, especially with a new carrier line coming out in 0.8.1. Unfortunately most of my experience fighting other ships with carriers around was against bots in PTS. Even with that limited experience, I don't think fighting carriers will be much different as it is with RTS CVs. It can be slightly satisfying when you see the big red damage numbers done to planes, but after a while it became a bit hollow. The CV is still just fighting against a mechanic, not against me directly. As much as I really wish for direct control over my AA so that it's really ME he is fighting, I think this would be too much for a good amount of players to handle without suffering. Now before you start saying that's crazy talk, people should either be able to handle it or be punished, I would agree with you IF there was skill based matchmaking. At least then, the players with lower capabilities would fight people of similar skill only, and what they would or wouldn't be able to do wouldn't be as unfair. I don't find it unreasonable to give some concessions to those players since they are forced to play against really good players. Back on topic to Automated AA however, having the entire interaction with another class be automated is fairly frustrating at times. I can think of a couple unobtrusive ways where a player can have more interaction with the aircraft, and that will be below where I suggest mechanic additions. Overall, carriers and ships interact the same way, it will just be much more frequent now since they will appear in more games. There will be some system shock at first, and I have no doubt that gameplay will settle and be balanced around it over time. Whether I want to be a ship in that gameplay however remains to be seen, and right now it's sitting at a no. 7. Defending Yourself from Airstrikes. Stay near ships with defensive fire if you don’t have one, don’t get engaged by planes when you can’t maneuver much, and be very careful with your DCP. At the start of 0.8.0, a lot of players won’t be experienced yet and you may not notice their effect all that much. They will probably lose a lot of planes doing things they shouldn’t, and be out of reserves for late game. Don’t let that fool you, good carriers will be deadly as ever, and nothing but the longest flak walls, highest continuous damage and most bizarre maneuvering will stop them. Using your defensive fire or catapult planes should not always be used just because you have them active. Saving them for more dangerous squad types, or protecting yourself from follow up attacks while your DCP is down would be better than trying to defensive fire rocket planes as soon as you see them. When Attack Planes are coming for you, their main goal is your soft spots. The biggest one being your superstructure. To describe how they launch rockets, I will use Shokaku as an example. They launch rockets within their elliptical as 2, and then 8, followed by the last 2 in a straight line. This means that broadsiding the incoming attack planes is exactly what they want you to do. Try to show the least amount of profile possible while still keeping them in your sector to fight against them the best. With Torpedo planes, the same can be applied. Show the least amount of profile as possible while maintaining your sector on them. You also want to try to turn towards them if you can, because this will reduce the amount of time the torpedoes are around you and reducing your movement options. If you turn away, it sets up potential for the enemy cv to cross drop you, since torpedoes move slower and they'll box you in longer. With Dive bombers, their preferred angle is with you pointing directly toward or away from them. At least the tech tree ones. Give them as much broadside as possible. 7-1 Beating CVs with the Numbers. What it comes down to now is minimizing the enemy CVs effect on you and the game as much as possible. Any amount of time waste and plane reserve hits you can cause to the enemy are victories. Even if they are small, they all add up, and wasting their time is good since they are focused on damage over time. Remember, even though there will be more players in carriers that you will see often, there will be a balance between good and bad ones, so it may not always be so bad fighting against a carrier. 7-2 DDs vs Carriers. Destroyers will still have to be careful early game, because attack planes can still hurt even if they don't delete you. Try to take a more cautious approach to caps, so as not to be spotted in the open by planes and be attacked by both them and enemy ships. Watch out for torpedo planes assisting in cross dropping your smoke. 7-3 Early Sector Switching. When under attack by a squadron, and you know they will pass over to your other side, try to learn the timing of your sector switch delay to line it up so it switches right when they pass over. This will maximize your sector, and there is no AA loss in switching. It will take some time to get it right, but every little bit will help. 7-4 The Downtier Experience. Be really careful when you are bottom tier against a CV as well. It's really hard to defend yourself alone against strong planes, almost to the point where it seems unfair. I hope WG puts more focus onto this area of balance. The downtier experience To judge whether or not you were successful in fighting off a plane attack, a good rule of thumb would be expecting 3 plane kills and upwards to even have a noticeable effect on his reserves per attack. If the enemy carrier is smart though, he will just land his planes before he loses too much. The best you can expect most of the time is to make sure you only get attacked once by the entire squadron, and try to mitigate the damage from that 1 attack as best you can. 8. Possible Mechanic Additions. One thing that is really strong right now is using the land command for your squadron right after an attack. Your planes disappear so quickly that the enemy can’t really shoot you down. Something that would be good is adding a similar effect of strafing out of a fighter lock. Losing a plane doing so, or taking a lot of damage from AA if you use the land command inside short or medium range AA. This would at least give the ships more of a chance to destroy planes and some punishment or risk to pulling the land maneuver (flying high into the sky sharply) right over enemy AA. I also think that since fires on CV only last 5s, the DCP auto consumable should never activate for them. A player would never use it for that, even if they somehow happened to have 4 fires going, that would not come close to the damage of a normal fire on anything else. Even if there are players that would want the auto use to activate for a single fire, it would just do them more harm than good. In respect to the lack of interaction for ships in fighting aircraft, one thing that would be doable is re-implement ctrl-click aircraft, and have a delay of 3-4 seconds between each time you are able to click to add in a couple bonus ticks of continuous damage. Nothing that will disrupt the balance, but at least add some player action = impact. Another thing that could help with that would be to add a fourth attack mode, being AA. Picture the mode you get for torpedoes, a large cone representing the limits of your aim, and a smaller one showing you where you are aiming within that cone. The smaller cone would increase the damage for any aircraft that are inside it (above it), and the large aim limits would just be your AA auras. This would not only be a better and more interactive system than what I just mentioned above, but this would also be better than the sector system. The smaller aim cone could be 1/4 or even 1/6 of your AA aura, like a slice of pie. You could lock it in place with the key used to activate the sector system now, so you could do other things, or take direct control during an attack to maximize the damage you do to the planes. You yourself fighting a CV while it is attacking you. This isn't quite as far as real control over your AA, but it would line up well with existing gameplay and reduce the automated RNG of your AA that is your entire interaction with another class. By @NCC81701, Have you thought about viability to adding manual control to altitude and AA similar to subs? Say for High altitude drop is less accurate but takes less damage from Short/Mid AA but low altitude attack is more accurate but take more damage from Short/Mid AA. The player ship then have to judge/decide the altitude level of the large caliber AA/flack burst. if it's at the correct altitude it does bonus damage. Cooldown will be present for changing the altitude of both planes and large caliber AA of course. 9. General Thoughts. Overall, I enjoyed my experience playing CVs, the same cannot be said for playing ships against them however. I feel that the gameplay of WoWs is much more strategic and enjoyable without CVs in random battles, and a lot of that is lost with them. When CVs are around, they dominate the no-mans land, and nothing can really contest this. Even if the CV can no longer one shot you, it doesn't change the environment they cause. This will really be felt if WG puts in 2v2 CV matches. If WG happens to read this, I really think you should limit it to 1v1 for at least 0.8.0, and then evaluate the effect from live to consider if upping the amount for 0.8.1 is warranted. I know this will impact the amount of people trying to play CV in 0.8.0 and the queue times, but 2v2 would really put negative opinions in people's minds as they experience it as ships, no matter how balanced you might think it is. Being attacked by a carrier is not something people will enjoy, and doubling that occurrence is risky for tolerance. 10. Thank You. I hope this Guide/Opinion piece was useful to you. I put a lot of work into it over the course of the week, and tried to make it as unbiased and fair as possible. I ask that you share this with people in the game so they too can get a handle on this new gameplay, and if you have questions or want to counterpoint what I’m saying, I’m always glad to respond. You can either comment to this thread or talk to me in Twitch. Also, feel free to argue points made here or by other people commenting, but keep it civil so this thread remains unlocked and open for discussion. Special Thanks to: @HellaCopterRescue for putting up with my long rants and playing Devil’s Advocate, along with helping me test things for video. This guide would not be what it is without his help. @Kousatsu for assistance behind the scenes ensuring this guide was well structured. @Carrier_Hornet for playing CV for me so I could play ships in PTS and guarantee carrier games. @Warlord78 and @Ponymagistrate for reviewing this guide among other things.
  23. PrinceOfTheOcean

    Tips for Hosho?

    I got Hosho today, and my first game went rather well; 2 Destroyed 50k Damage and 3 Citadels (I didn't notice that the Hosho had AP dive bombers, I thought they started at the Ryujo). I noticed a significant improvement with the Hosho over the Ranger, even though the Ranger is of higher tier. However, the games after that I was only able to get 20k-30k damage per game, with the same number of citadels. I don't think I know how to lead torps correctly; I can only hit one torp on a destroyer in a run and it's difficult for me to hit cruisers and battleships. With the attack planes I think I will get better as I get a new computer, but is there a good angle at which you should come in with your attack aircraft? With the AP dive bombers I watched Yuro's Ryujo at least three times, but when i try to drop from mid height I don't start the run correctly and my bombs end up missing. When i stick to high height it;s the same thing. I have gotten mediocre with the AP dive bombers, but once again I would like to get better. Are there any tips that you experienced payers can give me, someone who sucks at CV in general? Also, does anyone have recommendations for captain skills and upgrades? I'm training a IJN carrier captain (obviously) that currently has Air Supremacy and Torpedo Acceleration. For upgrades I have Air Groups Modification 1 and Aircraft Engines Modification 1. Thanks!!!
  24. "Independencia" Discussion tread Prolegomenon This is not the usual post when the proposer present his/her suggestion and is weighted by the rest. I want it to be more like an open discussion. Here there are a lot of very experienced forumers (is that a word?). Personally I suck with carriers. So I'm appealing to your better judgement to draft these carrier. I will put the historical part and my idea. But feel free to add or suggest anything. I will add it. The Historical Carrier This carrier was born as the Colossus class HMS Warrior in 1946. She was immediately transferred to the Canadian navy. But she lacked heathers. A very important feature in the Canadian waters as you may imagine. She was then returned to Britain. They used her for some time. Among the changes they made, the most important was to angle the deck 5º. She was present in the atomic test in Malden. In 1959 they sold her to Argentina. Argentina remove some Bofors and then add another ones. With these changes the displacement climb to 19.900 tons and the speed drop to 23 knots. The air component of the "Independencia" were 1) Vought "Corsair II" F4U-5, F4U-5N, and F4U-5NT: The corsair is already in game. In Lexington we have an inferior form. The "1D". The "5" is a even more capable aircraft. Is equipped with a much powerful engine witch translate in more heavy payload. In Midway we have a "corsair" but is not mentioned witch corsair it is. 2) North American SNJ-5 Texan: These were a small complement of training aircraft. 3) North American T-28P Trojan: An advanced trainer adapted for carrier operations. Truly nor the "Texan" or the "Trojan" are very interesting. On the other hand those F4U-5 looks far more appealing. So we could have a small aircraft loaded with F4U-5. These plane historically could carry rockects, or bombs. But there were no provision for torpedos. Neither the Texan or the Trojan could carry that. The Argentine Navy had used air-borne torpedoes but they never bought a torpedo bomber carrier based. There were nevertheless a small experiment. The Pucara, a Co-in indigenous aircraft, was tested as torpedo bomber. He was never used in carriers, but with such a short take off and roughed construction they will probably be adaptable. Implementation My idea was to implement these carrier as a sort of Saipan. Tier VIII. A small carrier, with a extremely small scuadron of planes (may be 4 or 5). But these aircraft will be faster, stronger and with more payload than the regular aircraft of the other ships. (As the F4U-5 are in comparison) Moreover the attack will be use all the aircraft of the squadron. (At least those that survive the AA). And they will launch their entire payload in a single attack and return to the carrier. (This is Kakaroto proposal) The "F4U-5s" tally this idea perfectly. They could work pretty fine with the rockets and also good with the bombs. But they are not torpedo- bombers. So, quoting admiral Farragut, "Damn the torpedoes!". I thought less dispense that weapon and focus in bombs. it will be more historical and really something different The load out I was thinking is 1 attack scuadron with rockets, 1 bomb scuadron with HE bombs and 1 bomb scuadron with AP bombs. These way we have an interesting and distinctive carrier. More over the ARA and the FAA were (still are) kinda famous by very low flying to make bombs attacks. So these detail could be implemented. Instead of the usual "dive" of the bombers. These Latinamerican aircraft will fly low and fast. Droping the bombs in a more horizontal style. These could make the bombs easier to hit but also prone to overpen. I understand that implement these mechanic may require some extra work from the developers, but I think is quite possible. If not possible, then just using the german style of attack will be sufficient. The next video is about an a4, a jet, but illustrate a bit of the style of attack I propose for Panam aircraft The torpedo alternative: If you don't want to dispense the torpedo there is a historical alternative. The Pucaras were Co-In aircraft develope in the 60s and used extensively by Argentina and Uruguay. And in small numbers by Colombia and Sry Lanka. They are turboprop and relative modern, so I'm reluctant to add them. But there performance is not spectacular for the game and they were tested to fire ww2 torpedoes. The mk XIII Another Aircraft: @COLDOWN propose to use non-naval indigenous aircraft. At first I was not really into the idea, but in my port there is a Graf Zeppelin with the deck fill with Focke Wulf ta-152. So, as far as I know, WG already took that step. A few good candidates to become "naval": I.Ae. 24 Calquín: WW2 cut the access to strategic material for Argentina. So they developed a sort of "Mosquito" with argentine woods. 100 aircraft produced. Length: 12 m (39 ft 4 in) Wingspan: 16.3 m (53 ft 6 in) Height: 3.4 m (11 ft 2 in) Gross weight: 6,500 kg (14,330 lb) Max takeoff weight: 7,200 kg (15,873 lb) Powerplant: 2 × Pratt & Whitney R-1830-SC-G Twin Wasp 780 kW (1,050 hp) each Maximum speed: 440 km/h (270 mph, 240 kn) Guns: 4× 12.7 mm browning ML or DL or 20 mm Hispano-Suiza 804 cannon (later variant) 12 x 75 mm 60 lb (27 kg) rockets (Mk VI) on the later variant 800 kg (1,800 lb) bombs on both early and late variant I.Ae. 30 Ñancú: This is more like a "heavy fighter". Full metal. It was only tested. Argentina could not develop simultaneously a jet and a piston fighter. Yet it was a very interesting design. 1 prototipe produced. Similat to the "Hornet" Length: 11.52 m (37 ft 10 in) Wingspan: 15 m (49 ft 3 in) Height: 5.16 m (16 ft 11 in) Gross weight: 7,600 kg (16,755 lb) Powerplant: 2 × Rolls-Royce Merlin 604 V-12, 1,342 kW (1,800 hp) each Armament 6 × 20 mm cannons 1 × 250 kg bomb (under fuselage) 10 × rockets (under wings) There are also jets ("IAE 37", "Pulqui 1" and "2") and imported aircraft (Fiat G-55, Spitfire mk IX, etc). So with out no more ideas for now I expect you feedback. Thank you.
×