Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'kaga'.



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 12 results

  1. Yea it's old - over a year - but (some adult language) it makes me laugh a whole lot. Good primer before going to battle in Kaga.
  2. Every once in a while, for us average players, things fall in place. Again, like my Jean Bart match today, we lost. We came really, really close... except our DD, last ship afloat on our team, after capping a needed cap, turned towards the TBs coming at him instead of turning away. It happens. Back and forth match. I do believe this is my first ever K while driving a carrier. Hope you're all having a fun weekend.
  3. It may be a bit earlier to ask this but, how is the Kaga currently? I am in a bit of a mood to waste $60 on a virtual boat
  4. ShizuoYimato

    Elige tu equipo.. (CVs)

    Soy el unico de aqui que al ver un mensaje asi: se imagina cosas asi? xD Mi orgullo como animador no me dejaba tranquilo.. me decia "Debes hacerlo!!" asi que.. Quizas les haga una linda animacion despues xd....
  5. 44 torpedo bombers lost out of 72 torpedoes released, scoring a total of 17 hits for 59k damage. 22 dive bombers lost out of 20 bombs released, scoring a total of 10 hits for 17k damage. 17 attack planes lost out of 40 rockets launched, scoring a total of 26 hits for 10k damage. 5 floodings for a whopping 3100 damage. 9 of the 17 torpedo hits were against a Colorado, and I actually had our DD ask me how in the hell the 'Rado was getting hit by so many torpedoes and taking so little damage. Welcome to CVs post 8.1. Yeap. Kaga plane health is totally balanced against same-and-higher-tier AA. Looks like another ship to become little more than a Port Queen until she gets some love. Oh yeah, btw. We lost because I couldn't really contribute to striking meaningful targets. EDIT: I only sunk the Lightning because he was already nearly dead and strayed into a straddled torpedo drop I dumped on him while trying to, quite ineffectively, cross-drop him. The Alaska was killed by a single torpedo dropped directly from the rear after they had shredded 7 out of the 8 remaining planes I had left in the squadron.
  6. So, this is me basically rushing part of a larger write up I'm working on because while what's in he full write up can be changed/added no issue after the fact, or well, in some cases maybe less issue. However, they are clearly intent to put Kaga out there day 1, and they are going to need time to at the least, revert things, and possibly develop. And what I saw of it today in Farazalleth's video at tier 8, I'm just not okay with. I have my issues with GZ being tier 8, but I can see reason to give her later war aircraft because of delays and changes being made. Kaga on the other hand - hell no. If she were a tech tree ship, fine, those are free game for some what if stuff, all of the IJN fighters having rockets is a bit too far for me but that's another story, but she's a premium, these ships, beyond the paper ones, are supposed to be accurate in things like modules, weapons and in the case of CV's - Planes. Clearly tier 6 planes, vs tier 10 AA kind of an issue - reasons tier removal is folly in the first place. I get WHY they are moving it up - there are issues with moving it down cause we paid money and it would then be worth less than what we paid, all that. Me personally, just give me the difference in dubloons if it has to be at tier 6 permanently, I'd rather she go down around there where she belongs instead of yet another shoehorn job. However, what I'd prefer is long term, she stays tier 7, my write up will hopefully show a means in which we keep FULL tech tree's for CV's, but have enough difference and ease in to learning and developing, to justify them - However I'm aware that it would likely further delay 8.0, which while I think it should be will likely not happen again, but in the short term, for MM reasons, move Kaga to tier 6 in 8.0, till odd tiers are integrated back in to the game and she goes back to tier 7, unless we remove the MM mirror on CV tiers to not impact the ships MM keeping her at tier 7 in 8.0 release. And then just bar her from sale while she's stuck at 6 till she's back at 7. Or just lock the ship out till it can be added back as tier 7 when back in. Far as aircraft go - A6M2 (Tier 6), B5N2 (Tier 6), D3A1 (Tier 6) A6M2 - 8-10 planes, 4-5 per attack group, 2x 60 kg HE bombs, per plane. Large circular drop pattern (A6M2's had issues in a dive and limitations, kinda just cover an area and help cut down a tad as this would be 16-20 bombs. My guess is the Type 99 Number 6 Model 1. Unlike other ones I don't have the damage numbers to try and base things here, so I can just give 2 general options on an idea of damage. The weight of these weapons is similar to the USN's HVAR rockets - another high volume weapon - and could have similar damage, it is a similar role of aircraft and all, more about starting fires and knocking out things like AA and secondaries. However, I'm pretty sure the 60 KG bomb has more explosives, so, it has higher damage, and likely blast radius, but trades out accuracy for that advantage of USN HVAR's as well as having to get closer. B5N2 (TB) - 12 planes, attacks 6 at a time, keeps current RTS pattern or has 4 forward planes, and 2 trailing between planes 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 (2 inverted triangles basically). Last time I was in test, TB alpha if not general was going to need a nerf just like RTS - more planes, but lower ordnance damage. Which will also deal with some of the fears of us having no limit on planes if were not hitting as hard. Only other thing would be using the torpedoes used at Pearl Harbor, uncertain as to exact designation as I see conflicting conventions - Either Type 91 Revision 1 or 2, or Type 97 small box type (which would be in line with the year said revision was made if re-designation). This would also return back an advantage IJN used to have in the TB front - a closer drop range than USN as this should still be the focus, though Kaga will have a tad more bomb focus compared to other IJN ships. D3A1 - 18 planes, 3 attacks, 6 per group. These should be a bit more accurate than the A6M2's (unless the A6M2 is balanced as high accuracy/low damage fire starters) using a more traditional oval shape as we see now. These should be using the Type 99 Number 25 model 1, or possibly the Type 98 Number 25 Model 1. Not knowing pen numbers for current or rework bombs in practice these should be more of a Semi-AP bomb either being a lower fire chance but enhanced pen HE bomb, the route I'd go more for here, or a short fuse AP bomb that's unlikely to nuke a BB, but score solid pens, and maybe be trouble for some cruisers/DD's. But the single 250 kg bombs should deal solid damage, well more than the A6M's but maybe less chance of fire given lower volume (or direct given more S-AP than HE). Optional - B5N2 (AP bomb) - The only plane to really operationally use an AP bomb in an anti-ship role as it was the only one that could carry it, and at that, had to do so as a level bomber. These would be your potential BB worst nightmare AP on an IJN ship as opposed to USN (the line that should have AP). I'm uncertain as to if it should swap out the TB's or the D3A1's or perhaps the ability to swap out both (leaving lighter ships to the A6M2). Either way these would be 12 planes, attacking 4 at a time. These would be the least accurate of the bombs, aim point likely at least as long as a Yamato, and a bit wider than it even, a trade off for the fact these can do some serious damage to even a BB by hitting the citadel. Ideally would be less effective vs cruisers/DD's (meant more as a Anti-BB specialization of the ship) Plane total on deck should be around 40 planes of a 90 plane hanger, initial losses should be easily replaced, however after that will be the regen which should take time to get back to full strength. Sorry this isn't my usual heavy detail work (plus side, less of a wall to read I guess) but I've tossed this together from bits I had in the last hour to get the thing up so if by chance they think the idea works there's time to swap it out before 8.0. Any feedback that's constructive is more than welcome and if anyone has some of the damage numbers/pen numbers even better and I can fold them in. At this point Wargaming's made it clear this rework is going to happen whether we like it or not, so at least might as well try and see if they take any proposals I have that will cut down on things I hate about it and this point bonus if it solves others issues with things cause I'm likely the only one this bent out of shape over the history aspect. And this one just made top of my list.
  7. landedkiller

    What should I do?

    I am looking to get USS Alaska and am dissatisfied with the current CV rework. I only have 12k in free xp, but could get 239,000 free xp back and 5,000 doubloons for trading in Shokaku. I really like that Halloween camo, but the ship is unplayable now. In addition, I was thinking about trading in Saipan for doubloons 9,700 and keeping Enterprize and Kaga. The carriers just seem vastly different from 8.0 in these new hot fixes. I am looking to make a decision by update 8.1 or soon after. The practice will continue in co-op for me, only getting 20k damage max out of the carriers since the rework. So In the end trade in Shokaku for 239,000 free xp and 5,000 doubloons and hope to grind out the rest of the free xp or trade in Shokaku and Saipan for 14,700 doubloons and 239,000 free xp? Again this is for USS Alaska Which is confirmed for 1,000,000 and I only have 12,000 in free xp.
  8. So, look - I want UK CV's. Us CV players have been climbing up and down the walls doing exorcist head spins waiting on a new line. Hell, I still have my suggestions for RTS UK and German CV's in my signature, till I get some more done on my insane "If it can have a line, a premium or whatever I'mma suggest it here" thread. Which will include 1-2 UK lines, full lines, with odd tiers, and same with Germany. But with how this rework has gone and all, and what I've seen relating to their development - they need to be tossed on the back burner for a bit. First off, you lot need to get the rework sorted out, and I highly doubt, unless 8.2/3 is more than 6 months out, you will have this fixed by then. And even then, we, the players, need to get settled in on whatever the hell this finally looks like. Before you throw another line and whatever it will entail. Second, aside from you guys needing to crack open some history books, throwing in it's (incorrect unless your using the ice CV) level carpet bombing thing as flavour, is just not a good idea to do full line and base it around that and hope it works. Especially when it's a nation known more for using rockets and TB's off CV's not DB's. Third is we do not need another "well we didn't have enough data" fiasco like this rework. Now, if your going to end in the smaller version of the ice carrier for a line that carries some bigger aircraft that level bomb and/or carpet bomb, somewhat begrudgingly on the others that aren't mini ice island, fine. Current line I've seen on the other hand I'll fight you on that even after you release them. But test these 2 things on live server before you dedicate UK as having them. You've used premiums as test beds before, time to do it again. When it comes to level bombing in general, I can think of no better ship to test this with than Kaga. I am vehemently against IJN line having AP bombs, and nothing but AP bombs, but Kaga is one of the few ships that should really have the option. Add the option to have C6N's (as it lacks the correct B5N's) swap in place of the D4Y using the AP bombs in level attacks - which is exactly what happened in history as the B5N and C6N were the only ones that could carry them and use them only in a level bombing flight. I'd say have a torp swap out option but I feel that would likely get used far too little. But this can let us try it out and give feedback, and get data, and see if players actually respond to it well. What's better - an option on a CV you've already made your money on going unused because players aren't keen on it, or developing an entire line that goes unused because of it? When it comes to the carpet bombing idea, well, I've got 2 suggestions for that, both of which use some existing resources that can speed up dev time and get it out faster. The first, seeing as not only do you have a stock hull but the entire ship sitting unused now, is USS Shangri-La, an Essex class carrier, sporting PBJ-H's armed with say 4x 500 pound bombs per plane, and used also as the TB's, with P-51D's with rockets, at tier 8. Stock hull Essex, and tweaks you need to make her Shangri-La, then it's really just modeling the new planes. The other is what helped lead to that name being used, Hornet, a Yorktown Class, from the Doolittle raid. No TB's, but 4 B-25's with I think it was 4x 500 pound bombs, which you can have 16 on deck (number used) with 4 launching each time and either attacking in 1 run of 4 or 8 launch with 2 runs of 4. And F4F wildcat's - which Hornet had that day, just stored below decks that you can throw rockets on, as inaccurate as it would be, or have them serve as actual DB's. Shangri-La as a tier 8, Hornet as 6 (given it's not anywhere near as modified as E), and if you didn't want to change Kaga at all both could also test level bombing in general and see response as a one off ship before making a line based on the concept. Bonus points if you make them free xp/coal so more of us can get our hands on them to test, and so we have less reason to revolt at any changes cause technically free ship (unlike the GC). After what you've pulled with the rework, don't just double down on this UK CV "flavour" and push it out on yet another deadline. Sideline the line for now, give us 1 or 2 depending on what route you go here ships that are at least for now, one offs of the idea to prove that it can work, be fun, and be balanced. Because when AP was brought in on E sure, it was annoying as hell when it showed up, we said AP bombs needed to be nerfed, but it was one ship - it wasn't really a problem till you didn't nerf it but added it to the line. Iwaki Alpha proved smoke based cruisers could work, with some tweaks to make them a tad less op. Scharnhorst proved torps on a BB and undergunned BB's, a list of premium ships and evens that proved a future concept for a ship, a line, whatever, could work. Give us even just 1 ship as a demo of what you wanna do with UK's line so we can give you feedback so that your not adding nearly as much to the fire or starting anew one. There were 32 planned, 24 built, Essex class carriers. Aside from Essex as the tier representative, I think we can easily spare 1 or 6 of them as test beds for ideas, let alone Independence class, or better yet, another sidelined ship - Bogue, of which UK had 34 as Attacker and Ruler class, with TBF/M's that carried multiple bombs, or even Swordfish with numerous smaller ones. HMS Attacker, Arbiter, Hunter, or Reaper, with Seafires equipped with single bombs, or F4F's and Sea Hurricanes with rockets or bombs, and the TBF's or Swordfish with multiple bombs, or torpedoes, or rockets or being completely interchangeable. An open live server test, on a larger scale, of the concepts.
  9. DDG_53_John_Paul_Jones

    Saipan/Kaga Nerf NEEDED

    Nothing is more annoying than being placed in a match against a Saipan/Kaga. They are both broken when it comes to Air superiority/Attacks. Sure, the Saipan doesn't have great strike squad sizes but the Kaga is so OP. The strikes are monstrous, But that is semi-bearable. Now the Saipan is REALLY F****** BROKEN. So a person who played countless hours and isn't too [edited] when it comes to carriers gets run over by a strafe slinging Saipan. It can strafe out of dogfights without losing planes, It takes 6 planes to Kill 2 of the planes of ONE squadron, and if you are lucky the third plane of the squad. I personally own the Saipan, Great ship. However, I never play it because it is not fun- Even if the other team has a REALLY good carrier player and I still beat them. I can easily outmatch them by using the strafing technique or by throwing squads at them. Oh, I forgot to mention the Saipan can hold 22 fighters and 25 torpedo bombers. So I can essentially throw fighters away and only take 1 minute to get off the deck compared to the 1:30 of a ranger. Any comments Ideas? -
  10. FirstWooba

    Premium CV Refund

    Hello there. I've been playing WoWs for over 2 years now and as you can tell I rarely post. I've largely been happy with the game and overall development. I've long been one of the better CVs around (not the best but fair enough) and I've always enjoyed the gameplay. Because I enjoyed the gameplay I bought both the Saipan and the Kaga. I would like the option to exist for a refund, not in doubloons, but in the same currency people purchased their ships with. I went to work, I earned my money, and I took my time and decided what I wanted to purchase. The fact that my ship will still be named "Kaga" or "Saipan" does not mean that what I will have after the update is the same as what I initially purchased. I am hoping you choose to do the right thing here and offer a refund in cash to the card used to make the purchase. To stem the inevitable salt and [edited] comments, let me say I'm not angry about the rework. I get the need for it...I see it 20 times a day. Within the first minute of a battle I've usually already won the air struggle, which means that ~70% of the time my team also wins the match. I get why WG would seek to change it to suit their broader player base. I'm fine with that decision. What I need is for WG to "get that" once the CV rework goes live I no longer have what I paid for, and do the right thing. If I later decide I want another ship I'll buy it like I bought my previous ones, but for now a refund is in order, and it's the only moral course of action. Anything less is just greed. In the event that a refund option does not happen, I whole-heartedly promise that you'll never see another dime out of me, and I know for a fact I'm not alone. With a dwindling player base, does WG really want to risk losing loyal players just to steal a few dollars? It is theft btw. To continue to hold my funds while denying me the item I purchased under the conditions I purchased it is considered theft just about anywhere in the world, and is illegal anywhere but online apparently.
  11. anonym_Hf93Jbjm9WjT

    Kagafoo fun.

    My best match of the weekend. Oh, except it's Monday already?
×