Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
The_Big_Red_1

Shokaku vs Lexington

37 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

312
[KOOKS]
Alpha Tester
2,837 posts
4,849 battles
2 hours ago, HBZK100 said:

While I do agree that USN CVs need a better balanced configuration. The strike configuration isn't as difficult to use as some of you think. Sure, It's gona be a pain with Shokaku fighters, but if you are patient and play smart, you can still get in a good chunk of damage.

 

Hardest part for Shokaku is that you have to multitask a LOT, so when shokaku is busy trying to hit ships, you can use that advantage to go hit other ships in another direction, he'll have a hard time using both fighters and bombers at the same time.

Strike US carrier? You only need to worry about striking...while your allies ask where the heck is the air cover. Nobody spec for AA because it's rare to see carriers outside of using one...and I doubt that players even pay attention of what is going on up in the sky when they are not carrier... expecting the carrier to provide the air cover.

When the US carrier player load fighters people ask why don't they help in sinking ships...when they load bombers they ask for air cover...when they get everything they have too few to perform effectively in its work. US carriers that are not premium are just screwed all over, and other player's opinion on you are going to be low. Why do US carriers even exist then?

With the Enterprise in the picture the Lex now has two competitors...at least the E's has a lot more potatoes compared to Shokaku and other Lex...despite having 5x2 fighters they are of less concern...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,198
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
16,913 posts
15,583 battles
3 hours ago, pyantoryng said:

Strike US carrier? You only need to worry about striking...while your allies ask where the heck is the air cover. Nobody spec for AA because it's rare to see carriers outside of using one...and I doubt that players even pay attention of what is going on up in the sky when they are not carrier... expecting the carrier to provide the air cover.

When the US carrier player load fighters people ask why don't they help in sinking ships...when they load bombers they ask for air cover...when they get everything they have too few to perform effectively in its work. US carriers that are not premium are just screwed all over, and other player's opinion on you are going to be low. Why do US carriers even exist then?

With the Enterprise in the picture the Lex now has two competitors...at least the E's has a lot more potatoes compared to Shokaku and other Lex...despite having 5x2 fighters they are of less concern...

 

This Ranked Season I've been using Independence a lot.  All but one have been AS, the other was Stock, I dare not do Strike.  That said, I average a Clear Skies every match with her and yet people complain that I'm not doing enough in the air to protect them.

 

I sweep the skies clear of opposing aircraft and get Clear Skies award, even catapult aircraft, permaspot DDs and their torpedoes, spot for gunfire... And the team will still potato its way to defeat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
312
[KOOKS]
Alpha Tester
2,837 posts
4,849 battles
3 hours ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

 

This Ranked Season I've been using Independence a lot.  All but one have been AS, the other was Stock, I dare not do Strike.  That said, I average a Clear Skies every match with her and yet people complain that I'm not doing enough in the air to protect them.

 

I sweep the skies clear of opposing aircraft and get Clear Skies award, even catapult aircraft, permaspot DDs and their torpedoes, spot for gunfire... And the team will still potato its way to defeat.

Well, it's Ranked, and you can hope that your team perform better than randoms...Spotting is still useless without somebody to take advantage of it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,844 posts
3,781 battles
On 5/31/2017 at 5:29 PM, LaughingLupine said:

Theres nothing wrong with the load outs.  If you want to run a ballanced loaf play Jap, if you want to specialize play US.  Its that simple.  

 

I hate the fighter they shove diwn my troat at teir 9 and 10 on the US side.  I'd trade it in for a bomber or a torp in a heartbeat.  

 

The Bogue strike is hard because your allys have no AA.  But from the InDy up you have no need for fighters if you know what your doing.  (Reguardles of what the BBs are crying about in the chat box.)

 

 

The problem with that is that IJN's 'balanced' loadout is her strike loadout too.  Even her AS loadouts have more damage potential and more anti-air potential then the USN's equivalent.  So no,  this is not balanced in the least.  

The issues come down to the numbers.  USN gives up its anti-air potential for the highest theoretical damage while IJN gives up nothing for the highest actual damage.  IJN damage relies on torpedo's,  USN's on bombers.  HE bombers.  And while yes,  setting fires is nice and all the damage from fires is 100% repairable.  Torpedo damage?  Not so much.  But even beyond that,  USN damage relies on RNG dependent HE bombs.  Its RNG on whether or not they hit,  then its RNG on whether or not they deal damage, then its RNG on whether or not they start fires.  IJN,  on the other hand,  relies almost entirely on the players ability to manual drop torpedo's directly onto targets and thus is much less RNG dependent.  

Right now AP bombs are not set up to counter this.  Right now AP bombs are just one more form of crippling overspecialization for the USN and once again suffer all the setbacks of being RNG dive bombers.  

That being said,  like I think it was Tengu said,  USN can still perform well.  They just have an uphill struggle against IJN with IJN being king of the mountain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
80
[PNGYN]
Alpha Tester
1,306 posts
2,044 battles
19 minutes ago, Palladia said:

The problem with that is that IJN's 'balanced' loadout is her strike loadout too.  Even her AS loadouts have more damage potential and more anti-air potential then the USN's equivalent.  So no,  this is not balanced in the least.  

The issues come down to the numbers.  USN gives up its anti-air potential for the highest theoretical damage while IJN gives up nothing for the highest actual damage.  IJN damage relies on torpedo's,  USN's on bombers.  HE bombers.  And while yes,  setting fires is nice and all the damage from fires is 100% repairable.  Torpedo damage?  Not so much.  But even beyond that,  USN damage relies on RNG dependent HE bombs.  Its RNG on whether or not they hit,  then its RNG on whether or not they deal damage, then its RNG on whether or not they start fires.  IJN,  on the other hand,  relies almost entirely on the players ability to manual drop torpedo's directly onto targets and thus is much less RNG dependent.  

Right now AP bombs are not set up to counter this.  Right now AP bombs are just one more form of crippling overspecialization for the USN and once again suffer all the setbacks of being RNG dive bombers.  

That being said,  like I think it was Tengu said,  USN can still perform well.  They just have an uphill struggle against IJN with IJN being king of the mountain.

another reason why USN carriers need to be seriously buffed to level the playing field

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
312
[KOOKS]
Alpha Tester
2,837 posts
4,849 battles

US tree carriers seem to only be balanced against themselves. The introduction of JPN carriers broke that balance beyond repair...shifting Independence to T6 just because Zuiho can't go beyond 30 being one of those things...then again, having Baltimore hull at tier 6 seems unacceptable to some.

If 2/2/2 is the end-all choice for JPN, US is denied of it when a perfectly good option already exist in the shape of 2/1/1...though that won't fix Ranger because it doesn't have that in the first place...what about the classic 1/2/1 retooled to 1/1/2 offered as upgrade in Ranger. The rigidity of loadout upgrade in "balance, AS, strike" leave no room for those I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,864
[-Y-]
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
5,535 posts
7,666 battles

Lexington with AS loadout beats Shokaku, everytime. But as I have found out, it quickly gets boring. On the other hand, teammates in random matches make less noise when they have aircover (even occasionally, if very rarely, compliment their lex!) 

Easier to focus and disrupt Shokaku with your AS Lexington as they will be busy going nuts over multitasking, just bait their fighters and shadow box their TBs until rest of your fleet gains an upperhand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,844 posts
3,781 battles
On 7/6/2017 at 1:41 PM, pyantoryng said:

US tree carriers seem to only be balanced against themselves. The introduction of JPN carriers broke that balance beyond repair...shifting Independence to T6 just because Zuiho can't go beyond 30 being one of those things...then again, having Baltimore hull at tier 6 seems unacceptable to some.

If 2/2/2 is the end-all choice for JPN, US is denied of it when a perfectly good option already exist in the shape of 2/1/1...though that won't fix Ranger because it doesn't have that in the first place...what about the classic 1/2/1 retooled to 1/1/2 offered as upgrade in Ranger. The rigidity of loadout upgrade in "balance, AS, strike" leave no room for those I guess.

Rangers basic loadout needs to be a 1/1/2.  Having basic loadouts be crud is just silly and I have no idea why they thought that'd be a good idea.  Ranger needs a 1/1/2,  Lex needs a 1/1/2,  Essex needs its 2/1/2 back.  Pretty sure just browsing at the stats that it isn't going to break anything but it might help bring those ships up a notch or two.  Not like...abysmally below their IJN counterparts.

Of course when we have a third option introduced we might see some parity.  Having just two lines is hard to balance,  maybe adding in a third will give the USN something to be good against and the IJN something to be bad against.  I mean don't get me wrong,  I'd rather see skilled gameplay trump paper rock scissors but right now the USN need anything they can get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
100
[BZERK]
Members
741 posts
3,413 battles

I've played Lexington quite a few times against the Shokaku; if you get some incredibly fortunately damn lucky (how many synonyms for this do I have to use?) strafes off against his fighters and strike planes, you might just give yourself a chance. I've had all my fighters get killed while all my plane kills are just fighters, leaving his strike element largely untouched (save against AA ships.) Just play it right and you'll come out on top. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×