Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Mr_Alex

Make CV's great again

13 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

469
[-JEDI]
Alpha Tester
2,667 posts
8,151 battles

I think its time that WG made CV's great again, for example IJN should have fast torpedo along with lethal damage and USN should have good dive bombers, but will this be ever done at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
493
[KVLT]
[KVLT]
Members
2,307 posts
9,146 battles

IJN torps do less damage than the USN counterparts and people cry about that yet you want them more potent.  I mean im ok with this but i imagine a large number wont be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
469
[-JEDI]
Alpha Tester
2,667 posts
8,151 battles

IJN torps do less damage than the USN counterparts and people cry about that yet you want them more potent.  I mean im ok with this but i imagine a large number wont be.

 

problem is IJN torpedo and aerial torpedo did have a reputation for being lethal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
493
[KVLT]
[KVLT]
Members
2,307 posts
9,146 battles

 

problem is IJN torpedo and aerial torpedo did have a reputation for being lethal

 

Yes because WG has done a superior job at keeping this game historically accurate regardless of balance implications

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
137
[AR]
Members
364 posts
20,931 battles

As someone whom has always defended CVs, I would say the dmg potential of IJN CV torps are fine as is. Although I think that the massively high USN CV detection range may need some looking at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37
[SAMMI]
Members
408 posts
7,514 battles

As someone whom has always defended CVs, I would say the dmg potential of IJN CV torps are fine as is. Although I think that the massively high USN CV detection range may need some looking at.

 

tru dat 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
11,026 posts
30,665 battles

CVs are already a complete WG fabrication in every way other than superficial appearance.

 

WG needs to ditch the rest of the historical nonsense and rework CVs into something that works with the game, instead of a compromise between the game and real life.

 

I also love the complete lack of any actual points being made in the OP.

 

IJN air dropped torps are already fast and lethal.

 

USN DBs are already powerful (almost ridiculously so).

 

You have neither justified why CVs are weak (they aren't) or why they need buffs (they don't).

Edited by issm
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
469
[-JEDI]
Alpha Tester
2,667 posts
8,151 battles

CVs are already a complete WG fabrication in every way other than superficial appearance.

 

WG needs to ditch the rest of the historical nonsense and rework CVs into something that works with the game, instead of a compromise between the game and real life.

 

I also love the complete lack of any actual points being made in the OP.

 

IJN air dropped torps are already fast and lethal.

 

USN DBs are already powerful (almost ridiculously so).

 

You have neither justified why CVs are weak (they aren't) or why they need buffs (they don't).

 

​Historically in game, IJN aerial torpedo used to be 41 knots in terms of travel speed rather than the 39 knots travel speed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
11,026 posts
30,665 battles

​Historically in game, IJN aerial torpedo used to be 41 knots in terms of travel speed rather than the 39 knots travel speed

 

Ooooh 2 knots.

 

Apparently that's a big deal, but more closer range firepower than a destroyer isn't.

 

Well, tell you what, I don't have any problems landing torps with the "slow" torps, so they're fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
469
[-JEDI]
Alpha Tester
2,667 posts
8,151 battles

The thing is I think IJN aerial torpedo should have their travel speed of 41 knts back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
137
[AR]
Members
364 posts
20,931 battles

CVs are already a complete WG fabrication in every way other than superficial appearance.

 

WG needs to ditch the rest of the historical nonsense and rework CVs into something that works with the game, instead of a compromise between the game and real life.

 

I also love the complete lack of any actual points being made in the OP.

 

IJN air dropped torps are already fast and lethal.

 

USN DBs are already powerful (almost ridiculously so).

 

You have neither justified why CVs are weak (they aren't) or why they need buffs (they don't).

 

Get over your hysterical anti CV rants boy.

 

CV's are fine as is, only thing that needs to be looked at are USN CV detection ranges. CV torps only deal 8.5k dmg on IJN and 9.8k on USN. You won't be dealing with nearly as many USN torps as IJN so there's that. DBs also only deal 4.6 on IJN and 7.5 on USN and 10.8k by T8+ planes. You also take into account torpedo bulges that reduces torp dmg by at least 13%+++ and another 3% from dmg control mod 1 and CV torps are not nearly as scary as they seem. Really it takes as much as 2-3 CV torps to deal the same amount of dmg that 1 IJN DD torp does or more.

 

Then there are DB's. Auto DB's are almost useless save against BB's, and even still less efficient. You need to be skilled in manual DB drops (like myself) to make CV's effective at all. Auto DB's will almost always miss on DD's, thus you really need to know how to time a manual drop on them. Also, even with a nicely timed manual DB drop, most of those bombs wont hit the target or are likely to.

 

Just be happy there are no guys operating those AA mounts on your ship, otherwise I would strafe them out of the way then unleash my payload on you.

 

CV's are fine as is, kid.

Edited by Aiser50

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.

×