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

CV Ammunition Buffs

27 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

520
[-FBS-]
Members
2,646 posts
4,290 battles

So, from the patch notes we have:

  • The "Air Groups Modification 2" upgrade will now, in addition to the 20% bonus to fighters' HP, increase their ammunition count by 50%
  • Dogfighting Expert Moved from Level 3 to Level 1. Added a bonus: +10% to ammunition count of fighters.

 

Interesting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
520
[-FBS-]
Members
2,646 posts
4,290 battles

A change to CVs that isn't a nerf?

 

 

Whoa.

 

Probably to help offset the use of evasive maneuvers. 
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
522
[IN3PT]
Beta Testers
1,703 posts
6,511 battles

Well, didn't they say they wanted to see more air superiority CVs and less all strike?

 

Still doesn't solve the American issue of over specialization, but at least it's a carrot in favor of Air sup, rather than a stick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,683
[-K-]
Supertest Coordinator, Alpha Tester, WoWS Community Contributors, Wiki Editor
6,522 posts
28,454 battles

 

Probably to help offset the use of evasive maneuvers. 

 

Which is hilarious because strafing would have been the only way to reliably kill a squadron using that skill, separating skilled players from the "point and click" players.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
520
[-FBS-]
Members
2,646 posts
4,290 battles

 

Which is hilarious because strafing would have been the only way to reliably kill a squadron using that skill, separating skilled players from the "point and click" players.  

 

+75% HP will most likely need two strafes to kill a squad.

 

So, probably a net nerf to AS. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
323
[KOOKS]
Alpha Tester
2,869 posts
4,864 battles

I had seen this from, like, two patches ago (even before 0.6.0) on test, but I wasn't sure if it would make it to live.

 

...now I regret not checking it out... There will be someone out there that go for full-on fighter build just for +60% ammo, and will low tier fighters get almost bottomless magazines?:unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
520
[-FBS-]
Members
2,646 posts
4,290 battles

I had seen this from, like, two patches ago (even before 0.6.0) on test, but I wasn't sure if it would make it to live.

 

...now I regret not checking it out... There will be someone out there that go for full-on fighter build just for +60% ammo, and will low tier fighters get almost bottomless magazines?:unsure:

 

Inb4 Bogue OP

Oh wait... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
5,281 posts
12,191 battles

It's basically a nerf to anything that isn't USN AS, and a highly unneeded buff to Saipan. Evasive maneuvers needs no bloody counter as is because attrition rates have been an issue for a long time. Not that that skill really acts as a buff when it has plenty of other drawbacks. Strafing will be that much more of an issue after the last damned ammo buff (press alt to delete enemy planes is not skill, it's poor game balance). Mid tier USN will gain that much more an edge over IJN, even without AS, Upper tiers USN AS will decimate, IJN will have the edge over all the strike USN CV's because they will still exist because either A: they need the ability to deal damage for the team because the DB's aren't enough and trying to rely on your team to deal damage is a crap shoot and B: playing AS ships still rewards way less than a strike CV because scouting and downing planes mean precisely nothing. Oh right and Saipan already has the edge on any CV at tier 7 not running DFE and/or AS skills, like it needed another damned ammo buff to make that worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[BOTES]
Members
2,393 posts
10,555 battles

How is it a nerf to non USN AS? It lets people strafe more. Makes it much harder for a 1/1/1 USN CV to bait strafes and win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
4,302 posts
7,932 battles

I don't really see this as a nerf to IJN, because more ammo overall will benefit them more than USN. USN already has enough ammo to reliably strafe and still combat afterwards, or to strafe multiple times. IJN getting more ammo will help them a lot more because they face more issues with ammo shortages. To put it this way, IJN fighters will now have about as much ammo as USN fighters do now. USN fighters will still have proportionally more, but that's of limited utility because there's only so much ammo a wing can consume before it has to RTB to replace damaged planes, or has the chance to based on battle conditions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,256 posts
4,322 battles

I'm on my phone and researching sucks.

 

Lets say for arguments sake USN has 100 ammo and IJN has 50 ammo. Increasing both ammos by 50% IJN goes to 75 and USN goes to 150. The proportion of increased ammo goes to USN. Also USN already has the more destructive strafes and will proportionally get more.

 

A better example might be if USN can get 4 strafes it will get 6, if ijn can get 3 the get 4 1/2. While it does benefit both nations extra strafes is more beneficial to the nation with more existing ammo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
363 posts
6,572 battles

Well, didn't they say they wanted to see more air superiority CVs and less all strike?

 

They want more? USN AS CV's are already ridiculously broken at higher tiers, and it's whats killing the CV meta game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
520
[-FBS-]
Members
2,646 posts
4,290 battles

 

They want more? USN AS CV's are already ridiculously broken at higher tiers, and it's whats killing the CV meta game. 

 

If by broken you mean can't do jack to the other 11 ships on the enemy team, I agree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
323
[KOOKS]
Alpha Tester
2,869 posts
4,864 battles

The Lex's stock T7 fighter gets a little over 100 loadout with just the fighter mod in the second slot.

 

...hmmmmmmm...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,367
Members
2,688 posts
4,560 battles

Well, didn't they say they wanted to see more air superiority CVs and less all strike?

 

Still doesn't solve the American issue of over specialization, but at least it's a carrot in favor of Air sup, rather than a stick.

 

Can you find a source for that?  Personally find it hard to believe.  I already see way more AS then strikes as it is,  can't see them wanting to tip that balance even further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
522
[IN3PT]
Beta Testers
1,703 posts
6,511 battles

 

They want more? USN AS CV's are already ridiculously broken at higher tiers, and it's whats killing the CV meta game. 

 

I don't know enough about higher tier CVs to comment really (ground my way to Lex, but she's pretty much just a port queen, might have taken her out once)

 

As for what WG wants? They stated before (a Q&A I think, maybe Sub-Octavian?) that they wanted CVs to play more "support" and less "bane of the high seas" (paraphrased but that was the gist of it), that (to me) means more AS and less strike. 

 

I didn't say WG was doing *smart* things with CVs, just being impressed that they were using a "carrot" rather than a "stick". Last time they modified the economy to punish the strike CV... while spotting rewards still don't really cover for AS CVs (felt like a "stick" to me and I went from part-time CV captain to no-time).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,343
[NG-NL]
Members
7,136 posts
12,568 battles

It sounds like the ammo buff is simply to counter Evasive's 75% HP buff.

 

However, competent CV captains like me will simply use Evasive to get our bombers out of the AA, then order them to a location near carrier so red fighters cannot catch up without running into friendly AA.

 

I fail to see the point of carriers using AS after T6 though. Emptying a 72-plane hangar is tough when the enemy CV is competent. Plus CV economy got no tweaks, and it's too boring just playing cat and mouse with fighters. I find the fun in CV comes from smashing enemy ships with TB and DB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,256 posts
4,322 battles

I would even say that t6 as is a waste. The aa starts making it redundant.

 

You are probably right with the + 50% ammo to compensate for EM. But who really revenge kills bombers. All it really is is a waste of ammo unless you can strafe multiple squadrons. Only in rare situation is it better to kill retreating bomber than to have your fighters in the air. Often I would rather rearm my fighters than case

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,367
Members
2,688 posts
4,560 battles

 

I don't know enough about higher tier CVs to comment really (ground my way to Lex, but she's pretty much just a port queen, might have taken her out once)

 

As for what WG wants? They stated before (a Q&A I think, maybe Sub-Octavian?) that they wanted CVs to play more "support" and less "bane of the high seas" (paraphrased but that was the gist of it), that (to me) means more AS and less strike. 

 

I didn't say WG was doing *smart* things with CVs, just being impressed that they were using a "carrot" rather than a "stick". Last time they modified the economy to punish the strike CV... while spotting rewards still don't really cover for AS CVs (felt like a "stick" to me and I went from part-time CV captain to no-time).

 

Then USN need to have a valid balanced option.  I know,  preaching to the choir,  but its hard for the USN to be scouts from T5-8 and deal damage at the same time.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
522
[IN3PT]
Beta Testers
1,703 posts
6,511 battles

 

Then USN need to have a valid balanced option.  I know,  preaching to the choir,  but its hard for the USN to be scouts from T5-8 and deal damage at the same time.

 

Agreed. And, shortly before I got Lexi, she had an awesome 2/1/1 loadout.

 

WG, in their infinite wisdom, decided this loadout *had* to go. As it stands, I hate the idea of running her 1/1/1 and am hesitant to spend the free xp to get to 2/0/2. There are days I'm tempted to free XP the strike loadout , 68% WR with strike Ranger, so I have reason to believe i could succeed with it, but I was pretty tired of being yelled at by people for not "giving them air cover" and just haven't summoned the will to tolerate that again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×