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

Tier 4-6 Premium Carriers?

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

173
[SIDE]
Members
714 posts
3,139 battles

Hey guys. Just seeing now that we have two Tier 7 Aircraft Carriers (Kaga & Saipan), and two Tier 8 Aircraft Carriers (Graf Zep & Enterprise)

 

Do you guys think we'll ever see any Premium carriers from Tier 4 to Tier 6? If so, what carriers?

 

Some of the few interesting choices would be a completed version of Sparviero (Though... would it be German or Italian? Who knows! lol)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,581
[ERN]
[ERN]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
10,101 posts
4,223 battles

i think we got enough premium cvs right now. I perfer if they finish working on the CV overhull that they promise

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
755
[SF-A]
Members
2,849 posts
5,548 battles

Nobody with a brain will buy a T4 or T5 premium CV without manual drops. Maybe T6 could use some diversity, but as MajorRenegade said, the tech trees need to be balanced first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,097
[_ARP_]
[_ARP_]
Supertester, Supertest Coordinator
11,944 posts
3,863 battles

About the only one I can think of off the top of my head would be Furious/Glourious/Courageous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,258
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,782 posts
14,856 battles
27 minutes ago, MajorRenegade said:

I perfer if they finish working on the CV overhull that they promise

SOON?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,196
[GWG]
[GWG]
Members
5,335 posts
9,424 battles

Casablanca class 'Gambier Bay' might be a good contender..  But at tier 5, it would never face off against the Yamato.

An AA nerfed 'Shoho' could be an IJN tier 5.

Not to mention opportunities for British tier 3 'HMS Argus' -- the very first CV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
25 posts
16 battles

The game needs balance.   Not ships that are the most op'd in the game for any ship type,   are always #1 for carry potential,  can sit in safety 99% of every match,  attack an demolish multiple ships at the same time,   can also lock down defense aircraft or scout with them all the while these planes unveiling the entire map,  stopping any progress or forward momentum making the match a stand still like nearly every match with 2 carriers in it.

If you cannot do all the things previously mentioned, then please play coop in that cv for 50 matches,  at the end of that you will be able to do it.  If you cannot you can ask Umikami to show you how to own in a match lol,  he will teach you many many things lol.

 

an you want a super powered one of those to be added to the others?

 

The game might need a decline of bb's played a bit but carriers should be limited to one per match.  Any more than that an it stalls an entire match an bb's just sit back by a zone wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,244
[SCCC]
Members
1,132 posts
5,571 battles

A T6 CV sure, but having a T4 or T5 is just a waste.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
87
[M_L]
[M_L]
Beta Testers
321 posts
8,831 battles

I've said it before, but if they put out a mission for an Attacker Class aka British Bogue with 2/2/0 with five aircraft a squad tomorrow I'd take it. As while it may not be good or the best first carrier to put out it's something. Not to mention they could put it out with minimal effort, and imply that the RN carriers or carrier rework was in process and likely to be put out by the end of the year. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,604 posts
3,573 battles
On 9/9/2017 at 0:11 PM, MajorRenegade said:

i think we got enough premium cvs right now. I perfer if they finish working on the CV overhull that they promise

Not to mention the disturbing trend of premium CV's being better than tech tree counterparts.  Graf Zeppelin is still better than Lex though...thats not saying much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
87
[M_L]
[M_L]
Beta Testers
321 posts
8,831 battles
1 hour ago, Palladia said:

Not to mention the disturbing trend of premium CV's being better than tech tree counterparts.  Graf Zeppelin is still better than Lex though...thats not saying much.

It's not that disturbing IMO. As players who enjoy and like playing that class/nation of ship will buy the premiums it means that mostly people who know what they are doing buy the premium carriers. As carriers can do well if the captain knows what they are doing they will do well. Since they cost money everyone who either doesn't enjoy or doesn't think that the carrier is worth the price due to them not being good enough won't buy it. Hence you get a subset of better captains in the premium carriers which is why they do better. A good number of premium ships are like this. The ship isn't inherently overpowered, when you take the 'average player' just about every premium ship is balanced. But if you put an above average player, or those who would be likely to buy and play the ship, in the ship suddenly it's way better than any of the tech tree counterparts. As the ship wouldn't sell if it was under-powered or even not quite competitive (look at Graf Zeppelin), there has to be a standard of balance between the ship stats and then if you filter out all the bad players by putting it behind a paywall suddenly any ship can be overpowered. For example take USS Flint, that ship is hard to get and performs way better than just about every other ship in it's tier. Not because the ship is inherently over powered but because those who got it know how to get the most out of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,604 posts
3,573 battles
2 minutes ago, Grathew said:

It's not that disturbing IMO. As players who enjoy and like playing that class/nation of ship will buy the premiums it means that mostly people who know what they are doing buy the premium carriers. As carriers can do well if the captain knows what they are doing they will do well. Since they cost money everyone who either doesn't enjoy or doesn't think that the carrier is worth the price due to them not being good enough won't buy it. Hence you get a subset of better captains in the premium carriers which is why they do better. A good number of premium ships are like this. The ship isn't inherently overpowered, when you take the 'average player' just about every premium ship is balanced. But if you put an above average player, or those who would be likely to buy and play the ship, in the ship suddenly it's way better than any of the tech tree counterparts. As the ship wouldn't sell if it was under-powered or even not quite competitive (look at Graf Zeppelin), there has to be a standard of balance between the ship stats and then if you filter out all the bad players by putting it behind a paywall suddenly any ship can be overpowered. For example take USS Flint, that ship is hard to get and performs way better than just about every other ship in it's tier. Not because the ship is inherently over powered but because those who got it know how to get the most out of it. 

Respectfully I disagree.  Premium carriers so far have all had gimmicks that put them above their tech tree counterparts and that is not only unhealthy,  its pay to win.  On par with I would not argue or see an issue,  but the trend so far is to make them flat out better.  The Saipan and Kaga are both excellent examples,  with the Saipan having tier 9 fighters, 1000pd bombs,  and two torpedo groups and the Kaga having hands down the best plane launched torpedo's in the game.  The Enterprise is a different example and may wind up being less of one once AP bombs are introduced,  but for the moment her gimmicks are said AP bombs and having a balanced loadout with USN planes.   The Zeppelin...we'll see where she goes.

Anyway my point is, it is important for premiums to be competitive but not flat out better than their counterparts and so far almost without exception CV premiums have been better.  Its a bad standard to set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
87
[M_L]
[M_L]
Beta Testers
321 posts
8,831 battles
17 minutes ago, Palladia said:

Respectfully I disagree.  Premium carriers so far have all had gimmicks that put them above their tech tree counterparts and that is not only unhealthy,  its pay to win.  On par with I would not argue or see an issue,  but the trend so far is to make them flat out better.  The Saipan and Kaga are both excellent examples,  with the Saipan having tier 9 fighters, 1000pd bombs,  and two torpedo groups and the Kaga having hands down the best plane launched torpedo's in the game.  The Enterprise is a different example and may wind up being less of one once AP bombs are introduced,  but for the moment her gimmicks are said AP bombs and having a balanced loadout with USN planes.   The Zeppelin...we'll see where she goes.

Anyway my point is, it is important for premiums to be competitive but not flat out better than their counterparts and so far almost without exception CV premiums have been better.  Its a bad standard to set.

 

 

I'd like to defend my position as I think I have some good reasoning behind my stance on why neither are overpowered. 

Any good carrier captain can shut down Kaga. It's alpha strike is all that Kaga has going for it. The fighters can be run over by any competent player and then it's just hunt the torpedo bombers. Or if you focus the torpedo bombers since they are the only damage Kaga can put out as the dive bombers are pretty wimpy. So as long as down torpedo bomber strikes are getting shot down the Kaga's game is ruined. So if more carrier captains focused on strike aircraft rather than killing fighters early on Kaga's stats would fall quickly. 

Saipan has to choose torpedoes or bombs torpedoes means that it isn't super powerful in the anti air role with torpedo bombers which only put down 6 torpedoes. Sure it may put those torpedoes down more accurately but it's only 6 of them. A total of 54 k potential the same as Ranger's torpedo bombers except Ranger can also have 21 dive bombers or 7 dive bombers and 7 fighters. As for the 1000lb bombs you get 1 flight of 8 or 9 bombers. You may not loose that many bombers thanks to the tier and the three fighter squads but you can't dot stack with only one bomber squad nor can you really force out DC usage like other carriers thanks to no torpedoes for floods. Either way a well played ranger can put out more damage than Saipan can. Not to mention that any aircraft you loose in Saipan is painful as you only have 48 aircraft. Honestly if Saipan had tier 7 or 8 aircraft it would be super under powered due to having 2/3s the hangar and at best 21 aircraft in the air. 

While I understand that both of those ships are seen as OP if you really look at them they aren't that much better than anything else at tier 7. While I may not have stats to back it up, I think Hiryu is the best carrier all round at the tier. Hiryu's offence isn't any weaker than Kaga just balanced for a more DOT heavy game play while the fighters are way better. Hiryu isn't a premium it's the standard line ship. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
858
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
3,840 posts
4,224 battles
On 9/9/2017 at 0:38 PM, Umikami said:

SOON?

 

SoonTM-804x356.png

 

Edited by Carrier_Lexington

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,258
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,782 posts
14,856 battles
On ‎9‎/‎9‎/‎2017 at 9:57 AM, Wolcott said:

The RN had several lend-lease Bogue CVEs, so that could make a nice premium. HMS Emperor perhaps?

This would be a quick and easy way to test Fleet Air Arm Aircraft in action!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,578
[TASH]
Members
4,993 posts
7,912 battles
On 9/9/2017 at 0:37 PM, Goose21891 said:

About the only one I can think of off the top of my head would be Furious/Glourious/Courageous.

A couple ships that might work could be USS Wolverine (IX-64) and/or USS Sable (IX-81).  They're both obscenely slow, slower than even the Bogue, have paddle wheels for propulsion, no armor, no defensive armament, and no hangar deck.  Their weaknesses mean they probably won't work beyond T5, especially since even the Bogue could technically park more planes on her deck, but the aircraft they used were Avengers, Hellcats, Corsairs, and Dauntlesses - T7 at earliest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,940 posts
5 hours ago, ValkyrWarframe said:

A couple ships that might work could be USS Wolverine (IX-64) and/or USS Sable (IX-81).  They're both obscenely slow, slower than even the Bogue, have paddle wheels for propulsion, no armor, no defensive armament, and no hangar deck.  Their weaknesses mean they probably won't work beyond T5, especially since even the Bogue could technically park more planes on her deck, but the aircraft they used were Avengers, Hellcats, Corsairs, and Dauntlesses - T7 at earliest.

Actually Bogue CVEs did carry Avengers, Hellcats & Corsairs (the latter with the Fleet Air Arm, not sure about the USN). The Bogue we currently have in the game is a heavily nerfed version of what she is really capable of. Heck, for some reason even the GM FM-2 is significantly inferior to the Grumman F4F-4.

pha0111.jpg

F4U Corsair on HMS Arbiter, a Bogue-class CVE.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
87
[M_L]
[M_L]
Beta Testers
321 posts
8,831 battles

The ship isn't nerfed, the aircraft are. It's to help keep AA and aircraft roughly in the same league. Or at least that's what I heard when someone asked the Devs about it 

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.

×