Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Kevik70

AS CV is Pure Cancer

69 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

294
[O7]
[O7]
Beta Testers
1,252 posts
7,648 battles

I have found that AS load out for CV's is pure cancer and quite frankly I am loving every moment of it. That's right, I said I am loving CV AS cancer mode and I don't regret saying that at all. :cap_cool:

 

I do suppose I should explain my reasoning. Today I finally decided to start going down the US CV line again in preparation for the US CV rework by unlocking and purchasing the Tier 7 US CV, USS Ranger. Now normally  I would have played it with the balanced load-out much like I did with the IJN line but my fighter play has always been a little lacking and I wanted to get better. So I decided to go AS Ranger and focus a bit on improving my CV game-play.  :fish_book:

 

Let me tell you, I have not once regretted doing so. I have owned almost every enemy CV in the air war, Kaga's wrecked, Hiryu's didn't stand a chance, Saipan's  well a little tough but I came out on top, even opposing AS Ranger's could not stop me. (A few CV's did put up a good fight, for sure) So far I have an average of 34 planes shot down per game, and I hit a personal best today with 57 planes shot down in one match.  Also farmed 2 clear skies just for giggles. :cap_rambo:

 

Now going AS would typically lead to seriously reduced damage numbers as you lack a torpedo squad. However I think I've been holding my own on the damage output with an average of 71k damage per game.  Sure other players can do better but that's still nothing to scoff at. Typically my damage came from BBs using their DCP on the first dive bomber attack while my second squadron lied in wait or that one time a KGV let four fires burn at once without ever using DCP. Sure I don't have the deletion power but my div mates can typically take care of those I can't. I think in my 14 battles in the Ranger today I got at least 3 witherers and a handful of arsonists thrown in for good measure. :Smile_playing:

 

Right now I am already half way to the Lexington and a nice 1688 WTR in the ship to boot. I am quite please with my performance today and I almost feel sorry for a few of the opposing CV's I played against. (Except that one 34% WR player, I still don't understand how someone can be that bad at this game.....) 

 

Here are some of the games I actually screen shotted and my accompanying stats for today.

Spoiler

shot-17_11.14_14_06.49-0117.thumb.jpg.cff80e51eb83a16e3d7edce38857af1f.jpgshot-17_11.15_02_28.08-0127.thumb.jpg.ffeca66eb6cfac4e44a5e8863420652d.jpg5a0bf4db72f75_RangerLove.thumb.png.b4f0f5adb0da5c61df29a987c1bf4b85.png

It's those double diver bombers that really give the AS Ranger (and by extension other US CV's) some potential to do a decent amount of damage. AS Saipan is great for shooting down planes but the one Dive Bomber squad just can't rack up the fire damage in the same fashion. AS Hiryu is has 2 DB squads and even a torpedo squad but the smaller sizes of each squadron means losing even 1 planes can be quite crippling to a strike. (Especially if your loitering planes around waiting for BBs to use DCP) That and the reserves for strike planes in Hiryu is reduced by spitting reserves between to types of strike planes. (I have noticed that the TP tend to die very quickly as well) However a 7 plane squadron from the Ranger(with proper captain skill) can typically muscle through fairly decent BB AA and still land several hits on target and the second squadron means you can set perma fires quite easily. Overall the AS Ranger has quite the damage potential, even without a torpedo squad with extensive reserves for both Fighters and DBs.

 

 

It feels nice to brag a bit but I do suppose I should put a few tips and pointers in how to play AS Ranger. (Though with only 14 battles I am certainly no expert) Basically just position your fighters between your team and the opposing CV's strike planes and use strafe abundantly to wipe out whole squadrons at once. (though do try to avoid enemy strafes in return) For the bombers, pick on BBs of opportunity who have left the cover of AA cruisers and enemy fighters. First set the targeted BB on fire with your first set of Dive bombers and if he uses DCP then move in with the second set for perma fires. (If he lets the first of set fires set then you still profit :Smile_coin:) Last tip is to spot opposing dds as often as possible, since you don't really have the ability to go after them yourself, you need to be the eyes for your team so they can kill the offending enemy DDs for you.

 

All in all, those tips are pretty good for any CV player no matter the load-out and can get fairly excellent results if played right. Anyways, best of luck to all of you and perhaps we shall see each other out on the battle field. 

 

Also, jokes on anyone who thought this was going to be a CV rage thread, lol. :Smile_teethhappy:

 

 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
537 posts
2,753 battles

AS is really really gay, for lack of a better term, in unranked random battle. 

 

Get some skill and learn to play strike. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
294
[O7]
[O7]
Beta Testers
1,252 posts
7,648 battles
15 minutes ago, Desmios said:

AS is really really gay, for lack of a better term, in unranked random battle. 

 

Get some skill and learn to play strike. 

It is the bane of all Strike CV players, and I am loving their misery. :Smile_playing:

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,590
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,602 posts
14,017 battles

For Tier VII-VIII USN CVs, as it stands now, I can see them needing to go to AS spec.  I hate AS spec.  Let me get that out of the way.  Consider however the firepower of the CVs that compete with Ranger and Lexington.

 

Tier VII

Hiryu

Saipan

Kaga

 

Tier VIII

Shokaku

Enterprise

Graf Zeppelin

 

Those CVs are better than Ranger and Lexington at their respective tiers.  A number of them pack considerable attack power.  A number of them will easily sweep away that 1 Ranger / Lexington fighter unit if Stock.  Lord help you if you are USN Strike at these tiers.  Not to mention your team hating you because you have no fighters to scout nor protect the team with.  Imagine a Kaga getting free reign to do whatever it wants because it faces a Strike Ranger :Smile_hiding:

 

Hiryu, Shokaku are flexible.  They are proven performers even in Ranked.  Last Tier VII Ranked for example, Hiryu was the Highest WR% ship in Ranked, better than even Saipan! Ranger, OTOH, was the worst of the worst.

Spoiler

DAzDYie.jpg

 

Kaga sucks air-to-air but has World Ending Alpha Strike Damage.  You do NOT want to deal with a Kaga TB strike, not even as a DD.  Kaga has the power to literally run over Ranger in one attack run.  If it's a Strike or Stock Ranger, say, "Good night, Gracie" because Ranger's a$$ is going back to port.

 

Saipan fields the Corsairs of Doom, 1 USN fighter unit from Stock Ranger isn't stopping that and will get dominated easily.  Strike Ranger will get devoured.

 

Enterprise will simply overwhelm Stock Lexington because 1 fighter unit is not enough to stop the IJN CV-like "Octopus" ability of Enterprise.  Not to mention if you want to go air-to-air, Enterprise has **MASSIVE** fighter reserves.

 

The Wild Card is Graf Zeppelin, her specs have been alternating a lot and there's no clear picture so far on what she'll look like finalized.  But rest assured, it will be better than Lexington, unlike when GZ first released.  We simply cannot have a Tier VIII CV that is worse than Lexington, most especially a Premium CV.

 

There is so much power, flexibility, reach in CVs at Tier VII-VIII not named Ranger and Lexington.  How do Ranger and Lexington keep up with the arms race?  They can't.  They are being overhwhelmed.  So you can do AS Spec and at least make the lives of the opposing CV harder and at least protect your team, spot for your team.

 

But hey!  At least WG is going to help out Lexington and Ranger in the US CV Revamp by giving them ONE MOAR DIVE BOMBA and removing any choice they have!  :Smile_sceptic:

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
749
[OO7]
[OO7]
Members
1,583 posts
5,874 battles

I struggle to comprehend people that cannot make US CVs perform in their current state.  Then again, I see people suggest stock loadout all the way up to Lexington, so there's that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,590
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,602 posts
14,017 battles
14 minutes ago, _V12 said:

I struggle to comprehend people that cannot make US CVs perform in their current state.  Then again, I see people suggest stock loadout all the way up to Lexington, so there's that.

 

Garbage ships are garbage ships.  You can get someone to make some good games with these turds, but in the end, it's still a turd.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
749
[OO7]
[OO7]
Members
1,583 posts
5,874 battles
7 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

 

Garbage ships are garbage ships.  You can get someone to make some good games with these turds, but in the end, it's still a turd.

 

Please, who decides what ships are garbage and what ships are OP?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
361
[-I-]
Members
1,719 posts
10,242 battles
30 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Garbage ships are garbage ships.  You can get someone to make some good games with these turds, but in the end, it's still a turd.

 

Neither the Midway nor the Essex are currently or have ever been(at least since I've been playing) "garbage ships".

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,590
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,602 posts
14,017 battles
4 minutes ago, dngrcnnn said:

Players being bad in them doesn't mean the ships are bad. But you do you.

 

Someone does great in Krispy Kreme doesn't mean Krispy Kreme is a great bote.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
108
[MKF]
Members
399 posts
14,832 battles
1 hour ago, Kevik70 said:

It is the bane of all Strike CV players, and I am loving their misery. :Smile_playing:

I would much rather see an AS Ranger on my team than a strike one...

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,590
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,602 posts
14,017 battles
Just now, Dath_1 said:

I would much rather see an AS Ranger on my team than a strike one...


Strike Ranger, Strike Lexington are suicidal in today's WoWS.  Your teammates will be justifiably upset.  Imagine a Strike Ranger facing off against a Kaga.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,327
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,484 posts
6,657 battles

Nice to know you are having fun, also pleased to see a successful example of AS Ranger proving the naysayers wrong. I look forward to seeing your results with AS Lexington, for which I wish you the best of luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
749
[OO7]
[OO7]
Members
1,583 posts
5,874 battles
42 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:


Strike Ranger, Strike Lexington are suicidal in today's WoWS.  Your teammates will be justifiably upset.  Imagine a Strike Ranger facing off against a Kaga.

 

55 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

GK6R8Wi.jpg

 

 

Midway W/R sits around 48% for all PVP.  Nice job picking solo stats only, leaving out about half (yes, half) of T10 CV matches, including most of us who are actually competent - average damage jumps when showing all PVP, suggesting in fact that you legitimately only want us to consider potato players when balancing ships.  

 

That's insane.

 

There is nothing wrong with US CVs.  Nothing.

 

As for how "upset" my teammates should be if I show up in Strike Ranger....

IMG_5929.thumb.PNG.3ac10a0301c31418d649af5db1550f6d.PNG

I run all strike everything, except Independence and Midway.

 

 

For full disclosure...

IMG_5930.thumb.PNG.f788e7cc300ce5ec5ea571c2b7dab215.PNG

Edited by _V12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,327
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,484 posts
6,657 battles
1 minute ago, _V12 said:

 

 

Midway W/R sits around 48% for all PVP.  Nice job picking solo stats only, leaving out about half (yes, half) of T10 CV matches, including most of us who are actually competent - average damage jumps when showing all PVP, suggesting in fact that you legitimately only want us to consider potato players when balancing ships.  

 

That's insane.

 

There is nothing wrong with US CVs.  Nothing.

 

As for how "upset" my teammates should be if I show up in Strike Ranger....IMG_5929.thumb.PNG.3ac10a0301c31418d649af5db1550f6d.PNG

I run all strike everything, except Independence and Midway.

 

 

For full disclosure...

IMG_5930.thumb.PNG.f788e7cc300ce5ec5ea571c2b7dab215.PNG

As you have not even played 100 battles in a single CV under t8, your stats prove little. Your experience with Shok and Hak is more relevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
217 posts
1 hour ago, Kevik70 said:

It is the bane of all Strike CV players, and I am loving their misery. :Smile_playing:

For maximum CV-rage, I recommend a division:
Saipan (Strike is fine) +  Kidd (AA spec) + Mikhail Kutuzov/AA-spec Kii. AS Ranger is ok if you don't have a Saipan

Not only will you farm the tears of the red CV (you can almost hear them throwing their keyboard at the screen), if your div mates are good it's a good way to farm a 80-90% WR

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
749
[OO7]
[OO7]
Members
1,583 posts
5,874 battles
3 minutes ago, nuttybiscuit said:

As you have not even played 100 battles in a single CV under t8, your stats prove little. Your experience with Shok and Hak is more relevant.

Statistically speaking, your comment says more about you than it does about me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,327
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,484 posts
6,657 battles
3 minutes ago, _V12 said:

Statistically speaking, your comment says more about you than it does about me.

My comment was not intended as an insult, nor a comment on your ability. Calm down.

It is a simple fact that sample sizes of battles of fewer than 100 are not reliable evidence of a ship's potential (nor of a player's potential). Which is why I referred to your experience with Shok and Hak which are far more relevant and helpful.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
749
[OO7]
[OO7]
Members
1,583 posts
5,874 battles
Just now, nuttybiscuit said:

My comment was not intended as an insult, nor a comment on your ability. Calm down.

It is a simple fact that sample sizes of battles of fewer than 100 are not reliable evidence of a ship's potential (nor of a player's potential). Which is why I referred to your expreience with Shok and Hak which are far more relevant and helpful.

 

No insult taken.  However, you would be remiss to ignore the clear trend.  70% over 13 games, 77% over 22 games, 79% over 24 games, and 84% over 37 games.  The probability of one of those samples being low?  Pretty good.  The probability of most, or all of them being low?  Or if we even take them together as a whole?  I can run the numbers for you if you want, but I know they won't be pretty at percentages that far from 50% with even such mild sample size.  Not to mention that is just winrate.  When you take a look at the average ships killed and average damage, the statistical noise angle gets pretty shaky.

 

You'd have been better off mentioning that my US CV stats are, largely, less than a year old, while the IJN CVs were my first line.  When you look at them both in the context of the last few months, they are about even instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
391
[R-F1]
Beta Testers
1,845 posts
6,756 battles
1 hour ago, _V12 said:

 

Please, who decides what ships are garbage and what ships are OP?

I'm pretty sure the stats bear it out... along with the fact that all but the minority of players who would also enjoy slamming the [edited] in sliding glass doors have dropped t7 and t8 usn cvs as soon as they possibly could.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
749
[OO7]
[OO7]
Members
1,583 posts
5,874 battles
Just now, Shadeylark said:

I'm pretty sure the stats bear it out... along with the fact that all but the minority of players who would also enjoy slamming the [edited] in sliding glass doors have dropped t7 and t8 usn cvs as soon as they possibly could.

 

Do most competitive online games balance based off the average player, or the best players?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
391
[R-F1]
Beta Testers
1,845 posts
6,756 battles
1 hour ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

 

Someone does great in Krispy Kreme doesn't mean Krispy Kreme is a great bote.

Unicum players could dominate in a rubber dingy armed with a monkey flinging poo.  Doesn't make the monkey turd armed rubber dingy a gudbote.

 

Just because the 1% can make a boat perform doesn't make it a good boat... quite the opposite actually... if the 99% can't make a boat perform that does make it a bad boat.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
391
[R-F1]
Beta Testers
1,845 posts
6,756 battles
2 minutes ago, _V12 said:

 

Do most competitive online games balance based off the average player, or the best players?

They may not balance based off the middle of the bell curve, but they don't balance off the top 1% that's for sure... not if they want to successfully market their product and make money from their efforts.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
749
[OO7]
[OO7]
Members
1,583 posts
5,874 battles
Just now, Shadeylark said:

They may not balance based off the middle of the bell curve, but they don't balance off the top 1% that's for sure... not if they want to successfully market their product and make money from their efforts.

 

Incorrect.  The most successful online game franchises, including stalwarts such as League of Legends, CS:GO, etc. balance based off of the best players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×