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

New Midway Changes

65 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[APOC-] Show_Me_Your_Cits 786
2,480 posts
6,478 battles
3 minutes ago, _V12 said:

 

Explain how it's worse than current 2-1-2 Midway.

Your TBs are much slower, and have much less HP. You may get two squads, but they're going to take longer to fly to the target, spend longer in their long and mid range AA auras, and longer to get back to the carrier. On top of this, they're slow enough that even when empty, a Hak's fighters can run them down and murder them all. 

 

So you're going to lose more planes after waiting longer to maybe possibly get a strike off, if they don't get eaten up before the drop. Then, when they're on their way back, the enemy CV can wait until they've run about halfway back, and murder them all, making you wait for the time traveled as well as the downed squadron penalty. 

 

If WG thinks 12 TBs are a problem, they need to either reduce squadron size or torp alpha. And leave the planes at T10. If I wanted to play with slow planes, I wouldn't have put in all the painful effort to get a Midway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NMKJT] KiyoSenkan 5,340
17,354 posts
3,741 battles
2 minutes ago, Anumati said:

Don't forget. All enemy fighters are 180 knots or faster

I actually forgot about that but it is also a major issue with them, yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SF-3] Anumati 646
1,551 posts
4,405 battles
4 minutes ago, Show_Me_Your_Cits said:

Your TBs are much slower, and have much less HP. You may get two squads, but they're going to take longer to fly to the target, spend longer in their long and mid range AA auras, and longer to get back to the carrier. On top of this, they're slow enough that even when empty, a Hak's fighters can run them down and murder them all. 

 

So you're going to lose more planes after waiting longer to maybe possibly get a strike off, if they don't get eaten up before the drop. Then, when they're on their way back, the enemy CV can wait until they've run about halfway back, and murder them all, making you wait for the time traveled as well as the downed squadron penalty. 

 

If WG thinks 12 TBs are a problem, they need to either reduce squadron size or torp alpha. And leave the planes at T10. If I wanted to play with slow planes, I wouldn't have put in all the painful effort to get a Midway. 

Well it's not like WG just buffed DD AA again.. Oh wait.. DDs with better than BB AA are common now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OO7] _V12 537
1,268 posts
4,891 battles
8 minutes ago, nuttybiscuit said:

I am curious (with zero experience of t10 CVs but working on correcting that) how t8 strike planes will manage in t10 dominated battles, what strategems you would employ to mitigate AA screens.

 

Same ones employed playing any other CV.  I'm not sure why this is an issue, the numbers work.

 

6 minutes ago, AraAragami said:

Play Lexington and tell us how great tier 8 planes are in tier 10 AA.

 

I did.  Was a blast.  84% WR.  

 

4 minutes ago, Anumati said:

 

Don't forget. All enemy fighters are 180 knots or faster

 

I can see this being an issue in terms of reaction times, but the number of situations it matters averages out to one or less per battle.

 

2 minutes ago, Show_Me_Your_Cits said:

Your TBs are much slower, and have much less HP. You may get two squads, but they're going to take longer to fly to the target, spend longer in their long and mid range AA auras, and longer to get back to the carrier. On top of this, they're slow enough that even when empty, a Hak's fighters can run them down and murder them all. 

 

The numbers, which I said in an earlier post, do not support a higher attrition rate for 2 T8 TBs than the 1 T10 TB.

 

If you're in a 2 fighter Midway and having an issue dealing with Hakuryu's fighters, uninstall.  You know that's a poor argument.*

 

2 minutes ago, Show_Me_Your_Cits said:

So you're going to lose more planes after waiting longer to maybe possibly get a strike off, if they don't get eaten up before the drop. Then, when they're on their way back, the enemy CV can wait until they've run about halfway back, and murder them all, making you wait for the time traveled as well as the downed squadron penalty. 

 

*See above.

 

2 minutes ago, Show_Me_Your_Cits said:

If WG thinks 12 TBs are a problem, they need to either reduce squadron size or torp alpha. And leave the planes at T10. If I wanted to play with slow planes, I wouldn't have put in all the painful effort to get a Midway. 

 

IJN has always had faster planes, so if one wanted the fastest ones one should have picked that line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ANTKB] devastator5000 223
1,703 posts
2,884 battles
4 minutes ago, Anumati said:

Well it's not like WG just buffed DD AA again.. Oh wait.. DDs with better than BB AA are common now. 

 

Here is the real problem, AA is to dang powerful makes playing high tier CVs a nightmare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ANTKB] devastator5000 223
1,703 posts
2,884 battles
2 minutes ago, _V12 said:

I did.  Was a blast.  84% WR.  

 

Not everyone is a good as you though, I loved my lexington but her planes HP shortcomings against T10 AA made it a frustrating grind towards the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[APOC-] Show_Me_Your_Cits 786
2,480 posts
6,478 battles
15 minutes ago, _V12 said:

 

Same ones employed playing any other CV.  I'm not sure why this is an issue, the numbers work.

 

 

I did.  Was a blast.  84% WR.  

 

 

I can see this being an issue in terms of reaction times, but the number of situations it matters averages out to one or less per battle.

 

 

The numbers, which I said in an earlier post, do not support a higher attrition rate for 2 T8 TBs than the 1 T10 TB.

 

If you're in a 2 fighter Midway and having an issue dealing with Hakuryu's fighters, uninstall.  You know that's a poor argument.*

 

 

*See above.

 

 

IJN has always had faster planes, so if one wanted the fastest ones one should have picked that line.

The argument isn't "Haku has faster planes," its Hak's plans can now run down my EMPTY TBs. 

And should I keep my fighters flying next to my strike package all game like a scrub? Dealing with a Hak fighter on fighter, again, is not the issue. The issue is positioning and the fact that my empty squads can be run down. Running down a laden squad? Sure, part of the game. Running down an empty squad? No. 

 

I can't always be dealing with Hak's fighters, sometimes I have to run an intercept. If I don't, he wins, because of his damage output with.... 12 T10 torpedo bombers. 

 

Also, you claimed that 2 squads have 170% HP of 1 T10 squad... I don't think AA works that way. I'm reasonably sure, correct me if I'm wrong, that it works on each squad's individual HP pool and not the sum total of all planes in the aura. 

Edited by Show_Me_Your_Cits

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KP] IronMike11B4O 231
1,134 posts
15,089 battles
31 minutes ago, AraAragami said:

Play Lexington and tell us how great tier 8 planes are in tier 10 AA.

Oh snap! Yeah Lex made me quit playing CV's altogether. That was about a year ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NMKJT] KiyoSenkan 5,340
17,354 posts
3,741 battles
18 minutes ago, _V12 said:

I did.  Was a blast.  84% WR.  

 

Since high tier AA was buffed?

 

I guess that's why you're the unicum and I'm the filthy casual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OO7] _V12 537
1,268 posts
4,891 battles
4 minutes ago, Show_Me_Your_Cits said:

The argument isn't "Haku has faster planes," its Hak's plans can now run down my EMPTY TBs. 

And should I keep my fighters flying next to my strike package all game like a scrub? Dealing with a Hak fighter on fighter, again, is not the issue. The issue is positioning and the fact that my empty squads can be run down. Running down a laden squad? Sure, part of the game. Running down an empty squad? No. 

I can't always be dealing with Hak's fighters, sometimes I have to run an intercept. If I don't, he wins, because of his damage output with.... 12 T10 torpedo bombers. 

 

They were always able to do that (or pretty close depending on which specific CVs).  TBs are just slow.  Picking to contest a strike instead of saving your own planes is a compromise you have to make, that's part of the game.  Thankfully for Midway, her 36% larger capacity makes those choices less painful.

 

4 minutes ago, Show_Me_Your_Cits said:

Also, you claimed that 2 squads have 170% HP of 1 T10 squad... I don't think AA works that way. I'm reasonably sure, correct me if I'm wrong, that it works on each squad's individual HP pool and not the sum total of all planes in the aura. 

 

AA works on one squad a time, so the total effective health pool is the sum.  How this plays out:  For example, if you expect to lose one full squad of 6 T8 TBs, you'd expect to lose about 4 T10 TBs to the same AA.  Whether you are flying around one squad or two is irrelevant, as the second squad isn't touched until the first is dead.*

 

*AA, untargeted, will tend to pop around to different squads at random, but it can still only shoot at one squad at a time.

 

1 minute ago, AraAragami said:

 

Since high tier AA was buffed?

 

I guess that's why you're the unicum and I'm the filthy casual.

 

About....8 or 9 months ago iirc.  No significan buffs since the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SF-3] Anumati 646
1,551 posts
4,405 battles
2 minutes ago, _V12 said:

 

They were always able to do that (or pretty close depending on which specific CVs).  TBs are just slow.  Picking to contest a strike instead of saving your own planes is a compromise you have to make, that's part of the game.  Thankfully for Midway, her 36% larger capacity makes those choices less painful.

 

 

AA works on one squad a time, so the total effective health pool is the sum.  How this plays out:  For example, if you expect to lose one full squad of 6 T8 TBs, you'd expect to lose about 4 T10 TBs to the same AA.  Whether you are flying around one squad or two is irrelevant, as the second squad isn't touched until the first is dead.*

 

*AA, untargeted, will tend to pop around to different squads at random, but it can still only shoot at one squad at a time.

 

 

About....8 or 9 months ago iirc.  No significan buffs since the time.

When I played lexington I was fighting hakuryu every game :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GREPT] Raptor_alcor 1,488
6,739 posts
6,320 battles

Eh, I'm just going to see how this works out, very likely chance they'll gut the IJN carriers to try to match what they are doing to the USN. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SF-3] Anumati 646
1,551 posts
4,405 battles
9 minutes ago, Raptor_alcor said:

Eh, I'm just going to see how this works out, very likely chance they'll gut the IJN carriers to try to match what they are doing to the USN. 

Don't give them ideas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NMKJT] KiyoSenkan 5,340
17,354 posts
3,741 battles
9 minutes ago, Raptor_alcor said:

Eh, I'm just going to see how this works out, very likely chance they'll gut the IJN carriers to try to match what they are doing to the USN. 

From what WG reps have said, Japanese carriers are about where they want them.

 

Which is why I'm boggled that they don't just implement squadron parity and bring the USN to the IJN level. I remain unconvinced that these changes are going to help the line at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OXIDE] Bohomit 3
8 posts
1,842 battles

As long as we are talking about cancer give siapan 3/0/1 tier 9 bombers AP bombs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POP] nuttybiscuit 713
3,000 posts
4,042 battles
3 minutes ago, Bohomit said:

As long as we are talking about cancer give siapan 3/0/1 tier 9 bombers AP bombs

They cannot touch Saipan, or Enterprise or Kaga, too many owners, too much of a headache. GZ rework only possible because there are only a few hundred owners on the NA server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SF-3] Anumati 646
1,551 posts
4,405 battles
26 minutes ago, Bohomit said:

As long as we are talking about cancer give siapan 3/0/1 tier 9 bombers AP bombs

 

Too complicate for devs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AHOY_] YamatoA150 1,213
5,665 posts
2,935 battles

Huh. I wonder what happened to the 1600 lb bombs that were tested alongside Enterprise; unless the stock DBs now feature them but get downgraded in exchange for higher tier planes.

 

Quote

1600lb Mk1 AP Bomb

Maximum Damage: 10100

Fixed Penetration: 70mm - 280mm*, does NOT cause fire.

Bomb drops vertically and ricochet at 45°.

Bomb dispersion: V 270 meters / H 54 meters; manual drop (ALT-attack) is 10% more accurate than auto drop.

Bomb detonator delayed from 0.02 seconds to 0.03 seconds.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SF-3] Anumati 646
1,551 posts
4,405 battles
1 hour ago, YamatoA150 said:

Huh. I wonder what happened to the 1600 lb bombs that were tested alongside Enterprise; unless the stock DBs now feature them but get downgraded in exchange for higher tier planes.

 

 

That would make USN AP DBs actually useful probably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OO7] Madwolf05 1,860
5,412 posts
2,882 battles

The USN will never have great DBs as long as the drop pattern is 100% RNG trash on even BB sized targets.

 

Putting forth all the time and effort to miss a perfect manual drop on a BB isn't trust frustrating but is a huge amount of potential lost that can lead to a snowball defeat with nothing the CV driver could do to correct it.

 

The problem with these loadout changes is simply being too conservative, once again,  with their USN CV changes while the IJN CVs run around with incredibly contradictive setups by comparison.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NMKJT] KiyoSenkan 5,340
17,354 posts
3,741 battles

Frankly the USN carriers will never be truly balanced until they have the same number of planes per squadron and the same number of total squadrons in the air as their IJN contemporaries.

 

WG has proven time and again since CBT that they cannot properly balance asymmetrical loadouts. It's time to concede something and make it easier on themselves.

Edited by AraAragami

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,975 posts
3,899 battles
6 hours ago, Anumati said:

Midway has the exacty same spread and damage as Enterprise. Which struggles to hurt t10 BBs period with AP bombs.

Struggles to get the bombers close enough to get good hits.

 

Not to mention the fact that you still can miss when your bombing circle is smaller than the ship you are bombing which never ceases to amuse.

 

How about realize you have 2 flights of USN TBs with superior drop patterns instead of whining about the best-non AP bombers in the entire game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SF-3] Anumati 646
1,551 posts
4,405 battles
Just now, Sakuzhi said:

Struggles to get the bombers close enough to get good hits.

 

Not to mention the fact that you still can miss when your bombing circle is smaller than the ship you are bombing which never ceases to amuse.

 

How about realize you have 2 flights of USN TBs with superior drop patterns instead of whining about the best-non AP bombers in the entire game?

 

Two flights of t8 bombers that move at the speed of t7 planes. That are fighting t10 AA constantly while trying to evade fighters moving at 180+ knots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,975 posts
3,899 battles
5 minutes ago, Anumati said:

 

Two flights of t8 bombers that move at the speed of t7 planes. That are fighting t10 AA constantly while trying to evade fighters moving at 180+ knots.

Unless they changed the stats of those bombers.

 

None of your complaints about the Midways bombers stand up to anything.

 

unless you are talking about the Enterprise, which isn't terribly important in the discussion of the Midway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×