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

What about the Saipan?

24 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

155
[EREKT]
Members
781 posts
5,784 battles

So, why didn't they give the Saipan the balanced loadout option and AP bombs? Leave the other two options.

 

 

EJ

 

 

Edited by HorrorRoach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
155
[EREKT]
Members
781 posts
5,784 battles

So what? It might be a little weaker but more fun to play with a balanced loadout option...

 

1-1-2? If only you could have one DB be HE and the other AP..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,092
[SPTR]
Members
3,459 posts
5,674 battles
3 minutes ago, HorrorRoach said:

So what? It might be a little weaker but more fun to play with a balanced loadout option...

 

1-1-2? If only you could have one DB be HE and the other AP..

The point is, WG can, but they don't have a need, to change it, unlike other USN CVs that really needed the change to compete.

Therefore WG has no reason to spend testing resources and manpower to put this at a priority.

They don't work for free you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
845
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,385 posts
7,979 battles

You mean the tier 7 carrier with tier 9 planes that only a 10 point proper built Ranger's planes can beat, with 9 tier 9 DB's per squad with 3 of those fighters, or 2 and with TB's that are tier 9? I wonder why they wouldn't give it AP bombs or any kind of mixed strike loadout.

 

OH right, because barring the proper set up and a good captain vs a bad one it's the most broken CV in the game and never should have been resold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
155
[EREKT]
Members
781 posts
5,784 battles
24 minutes ago, The_first_harbinger said:

The point is, WG can, but they don't have a need, to change it, unlike other USN CVs that really needed the change to compete.

Therefore WG has no reason to spend testing resources and manpower to put this at a priority.

They don't work for free you know.

 

Why does Saipan seem strong? Because it's fighters dominate, which allows the torpedo bombers to have their way. a more balanced 1-2-1 or 1-1-2 will be less of a headache for the opposing CV player, the Saipan won't be able to shut him down....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
155
[EREKT]
Members
781 posts
5,784 battles
5 minutes ago, DemonicTreerat said:

No. Do NOT touch the only USN carrier that is actually remotely competitive with Wargaming's substitute masturbation devices.

 

 

who said anything about getting rid of the other loadouts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
332 posts
2 minutes ago, HorrorRoach said:

 

 

who said anything about getting rid of the other loadouts?

Because you know damn well that is exactly what Wargaming would do. They would find some excuse to [edited] over Saipan then call it a "trade off for the AP bombs". Just look at, oh, their entire history of treatment for USN carriers. Its one long list of either nerf to the ground or buffs that turned out to have zero actual effect. Better if those idiots never touched another line of code again than let them "balance" something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,066 posts
1,816 battles
5 minutes ago, HorrorRoach said:

Why does Saipan seem strong? Because it's fighters dominate, which allows the torpedo bombers to have their way. a more balanced 1-2-1 or 1-1-2 will be less of a headache for the opposing CV player, the Saipan won't be able to shut him down....

 

The Saipan is a premium and those have to be good plus people who have never touched CV can use it so they have to have some help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,092
[SPTR]
Members
3,459 posts
5,674 battles
31 minutes ago, HorrorRoach said:

 

Why does Saipan seem strong? Because it's fighters dominate, which allows the torpedo bombers to have their way. a more balanced 1-2-1 or 1-1-2 will be less of a headache for the opposing CV player, the Saipan won't be able to shut him down....

yeah, that would've been nice.

Too bad WG have a special policy for these premiums...They can't nerf them, they can not change them as long as there any possibility of controversy, they can only buff them.

Changing the loadout would cause controversy, adding the loadout is unnecessary. I'm sorry to say, but we won't be seeing a balanced Saipan loadout anytime soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
155
[EREKT]
Members
781 posts
5,784 battles

Adding a balanced loadout without removing the other two load outs isn't really a buff or a nerf. it's a Berf.

 

 

Saipan needs a Berf

Edited by HorrorRoach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
174
[KENT]
Members
481 posts
3,039 battles
57 minutes ago, DemonicTreerat said:

No. Do NOT touch the only USN carrier that is actually remotely competitive with Wargaming's substitute masturbation devices.

I'd be hardpressed to call the Saipan "remotely competitive" when it performs consistently higher (in terms of xp) compared to the Kaga, Hiryu, and then poor little Ranger.  In addition, up to 3/4s of the community believes the Saipan should be rebalanced in light of the USN CV nerfs, and it is seen as the most broken CV by 57% of the community.  But yes, it's only remotely competitive.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[WOLF2]
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles

The premium CVs seek to give an alternate game play type to their line, which Saipan load outs do. All Saipan needs is some sort of penalty for exiting a dog fight.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


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

The premium CVs seek to give an alternate game play type to their line, which Saipan load outs do. All Saipan needs is some sort of penalty for exiting a dog fight.

I'd rather they just remove strafe entirely.  Broken mechanic is broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[WOLF2]
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles
40 minutes ago, Palladia said:

I'd rather they just remove strafe entirely.  Broken mechanic is broken.

Maybe they can once they rework AA. But for now, there's got to be a way to keep so many squadrons in check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
819 posts
3,823 battles
55 minutes ago, Palladia said:

I'd rather they just remove strafe entirely.  Broken mechanic is broken.

I'd be fine with the strafe if they reduced its cone of influence a bit, Its rather irratating when you avoid the strafe but you somehow you still lose the majority of your squadron cause somehow the strafing fighters can strafe planes that are not directly in their line of fire. I mean when you aim a strafe you get the aiming marker but the actual effect goes outside of that marker and if you ask me the strafe should only effect the area it highlights. I've even lost planes that were behind strafing fighters.

Edited by Magic_Fighting_Tuna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
352
[D12]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,065 posts
8,857 battles

Imagine the Dive bombers with AP lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
68
[WOLF3]
Members
157 posts
5,518 battles
3 hours ago, Nachoo31 said:

Imagine the Dive bombers with AP lol.

Oh God, think of the poor Tier V BBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,050
[PVE]
Members
5,363 posts
17,840 battles

I would have liked to see an option for a 1/1/1 Saipan load out. Probably not all that popular for most players, I just like having options. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
83
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
1,107 posts
11,851 battles
1 hour ago, Taylor3006 said:

I would have liked to see an option for a 1/1/1 Saipan load out. Probably not all that popular for most players, I just like having options. 

For a premium US balanced loadout WG has an Enterprise they would eventually like to sell to you for a limited time at a higher cost.  :Smile_coin:

Suckered me into buying one before I was prepared to play it!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,050
[PVE]
Members
5,363 posts
17,840 battles
14 minutes ago, BarbedWireRat said:

For a premium US balanced loadout WG has an Enterprise they would eventually like to sell to you for a limited time at a higher cost.  :Smile_coin:

Suckered me into buying one before I was prepared to play it!

LOL I have both. I bought the Saipan early on when grinding the US CV line to help get my captains up to snuff. The Enterprise I got in a bundle and she is ok. Unfortunately it was near the end of my interest in carriers so have not played her much, maybe a dozen games in co-op. Again the 1/1/1 load out probably wouldn't appeal to anyone but PvE players like myself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,604 posts
3,573 battles
8 hours ago, Nachoo31 said:

Imagine the Dive bombers with AP lol.

Those 1000pders at T7 are already scary enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×