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

Good bye my old friends

31 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

413
[STP]
[STP]
Beta Testers
2,022 posts
11,126 battles

I gonna miss you t_t

 

Not as much i miss jet fighters... give jets back! (have any mod for change the models and sound for that?)

midway11-29-2017D.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,313
[TF16B]
Members
8,054 posts
16,991 battles

What I won't miss? AS Bogues and Independences...

 

Poor, poor, layabout AS drivers... Now they might actually have to learn to attack ships if they want to really accomplish anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
201
[-BRS-]
Members
877 posts
7,315 battles
20 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

What I won't miss? AS Bogues and Independences...

 

Poor, poor, layabout AS drivers... Now they might actually have to learn to attack ships if they want to really accomplish anything.

What I won't miss? Strike Bogues, Independences, Rangers, and Lexingtons...

 

Poor, poor, layabout strike drivers... Now they might actually have to learn to attack planes if they want to really accomplish anything.

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,313
[TF16B]
Members
8,054 posts
16,991 battles
3 hours ago, Cpt_Cupcake said:

What I won't miss? Strike Bogues, Independences, Rangers, and Lexingtons...

 

Poor, poor, layabout strike drivers... Now they might actually have to learn to attack planes if they want to really accomplish anything.

 

No problem attacking planes. Non-AS is simply a more productive use of my time... Apparently WG feels that way as well.

 

A strike driver is always able to help their team; an AS driver is only as good as the rest of their team's ability not to be completely worthless.

 

I'll never understand AS driver's love for that loadout because I've seen too many of them get sunk, despite it's supposed 'superiority.'

 

Edited by Estimated_Prophet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,493
[GREPT]
[GREPT]
Beta Testers
6,739 posts
7,082 battles
13 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

 

No problem attacking planes. Non-AS is simply a more productive use of my time... Apparently WG feels that way as well.

 

A strike driver is always able to help their team; an AS driver is only as good as the rest of their team's ability not to be completely worthless.

 

I'll never understand AS driver's love for that loadout because I've seen too many of them get sunk, despite it's supposed 'superiority.'

 

Good for you? I've run into more BALANCED USN carriers than I have AS honestly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
207
[ANZAC]
[ANZAC]
Members
598 posts
5,024 battles
31 minutes ago, Raptor_alcor said:

Good for you? I've run into more BALANCED USN carriers than I have AS honestly. 

Because finally people are starting to wake up.

Forcing US CV drivers into a balanced loadout is forcing them to be better CV drivers. It's better for their team, and ultimately better for them as players.

I don't believe that IJN CVs are superior to US CVs. I believe that the stats have been skewed by bad US CV drivers running AS and losing matches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,078
[SIM]
Members
2,430 posts
4,060 battles

Are we really crying about AS CVs? The ones that actually help their team out through screening enemy planes and spotting enemy ships? Wow. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
[SYN]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
4,420 battles
32 minutes ago, SkaerKrow said:

Are we really crying about AS CVs? The ones that actually help their team out through screening enemy planes and spotting enemy ships? Wow. 

Yep. So many crying about AS builds that actually shut down strike loadouts.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,174 posts
5,936 battles
1 hour ago, HyperFish said:

Because finally people are starting to wake up.

Forcing US CV drivers into a balanced loadout is forcing them to be better CV drivers. It's better for their team, and ultimately better for them as players.

I don't believe that IJN CVs are superior to US CVs. I believe that the stats have been skewed by bad US CV drivers running AS and losing matches.

Wh...what? You ran AS if you actually wanted to win as USN. Non AS Ranger and Lexington was grounds for execution if you ask me.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
179
[NOOBS]
[NOOBS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
445 posts
11,580 battles
50 minutes ago, SkaerKrow said:

Are we really crying about AS CVs? The ones that actually help their team out through screening enemy planes and spotting enemy ships? Wow. 

I agree, AS was a TEAM build, I know, face palm all the way with the complaining about it.  

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
231
[SF-3]
Members
1,438 posts
7,891 battles

Glad you guys are happy USN lost is AS build, too bad IJN can still run AS and have a 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 fighter advantage over the USN CV. I mean I guess turn about is fair play but I feel like AS IJN meta is going to wreck USN balanced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
207
[ANZAC]
[ANZAC]
Members
598 posts
5,024 battles
24 minutes ago, SeraphicRadiance said:

Wh...what? You ran AS if you actually wanted to win as USN. Non AS Ranger and Lexington was grounds for execution if you ask me.

Running AS didn't actually help your team win. You tried to stop the enemy CV from getting through, and most of the time that fails because the enemy (IJN) has more bombing squads than you have fighters. You relied on your team to win while you did the best you could to negate the other carrier. Worst case scenario, you're outplayed and your planes are helplessly circling in the air around your sinking allies. Yes, you can spot... but any type of squadron can do that. Fighters don't strike fear in the red team. Torp bombers on their broadsides do that. Even if you're not causing damage, you're directly influencing the enemy. You have them turning broadside to your allies to avoid torps you have no intention of firing. You can push dds out of cap with a drop.

If your team's CV isn't causing damage to the enemy, then they're relying on you and your team to do it for them. AS was a crutch, as just because you shot down planes doesn't mean a thing.

15 minutes ago, HooplaJones said:

I agree, AS was a TEAM build, I know, face palm all the way with the complaining about it.  

If this was a team game everyone would be running AA you protect their teammates... but most don't because all that matters is punching holes in red ships. And that's a good thing. Most games seem to be won on destroying all of the enemy, or by timing out while ahead on points. Which is more likely to help your team sink ships and score points... AS?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,011
[PVE]
Members
5,310 posts
17,764 battles

I was happy with the 78k of free xp and over 10 million credits but not going to bother playing cv's anymore until they work out the UI and figure out how to model 8 signal flags for them. Taking away my choices about what kind of planes I can use and the idiotic decision that changing from HE to AP during the battles is only for everyone else, not carriers. Maybe Wargaming could model ships rusting away in port the longer they are unplayed, would be satisfying to see them rusted to the point of settling on the bottom. It would be cool just to see the conning tower poking up from the water.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
207
[ANZAC]
[ANZAC]
Members
598 posts
5,024 battles
1 minute ago, Taylor3006 said:

I was happy with the 78k of free xp and over 10 million credits but not going to bother playing cv's anymore until they work out the UI and figure out how to model 8 signal flags for them. Taking away my choices about what kind of planes I can use and the idiotic decision that changing from HE to AP during the battles is only for everyone else, not carriers. Maybe Wargaming could model ships rusting away in port the longer they are unplayed, would be satisfying to see them rusted to the point of settling on the bottom. It would be cool just to see the conning tower poking up from the water.. 

I want to be able to change my squads on the fly. If I have a pool of 76 aircraft, all types, and a maxium of 6 squads aloft at a time, I want to be able to decide what I want to send up. 6 torp squads? Sure. 2 of each? Go for it. You can change between AS and Strike..or a combination of both.. as the match progresses.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,352
[SYN]
Members
4,525 posts
11,433 battles
6 hours ago, Cpt_Cupcake said:

What I won't miss? Strike Bogues, Independences, Rangers, and Lexingtons...

 

Poor, poor, layabout strike drivers... Now they might actually have to learn to attack planes if they want to really accomplish anything.

 

Strike Bogues and Independences were probably the worst things you can have on your team.  Glad they're gone.  Rangers and Lexingtons weren't as bad, but still.

 

However, it seems that the very point of playing most US CVs at all is now gone, too.  Not sure if this will go down well with US CV players...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
212
[TBOW]
Members
1,178 posts
10,416 battles
4 minutes ago, HyperFish said:

I want to be able to change my squads on the fly. If I have a pool of 76 aircraft, all types, and a maxium of 6 squads aloft at a time, I want to be able to decide what I want to send up. 6 torp squads? Sure. 2 of each? Go for it. You can change between AS and Strike..or a combination of both.. as the match progresses.

You should need to determine your loadout of planes ahead of time in how many fighters, TBDs and DBs.  What you should have the flex for if it is a option on the CV is HE or AP.  How the squadron goes out armed.  Just like the gun ships do.  They have a choice of HE or AP shells CVs should have the same choice for bombs during battle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,174 posts
5,936 battles
27 minutes ago, HyperFish said:

Running AS didn't actually help your team win. You tried to stop the enemy CV from getting through, and most of the time that fails because the enemy (IJN) has more bombing squads than you have fighters. You relied on your team to win while you did the best you could to negate the other carrier. Worst case scenario, you're outplayed and your planes are helplessly circling in the air around your sinking allies. Yes, you can spot... but any type of squadron can do that. Fighters don't strike fear in the red team. Torp bombers on their broadsides do that. Even if you're not causing damage, you're directly influencing the enemy. You have them turning broadside to your allies to avoid torps you have no intention of firing. You can push dds out of cap with a drop.

If your team's CV isn't causing damage to the enemy, then they're relying on you and your team to do it for them. AS was a crutch, as just because you shot down planes doesn't mean a thing.

If this was a team game everyone would be running AA you protect their teammates... but most don't because all that matters is punching holes in red ships. And that's a good thing. Most games seem to be won on destroying all of the enemy, or by timing out while ahead on points. Which is more likely to help your team sink ships and score points... AS?

 

I'm not entirely sure you fully understand what sort of snowball effect happens when you give up complete control of the skies to the enemy CV. You effectively hand a significant advantage to the enemy's destroyers by offering full control of caps to the enemy's fighters and whatever payload he's running ( particularly IJN, also known as the best CV line because of sheer versatility.) You can't strike things if you're facing a competent carrier and they have fighters placed properly. It doesn't even matter if you win the air war, you simply cannot just let them do whatever they want. 

 

Spotting is the number one strength of carriers, you cannot spot things if your planes are effectively not allowed to fly in caps. WG still has spotting  and plane kills undervalued in terms of rewards, which creates a noob trap that edges players towards strike. 

 

If you have air supremacy, you give massive advantages to your team in spotting, and heavily skews cap fights in your favor. It's why I rate the Kidd so highly, and why I become absolutely livid when I'm running a destroyer that has issues defending itself from planes, and am paired with a CV that has no fighters. It makes my job much more difficult, and my job is winning.

 

So to answer your question, yes, AS is in fact more likely to help your team score points and sink ships. When torpedoes are spotted the second they're launched and destroyers are permanently spotted when going anywhere near a cap, you're not going to get any points.

Edited by SeraphicRadiance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
207
[ANZAC]
[ANZAC]
Members
598 posts
5,024 battles
19 minutes ago, Kuckoo said:

 

Strike Bogues and Independences were probably the worst things you can have on your team.  Glad they're gone.  Rangers and Lexingtons weren't as bad, but still.

 

However, it seems that the very point of playing most US CVs at all is now gone, too.  Not sure if this will go down well with US CV players...

The best Bogue and Indy were the stock 110 and 111 respectively.

Now Bogue has 111.

It's gone down very well with me. I never played AS because... well... I want to sink ships and win games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
207
[ANZAC]
[ANZAC]
Members
598 posts
5,024 battles
19 minutes ago, SeraphicRadiance said:

I'm not entirely sure you fully understand what sort of snowball effect happens when you give up complete control of the skies to the enemy CV.

Just because someone is running balanced or strike does not mean they've given up control of the skies.

While that fighter squadron has you spotted and is making your game miserable, take heart in the fact that the squadron is allowing your teams CV even more opportunity to strike against the enemy. His job is winning... just like yours is.

Besides, I can't count the number of times I've tried my hardest to keep a dd spotted for my team only to have everyone just ignore it. Best if I just try to take it out myself... which is something AS CVs just can't do.

There's no such thing as "fighters placed properly". If his fighters are too far forward he's getting hammered by your teams AA, and he's left himself defenseless against a snipe. If he hangs his fighters back, he's not spotting and can't react to quick attacks from the other CV. If he's actively hunting the other CVs squads... its so easy to distract them with a TB squad while you hammer them with your remaining squads.

AS builds shoot down more planes. That's not up for debate. I lose plenty of planes to AS builds... but I'm pretty sure I lose less games to AS builds.

Edited by HyperFish
Spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,291
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
5,743 posts
9,439 battles

As a DD main, this is how sympathetic I am to the plight of CV drivers.

 

:fish_sleep:

 

Thank you and have a good day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
207
[ANZAC]
[ANZAC]
Members
598 posts
5,024 battles
8 minutes ago, SeraphicRadiance said:

 a noob trap that edges players towards strike.

Sorry, I can't work out how to address this in prev post.

What drives people towards AS is being blown up by a strike CV. They're not trying to protect their team, they're trying to protect themselves... and then they never change.

This breaks the mold. You can't mindlessly patrol the skies anymore. Now you need to learn to strafe. Now you need to actually help your team. Some people will give up and not play CVs, but that's not necessarily a bad thing IMHO, since they were the ones who relied on AS to give them a "good game" without understanding it could have been so much better had they followed a different path.

People are up in arms about how defensive high Tier games have been, but don't you realise that AS is exactly that? It's the equivalent of hiding behind an island and sniping. This change forces CV captains on both sides to be more aggressive. US CVs captains now have to learn to strike directly at the enemy, while IJN CVs need to learn how to use their fighters again to equalise the damage potential from the US squadrons against their own weaker, smaller squadrons.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,174 posts
5,936 battles
6 minutes ago, HyperFish said:

Just because someone is running balanced or strike does not mean they've given up control of the skies.

While that fighter squadron has you spotted and is making your game miserable, take heart in the fact that the squadron is allowing your teams CV even more opportunity to strike against the enemy.

Besides, I can't count the number of times I've tried my hardest to keep a dd spotted for my team only to have everyone just ignore it. Best if I just try to take it out myself... which is something AS CVs just can't do.

There's no such thing as "fighters placed properly". If his fighters are too far forward he's getting hammered by your teams AA, and he's left himself defenseless against a snipe. If he hangs his fighters back, he's not spotting and can't react to quick attacks from the other CV. If he's actively hunting the other CVs squads... its so easy to distract them with a TB squad while you hammer them with your remaining squads.

AS builds shoot down more planes. That's not up for debate. I lose plenty of planes to AS builds... but I'm pretty sure I lose less games to AS builds.

Those examples are development of game sense. There is such a thing as placing fighters properly. You learn where the key points to send your fighters at. Enemy planes not appearing where  and when they're supposed to to support his team? Chances are they're going for a snipe, and you can pull back fighters to defend yourself or other backline targets they're going for. Otherwise, you pick fights when you can or disengage if there are dangerous AA boats approaching. 

 

CV gameplay is still very much multidimensional. You're thinking way too binary. Often times, sinking the enemy ships yourself is not possible or likely to succeed, and most certainly made more difficult if you have no fighters to distract the enemy's fighters. 

 

Now that I think of it, the issue the standard US CVs have are that they encourage this type of binary thinking, because the ships themselves are extremely inflexible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
207
[ANZAC]
[ANZAC]
Members
598 posts
5,024 battles
15 minutes ago, SeraphicRadiance said:

Those examples are development of game sense. There is such a thing as placing fighters properly. You learn where the key points to send your fighters at. Enemy planes not appearing where  and when they're supposed to to support his team? Chances are they're going for a snipe, and you can pull back fighters to defend yourself or other backline targets they're going for. Otherwise, you pick fights when you can or disengage if there are dangerous AA boats approaching.

But as the saying goes. "The bombers will always get through." I don't think I've ever played against you, so you may be very, very good as AS. You may be able to completely lock down a game regularly, but in my experience that happens rarely. From a purely mathematical point of view. 2 of your fighters take out 2 of my bomber squads, but as IJN or pre-patch US Strike I have 1 more squad that will get through... around the edge or up the middle, and unless that squad is knocked out by AA it is more likely than not to hit something... and that very act of hitting something has reduced your entire teams HP... which is something your team will need to push just that little bit further to compensate for. This isn't even taking into account that chasing down a squad can take you so far out of position that you could drive the aircraft carrier itself through the hole in your defense.

15 minutes ago, SeraphicRadiance said:

CV gameplay is still very much multidimensional. You're thinking way too binary. Often times, sinking the enemy ships yourself is not possible or likely to succeed, and most certainly made more difficult if you have no fighters to distract the enemy's fighters. 

It's all about the odds and RNG. Sometimes you can sink the ship. Sometimes you can't, but by running strike instead of AS you better your chances. The problem with the AS build is that it convinced people that this was the only way to play US CVs, reinforced by people who don't even play CVs talking about "doing it for the team".

15 minutes ago, SeraphicRadiance said:

Now that I think of it, the issue the standard US CVs have are that they encourage this type of binary thinking, because the ships themselves are extremely inflexible. 

You've got it. Ironically, by taking away the choice, WG have forced US CV drivers to be better and more adaptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
112
[TAFY3]
Beta Testers
429 posts
5,929 battles

I play Strike because AS doesn't pay out equivalent XP.  If I could make as much XP shooting down planes as I could sinking ships I'd play AS.

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.

×