Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
1HandTiedBehindMyBack

AWhy is it ok that the Enterprise is vastly better than the Lex?

37 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
355 posts
7,402 battles

So the fix for US CVs is to make them 1 simple garbage load out good at nothing.  This made even worse in the above case as the Enterprise better AS and strike!  Why does WG hate US carriers so much that they nerf the line over and over?  It is not like they had a bigger and better carrier force than the world combined at worlds end!  Just sad that it still a L if you have a Lex unless they have a Lex.  Oh grats on the upcoming midway nerf, can't have anything US on top!

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
198
[WOLF1]
Members
619 posts
12,934 battles
13 minutes ago, 1HandTiedBehindMyBack said:

So the fix for US CVs is to make them 1 simple garbage load out good at nothing.  This made even worse in the above case as the Enterprise better AS and strike!  Why does WG hate US carriers so much that they nerf the line over and over?  It is not like they had a bigger and better carrier force than the world combined at worlds end!  Just sad that it still a L if you have a Lex unless they have a Lex.  Oh grats on the upcoming midway nerf, can't have anything US on top!

As far as the Enterprise goes, its a premium man.  You do the math.  In regards to US carriers well I have no logical response other than to say buy a Saipan and be an AIR BOSS.:cap_cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,124
[ARGSY]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,120 posts
18,636 battles

The Enterprise has only the stock planes from the Lexington and needed some gimmick like the T9 module to make her ok because they keep her historic as a premium. The Yorktown class CV were also later build from start up as a CV while the Lexington and Saratoga used battlecruiser hulls. 

The Lexington has a better torpedo spread. 

The Enterprise has tons of fighters but only a limited number of strike planes.

The reason why they nerf the Midway is that she seems to overperform. There was a good post about this 2 days ago in the forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50
[SOUS]
[SOUS]
Members
289 posts

This seems to be the longest running issue in WoWs. I've given up trying to follow Wargaming's logic when it comes to USN CVs (and CVs as a whole). All I can think of is that the single loadouts might be easier to troubleshoot, but that hasn't happened so far... not holding my breath at this point either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
425
[PC]
Members
1,866 posts
1 hour ago, 1HandTiedBehindMyBack said:

So the fix for US CVs is to make them 1 simple garbage load out good at nothing.  This made even worse in the above case as the Enterprise better AS and strike!  Why does WG hate US carriers so much that they nerf the line over and over?  It is not like they had a bigger and better carrier force than the world combined at worlds end!  Just sad that it still a L if you have a Lex unless they have a Lex.  Oh grats on the upcoming midway nerf, can't have anything US on top!

Underperforming US carriers is sort of a running joke on warships. They were every bit as good as Japanese carriers, if not more so. The late war US carrier planes were much better than their Japanese counterparts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,337
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,514 posts
6,677 battles

You will read many apologists for the p2win situation with t7 and t8 cvs, but the short answer is that with only 2 cv tech trees, any premium cv will have a big and disproportionate influence, big fish in a small pond, so to speak. Second reason, it does not matter how strong the fighter group, a single fighter squadron (Lexington) will always be at a tactical disadvantage to a dual fighter squadron group (Enterprise/Shokaku). Third reason, a crap Lexington makes it easier to sell and make money from Enterprise. Fourth reason, there really are very many bad cv players (self included on occasion) who play USN cvs than play IJN cvs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
694
[DRACS]
Members
3,357 posts

The problem is not that Enterprise is OP. In fact, she's fairly well balanced against Shokaku. The problem is that Lexington is still cr*p, as are all the other USN tech tree CVs before Midway.

  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,616
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,648 posts
14,025 battles

Everything's better than Lexington at Tier VIII since her nerf in 2015.  The revamp did not help her at all.

 

Her air coverage is absolutely atrocious with 1 fighter unit at Tier VIII.

 

Give Lexi back her 2/1/1 spec she had at launch and then she can be something to be respected.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
694
[DRACS]
Members
3,357 posts
38 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Give Lexi back her 2/1/1 spec she had at launch and then she can be something to be respected.

This ^

Wargaming seems way too focused on USN dive bombers in all their loadouts, although USN HE bombs are wildly inaccurate, and USN AP bombs are way too inconsistent and *heavily* dependent on matchmaking. Fighters reward skill. Dive bombers do not.

Edited by KaptainKaybe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
285
[O7]
Members
595 posts
7,861 battles

It's not fair to the people who pay real money for a ship if what they get isn't any better than the free equivalent. 

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,337
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,514 posts
6,677 battles
3 minutes ago, Feminist said:

It's not fair to the people who pay real money for a ship if what they get isn't any better than the free equivalent. 

quite right, the more we pay for a unit the better is must be, right? perfectly sensible way to develop a game...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,616
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,648 posts
14,025 battles
2 hours ago, Feminist said:

It's not fair to the people who pay real money for a ship if what they get isn't any better than the free equivalent. 

Let's be reasonable!

aZ2tnj3.jpg

How much is too much?

Share this post


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

Let's be reasonable!

aZ2tnj3.jpg

How much is too much?

Love how Lex now out-damages Shoukaku on average, while it was far the opposite previously, yet "the new builds are garbage!".  Lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
432
[FML]
Members
1,633 posts
9,910 battles
10 hours ago, 1HandTiedBehindMyBack said:

So the fix for US CVs is to make them 1 simple garbage load out good at nothing.  This made even worse in the above case as the Enterprise better AS and strike!  Why does WG hate US carriers so much that they nerf the line over and over?  It is not like they had a bigger and better carrier force than the world combined at worlds end!  Just sad that it still a L if you have a Lex unless they have a Lex.  Oh grats on the upcoming midway nerf, can't have anything US on top!

 

9 hours ago, awiggin said:

If you want American power, you must pay.....:Smile_teethhappy:

Indeed. To quote a little Westside Story: 

"Nothing for free in America..."

;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
432
[FML]
Members
1,633 posts
9,910 battles
3 hours ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Let's be reasonable!

aZ2tnj3.jpg

How much is too much?

Curious how only 10k more damage and 7 extra plane kills on average leads to an extra 10 per cent higher win rate. I wonder if carriers are more finely tuned than other ships, or whether only good carrier drivers bought the Enterprise...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
156
[R-R-R]
Members
970 posts
6,427 battles
31 minutes ago, UltimateNewbie said:

Curious how only 10k more damage and 7 extra plane kills on average leads to an extra 10 per cent higher win rate. I wonder if carriers are more finely tuned than other ships, or whether only good carrier drivers bought the Enterprise...

Old USN strike load out can farm easy BB damage and it is not so different from current 'balanced' load out.

You can't win games by just farming BB damage in a carrier. Other carriers have better air control and anti-DD potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
694
[DRACS]
Members
3,357 posts
4 hours ago, _V12 said:

Love how Lex now out-damages Shoukaku on average, while it was far the opposite previously, yet "the new builds are garbage!".  Lol.

Those stats also show how Lex has a *significantly* worse win rate than Shokaku despite slightly higher damage. That does indeed imply garbage to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,015
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,020 posts
11,539 battles
2 hours ago, UltimateNewbie said:

Curious how only 10k more damage and 7 extra plane kills on average leads to an extra 10 per cent higher win rate. I wonder if carriers are more finely tuned than other ships, or whether only good carrier drivers bought the Enterprise...

it's the k/d ratio.  I'd imagine that Shokaku is deleting more DD's with cross drops, while Lex is forced to damage farm BBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,616
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,648 posts
14,025 battles
10 hours ago, _V12 said:

Love how Lex now out-damages Shoukaku on average, while it was far the opposite previously, yet "the new builds are garbage!".  Lol.

 

7 hours ago, UltimateNewbie said:

Curious how only 10k more damage and 7 extra plane kills on average leads to an extra 10 per cent higher win rate. I wonder if carriers are more finely tuned than other ships, or whether only good carrier drivers bought the Enterprise...

You guys only looked at 1 stat column and then say everything's fine?

Aerial coverage with 1 fighter unit does not cut it at Tier VIII.  It didn't cut it at Tier VII against Hiryu, Kaga, Saipan where Ranger is failing (still) and it definitely doesn't cut it at Tier VIII against the likes of Enterprise, Shokaku.  Lexington does decent average damage with Shokaku.  But then again, look at EVERYTHING ELSE and she spectacularly fails.  She does the same average damage as Shokaku, yet has a worse Ship Kill Avg and a vastly inferior Kill / Death Ratio.  A measure of the usefulness in the match is XPs, and Lexington has a significantly worse average than Enterprise and Shokaku.

 

Here's another perspective of how that 1/1/1 is failing Lexington and her teams in Ranked.

Bc3ijDP.jpg

The absolute dregs.  Lexington was the first of the US CV Revamp ships to go through the test of Ranked, and WG's concept of how Tech Tree USN CVs should be has so far spectacularly failed.  That is a 10% disparity in WR% between Enterprise and Lexington and 6% disparity with Shokaku and Lexington.  Everything else outside of Damage Avg is absolutely terrible and markedly inferior.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
444
[BOTES]
Members
1,896 posts
6,607 battles
35 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Aerial coverage with 1 fighter unit does not cut it at Tier VIII.  It didn't cut it at Tier VII against Hiryu, Kaga, Saipan where Ranger is failing (still) and it definitely doesn't cut it at Tier VIII against the likes of Enterprise, Shokaku. 

This is the most important part and the reason why I was never happy about the new USN CV loadouts. Against superior or equally skilled players, you CANNOT beat someone with fewer fighter groups. It just isn't possible. The soft stats don't have any meaningful impact on strafes and you lose too many defensive tactics. You can't cross strafe, you can't strafe bait, you can't zone, you can't spot, and you can't attack aggressively. I also hated the removal of manual drops and strafes from T4-T5 because IJN cannot win clicker battles with an equal number of fighter groups.

CV mechanics in general are screwed up beyond repair. They need to be temporarily removed from the game and seriously overhauled from the ground up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
[SYN]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
4,430 battles

Like I've said before. Except for plane tier difference there was absolutely ZERO reason not to use Enterprise's loadouta on Lexington and Ranger. 2/2(5 plane squads)/2. Zero reason. Well balanced and wouldn't of been so OP a well fought IJN carrier couldn't beat them.

But NOOO. WG even said only reason the USA won is because we mass produced garbage.   Yeah....sure the USA did.

Share this post


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

Like I've said before. Except for plane tier difference there was absolutely ZERO reason not to use Enterprise's loadouta on Lexington and Ranger. 2/2(5 plane squads)/2. Zero reason. Well balanced and wouldn't of been so OP a well fought IJN carrier couldn't beat them.

But NOOO. WG even said only reason the USA won is because we mass produced garbage.   Yeah....sure the USA did.

Yeah, 34 planes in the sky at tier 7 isn't an issue at all.  

You literally just suggested giving the Midway loadout, deemed OP at tier 10, to the tier 7 carrier.  LOL

Edited by _V12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
[SYN]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
4,430 battles
11 minutes ago, _V12 said:

Yeah, 34 planes in the sky at tier 7 isn't an issue at all.  

You literally just suggested giving the Midway loadout, deemed OP at tier 10, to the tier 7 carrier.  LOL

And by the by how many does Shokaku put up? Oh wait 24. But put on that handy tier 4 skill and she can hit 34, and no one says a word. Bit hypocritical if you ask me.

And FURTHERMORE, why does the USN get locked into 1 set up but IJN still retains the ability to pick far BETTER setups? 

Care to explain?

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.

×