Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Halonut24

Question about High-Tier CV aircraft.

14 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

122
[WOSV]
Members
331 posts
2,215 battles

So during my quest for USS Midway, I couldn't help but notice something. Granted it's not news, but has really only gotten me thinking about it recently.

Throughout both CV lines, each Carrier gets it's aircraft at it's same tier. This holds true for both lines until Tier IX. USN Aircraft hit a wall and stop progressing for a full tier at Essex. Tier VIII Fighters and TB, with only DB retaining tier. Taiho retains all Tier IX Aircraft when maxed out. Then, at my dream ship Midway, the fighters progress one tier up to IX, the TB stay at VIII, and only the DB retain their tier. Hakuryu's aircraft all retain their tier.

Why? What is the thought process behind under-tiering USN Aircraft at top tier? Also, how much does it actually affect the performance of said aircraft? Something in the back of my mind says it's to counteract the larger flight sizes, but I'm not sure.

I can live with Essex having only Tier VIII TB. But why does Midway have to as well? The only USN CV to have Tier IX TB is Saipan. Why does Midway only allowed Tier VIII TBM's when it could, and in my opinion should have access to Tier IX Douglas Skyraiders.

If performance is not that much affected by tier, then I could almost see having Tier IX vs Tier X fighters because of the Dogfighting Expert captain skill. But the TB? Really looks handicapped to me. Maybe a bit too much.

I don't want it to sound like I'm complaining, but it doesn't make much sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
785
[STW-M]
Members
2,071 posts
5,874 battles
31 minutes ago, Halonut24 said:

So during my quest for USS Midway, I couldn't help but notice something. Granted it's not news, but has really only gotten me thinking about it recently.

Throughout both CV lines, each Carrier gets it's aircraft at it's same tier. This holds true for both lines until Tier IX. USN Aircraft hit a wall and stop progressing for a full tier at Essex. Tier VIII Fighters and TB, with only DB retaining tier. Taiho retains all Tier IX Aircraft when maxed out. Then, at my dream ship Midway, the fighters progress one tier up to IX, the TB stay at VIII, and only the DB retain their tier. Hakuryu's aircraft all retain their tier.

Why? What is the thought process behind under-tiering USN Aircraft at top tier? Also, how much does it actually affect the performance of said aircraft? Something in the back of my mind says it's to counteract the larger flight sizes, but I'm not sure.

I can live with Essex having only Tier VIII TB. But why does Midway have to as well? The only USN CV to have Tier IX TB is Saipan. Why does Midway only allowed Tier VIII TBM's when it could, and in my opinion should have access to Tier IX Douglas Skyraiders.

If performance is not that much affected by tier, then I could almost see having Tier IX vs Tier X fighters because of the Dogfighting Expert captain skill. But the TB? Really looks handicapped to me. Maybe a bit too much.

I don't want it to sound like I'm complaining, but it doesn't make much sense to me.

Apparently, the down-tiered fighters are supposed to balance out the larger squadrons and more powerful strafes of the USN fighters and—for Midway, at least— the large reserves.

Before the USN CVs fell to their current state, there was once a time where Midway had a 2-2-2 loadout with all tier 10 planes and, at one point, even jet fighters. Even I have to say they were ridiculously OP, and eventually all USN CVs got the shaft.

After the USN CV rework (in which their balanced loadouts were tweaked and their strike/air superiority loadouts removed), Essex got a 2-1-2 loadout but with tier 8 fighters and torpedo bombers. The fighters were nerfed for the aforementioned reason but I really can't say why they decided to nerf the torpedo bombers as well.

Midway's story is even more interesting: it got back its 2-2-2 loadout, but in order to ensure that it couldn't return to its OP days, WG made its torpedo bombers tier 8 (never mind how Hakuryu having 12 tier 10 torpedo bombers never seemed to bother anyone). Curiously, they did give Midway tier 10 fighters, but they were removed apparently after Hakuryu players started complaining about how they couldn't fight Midway (which, IMO, is quite ironic considering Hakuryu and the rest of the IJN line dominated the USN line for more than a year with nary a protest, but then suddenly Midway starts actually not being a pushover and they start crying for nerfs).

The currently final part of Midway's saga was that it also got its hanger reserves nerfed and Hakuryu, inexplicably, received a third fighter squadron, thus basically making 4-2-2 Hakuryu pointless and putting Midway on an even greater disadvantage. All the meantime the rest of the USN tech tree CVs from tier 7-9 languish in inferiority against the IJN and premium CVs.

Compare the winrates between the tier 7-9 CVs, which quite clearly demonstrate that USN tech tree CVs have an enormous WR disparity (around 5-7% usually) against the others, including Graf Zeppelin, a carrier that was an atrocity of naval engineering IRL and saw use only as a lumber shed during the war:

  • tier 9:
    • Essex: 46.31%
    • Taiho: 53.48%
  • tier 8:
    • Lexington: 47.39%
    • Shokaku: 53.09%
    • Enterprise: 54.39%
    • Graf Zeppelin: 53.89%
  • tier 7:
    • Ranger: 47.07%
    • Hiryu: 52.29%
    • Saipan: 52.21%
    • Kaga: 56.68%

In addition, out of ALL the ships in the game, Midway and Essex have the lowest and second lowest WR, respectively, followed by Ranger at the sixth lowest and Lexington at the eleventh lowest.

It's at times like these that one wonders if WG just absolutely hates tech-tree USN CVs and is constantly conspiring to keep them among the worst ships in the game.

Alas, until the rework comes (whenever it may), WG will not change any other aspect of the current CV situation, so USN CV players simply have to suffer until then, and it's unknown even after the rework if some semblance of balance will finally be restored.

 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
150 posts
10 battles

The folks at wargaming arent very good at their jobs and decided to rework USN CVs by restricting what planes they can bring and down tiering their planes at tier IX all while leaving IJN CVs alone except only when to buff them. They have done this regardless of community out cry to stop killing the Midway in the name of "balance". Simply, wargaming is clueless when it comes to what should be done with CVs period. You may as well stop your grind to Midway because there just isnt any point in playing her anymore, especially with the pure buff Hak just received in its legendary module. As far as the USN CV nerfs go, wargaming can sit and spin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,263
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,802 posts
15,262 battles

Something I think you aren't considering is that WG and WoW aren't looking at the NA server for their CV stats; they look at the Russian server for stats because it's both the hometown server and the largest server. Midway was nerfed because she dominated on the Russian server while being equal/competitive on the others. Non-Russian ship too strong on Russian server = nerf, regardless of how it's doing anywhere else. If you check the stats for the Russian server from both prior and after the Midway nerf the information is all right there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,816
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
16,131 posts
14,535 battles
2 hours ago, Avenge_December_7 said:

Apparently, the down-tiered fighters are supposed to balance out the larger squadrons and more powerful strafes of the USN fighters and—for Midway, at least— the large reserves.

Before the USN CVs fell to their current state, there was once a time where Midway had a 2-2-2 loadout with all tier 10 planes and, at one point, even jet fighters. Even I have to say they were ridiculously OP, and eventually all USN CVs got the shaft.

After the USN CV rework (in which their balanced loadouts were tweaked and their strike/air superiority loadouts removed), Essex got a 2-1-2 loadout but with tier 8 fighters and torpedo bombers. The fighters were nerfed for the aforementioned reason but I really can't say why they decided to nerf the torpedo bombers as well.

Midway's story is even more interesting: it got back its 2-2-2 loadout, but in order to ensure that it couldn't return to its OP days, WG made its torpedo bombers tier 8 (never mind how Hakuryu having 12 tier 10 torpedo bombers never seemed to bother anyone). Curiously, they did give Midway tier 10 fighters, but they were removed apparently after Hakuryu players started complaining about how they couldn't fight Midway (which, IMO, is quite ironic considering Hakuryu and the rest of the IJN line dominated the USN line for more than a year with nary a protest, but then suddenly Midway starts actually not being a pushover and they start crying for nerfs).

The currently final part of Midway's saga was that it also got its hanger reserves nerfed and Hakuryu, inexplicably, received a third fighter squadron, thus basically making 4-2-2 Hakuryu pointless and putting Midway on an even greater disadvantage. All the meantime the rest of the USN tech tree CVs from tier 7-9 languish in inferiority against the IJN and premium CVs.

Compare the winrates between the tier 7-9 CVs, which quite clearly demonstrate that USN tech tree CVs have an enormous WR disparity (around 5-7% usually) against the others, including Graf Zeppelin, a carrier that was an atrocity of naval engineering IRL and saw use only as a lumber shed during the war:

  • tier 9:
    • Essex: 46.31%
    • Taiho: 53.48%
  • tier 8:
    • Lexington: 47.39%
    • Shokaku: 53.09%
    • Enterprise: 54.39%
    • Graf Zeppelin: 53.89%
  • tier 7:
    • Ranger: 47.07%
    • Hiryu: 52.29%
    • Saipan: 52.21%
    • Kaga: 56.68%

In addition, out of ALL the ships in the game, Midway and Essex have the lowest and second lowest WR, respectively, followed by Ranger at the sixth lowest and Lexington at the eleventh lowest.

It's at times like these that one wonders if WG just absolutely hates tech-tree USN CVs and is constantly conspiring to keep them among the worst ships in the game.

Alas, until the rework comes (whenever it may), WG will not change any other aspect of the current CV situation, so USN CV players simply have to suffer until then, and it's unknown even after the rework if some semblance of balance will finally be restored.

 

 

Ranger, Lexington in particular have very abysmal history in this game.  The USN CV Revamp amazingly made them worse.  That really deserves some sort of award.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
78
[-S-R-]
Beta Testers
669 posts
12,364 battles

I lost a whole first wave of midway planes to one stupid Kurfurst alone. So yes playing T10 vs T10 with 0 dmg is fo fun.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
876
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,449 posts
8,107 battles
4 hours ago, Halonut24 said:

Throughout both CV lines, each Carrier gets it's aircraft at it's same tier.

False actually - IJN gets 1 tier higher fighters (5 and 6) at tiers 4 and 5, and one tier lower at I believe it's 7 or 8, can't recall off the top of my head (TB's on I'm sure it's Hiryu/stock Shokaku are tier 6). 

 

4 hours ago, Halonut24 said:

Why? What is the thought process behind under-tiering USN Aircraft at top tier? Also, how much does it actually affect the performance of said aircraft? Something in the back of my mind says it's to counteract the larger flight sizes, but I'm not sure.

The thought process is right, but executed wrong. I will say it forever as a USN CV main - our fighters have been OP since day one. They have more HP, more effective DPS (DPS in tool tip x number of planes), lower DPS loss (because it's spread out over more planes) AND more ammo. What was needed was USN need a nerf to DPS, and IJN MAYBE a slight buff to DPS so that, in initial combat and all, IJN had a slight advantage (as it stands USN has a significant one), with USN relying on durability to win by having that lower DPS loss, and more ammo to just bleed IJN of theirs - war of attrition really. Removing the top tier planes is the slackers way of doing it that is ineffective because other than yeah, okay, we have more issues running IJN plans down, the nerf itself is barely enough to fix it at best, but wait, DFE skill basically undoes the nerf to DPS, and adds ammo, on top of the extra ammo from the lower tier planes, so it's almost actually a damn buff to USN fighters, something they did before when we asked them to give us accurate damned DB's because our damage was an issue.

And so, because our fighters are OP, and they can't seem to get it through their heads to fix them, they instead force Ranger and Lex to 1 fighter, that runs into issues thanks to the newer exit strafe mechanic and how it works, Essex's runs into issues for a different reason I'll get to, and then Midway is STILL OP because they gave it the 2,2,2 setup it had at lunch, in beta, in alpha and was, guess what, broken as :etc_swear: back then too, more so because AA wasn't overbuffed and we had jets. And the Hanger nerf to Midway was idiotic because HAK, was running out of planes, because AA is insane and Midway doesn't help, and has always had a lower reload ration than Midway and all they needed to do was add 20 planes to Hak, give or take 1-2 for balanced numbers in groups.

 

Then you have the TB's, which, Essex is actually a victim of the stupidity of giving Midway it's 2,2,2 setup back. See, when someone suggested this for lord knows why, someone likely brought up "but that was brokenly OP" and they, or someone else, suggested "make the TB's tier 8". Because hey, that will weaken them against AA. Which, yes, there are tier 10 ships solo or worse yet grouped, you will never get near - and then there are the tier 10's that have still inferior AA especially after getting hit by DB's, the tier 9's, and oh right, the tier 8's you see, who have enough to handle the tier 8 CV's version, but the tier 10 has more hitpoints from an upgrade, and those ships get thoroughly wrecked especially thanks to a broken mechanic called manual drop. And where is Essex the victim here you might ask? Ya see, Wargaming has this thing that, also kinda made certain ship placements wonky at times and all, like Cleveland, stirred things like with Gnei, that, they like "consistency". It's why they shove Cleveland at tier 6 cause 152 mm guns in the old line, and why Gnei only has the 381 mm guns not the 283's like Scharn. They couldn't have Essex get the tier 9 TB's then jump back to 8. Problem being, with Midway, two groups means you can overwhelm AA and still get through. Even without player focused fire, AA prioritizes armed TB's - so that group gets focused, and usually melted, and targeted most by fighters, really leaving you with the old AS Lex setup of 2,0,2 as opposed to at least Essex's 3,0,2. 

 

This is the flawed thinking behind those changes.

3 hours ago, Avenge_December_7 said:

for Midway, at least— the large reserve

Formerly, as her reserved got nerfed, which they should undo that and buff Hak's hanger or just give us the tier 10 fighters back as the only difference is that we have a little more speed and IJN has half a chance of running us out of ammo. 

4 hours ago, Avenge_December_7 said:

(never mind how Hakuryu having 12 tier 10 torpedo bombers never seemed to bother anyone)

It has, especially because of manual drop, though also, IJN was supposed to be based around it's TB's and has pretty terrible DB's, with USN vice-versa. However, the other reason, even with manual drop is that, if they aren't grouped a certain way IJN actually has gaps that you can get a BB through, especially if the drop is too close. USN's tight packed torps mean only at max range, or a DD that gets lucky two torps are too close together thanks to RNG (yes, even torps have some dispersion RNG) and create a gap it just barely fits through. That and, back in the day, IJN bombers still had speed and sheer volume of planes in the air, but they used to have worse HP than USN therefore worse survivability, and it wasn't uncommon to lose a group or even two on the attack run. more often only 8 or 9 even hit the water. 

 

4 hours ago, Avenge_December_7 said:

which, IMO, is quite ironic considering Hakuryu and the rest of the IJN line dominated the USN line for more than a year with nary a protest

We did protest, for more than a year, but some just up and left, as IJN players had when USN was undisputed king of the hill, but even those of us that did started to get fed up because we had two easy request - change our strike to 1,x,x, or 2,x,x at 9 and 10, so that way, we had fighters, so teams would stop complaining about no fighters, and so we would as well, and on AS, especially after several buffs to AA meant to cancel out manual TB drops that nerfed DB's hard, some buffs to at least their HP to get through stronger AA so we could use fires to our advantage by sending staggered attacks not massed ones, and maybe make our planes just a little more accurate tan IJN's (currently most USN HE DB's have similar or worse dispersion than IJN, but have more per group so they tend to hit more just cause as they saying goes "throwing enough :etc_swear: at the wall"), and those of us that got the fact "hey, our fighters are OP said "hey, long as you fix our CV's to have better DB's we can rely on, or give us a usable strike option, go ahead and nerf them some.

So instead they BUFFED THE DAMN FIGHTERS to fix the issue that AS had no reliable damage dealing ability, and that strike had 0 fighter cover for the team or our own planes. They basically ignored every protest. But then GZ happened, they wen't "oh crap maybe we should listen", and then listened to the wrong people apparently or just did whatever idea was shouted at them the most or popped in their head. Which is why a fair few of us have no faith in them rebuilding CV gameplay from the ground up given they couldn't handle fixing this which really isn't that freaking hard. Cripes, I basically came up with the number Midway was nerfed to with the hangar, and it's alternate of buffing Hak's hangar by 20/21 planes, in 5 minutes with a calculater while they had to apparently test a 50 plane nerf. 

 

The majority of the issues with CV's is just bloody numbers. Fighter imbalance, lower USN DPS, maybe raise IJN's, tweak ammo after that, done, at one point I had a chart of the exact numbers to change them to. Overpowered manual drops? change max damage of torps, done. DB's too inconsistent, lower the dispersion ring closer to, but not quite, Saipans level, boom, done. Alpha is a bit much with better accuracy DB's especially against DD's, lower the max damage, boom, done. AA OP, drop the AA numbers back down to how they were before, maybe a little higher, BOOM.DONE. CV's and fires, lower the 24 freaking percent base damage per fire, DONE. The only thing that comes to mind that doesn't involve numbers, is taking the damn emergency takeoff skill and making it a built in mechanic, and change the skill the lower the penalty because s it is, it is way more effective to actually in most scenarios, use a premium DCP, let them rearm, and then if needed pop DCP again to launch and is actually faster with that, maybe a flag, or at worst a 2 point captain skill, than the 3 point one.

And don't even get me started on history and what they did with GZ's planes or the fact AP bombs with less than 1/3rd of the explosives deal 4/5ths the damage of HE bombs when BOTH numbers are the numbers the deal when they hit the citadel. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,383
[RLGN]
Members
8,266 posts
17,289 battles
4 hours ago, Avenge_December_7 said:

Alas, until the rework comes (whenever it may), WG will not change any other aspect of the current CV situation, so USN CV players simply have to suffer until then, and it's unknown even after the rework if some semblance of balance will finally be restored.

CV rework... Whatever...

WG’s answer to a problem they created, (giving carriers manual attacks in the first place,) and which they probably could have fixed last year, like they promised; except that removing manual attacks was apparently too simple a solution to be accepted.

@WanderingGhost

What Ghost said; seconded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,230
[GWG]
[GWG]
Members
5,412 posts
9,576 battles

What I saw with the last CV change to the US line was to remove some of the variables of US CV play.

No longer has 3 modes of plane groupings...  No more Air Superiority builds.  You now get your choice of 'Balanced' instead of Strike or Fighters.

Lexington looks to be the best US build now..  But unfortunately, it's up against the Enterprise and Graf where a simple captain skill will negate any advantage of tier.

--- Lexington SERIOUSLY needs it's fighter build back to remain of any use.  It's the only build I would dare take into Random.

....

So the US line is SIMPLE to use.  The others splay out in complexity towards operator overload.

What I find is that it takes a dedicated User Interface to operate these more complex carriers.  Folks need to remap their keyboards and set up macro keys.  CV operations is a completely different video game from operating a destroyer.  However, the US CVs are still simple enough to switch over to without getting overloaded.

I see one solution to the complexity is to stack the strike planes....   Don't do that against me, or you will be VERY sorry... lol

So I present to you the weakness of these OP builds of Enterprise, Graf, and Shokaku.  OVERLOAD THEIR OPERATORS.  Make them lose track of stuff.  Do confusing stuff (but not stupid).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
876
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,449 posts
8,107 battles
20 hours ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

WG’s answer to a problem they created, (giving carriers manual attacks in the first place,) and which they probably could have fixed last year, like they promised; except that removing manual attacks was apparently too simple a solution to be accepted.

Here is ONE thing I will give them on keeping manual attacks. When it comes to strafing, part of it was a deal to hopefully help lower tier/weaker IJN fighters, have a better chance against hiher tier CV's/USN fighters, which, obviously, doesn't because they have access as well, and theirs is better, but in it's original form - was a debuff against grouped bombers similar to DF AA that could maybe knock a couple planes down. It actually required some real skill and timing to debuff them as they were getting the attack going so they did less damage to an allied ship even if they weren't paying attention to dodge. As opposed to "lol auto delete at will". Especially if they could add a DPS debuff to fighters caught in it, it could stay if it were reverted closer to it's original "debuff and knock a couple planes down" state, as you do not have the same attrition, aren't completely at RNG's mercy with fighters and are slightly more than point and click. What it is now  is an issue, beyond tier 4 and 5. 

Manual drops well, while added before said changes, DD players are actually in part to blame for it staying. If you take out the "lol delete" damage factor, prior to certain changes it was really only useful for when you need to squeeze an attack into a smaller space that auto drop would drop on land/water that's too shallow or a slightly different spread pattern. Especially back when BB's were a tad less agile albeit you can still score similar accuracy with auto drops to manual, if you predict and aim right. However, back in the day, and there is even a cap video about this, any ship in smoke using it's AA guns was spotted, so, a DD that turned them off was safe from spotting and mostly safe from air attack without manual drops. Though, them being camped by planes was a slight issue, I say slight cause most cases would be solved by having a cruiser support you, or friendly CV fighters. And after a ton of complaints from DD players, aircraft spotting in smoke was completely removed, which, especially before smoke changes, was a really big issue because you could fit 3 BB's in a smoke screen with 2 cruisers, AA blasting as well as main guns, and never see them. And while this is still frustratingly true for AA, now at least some ships, mostly BB's would be spotted by firing from ships. But doesn't change the fact that at this point, CV's do need a means to attack smoke.

But that said, alpha on CV's is way too high for it to work as is. My views on an alpha nerf to CV's is a bit extreme maybe, I'd nerf TB damage to 1500-2000 damage tops, though maybe room for more at higher tiers and all, as well as DB's max damage, especially the AP bombs. But this is with a trade off that while TB's, especially with MD are accurate enough (still talking depending on ships and all potential to 1 shot a DD if all hit, heavy damage to cruisers, moderate to BB's) to deal damage improving DB accuracy quite a bit so they are hitting more often with HE DB's, maybe even AP is a bit more accurate and all, but AA is reduced so you can send a group, wait, then send the next in after DCP is popped or make them wait it out, then hit again, and make use of the various DoT effects to score the bigger numbers and take ships out because especially when it came to many larger ships, it was seldom really a direct hit causing massive catastrophic damage near instantly, outside of cases like Arizona where a direct hit starts a chain reaction, but more often uncontrolled fires and flooding that forced a ship to be abandoned and scuttled. 

 

Straight removing manual attacks, albeit, if they were going to remove them at any tier it should have been then all tiers, would be harder and really cause more issues, the simplier solutions were really again, just change some numbers. Change Strafe's DPS multiplier to a lower number, lower the alpha on at least torps given manual drop and them. A little more than point and click, fewer, if any, ships just deleted in one strike, and noobs not having their ship or planes deleted actually means they can learn. Everyone wins. Other than any ship intent to just park in smoke if there is a CV and few, if any real torp boats. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
102
[LEGIT]
Members
448 posts
6,428 battles

Not that I am siding with IJN CVs ( Im a dirty IJN CV player.. and I played Bouge and Indy at some point) but the Old midway ( before USN CV rework) it had 302 set up with 3 x 6 ( 7 with AS) fighters and 2x6 ( 7 with AS) DBs. With this complement the Hak didnt stand much of a chance against Midway since Midways fighters are much stronger individually than a single IJN plane. Now I dont own a Hak on the main server yet, But I played both Midway and Hak in Test servers before USN rework. With powerful strafing and more fighter groups the best way to counter was to use the Haks 422 setup ( Even this wont do much if the skill gap between CVs is big and MIdway having much larger hanger). As for old Bouge, Indy, most people used the 201 setup which gave an huge advantage against Zuiho, Ryujo since these ships primarily use 121 and 122 setup( of course USN had a major disadvantage when they used 012 setup ). Unless Ryujo captain used 311 it would have been difficult to defend its strike fighters from US planes. For Ranger and Lex I had no complaints since Hiryu and Shokaku had 222 set ups which gave a 50% chance of winning against USN CVs ( Hell 95% chance of winning if the USN captain used 013 setup). As for Old Essex... I have no coments ( since I didnt play much of Taiho and Essex at that time)

My conculssion? : in T 5,6,7,8 IJN CVs had 50% to 95% chance of winning, T9 about 30ish% to 80%( Old Essex 113 setup) and nearly impossible to win in T10 against Midway if it had 302. Which is why WG decided to balance USN CVs so that they can be a multi role CV having both Strike and Versatile rather then Strike or Versatile. And with this came the US plane tier nerf so it could match the strength of IJN CVs 

Edited by KAGA_kaini

Share this post


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

Plane tier is just an arbitrary number. What matters is whether the squadron makeups and reserves work. I mean, there's no reason WG couldn't mark the tier 8 planes as tier 20, but it wouldn't change anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,816
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
16,131 posts
14,535 battles
On 7/10/2018 at 4:52 AM, AVR_Project said:

What I saw with the last CV change to the US line was to remove some of the variables of US CV play.

No longer has 3 modes of plane groupings...  No more Air Superiority builds.  You now get your choice of 'Balanced' instead of Strike or Fighters.

Lexington looks to be the best US build now..  But unfortunately, it's up against the Enterprise and Graf where a simple captain skill will negate any advantage of tier.

--- Lexington SERIOUSLY needs it's fighter build back to remain of any use.  It's the only build I would dare take into Random.

....

So the US line is SIMPLE to use.  The others splay out in complexity towards operator overload.

What I find is that it takes a dedicated User Interface to operate these more complex carriers.  Folks need to remap their keyboards and set up macro keys.  CV operations is a completely different video game from operating a destroyer.  However, the US CVs are still simple enough to switch over to without getting overloaded.

I see one solution to the complexity is to stack the strike planes....   Don't do that against me, or you will be VERY sorry... lol

So I present to you the weakness of these OP builds of Enterprise, Graf, and Shokaku.  OVERLOAD THEIR OPERATORS.  Make them lose track of stuff.  Do confusing stuff (but not stupid).

 

The only thing Lexington is good against is another Lexington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,230
[GWG]
[GWG]
Members
5,412 posts
9,576 battles
1 hour ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

The only thing Lexington is good against is another Lexington.

Yup...  Perfect for Co-Op since you know what you'll be facing.  The only variable is HE or AP bombs.

I usually sell off the stock builds on the IJN CVs.

As soon as I work up a strategy, I'll wander back out into random-land with the Lexington.  But it will take a major effort to break-even facing a different CV.

Edited by AVR_Project

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×