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

AP or HE Bombs ?

11 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
60 posts
4,698 battles

Just got the Lexington with ap bombs, never have experienced using them, which one should I use ap or he bombs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,526 posts
10,950 battles
5 minutes ago, galspanic said:

Both.  HE is probably better in more situations, but getting 6 citadels and 68k damage on one drop is hilariously fun.

Fun for you maybe...for the rest of us non CV players it's just a broken mechanic in the game...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts

AP. 

Go into coop and/or training rooms to learn how to optimize your drop techniques.

Dmg wins battles, and AP is your top dmg dealer on Lex.

Lex has a strike loadout, all that really matters is how to maximise your damage through put over the course of a battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
821 posts
6,988 battles
36 minutes ago, _Rumple_ said:

Fun for you maybe...for the rest of us non CV players it's just a broken mechanic in the game...

Uhhh... clearly.  But I don’t play any ship to make fun for my opponents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,926
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,815 posts
11,212 battles

AP bombs are basically a summary of everything wrong Wargaming ever did wrong with carriers, especially USN before the squadron reworks (that honestly just made things worse all around) - OP in some scenario's, near useless in others, and over specialized.

AP bombs have high accuracy, and yes, can deal stupid amounts of damage - to certain BB's and CA's. If you even manage to hit CL's and DD's - typically you overpen. And that doesn't even factor in when you do hit say a Kron (easy target that eats citadels) but the bomb manages to hit something so it ricochets offs or better yet - the infamous 0 damage pen. 

Which is where I will actually disagree with LoveBote on this because yes damage certainly helps win, but I find HE to be far more effective as a damage dealer. It may not have insane alpha vs a BB or some cruisers, but, it's more effective against DD's when it hits, and some CL's. They don't ricochet like AP and even a hit that doesn't do damage can still start a fire that will. Which can do 5 things - cause him to burn his DCP so you can set him on fire again, as before but instead the TB's cause floods, as before but allows a teammate to start a fire or flood, has him burn as he waits on the other strikes to not  waste it for a potentially worse hit, or he's already popped his DCP and burns. Also, unlike AP - HE bombs will better soften up enemy AA, meaning you can maybe lose less TB's in an attack. 

But that's my preference - I prefer a more universal loadout that over time, can net me huge damage and allow for teammates to deal more and better disable ships to help them have more of a chance (DD torp tubes, BB secondaries, occasionally other main armaments, etc). LoveBote's way is more instant gratification numbers but a bit more specialized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,166
[RKLES]
Members
12,093 posts
13,750 battles
2 hours ago, galspanic said:

Uhhh... clearly.  But I don’t play any ship to make fun for my opponents.

Ah but if you take AP bombs it is a lot more fun for DDs when they are stalking your CV... :cap_haloween:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
303
[BIER]
Members
451 posts
6,352 battles

I agree with @WanderingGhost, in that AP bombs are a classic example of WG's incompentance.

They NEVER think things through, it's like the entire feature team has ADHD, and the development teams don't bother to ask questions, they just throw something together in the fastest way possible.

For example, not only do AP bombs virtually wipe out BBs (heavily encouraging camping in the BB population) with single squads, but DAA is quiet ineffective against them, and thus there's no hope of discouraging a AP bomb drop on a friendly BB you might be defending.  And, of course, they can fly right through most BB AA.  We didn't need bombers that could wipe out BBs in one attack, in the first place - that was what Torpedo Planes were doing. 

And as far as being a counter to BBs, why can they then citadel ALL cruisers, regularly?  Not just the CAs, either, which is bad enough - CAs get wiped out even easier than BBs by AP bombers. I just finished a game here in an Edinburgh, and I got citadeled by a 2-plane AP bomb squad. That's a CL, where there shouldn't be ANYTHING to allow an AP bomb to citadel. But noooooo, it's probably due to something like the bomb landing on a turret, and being armed by the (modest) turret armor.

Once again, this is the fault of the overly complicated armor scheme used here, which while it may have sounded great on paper, is a textbook example of NOT understanding what you're doing in software development. 

WoWS is a video game. It's NOT a reality simulator. The vast majority of faults in this game stem from the basic confusion in WG's head between the two, and the way their semi-reality implementation repeatedly fails in the face of what the entire purpose of the GAME is: consistent fun.  WoWS is one of the least consistent games in terms of user experience there is. 

 

I'd load AP bombers all the time over HE ones. That's because they behave like the old BB AP vs Destroyer problem:  while the *intent* was OK, the actual *implementation* completely screws up the purpose, and thus has all sorts of dumb side effects that make it break the game.

In this case, AP bombs are superior in all uses to HE, except on destroyers. Who cares if you burn through AA modules or cause a perma-fire on a BB using the HE bombers, when that same squad will 1-shot the entire ship on a regular basis?  AP bombs cause SOOOOOOO much more damage to a target that any possible HE effects cannot in any way catch up.  That's due to both the ridiculous amount of damage an AP bomb does, plus the ludicrously higher hit rate they do.  When a squad of AP bombers can be counted on to *reliably* cause 10x the damage of the same squad of HE bombers to all targets except DDs, why would you ever chose the HE?  

And the fact that AP bombers have this effect on every ship class except DDs?  Where using HE bombers was problematic in the first place, as they have a difficult time hitting them?

AP bombers are just vastly superior in practice. You can spot DDs with them easily, and cause massive damage to anything else. HE bombers simply can't be anywhere near as impactful.

 

Edited by LAnybody

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
174
[FTH]
Members
1,001 posts
15,222 battles

It depends on what you want to do and how you want to play. Are you primarily a alpha striker, or do you prefer damage over time? Do you like switching out squadrons to attack with while others loiter outside of AA range for a damage control party to cool down? If so, HE may work, and you gain the added bonus of being able to hit DDs for more than overpens. Or, do you prefer to do just a screw it send it where you throw 3 (or 4 later on in the line) squadrons at the target and see if there is anything still standing after the mushroom cloud disappates? If that's the case, go for the AP ones. But, know ahead of time if you do, your only defence against DD's at that point becomes your torpedo squadron.

Myself, I run the AP ones, but it's whatever anyone wants to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,926
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,815 posts
11,212 battles
1 hour ago, LAnybody said:

HE bombers simply can't be anywhere near as impactful.

I beg to differ -

Spoiler

0YgJZmC.jpg

Spoiler

shot-18_12.18_02_36.27-0249.thumb.jpg.418510f4a293e5910670df995d620f39.jpg

Both of these the HE bombs, and resulting fires, deal 50% or more of my damage in games over 150k damage. That second one over 100k in HE bombs alone. And against ships that AP bombs don't usually nuke. And that doesn't count taking out AA guns to make it easier to hit them again, secondaries, torp tubes, etc that lowered damage to allies, and fires/flooding that fires that were put out with DCP opened up for other ships to deal longer term damage. The problem is getting through AA in the first place with USN DB's that need some HP buffs, and their accuracy has been overnerfed. Especially given the impetus of said nerf was that DD's at the time had citadels, which HE bombs easily punched through, so we easily one shot DD's, and those have since been removed. Dial the accuracy back in closer to what Saipan has, not exactly, but closer, HE is just as good, and against more targets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
303
[BIER]
Members
451 posts
6,352 battles

Both of those are exceptional cases. They depend entirely on the enemy not being able to manage his fires, and heavily on RNG to set them in the first place, not to mention actually hitting something to even have the chance to start the fire. Against someone who is good managing their fire (even if you're doing things like wait until the torps cause floods), let alone has things like BoS or FP, you're going to be doing MUCH less damage.

AP bombs provide MUCH more consistent damage - they hit much, much more often, and do very consistent damage - easily 50% citadels on BBs or CA, and pens virtually all the rest of the time. No defense or captain skill works against AP bomb damage.

It's the inverse of AP vs HE for ships:  HE provides the most consistent damage in all situations, with AP being very hit-or-miss (pun intended).  For CVs, AP bombers are much more consistent, and HE depends very heavily on favorable RNG and enemy actions.

And again, who cares about killing AA mounts, if your first strike simply deletes the ship, which AP bombs are extremely capable of doing?  HE bombers still have to run through that initial AA just like AP bombers do, so they'll take the same losses. The difference is that AP bombers won't have to come back again to finish the job. HE bombers will, almost always.

 

Edited by LAnybody

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×