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

Any reason not to use the Tiny Tim rockets on the Midway?

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,481
[DOTM]
Beta Testers
1,353 posts
8,394 battles

Seems like the HVAR rockets only real advantage over the Tiny Tim is a few more rockets for volley. Otherwise they do less damage, have a lower fire chance, less penetration and the Bearcats themselves somehow have slightly less HP than the Bearcats carrying Tiny Tims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
689 posts
5,662 battles
5 minutes ago, Zaydin said:

Seems like the HVAR rockets only real advantage over the Tiny Tim is a few more rockets for volley. Otherwise they do less damage, have a lower fire chance, less penetration and the Bearcats themselves somehow have slightly less HP than the Bearcats carrying Tiny Tims.

Far better for spamming small targets. You can still land a ton of damage with the 33mm of pen they have, you just have to aim superstructure.

Tiny Tims are good for "F you 50mm plating".

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,889
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
22,118 posts
12,359 battles
5 minutes ago, The_Painted_Target said:

Far better for spamming small targets. You can still land a ton of damage with the 33mm of pen they have, you just have to aim superstructure.

Tiny Tims are good for "F you 50mm plating".

This, the HVAR's are best against small targets such as DD's but it is the larger targets where the Tiny Tim's shine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,481
[DOTM]
Beta Testers
1,353 posts
8,394 battles
12 minutes ago, The_Painted_Target said:

Far better for spamming small targets. You can still land a ton of damage with the 33mm of pen they have, you just have to aim superstructure.

Tiny Tims are good for "F you 50mm plating".

Still seems baffling to me that the Bearcats that mount HVARs have slightly less health than the Bearcats carrying Tiny Tims. I mean, they are the exact same aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
689 posts
5,662 battles
1 hour ago, Zaydin said:

Still seems baffling to me that the Bearcats that mount HVARs have slightly less health than the Bearcats carrying Tiny Tims. I mean, they are the exact same aircraft.

The baffling continues when you realize the IJN spam rockets are better than the USN spam rockets, despite Japan never using rockets, top it off with torps that are 15 knots faster across every tier and you start wondering why the US carriers are even in the game.
 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,481
[DOTM]
Beta Testers
1,353 posts
8,394 battles
6 hours ago, The_Painted_Target said:

The baffling continues when you realize the IJN spam rockets are better than the USN spam rockets, despite Japan never using rockets, top it off with torps that are 15 knots faster across every tier and you start wondering why the US carriers are even in the game.
 

WG continuing the proud tradition of making American carriers feel underpowered compared to their IJN counterparts since launch even though Japanese naval aviation was non-existent by the end of the war whereas the US had the best/largest carrier force in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,296
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,903 posts
5,750 battles
8 hours ago, Zaydin said:

Still seems baffling to me that the Bearcats that mount HVARs have slightly less health than the Bearcats carrying Tiny Tims. I mean, they are the exact same aircraft.

6 hours ago, The_Painted_Target said:

The baffling continues when you realize the IJN spam rockets are better than the USN spam rockets, despite Japan never using rockets, top it off with torps that are 15 knots faster across every tier and you start wondering why the US carriers are even in the game.

Oh come now, the Japanese CVs have their own brand of confusing bovine excrement at least. Like why mounting a different torpedo decreases aircraft health and increases service time despite them both being the same J5N. I'll agree that it's odd to have the US as a gimmickless "vanilla" line while Japan gets the option at tier 10 to mount deep-water torps, has planes that can stealth torp, AND was given AP dive-bombs.  Any one or two would have been fine to differentiate them, all three is just overkill.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,481
[DOTM]
Beta Testers
1,353 posts
8,394 battles
1 minute ago, Landsraad said:

Oh come now, the Japanese CVs have their own brand of confusing bovine excrement at least. Like why mounting a different torpedo decreases aircraft health and increases service time despite them both being the same J5N. I'll agree that it's odd to have the US as a gimmickless "vanilla" line while Japan gets the option at tier 10 to mount deep-water torps, has planes that can stealth torp, AND was given AP dive-bombs.  Any one or two would have been fine to differentiate them, all three is just overkill.

 

It just serves to reinforce my belief that the dev team has a grudge/hatred for the USN for some reason. Possibly because the Soviet navy didn't do much at all during WW2.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
3,959 posts
4,920 battles
7 hours ago, The_Painted_Target said:

The baffling continues when you realize the IJN spam rockets are better than the USN spam rockets, despite Japan never using rockets, top it off with torps that are 15 knots faster across every tier and you start wondering why the US carriers are even in the game.

All the rockets except the "12cm rocket" on their early planes are real. Hakuryu rockets are misdesignated and should be Type 3 No 6 Mk 9. M2 zeroes didn't carry rockets, and I'm not sure if N1K3-A and A8M rocket loads are historical(possible, but the question is if that many hardpoints were actually installed), but the munitions are real and the smaller rockets saw combat use.

I'd definitely say that they don't really have better rockets on the whole, given they generally carry fewer and none of their rockets pens 32mm armor, meaning they need IFHE to damage battleship plating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
689 posts
5,662 battles
1 hour ago, Aetreus said:

All the rockets except the "12cm rocket" on their early planes are real. Hakuryu rockets are misdesignated and should be Type 3 No 6 Mk 9. M2 zeroes didn't carry rockets, and I'm not sure if N1K3-A and A8M rocket loads are historical(possible, but the question is if that many hardpoints were actually installed), but the munitions are real and the smaller rockets saw combat use.

I'd definitely say that they don't really have better rockets on the whole, given they generally carry fewer and none of their rockets pens 32mm armor, meaning they need IFHE to damage battleship plating.

Hak doesn't need to pen battleship plating with its rockets when it can dump torps in the water from safety every 60 seconds or so.

The rockets become hell when you're a cruiser trying to salvage a game from an enemy torp spamming hak keeping your team balled up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×