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

MIdway HE bombs

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,780
[HATE]
Members
1,002 posts
14,778 battles

A friend wrote this who doesn't want to be attacked personally. so I will post for him. It is a very good idea.

"First, I want to get something off my chest. Midway HE bombers do too much alpha damage. Plain and simple. For those of you who are not military historians let me give you a little background. The Midway's dive bombers are armed with two AN-M66 bombs per plane. These bombs weighed over 2000 lbs each. This means that a single bomber is carrying over 4000 lbs of ordinance at take-off. This is simply unrealistic for carrier-based aircraft. The USS Midway (at commissioning in 1945) had a length of just under 1000 ft, and that simply is not enough runway for a plane carrying 4000 lbs of ordinance to take off. The belief that a plane can take off in under a thousand feet carrying over 4000 lbs of bombs is unfounded in reality. Not to mention, the Douglass BTD Destroyer was only capable of fitting 3200lbs of ordinance in its bomb bay. Simple math tells us that the plane is carrying over 800 lbs of unrealistic ordinance. There are simple fixes to this problem of both reality and in-game effects of such a massive payload. The first is to simply cut the amount of bombs on each plane in half. This makes it so that each plane is only carrying a single 2000 lb bomb. However, doing so cuts the strike power in half, and is unlikely to be viewed favorably by CV players. Another option is to change the bombs to something more realistic. The ASM-N-2 Bat bomb was a radar guided (obviously radar guided bombs would be broken so that feature would be disabled) 1600 lb bomb that saw service from the end of 1944 to the end of the war. Two of these bombs weighs exactly 3200 lbs (not a coincidence) and would perfectly fit on the BTD Destroyer.(edited)

As these bombs are smaller and have a reduced payload, it would be easy to simply implement these as the bombs (WG can even keep the same dispersion on the bombs if they want) as they would be balanced with a reduced alpha strike. Needless to say, an improved fire chance over the AN-M66 could be called for to compensate for the lack of alpha. The capability to light multiple fires in a single strike and punish players that instantly damage control is something that I believe would be welcomed by the CV community. The reduced alpha strike would be greatly appreciated by the DD community who can lose half their health in a single attack run. And those perfect runs will no longer deal 15+ thousand damage on cruisers and battleships, effectively cutting their health by as much as a third. Keep in mind that these proposed changes would not in any way diminish the striking capability of the Midway, just slightly shift its HE bombs away from raw alpha to damage over time, and help to increase the survival of destroyers against dive bombers. I believe this change would be welcomed by the community as a whole, so please leave your thoughts and input below. Thank you."

Edited by MEANN
  • Cool 2
  • Boring 4
  • Meh 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,531
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
5,082 posts
18,009 battles

It doesn't address the core issues of the CV-AA situation, but I think this is one area where short-term improvement is possible and needed. Reduced alpha + increased FC allows the bombs to be effective against ships that naturally suffer greater damage from fires, namely battleships and Large Cruisers. This is reasonable from a balance perspective; however, from a WG perspective, you are much more likely to see an alpha reduction AND fire chance reduction because that's just how they seem to operate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,303
Members
2,631 posts
4,235 battles
1 minute ago, Edgecase said:

It doesn't address the core issues of the CV-AA situation, but I think this is one area where short-term improvement is possible and needed. Reduced alpha + increased FC allows the bombs to be effective against ships that naturally suffer greater damage from fires, namely battleships and Large Cruisers. This is reasonable from a balance perspective; however, from a WG perspective, you are much more likely to see an alpha reduction AND fire chance reduction because that's just how they seem to operate.

A sledgehammer instead of a scalpel,  yeah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,827
[S0L0]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,062 posts
5,702 battles

I got news for you... Pixels are weightless....    arbitrary damage assigned to arbitrary pixels...  with a name under it and an image to pretend some historic reality.    If we wanted to put a little reality into it.. most of the time a single one of these bomb strikes top deck would sink a destroyer IRL.... or at minimum remove it from combat for a year......    But kudos for portraying your friends "please nerf CV"  threads with some kind of clever talking points.      

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
117
[PEED2]
Members
121 posts
8,638 battles
4 minutes ago, RA6E_ said:

I got news for you... Pixels are weightless....    arbitrary damage assigned to arbitrary pixels...  with a name under it and an image to pretend some historic reality.    If we wanted to put a little reality into it.. most of the time a single one of these bomb strikes top deck would sink a destroyer IRL.... or at minimum remove it from combat for a year......    But kudos for portraying your friends "please nerf CV"  threads with some kind of clever talking points.      

The thing is, WG seems to want to make the game somewhat realistic, hence why AA only fires at certain ranges. 5in dual purpose mounts would not fire up to point blank like the 20mm cannons do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
61
[KIA]
Members
241 posts
12,607 battles

 

1 minute ago, The_Weeaboo said:

The thing is, WG seems to want to make the game somewhat realistic, hence why AA only fires at certain ranges. 5in dual purpose mounts would not fire up to point blank like the 20mm cannons do.

Except their sense of realism is.......not existent as this is an arcade-style game.  If you wanted realism, you'd have the dual purpose guns opening up as soon as they spotted the planes 10km+ to lay out some outrageous flak clouds coupled with VT fuses on the USN ships along with about 500 other unrealistic things regarding all the ships from the top down...hit rate, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,780
[HATE]
Members
1,002 posts
14,778 battles
12 minutes ago, RA6E_ said:

I got news for you... Pixels are weightless....    arbitrary damage assigned to arbitrary pixels...  with a name under it and an image to pretend some historic reality.    If we wanted to put a little reality into it.. most of the time a single one of these bomb strikes top deck would sink a destroyer IRL.... or at minimum remove it from combat for a year......    But kudos for portraying your friends "please nerf CV"  threads with some kind of clever talking points.      

people like you are why most topics that are about making the cvs balanced and would ruin your op life. this game is so closely modeled about the actual boats that is  bordering a sim. but to keep some semblance of balance they nerf boats and add rng. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,827
[S0L0]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,062 posts
5,702 battles
1 minute ago, The_Weeaboo said:

The thing is, WG seems to want to make the game somewhat realistic, hence why AA only fires at certain ranges. 5in dual purpose mounts would not fire up to point blank like the 20mm cannons do.

If WG removed all the items from game that didn't exist IRL, it would be a very small game?  And furthermore do you really believe that when WG decides how many HPs of damage a piece of ordinance in game does they base that on some historical value?   Or how they feel it should be balanced against the rest of the avatars?    They could have the pilot dropping hand grenades out of the window for the plane doing twice the damage if they feel like it balances the class...   Its pixels dudes......  OP's  conversation  about how big a bomb a plane in WW2 could actually carry is pretty rich coming from someone in a DD carrying unlimited torpedoes........  

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,780
[HATE]
Members
1,002 posts
14,778 battles
2 minutes ago, RA6E_ said:

If WG removed all the items from game that didn't exist IRL, it would be a very small game?  And furthermore do you really believe that when WG decides how many HPs of damage a piece of ordinance in game does they base that on some historical value?   Or how they feel it should be balanced against the rest of the avatars?    They could have the pilot dropping hand grenades out of the window for the plane doing twice the damage if they feel like it balances the class...   Its pixels dudes......  OP's  conversation  about how big a bomb a plane in WW2 could actually carry is pretty rich coming from someone in a DD carrying unlimited torpedoes........  

in a full 20 minute game a shimma has a 117 sec reload so it would if he shot every 117 sec would have 10 attacks. How many planes can you lose in a game? 100 150?  Don't think that there were that many pilots. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,827
[S0L0]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,062 posts
5,702 battles
12 minutes ago, MEANN said:

people like you are why most topics that are about making the cvs balanced and would ruin your op life. this game is so closely modeled about the actual boats that is  bordering a sim. but to keep some semblance of balance they nerf boats and add rng. 

 

3 minutes ago, MEANN said:

in a full 20 minute game a shimma has a 117 sec reload so it would if he shot every 117 sec would have 10 attacks. How many planes can you lose in a game? 100 150?  Don't think that there were that many pilots. 

Exactly my point! 

 

Spoiler

tupac-thug-life-temporary-tattoo-640x533.jpg.36d7a16fcc3efb31d16fc1014bde2ff4.jpg

 

  • Funny 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
135
[RNDM]
Members
369 posts
7,025 battles
48 minutes ago, MEANN said:

Two of these bombs weighs exactly 3200 lbs (not a coincidence) and would perfectly fit on the BTD Destroyer.(edited)

You know what I like this. They should do this but leave the alpha the same. In other words just change the name of the bombs so they fit better and leave it at that. +1 for historical accuracy with zero change in game performance.

PS I play Midway and hunt CAs and BBs instead of DDs because I still hold a grudge for radar ships like Moskova and Des Moines  and still enjoy attacking BBs too. Still try to stay the heck away from CLs though because those things will always be scary in DDs or CVs.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,780
[HATE]
Members
1,002 posts
14,778 battles
6 minutes ago, Xcalib3r said:

oh lookie there, another CV complaint, on weekly basis.   lol

COULD BE BECAUSE WE ARE TIRED IF BEING CRUSHED WITHOUT RECORSE!

  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,551 posts
14 minutes ago, Xcalib3r said:

oh lookie there, another CV complaint, on weekly basis.   lol

The level of absurdity some of these QQ threads are getting to. This is one is all about saying something wasn't historically accurate. Its a common go.   "omg nerf this because.... It's not historically accurate. Yeah thats it!"

 

 

Edited by Your_Ship_Is_On_Fire
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
117
[PEED2]
Members
121 posts
8,638 battles
3 minutes ago, Your_Ship_Is_On_Fire said:

The level of absurdity some of these QQ threads are getting to. This is one is all about saying something wasn't historically accurate. Its a common go.   "omg nerf this because.... It's not historically accurate. Yeah thats it!"

In that case, if I turned World of Warships into a spaceship arcade game and called it World of Spacecraft would you play it? Probably not.

A huge part of World of Warships' charm IS its history. Duking it out with an Iowa against a Musashi or Yamato lets people find out the "what ifs" of historical naval combat. People need to understand that history is an integral part of World of Warships and shouldn't be disregarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,551 posts
Just now, The_Weeaboo said:

In that case, if I turned World of Warships into a spaceship arcade game and called it World of Spacecraft would you play it? Probably not.

A huge part of World of Warships' charm IS its history. Duking it out with an Iowa against a Musashi or Yamato lets people find out the "what ifs" of historical naval combat. People need to understand that history is an integral part of World of Warships and shouldn't be disregarded.

You know what else is not historically accurate? The amount of main battery shells on board and catapult fighters on ships. Nerf those and then we will talk about the HE bombs. You are cherry picking something you dont like and calling it out as not historically accurate as an excuse to get the game tailored to you.

Edited by Your_Ship_Is_On_Fire
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,928
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
11,097 posts
15,168 battles

They are barely fudging it. If you count the wing racks the Destroyer could carry 4,200lbs  With no trouble taking off.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
135
[RNDM]
Members
369 posts
7,025 battles

Look if we were going to make the damage more "realistic" or "historical" for the HE bombs, could the torpedoes do more than tickle damage and have better flood chance?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,827
[S0L0]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,062 posts
5,702 battles
4 minutes ago, Your_Ship_Is_On_Fire said:

You know what else is not historically accurate? The amount of main battery shells on board and catapult fighters on ships. Nerf those and then we will talk about the HE bombs.

Lets not forget about torpedoes.. Most destroyers didn't carry more than they could load in their tubes...   And then again  IRL.. they were also pretty much just escort ships..   I guess players wouldn't like that much.     

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,848
[WOLFG]
Members
27,103 posts
7,217 battles
36 minutes ago, MEANN said:

How many planes can you lose in a game? 100 150?  Don't think that there were that many pilots. 

To be fair, you need 2 CVs to lose 150 planes, (you wouldn't have enough time with 1 CV) And on 2 CVs, yeah, there were more than that many pilots. You might be able to lose 100 with 1 CV, but they'd still have that many pilots, although you'd be scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
101
[MHG]
Members
318 posts
8,720 battles

For sake of balance on all HE dive bombers an alpha reduction probably needs to happen but be honest with everyone here... pretty much all CV players have seen 8-12 fires in a match before with less than 25k fire damage. If you are going to reduce their HE bomb alpha you need to give that alpha back somewhere. Relying on DoTs in this game is an exercise in frustration after the flood change+torpedo nerfs.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,769
[SALVO]
Members
24,197 posts
24,546 battles
1 hour ago, MEANN said:

A friend wrote this who doesn't want to be attacked personally. so I will post for him. It is a very good idea.

First, I want to get something off my chest. Midway HE bombers do too much alpha damage. Plain and simple. For those of you who are not military historians let me give you a little background. The Midway's dive bombers are armed with two AN-M66 bombs per plane. These bombs weighed over 2000 lbs each. This means that a single bomber is carrying over 4000 lbs of ordinance at take-off. This is simply unrealistic for carrier-based aircraft. The USS Midway (at commissioning in 1945) had a length of just under 1000 ft, and that simply is not enough runway for a plane carrying 4000 lbs of ordinance to take off. The belief that a plane can take off in under a thousand feet carrying over 4000 lbs of bombs is unfounded in reality. Not to mention, the Douglass BTD Destroyer was only capable of fitting 3200lbs of ordinance in its bomb bay. Simple math tells us that the plane is carrying over 800 lbs of unrealistic ordinance. There are simple fixes to this problem of both reality and in-game effects of such a massive payload. The first is to simply cut the amount of bombs on each plane in half. This makes it so that each plane is only carrying a single 2000 lb bomb. However, doing so cuts the strike power in half, and is unlikely to be viewed favorably by CV players. Another option is to change the bombs to something more realistic. The ASM-N-2 Bat bomb was a radar guided (obviously radar guided bombs would be broken so that feature would be disabled) 1600 lb bomb that saw service from the end of 1944 to the end of the war. Two of these bombs weighs exactly 3200 lbs (not a coincidence) and would perfectly fit on the BTD Destroyer.(edited)

As these bombs are smaller and have a reduced payload, it would be easy to simply implement these as the bombs (WG can even keep the same dispersion on the bombs if they want) as they would be balanced with a reduced alpha strike. Needless to say, an improved fire chance over the AN-M66 could be called for to compensate for the lack of alpha. The capability to light multiple fires in a single strike and punish players that instantly damage control is something that I believe would be welcomed by the CV community. The reduced alpha strike would be greatly appreciated by the DD community who can lose half their health in a single attack run. And those perfect runs will no longer deal 15+ thousand damage on cruisers and battleships, effectively cutting their health by as much as a third. Keep in mind that these proposed changes would not in any way diminish the striking capability of the Midway, just slightly shift its HE bombs away from raw alpha to damage over time, and help to increase the survival of destroyers against dive bombers. I believe this change would be welcomed by the community as a whole, so please leave your thoughts and input below. Thank you.

MEANN, just a suggestion.

If a friend really did write everything after that first short paragraph, I'd suggest putting it in a quote box, because that would make it much more clear that what was in said quote box were his words and not yours.  Like I said, just a suggestion for future use (or even an edit to the OP).

Edited by Crucis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,780
[HATE]
Members
1,002 posts
14,778 battles
1 minute ago, Crucis said:

MEANN, just a suggestion.

If a friend really did write everything after that first short paragraph, I'd suggest putting it on a quote box, because that would make it much more clear that what was in said quote box were his words and not yours.  Like I said, just a suggestion for future use (or even an edit to the OP).

thanks good idea! done!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×