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

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

36
[TACT]
Members
120 posts
2,508 battles

I support this. I do like the idea of more carriers in game, especially Japanese ones.

The only way to crush DDs is by making powerful carriers available to more people. This would make the Destroyer population leave the game, resulting in a less toxic environment. We don't need them!

Of you actually read through that after the DD rant, good. I am now writing here that that was a joke, though not entirely. I don't want to have DDs suffer. Some balance should be found that allows DDs to exist happily in a game with carriers. That being, said I have no idea how we would do this.

I feel kind of bad posting this here as it will probably change the topic entirely and make it into a toxic enviroment without its original topic. However, I don't really know where else to out it now. So here it is. 

 

Edited by MommaSheep1738
Left out the reason why I support it like an idiot.
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
412
[KAPPA]
Members
1,339 posts
7,483 battles

Trouble is, they looked at adding Shinano back in the day and had issues with reconciling a very T10 hull with a very T6-7 hangar capacity. Historically, she was never going to be a mainline fighting CV, she was more of a shuttle for delivering replacement aircraft to more suitable frontline CVs (Taiho, Zuikaku, Unryuu, possible future projects given more time and resources, etc.) and possibly a mobile aircraft repair depot (not sure, it's mostly a guess on that part). While hangar capacity as a mechanic has changed considerably, the overall number of strike planes you can put out has actually remained virtually the same due to using time as a limiting factor. She'd still have a very small ready reserve and likely a slow regen rate to keep the aircraft numbers in line with what she could actually hold. In effect, we're talking a likely T10 ship with Graf Zeppelin sized reserves and at best Shokaku planes. Sounds like a bad combo to me based on my CV experience. I'd love to see her in game, but I'm not sure how they'd make her work and also because of the Yamato remodeling project, the existing model they had of her from way early in development (pre-Hakuryu, I believe) is now beyond salvaging I'd guess and they'd have to start from scratch. Heck, they're already talking about having to update Musashi's model because of things they learned from the Yamato remodel project.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,821
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,384 posts
14,152 battles

A tier 10 with a tier 6 hanger capacity is not going to cut it with tier 10 regeneration rates. Her air wing was 47 planes, the rest of the 140 planes she could carry were in storage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,889
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
14,071 posts
19,197 battles
50 minutes ago, MommaSheep1738 said:

Some balance should be found that allows DDs to exist happily in a game with carriers. That being, said I have no idea how we would do this.

That's OK, neither does WoWs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
890 posts
14,046 battles

Considering all the teething problems the ship had and were not fixed before she was sunk...lets put her in the game, only she doesn't get a damage control party. :)

After all, with her hull size she would have 100k hit points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,573
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,303 posts
6,266 battles

Oh boy a Shinano thread, I wonder how many posts it'll take...

On 5/14/2019 at 7:19 PM, CaptHarlock_222 said:

Trouble is, they looked at adding Shinano back in the day and had issues with reconciling a very T10 hull with a very T6-7 hangar capacity. Historically, she was never going to be a mainline fighting CV, she was more of a shuttle for delivering replacement aircraft to more suitable frontline CVs (Taiho, Zuikaku, Unryuu, possible future projects given more time and resources, etc.) and possibly a mobile aircraft repair depot (not sure, it's mostly a guess on that part). While hangar capacity as a mechanic has changed considerably, the overall number of strike planes you can put out has actually remained virtually the same due to using time as a limiting factor. She'd still have a very small ready reserve and likely a slow regen rate to keep the aircraft numbers in line with what she could actually hold. In effect, we're talking a likely T10 ship with Graf Zeppelin sized reserves and at best Shokaku planes. Sounds like a bad combo to me based on my CV experience. I'd love to see her in game, but I'm not sure how they'd make her work and also because of the Yamato remodeling project, the existing model they had of her from way early in development (pre-Hakuryu, I believe) is now beyond salvaging I'd guess and they'd have to start from scratch. Heck, they're already talking about having to update Musashi's model because of things they learned from the Yamato remodel project.

On 5/14/2019 at 7:40 PM, BrushWolf said:

A tier 10 with a tier 6 hanger capacity is not going to cut it with tier 10 regeneration rates. Her air wing was 47 planes, the rest of the 140 planes she could carry were in storage

Exactly three counting the OP. Why am I not surprised?

Seriously, BrushWolf, you literally mentioned in your post why she COULD work at tier 10! If you take the 120 to 140 aircraft stowed for transport out then you now have room for probably around 50 more planes at least, thus making her air group on par with Hakuryu and Audacious. Why do people always act as if Shinano would be implemented in her unfinished, panic-driven "we need this NOW!" transport carrier form? Literally no other carrier in the game has had this as an obstacle, and you want to know which of them had the same problem? LANGLEY! Langley never even HAD an in-built self-defense wing because she was used solely as an aircraft ferry, yet here she is in-game with F3Fs, T4Ms, and SBUs flying off her deck into combat. I fail to see why Shinano couldn't or shouldn't be adjusted accordingly.

If you're unsure about her based on tankiness, I can respect that (though that unarmored hangar is going to mitigate a LOT of that), but can we PLEEEEEASE stop bringing up the size of her air group as reason not to put her in? It's such a trifling problem and I'm tired of debunking it every two weeks.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,821
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,384 posts
14,152 battles
6 minutes ago, Landsraad said:

Oh boy a Shinano thread, I wonder how many posts it'll take...

Exactly three counting the OP. Why am I not surprised?

Seriously, BrushWolf, you literally mentioned in your post why she COULD work at tier 10! If you take the 120 to 140 aircraft stowed for transport out then you now have room for probably around 50 more planes at least, thus making her air group on par with Hakuryu and Audacious. Why do people always act as if Shinano would be implemented in her unfinished, panic-driven "we need this NOW!" transport carrier form? Literally no other carrier in the game has had this as an obstacle, and you want to know which of them had the same problem? LANGLEY! Langley never even HAD an in-built self-defense wing because she was used solely as an aircraft ferry, yet here she is in-game with F3Fs, T4Ms, and SBUs flying off her deck into combat. I fail to see why Shinano couldn't or shouldn't be adjusted accordingly.

Ah, you want a what if Shinano that has nothing to do with the historical ship. The problem is the regeneration rates would need to be dismal to balance her against the tech tree tier 10's or she would be over powered particularly in clan battles which will have CV's soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,573
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,303 posts
6,266 battles

I fail to see how taking stowed aircraft out of the hangar and adding support personnel for additional flight ready aircraft suddenly makes it have "nothing to do with" the historical Shinano. Lexington never got the twin 5"/38s that both of her hulls sport around the island in real life, does that mean that in-game Lexington has nothing to do with the real CV-2?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
412
[KAPPA]
Members
1,339 posts
7,483 battles
On 5/17/2019 at 11:34 PM, BrushWolf said:

Ah, you want a what if Shinano that has nothing to do with the historical ship. The problem is the regeneration rates would need to be dismal to balance her against the tech tree tier 10's or she would be over powered particularly in clan battles which will have CV's soon.

 

On 5/17/2019 at 11:38 PM, Landsraad said:

I fail to see how taking stowed aircraft out of the hangar and adding support personnel for additional flight ready aircraft suddenly makes it have "nothing to do with" the historical Shinano. Lexington never got the twin 5"/38s that both of her hulls sport around the island in real life, does that mean that in-game Lexington has nothing to do with the real CV-2?

Sorry for how late I am getting back to this, took a few days off from both the game and the forum mostly because of some IRL stuff.

With the argument of a 'what if' version of Shinano that isn't limited by how many assembled planes she could carry, I'd argue that if they had the time and resources to build a proper CV version, they would actually have built what we basically call Hakuryu instead (improved Taiho design). There were so many problems with converting Shinano to a CV because she was so far along as a BB and had most of her armor already installed, leaving little room for any hangar space. They really only did it because they had no other option. A more realistic option for a 'proper' CV conversion would have been the barely started Warship No. 111 hull.

Also as a side note, Lex in game has the 5 inch guns because Saratoga got them. The devs stated long ago that the tech tree ships are largely meant to be 'composites' of all of the class members, though most of the time this devolves into, 'which sister had a configuration best suited to fit at the tier', see T5 Kongo using Hiei's refit.

Edited by CaptHarlock_222

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,575
[WOLF3]
Members
26,963 posts
23,767 battles

I think Shinano would be awesome, CVL sized air group and better yet, the lack of Damage Control Party would be historical!

:Smile_teethhappy:

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,573
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,303 posts
6,266 battles

Y'all are completely hopeless, I'm sick to death of debating this kind of stuff over and over again, I'm just here to do some shameless self-promotion and peace out. Maybe now I can get someone besides Umi to start up discussion.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[FLTF1]
Members
9 posts
6,592 battles

I would agree to this, not only be the first premium t10 CV but make the yamato trio

She can hold 120 aircraft and rival Midway in health

 

Edited by Charizardfan32

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
447
[STORM]
Alpha Tester
1,125 posts
4,405 battles
On 5/14/2019 at 7:05 PM, MommaSheep1738 said:

I support this. I do like the idea of more carriers in game, especially Japanese ones.

The only way to crush DDs is by making powerful carriers available to more people. This would make the Destroyer population leave the game, resulting in a less toxic environment. We don't need them!

Of you actually read through that after the DD rant, good. I am now writing here that that was a joke, though not entirely. I don't want to have DDs suffer. Some balance should be found that allows DDs to exist happily in a game with carriers. That being, said I have no idea how we would do this.

I feel kind of bad posting this here as it will probably change the topic entirely and make it into a toxic enviroment without its original topic. However, I don't really know where else to out it now. So here it is. 

 

I'm a dd main. DD's need to learn how to play, not for CV's to be nerfed. 

 

If a DD were to play inside radar range of a Moskva or a Des Moines, get radared and terminated they would be laughed at and told to 'get good'. That's not opinion, that's fact because I saw the response of the BB and CA population when DD's were groveling for radars to be reeled in.

When dd's keep their AA on and operate so far away from the fleet that nothing can support them, they deserve to get terminated with prejudice. It's not difficult to keep smoke handy, keep AA off, and to keep a low profile afield or stay near AA in the fleet. 

 

DD players in general choose not to do this. I played the audacious and midway post rework to learn good tactics as a dd player to mitigate damage. If DD players refuse to adapt to meta its their own problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
834 posts
On 8/2/2019 at 10:58 AM, 1An0maly1 said:

I'm a dd main. DD's need to learn how to play, not for CV's to be nerfed. 

 

If a DD were to play inside radar range of a Moskva or a Des Moines, get radared and terminated they would be laughed at and told to 'get good'. That's not opinion, that's fact because I saw the response of the BB and CA population when DD's were groveling for radars to be reeled in.

When dd's keep their AA on and operate so far away from the fleet that nothing can support them, they deserve to get terminated with prejudice. It's not difficult to keep smoke handy, keep AA off, and to keep a low profile afield or stay near AA in the fleet. 

 

DD players in general choose not to do this. I played the audacious and midway post rework to learn good tactics as a dd player to mitigate damage. If DD players refuse to adapt to meta its their own problem.

Including to add when the ur just only 1 CV match and u are the firefighter try to get to every crisis that everyone said to there important if get to them all ur discredit for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
102
[UTWE]
Members
358 posts
5,925 battles

Or as the T10 for a IJN CV line split. There should be 2 CV lines per nation since they all had the ships for it. IJN had 2 T10 material CV's Shinano and Taiho and yet WG still added a paper ship... I think if they do do a line split it would be something like, RN: T4 Argus, T6 Courageous, T8 Illustrious, T10 Malta just to fill the gap. USN: T4 Bogue, T6 Independence, T8 Yorktown, T10 Essex. IJN: T4 Zuiho, T6 Hiryu, T8 Unryu, T10 Taiho or Shinano. It wouldn't be that hard since a lot of these ships' models are already made, they just need to figure out the gameplay. Wasn't a CV line split the original plan after the CV rework was released?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
258
[BLEP]
Alpha Tester
1,430 posts
16,704 battles

Well, there is one ship in the game now that shows Shinano could work... and that's Ark Royal! That ship's BIGGEST thing is the regeneration rate of its air group vs the amount on the deck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
6 posts
13,467 battles

Why not have it like an Audacious, slow regenerating planes but with medium health. Also small squads. But it will have Jap planes with good speed. Kinda like a mix of other CV stats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,581
[CYPHR]
Alpha Tester, Members, Beta Testers
3,657 posts
18,093 battles

Shinano was in the game during alpha.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×