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

USN vs IJN CVs

29 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

43
[LDQ]
Members
152 posts
716 battles

I've gotten to the tier 6 ranger and the tier 4 hosho, and so far after about 50 games on the USN line and only two on the IJN line i've come to notice some very key differences, and I want to know some opinions on which are better overall, also which I should really keep continue playing. So the first massive difference I noticed was the dive bombers and how on the Hosho as the dive bombers got lower the crosshair would actually stop and then stutter forward, while on the Ranger it is a smooth motion. Coming over from being used to how the USN carriers function it's definitely a bit hard to adjust however I almost find it easier to hit these dive bombers. Dive bombs also are AP instead of HE on IJN carriers so I'm seeing a LOT more citadel hits with these DBs. With the USN ships the amount of fires I got off of my DBs that weren't instantly put out did not feel as impactful as the citadel hits that I have been seeing. Another large difference I noticed is that the IJN carriers have significantly faster torpedo bombers, they definitely feel easier to land than on the USN carriers. I'm really not sure as to which line I should continue on or which really is better as they kind of just seem to be a certain preference but the Hosho seems to be much more consistent in its damage output and how well I can land shots with it. Overall what is the better line to grind out? Which is gonna do me better in the long run at tier X. Do USN carriers suck or are they just stronger in different areas? Are there any other CV trees worth checking out?

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,174
[WOLFB]
Members
3,105 posts
12,910 battles

IJN CV are strong against capital ship and weaker vs DD.

 

USN are strong against DD and good against capitabl ship.

 

It's much more easy to use USN CV because of their HE DB and good rockets but if you can aim with AP DB, IJN CV are better IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,241
[TARK]
Members
4,421 posts
1,700 battles

I am also at Ranger and Hosho.

Both are viable ships to go with.

Ranger has good squad for everything. Torpedo planes with short arming distance (easy to hit big targets), dive bombers that do damage against everything, and rocket planes that do good damage. They also have harder to shoot down planes. However, the torpedoes are slow so arent very useful against DDs, the dive bombs dont do a lot of damage, and the rockets require planning to use. The planes are slower...

The Hosho has great torpedo bombers, great dive bombers against big targets, and easy to use but low damage rocket planes. In addition, the planes are easier to shoot down but faster.

IMO, the USN carriers cope better with being bottom tier than the IJN. The USN carriers are easier to use in that squadron selection and aiming is easier. The Hosho rewards you with good damage if you select squadron well and aim well.. but you will struggle against DDs as your most effective weapon (believe it or not) against them is the torpedo.

It really comes down to your preference. You decide what makes you happy. Personally, I'm enjoying the Hosho a little bit more than the Ranger...but that's just personal preference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,738
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,621 posts
10,879 battles
23 minutes ago, NippleSnipplez said:

stop and then stutter forward,

The stutter itself I think is a bug or glitch that shows up. It used to be a smoother transition than what it is now. 

 

Honestly, once you get out of tier 4, both are equally bad, as is UK. And the carriers become even more generic. There are their smaller differences, but they have no real personality once you dial in with them. You shoot rockets, hit, move on, you drop torps, hit, move on, bombs same deal. That said, upper tier IJN TB's have been nerfed pretty hard, USN DB's took a hit as did rockets because they decided that it was better to hope we had trouble hitting DD's in stead of lowering the rocket damage - those of us that adjusted send DD's crying here about OP rocket planes while those that haven't cry rockets are useless. But that number dwindles as only the upper end and the stubborn stay playing the class, everyone else is waiting for fixes or quit so really were back to square 1 where RTS was that they wanted to fix. 

The difference in the DB attack your seeing is that USN stays in a dive till pull out, IJN dives then levels out more, even though flat out with the AP bombs they are using A: the TB's should be carrying them and B: dropped in level flight, no dive. The AP bombs of IJN also become less useful at higher tiers as BB's have better chances at bouncing them, near useless against a DD and most cruisers have AA that destroys planes and are targets of last resort or necessity. Even on a miss or shatter a USN DB HE bomb can score a hit that counts to defend, disable modules, or start fires, and is more effective vs the DD's you will more likely be targeting as most lack the AA to counter air attacks alone, and tend to over extend. They also will not over pen and again, even a shatter can start a fire that gets you damage or helps the team cause more. The volume of rockets USN releases are also better in terms of hitting a target, even when aimpoint stays large and again, better vs the DD's you will be hunting most, especially when they hunt you. Also, volume, fires, can take nice chunks out. They also have the "Tiny Tim's" - basically a 12 inch BB shell with a 14 inch HE bursting charge. Suffice to say anything you score a penetrating hit on feels that. They also now officially drop more torps in a run than IJN at tiers 8 and 10 meaning easier to score hits than IJN's 2 at a time on attack runs, giving you an edge hitting, well, everything.

Biggest issue is that they 'tried', and I use that word very generously, to give them a purpose without giving them a purpose. Under RTS, even with things like an AP option - USN was a better cruiser hunter, somewhat DD, IJN was a capital ship hunter. They tried to do it again in a back you know what-wards way, and honestly, there's little difference in gameplay, planes melt, or they don't, you aim, you hit, you move on, regardless of target, it's just at this point HE is more reliable for what you'll likely be dealing with.

As they have things set up know if we toss in the theoretical German line -

Germany - DD hunters with highly accurate bombs, HE and AP options to kit towards heavier targets, or perhaps carries both (very little TB development, DB focused) with the air to ground version of the R4M ground variant Panzerblitz 1 and 3 as options alongside the BR-21. 

UK - as is could easily be converted to CL hunter. Bombers shifted to actual DB's, maybe a shallower dive angle, keep multiple bombs of a smaller size (250-500 lbs) option of HE and AP, torps as is and fix the bloody RP-3's for the fact they are basically CL rounds with a higher velocity than the HVAR. 

USN - CA, maybe "Super cruiser" hunters. The volleys of 5 inch rockets still solid vs them and good for AA suppression, and the option of TT's. Carrying 500-1000 lb HE and AP bombs. Maybe the 2k HE bombs, keeps a decent size number of torps but lower damage ones. 

IJN - First off change the name or give them the proper rockets that were on par with the German BR-21, the current rocket as named in game is an AA rocket that might as well be a firecracker when attacking a ship. IJA and IJN were working together, IJA spun off an equivalent to Tiny Tim, at this point, add it as an option. Go back to 4 planes per attack flight like RTS had, and Hak had, but through the tiers, maybe 3 in the low ones if 4 is too much with a wider spread (like RTS had) but higher damage than USN - easier for smaller ships to dodge still likely to hit capital ships. Option of standard DB's armed with semi-armour piercing bombs (likely less shatters than HE vs BB) with an option to switch to TB type planes that level bomb at most tiers with the 800 kg AP bombs, perhaps at the top tier where I believe it's the B7A should actually be top of the tree have AP DB's and an option maybe of 800 kg HE bomb. 

They'd still be able to attack anything, they'd just be better at certain things than others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,616
[RKLES]
Members
11,022 posts
12,551 battles

@WanderingGhost As has been stated by many of us, there is no real optimal fix for CVs that would please 100% of players, since the only options are one of the following outcomes.

A. For CVs to be overpowered which will kill the game since if you want good air attack games there are a zillion better ones out there.  (Think about what happened when CVs got strong enough in the real world, they became the dominating force on the seas.)

B. For C to feel underpowered, but still able to maybe be playable. Meanwhile keeping non CVs happy enough if their AA feels like it’s defending them as well as can be expected.

C. Have CVs removed from the game as the main draw for WOWs players has been the good quality surface ship combat which is harder to find on the market, and makes WOWs more unique.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,738
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,621 posts
10,879 battles
1 minute ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

@WanderingGhost As has been stated by many of us, there is no real optimal fix for CVs that would please 100% of players, since the only options are one of the following outcomes.

A. For CVs to be overpowered which will kill the game since if you want good air attack games there are a zillion better ones out there.  (Think about what happened when CVs got strong enough in the real world, they became the dominating force on the seas.)

B. For C to feel underpowered, but still able to maybe be playable. Meanwhile keeping non CVs happy enough if their AA feels like it’s defending them as well as can be expected.

C. Have CVs removed from the game as the main draw for WOWs players has been the good quality surface ship combat which is harder to find on the market, and makes WOWs more unique.

Or D: Balance it right and screw the fools that want OP CV's, and OP AA. A perfectly balance game never appeases 100% of the players because there's is always at least that 1 guy that wants his thing to be more powerful. The point I get at is that German BB's don't really feel like UK, French, USN or IJN BB's, that is missing from CV's, and there are ways to bring that feeling back.

AA what Wargaming has stated they want to do hopefully puts on the right track that the gap between tiers is closing and the gap within tiers is closing. Ideally, if I play Lexington, I'm no longer curb stomping the tier 6 ships on a whim, and not banging my head on tier 10's with god level AA that butcher my planes. And the reverse true when I play surface ships given ii play a relative balance of all types because there are times I literally ignore CV's cause I know they can't touch me. Or I'm staying near the nearest cruiser because I know my AA is worth jack. Unless your a dummy and let flak blast your planes apart, there should be no scenario where even doing things right a CV takes 100% losses. Opposite side, unless I attack Ark Beta, maybe Kamikaze or in general things with literally or effectively no AA - I shouldn't take 0 losses. And if we trend AA a bit higher - that's fine - then just give us better reserves, more accurate to our CV's, or faster plane regen so we can not be effectively deplaned. There is a balance there, albeit a tricky one.

 

After that - everyone looks at CV's as some bizarre ship that can't fit. The ship is a ship, it just has main turrets that function in a odd way in that the turret is weaker than most other ships, but can move itself closer to the red ship. After that - it's the exact same things as every other type - damage, penetration, sigma, dispersion, etc. 

5-6 inch rockets and bombs around 100 -250 pounds are basically the DD/CL mains and BB secondaries. Lower damage, rely on volume or RoF, possibly both along with accuracy. And like everything else, higher accuracy, RoF and Volume, lower damage. While RoF is a bit weird, given rapid strikes by a group but time taken to travel, you have the volume of rockers fired and generally accuracy - so you reduce the damage - as is rocket damage is a bit high, accuracy is screwy in a way that widens the gap, lower the damage, reset accuracy to how it was, you put it in line with those. Same with bombs, maybe damage needs to be a tad lower.

21 cm rockets (GErmany, more or less what IJN should be using) and roughly 500 lb bombs - Basically CA shells. Bigger boom, less volume, a bit less accurate than the 5-6 inch guns, same should apply to the bombs and rockets.

Tiny Tim and similar rockets, 1000 lb bombs - basically low end BB and "super cruiser" guns are the equivalent here. again general lower volume, lower accuracy, but higher damage compared to previous.

1600 lb+ bombs - in IJN's case (the 800kg bombs) these are literally in the early tier planes converted 16 inch shells, and should be balanced similar.

Say we start them the exact same as corresponding stats on the weapons they are based off of (HVAR's started as converted 5 inch shells, etc) namely damage. Rockets especially depending on number of planes can be a bit high in numbers, in cases number of bombs can be too like in how UK operates and to a lesser extent USN - so for these you lower the damage. Now lets factor in that generally speaking the planes as they move closer afford less dispersion and are therefore more accurate, this applies generally to all of them, so you lower the damage and for the ones that already have volume, lower it further. 

Generally look at any ship, and typically you see the same pattern -higher volume and/or accuracy, lower damage, most distinct examples are between the DD, CL, CA, and BB. RTS, the Rework, CV is just another ship with turrets and torp tubes - they just work a bit different.

And on torps, as it is aerial torps should be doing less damage anyway, let alone and I say this as a Hak owner they should IN NO WAY deal a max 9333 damage, at all. Highest damage a torp should have is maybe about half that, and even then have a spread like RTS IJN group that a single groups drop a BB could fit between the torps. The more torps and tighter the grouping, less damage they should do.

 

Whats that leave? Spotting? Simply put unless they are a certain range from a friendly ship maybe, there should be no 3D spotting of ships, mini-map only. Or maybe if they fire guns/AA. That means we can reset cruiser and BB spotting ranges, maybe CV too, DD can stay as is, so it's just the CV, and anyone with the skill to somehow aim off the minimap, and not the team all focusing the DD because CV lights it while attacking it and dusabling it which hey, I think DD's need more module HP anyway. Fighters? This point Wargaming said they didn't want them as a focus - either remove them or separate them to something I can say "fly cap here" for my team. Between most people taking cat fighters and if they balance AA a bit higher anyway they are a pain to use as is, inconvenient, unreliable, and pointless most of the time.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5 posts
339 battles

I would say that CVs are OP when played correctly, same goes for destroyers, cruisers and battleships. Its how you use the ships that count. If you used BBs in broadsides all the time you would be chopped liver and would be at the bottom of the sea in the first 5 minutes of battle. However if you angled BB hulls you would get ricochets. So just because some guy who is expert at playing CVs and knows exactly what strategy works with them and kills people who are steering other type of ships doesnt mean that CVs are OP. If a BB player knew exactly how to use them you would get the same result. You would get alot of kills. These people are just whining because something other than a Shell blew up their ship sky high.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,174
[WOLF3]
Members
22,938 posts
20,858 battles
5 hours ago, AlcatrazNC said:

IJN CV are strong against capital ship and weaker vs DD.

 

USN are strong against DD and good against capitabl ship.

 

It's much more easy to use USN CV because of their HE DB and good rockets but if you can aim with AP DB, IJN CV are better IMO.

It kind of showed up in Tier X Ranked.  The only Tier X CV that was worth anything was Hakuryu.  Midway and Audacious did horribly.

http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/season/season12/ship_avg_na.html

Hakuryu was the only X CV that had 50%+ Avg Win Rate.  She even had a higher Damage Average than the HE focused RN & USN CV.

Excluding Rental ships, Midway had above and beyond the worst WR%.  For all the "Midway is OP!" claims, she looked quite bad.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
496
[NUWES]
Members
2,713 posts
8,684 battles
10 hours ago, NippleSnipplez said:

I've gotten to the tier 6 ranger and the tier 4 hosho, and so far after about 50 games on the USN line and only two on the IJN line i've come to notice some very key differences, and I want to know some opinions on which are better overall, also which I should really keep continue playing. So the first massive difference I noticed was the dive bombers and how on the Hosho as the dive bombers got lower the crosshair would actually stop and then stutter forward, while on the Ranger it is a smooth motion. Coming over from being used to how the USN carriers function it's definitely a bit hard to adjust however I almost find it easier to hit these dive bombers. Dive bombs also are AP instead of HE on IJN carriers so I'm seeing a LOT more citadel hits with these DBs. With the USN ships the amount of fires I got off of my DBs that weren't instantly put out did not feel as impactful as the citadel hits that I have been seeing. Another large difference I noticed is that the IJN carriers have significantly faster torpedo bombers, they definitely feel easier to land than on the USN carriers. I'm really not sure as to which line I should continue on or which really is better as they kind of just seem to be a certain preference but the Hosho seems to be much more consistent in its damage output and how well I can land shots with it. Overall what is the better line to grind out? Which is gonna do me better in the long run at tier X. Do USN carriers suck or are they just stronger in different areas? Are there any other CV trees worth checking out?

 I've been through all of them. I find the USN CVs to be more consistent. Their Attack Planes, DBs, and TBs are all useful in almost all situations. The TBs tend the be the least useful of the group, but they are still at least decent.  They are usually slow and take a while to aim and individual torp damage and flood chance is low. The HE DBs work well against everyone. They are accurate, inflict a good bit of damage. For large targets like BBs most of the damage comes from fires. For small targets like DDs they chunk out a lot of raw hp. The rocket planes are always good, and turn really good higher up. Planes overall are tough, but generally slow. 

For the IJN, the rocket planes do the job but they are rather mediocre. The TBs are very nice across the board. The AP bombers are selectively useful. They hit hard on well-armored targets (BBs and some cruisers), poorly on everything else. Some cruisers are so thinly armored that the AP bombers overpen them constantly. They pretty much always overpen. They also only drop one bomb apiece so RNGezus can be really painful sometimes. I've occasionally gotten good hard AP hits from IJN AP bombs, but that has been rare. More often you get an overpen when the bomb goes through the bow or stern or it deflects off of a turret roof or something. They are nearly utterly useless on DDs. Planes overall are fragile, but relatively fast. 

For the UK CVs, the torps are good. As good as the IJN in some ways. Their aim stabilizes very fast and the torps are reasonably quick. . The rocket planes are better than the IJN on average but worse than the USN. The level bombers are … interesting to use. There is very little accuracy to them. They tend to saturate an area. The larger the target the more likely it will get hit by more bombs. Individual bomblets don't so much and have really lousy penetration against armored targets. Damage for me tends to come mostly from fires. Low tier planes tend to be staggeringly slow and not super tough, but at higher tiers they get quite fast and quite tough but you have few of them. 

Personally I like the USN CVs most because they cover all situations well. No one hunts DDs as well as they do. They don't deal with BBs as well as the IJN, but they work. You are basically stacking dots on them by torping and stacking fires. Personally I use TBs and rocket planes (mainly tiny tims) on BBs,  and and save the DBs for DDs and some cruisers.  I suggest you try them all and see what they say. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,616
[RKLES]
Members
11,022 posts
12,551 battles

@WanderingGhost Let ask you this, would you allow DDs to fly around through the air at 100-200knts, drop shells and Torps, spot for their team, and repeated attacks in this manner? ( oh and of course if said craft were shot down another would quickly spawn.) Crazy example / question but in essence Flying Zombie DDs are what CV planes are like. And why people view CVs as some odd class of ship that can’t seem to fit in, because it is extremely difficult to balance the power of aircraft in a game like WOWs.

In WOWs there is no way to balance them, or pretty much any other game for that matter. Air combat games where you get to Attack ships your planes will be OP. Warship based games the planes can sting a little, but will not be of much of any concern or threat compared to other Warships.

So while players such as yourself demand and expect  CVs to “easily be balanced”, in practice there is no easy way to balance CVs weapons platforms with / against surface platforms. DDs, BBs, and CAs have to put their HP on the line in order to attack battles, and so with Submarines when added. Trouble is CVs can spawn mini attacking units to send into battle at no risk what so ever to the CV itself.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,174
[WOLF3]
Members
22,938 posts
20,858 battles
12 hours ago, Tzarevitch said:

 I've been through all of them. I find the USN CVs to be more consistent. Their Attack Planes, DBs, and TBs are all useful in almost all situations. The TBs tend the be the least useful of the group, but they are still at least decent.  They are usually slow and take a while to aim and individual torp damage and flood chance is low. The HE DBs work well against everyone. They are accurate, inflict a good bit of damage. For large targets like BBs most of the damage comes from fires. For small targets like DDs they chunk out a lot of raw hp. The rocket planes are always good, and turn really good higher up. Planes overall are tough, but generally slow. 

For the IJN, the rocket planes do the job but they are rather mediocre. The TBs are very nice across the board. The AP bombers are selectively useful. They hit hard on well-armored targets (BBs and some cruisers), poorly on everything else. Some cruisers are so thinly armored that the AP bombers overpen them constantly. They pretty much always overpen. They also only drop one bomb apiece so RNGezus can be really painful sometimes. I've occasionally gotten good hard AP hits from IJN AP bombs, but that has been rare. More often you get an overpen when the bomb goes through the bow or stern or it deflects off of a turret roof or something. They are nearly utterly useless on DDs. Planes overall are fragile, but relatively fast. 

For the UK CVs, the torps are good. As good as the IJN in some ways. Their aim stabilizes very fast and the torps are reasonably quick. . The rocket planes are better than the IJN on average but worse than the USN. The level bombers are … interesting to use. There is very little accuracy to them. They tend to saturate an area. The larger the target the more likely it will get hit by more bombs. Individual bomblets don't so much and have really lousy penetration against armored targets. Damage for me tends to come mostly from fires. Low tier planes tend to be staggeringly slow and not super tough, but at higher tiers they get quite fast and quite tough but you have few of them. 

Personally I like the USN CVs most because they cover all situations well. No one hunts DDs as well as they do. They don't deal with BBs as well as the IJN, but they work. You are basically stacking dots on them by torping and stacking fires. Personally I use TBs and rocket planes (mainly tiny tims) on BBs,  and and save the DBs for DDs and some cruisers.  I suggest you try them all and see what they say. 

 

I will add one thing about RN CVs and their Carpet Bombers.

They're useless until Tier X Audacious.

First, they're low pen, even in Tier X.  The pen is so low that WG ran into a problem with Ark Royal where the initial bombs couldn't even pen the superstructure of the Tier VIII BBs she's expected to encounter.  WG had to fix that.  Even then, the pen in general for these bombs are low.

Second, a major problem RN CV Carpet Bombers have is they don't drop enough bombs.  These things aren't accurate all.  Until you get to X Audacious.  The bombing runs are still real inaccurate, but Audacious' Carpet Bombers drop so many bombs (finally) that you actually get a respectable amount of hits, whereas in prior tiers these things are useless.

 

So, what you get in RN CV Carpet Bombers are bombers that don't drop enough ordnance, bombs that parachute to their target, to top it off, have penetration problems.  Only in Tier X are 2 out of 3 of those issues fixed.  Those Carpet Bombers suck bad even as late as Tier VIII Implacable.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,738
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,621 posts
10,879 battles
1 hour ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

Let ask you this, would you allow DDs to fly around through the air at 100-200knts, drop shells and Torps, spot for their team, and repeated attacks in this manner? ( oh and of course if said craft were shot down another would quickly spawn.) Crazy example / question but in essence Flying Zombie DDs are what CV planes are like. And why people view CVs as some odd class of ship that can’t seem to fit in, because it is extremely difficult to balance the power of aircraft in a game like WOWs.

 

1 hour ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

So while players such as yourself demand and expect  CVs to “easily be balanced”, in practice there is no easy way to balance CVs weapons platforms with / against surface platforms. DDs, BBs, and CAs have to put their HP on the line in order to attack battles, and so with Submarines when added. Trouble is CVs can spawn mini attacking units to send into battle at no risk what so ever to the CV itself.

If you read my post, or unless I forgot things or wasn't clear - then you'd realize the answer to the question you ask is "Yes", but not as you describe.

Lets for a moment, use your DD analogy. Because it's the closest to what your trying to describe lets use German DD's. 

- To the first point on speed - if any get over 200 knots it's tier 10 with the boost activated. Overall, speed at this point has not changed much from RTS and while yes - this does allow for better running down of ships the spawn point is usually 5+ grid squares from the target. Now, I haven't gone through trying to measure exact in the new system, but crossing a 4.5 km square took 10-20 seconds to cross, meaning it takes 50-100 seconds to get within striking range. And once your done striking, will take another 50-100 seconds to get there again. 

- Tying in to that first point is that these DD's, unlike normal DD's, have limited ammo, usually 2-3 shots, occasionally 4. Before, as mentioned above, you have to launch a new DD and wait for whats left, if anything to return. 

- Unlike a normal DD, these DD's launch with only guns, torpedoes, or the bigger 15 cm gun option. I can't interchange between weapons like a normal DD can. And as I said, because these get very close in, and therefore have generally better accuracy, should not be doing the same damage as a normal DD per hit, they should be dealing less. 

- My quick repeated attacks make up the difference that unlike my normal DD, I have those quick bursts, then roughly a 1 minute wait instead of when using guns just laying on the trigger for 2 minutes. Torps are a bit of a wash, maybe in my special DD's favour though in most scenarios, I have fewer tubes per launcher anyway. 

-- And sure, they spot but as I said - they should not spot like a normal DD, they should only locate a ship and render it so they themselves can target it, the most the rest of the team sees is the marker on the minimap.

- unlike a normal DD, my special DD has no smoke with which to hide, and a larger spotting range - meaning the secondaries (aa) open up far sooner - well before I can even attempt to fire my weapons in most cases.

- Also of note is that a normal DD has better range for spotting than my DD in the first place, and can better spot while hidden, as well as stealth torp.

 

You say DD's, BB's, and CA/L have to put their HP on the line in order to attack - but that's not actually true. Sadly it's on my pretty much dead laptop, but I have an entire game where my Kami R/Fujin was undetected while laying waste to a red team. BB's in many cases can out range targets, some even out range other BB's, and can fire from beyond their range safely. CA/L are arguably the the one with the most need to put HP on the line however some, like DD's, have smoke that can allow them to do damage with no real risk, and some have firing arcs that can let them deal damage with 0 risk at all. However, in cases where a ship does get close, they can actively maneuver to dodge while attacking the enemy ship, a luxury the CV no longer has. While true the physical hull is less in peril, it is more of a sitting duck than other ships, it instead risks it's turrets - it's actual ability to do damage, instead of the ship. Tell me - how many players do you think in BB's, DD's, and CA/L would trade having their hull be protected from a damage threat, lets say by some magic barrier, but to do so would have to leave their turrets far easier to incapacitate, with no DCP to use to fix them faster, and having to wait 4-6 minutes maybe more to be able to use that gun, torp tube, what ever again? Would those that especially use a mixed armament also trade that you have to fire each gun individually, one by one, barrel by barrel and tube by tube on torps?

 

Game design 101 - "End of the day, still basically a math equation where you need both sides to equal say 4", How my teacher summed up game balance. And it becomes way simpler to balance when you stop looking at CV's as some weird non-traditional unit, and as just another surface ship that has long range like a BB, but extremely fragile turrets, that ships have a dedicated weapons grouping to disable, and tends to be more accurate. AA vs planes is the only "unique" thing while at the same time being similar still to DP guns vs any ship. Rockets, bombs, torps, and if they add them depth charges and whatever else all use the exact same mechanics and all as every other ship, the CV itself, is just like any other ship other than in how it's turrets move.

 

But odds are were gonna have to agree to disagree because I firmly stand by the fact that CV's can be balanced if the right changes are made, just have to get Wargaming to actually make them and anytime we even try to get simple things like correct models it's a tooth and nail fight having to drag Wargaming kicking and screaming to do it.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,481
[CAG-1]
Members
1,872 posts
35 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

- My quick repeated attacks make up the difference that unlike my normal DD, I have those quick bursts, then roughly a 1 minute wait instead of when using guns just laying on the trigger for 2 minutes. Torps are a bit of a wash, maybe in my special DD's favour though in most scenarios, I have fewer tubes per launcher anyway.

That was my point exactly. CV's "might" have a high alpha... but they have low "damage per minute" when compared to any other ship with regular artillery.

 

Edited by ElectroVeeDub

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43
[LDQ]
Members
152 posts
716 battles
On 8/17/2019 at 11:52 AM, Tzarevitch said:

 I've been through all of them. I find the USN CVs to be more consistent. Their Attack Planes, DBs, and TBs are all useful in almost all situations. The TBs tend the be the least useful of the group, but they are still at least decent.  They are usually slow and take a while to aim and individual torp damage and flood chance is low. The HE DBs work well against everyone. They are accurate, inflict a good bit of damage. For large targets like BBs most of the damage comes from fires. For small targets like DDs they chunk out a lot of raw hp. The rocket planes are always good, and turn really good higher up. Planes overall are tough, but generally slow. 

For the IJN, the rocket planes do the job but they are rather mediocre. The TBs are very nice across the board. The AP bombers are selectively useful. They hit hard on well-armored targets (BBs and some cruisers), poorly on everything else. Some cruisers are so thinly armored that the AP bombers overpen them constantly. They pretty much always overpen. They also only drop one bomb apiece so RNGezus can be really painful sometimes. I've occasionally gotten good hard AP hits from IJN AP bombs, but that has been rare. More often you get an overpen when the bomb goes through the bow or stern or it deflects off of a turret roof or something. They are nearly utterly useless on DDs. Planes overall are fragile, but relatively fast. 

For the UK CVs, the torps are good. As good as the IJN in some ways. Their aim stabilizes very fast and the torps are reasonably quick. . The rocket planes are better than the IJN on average but worse than the USN. The level bombers are … interesting to use. There is very little accuracy to them. They tend to saturate an area. The larger the target the more likely it will get hit by more bombs. Individual bomblets don't so much and have really lousy penetration against armored targets. Damage for me tends to come mostly from fires. Low tier planes tend to be staggeringly slow and not super tough, but at higher tiers they get quite fast and quite tough but you have few of them. 

Personally I like the USN CVs most because they cover all situations well. No one hunts DDs as well as they do. They don't deal with BBs as well as the IJN, but they work. You are basically stacking dots on them by torping and stacking fires. Personally I use TBs and rocket planes (mainly tiny tims) on BBs,  and and save the DBs for DDs and some cruisers.  I suggest you try them all and see what they say. 

 

From my own limited experience (with a bit more games on IJN carriers now) it just feels easier to use the IJN torps and i feel like I get higher damage games with them. One thing I've noticed is that the USN rockets feels easier to use against DD (not sure if the crosshair is just larger so the chance of hitting is higher) but against larger targets I get more hits consistently. Maybe it's just placebo and in the IJN games I had better aim and in the USN games worse i dunno

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43
[LDQ]
Members
152 posts
716 battles
On 8/17/2019 at 2:03 AM, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I am also at Ranger and Hosho.

Both are viable ships to go with.

 Ranger has good squad for everything. Torpedo planes with short arming distance (easy to hit big targets), dive bombers that do damage against everything, and rocket planes that do good damage. They also have harder to shoot down planes. However, the torpedoes are slow so arent very useful against DDs, the dive bombs dont do a lot of damage, and the rockets require planning to use. The planes are slower...

The Hosho has great torpedo bombers, great dive bombers against big targets, and easy to use but low damage rocket planes. In addition, the planes are easier to shoot down but faster.

IMO, the USN carriers cope better with being bottom tier than the IJN. The USN carriers are easier to use in that squadron selection and aiming is easier. The Hosho rewards you with good damage if you select squadron well and aim well.. but you will struggle against DDs as your most effective weapon (believe it or not) against them is the torpedo.

It really comes down to your preference. You decide what makes you happy. Personally, I'm enjoying the Hosho a little bit more than the Ranger...but that's just personal preference.

Yeah I agree, I think I like the Hosho more right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
496
[NUWES]
Members
2,713 posts
8,684 battles
On ‎8‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 7:39 PM, NippleSnipplez said:

From my own limited experience (with a bit more games on IJN carriers now) it just feels easier to use the IJN torps and i feel like I get higher damage games with them. One thing I've noticed is that the USN rockets feels easier to use against DD (not sure if the crosshair is just larger so the chance of hitting is higher) but against larger targets I get more hits consistently. Maybe it's just placebo and in the IJN games I had better aim and in the USN games worse i dunno

I think the rockets may travel faster. I recall some of the IJN rocket planes seem to have a bit of a lag between launch and impact. It may just be my perception though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,389
[CAST]
Members
4,798 posts
3,359 battles

Another significant difference is that USN planes are tougher to shoot down, whereas IJN planes (and the carriers) are very stealthy. It's actually a pain to spot IJN carriers unless you take planes or DDs and push up quite far. The planes themselves can also often spot BBs without themselves being spotted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,527
[S0L0]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
3,606 posts
5,112 battles
On 8/17/2019 at 5:13 AM, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

@WanderingGhost As has been stated by many of us, there is no real optimal fix for CVs that would please 100% of players, since the only options are one of the following outcomes.

A. For CVs to be overpowered which will kill the game since if you want good air attack games there are a zillion better ones out there.  (Think about what happened when CVs got strong enough in the real world, they became the dominating force on the seas.)

B. For C to feel underpowered, but still able to maybe be playable. Meanwhile keeping non CVs happy enough if their AA feels like it’s defending them as well as can be expected.

C. Have CVs removed from the game as the main draw for WOWs players has been the good quality surface ship combat which is harder to find on the market, and makes WOWs more unique.

 

On 8/18/2019 at 12:20 AM, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

@WanderingGhost Let ask you this, would you allow DDs to fly around through the air at 100-200knts, drop shells and Torps, spot for their team, and repeated attacks in this manner? ( oh and of course if said craft were shot down another would quickly spawn.) Crazy example / question but in essence Flying Zombie DDs are what CV planes are like. And why people view CVs as some odd class of ship that can’t seem to fit in, because it is extremely difficult to balance the power of aircraft in a game like WOWs.

In WOWs there is no way to balance them, or pretty much any other game for that matter. Air combat games where you get to Attack ships your planes will be OP. Warship based games the planes can sting a little, but will not be of much of any concern or threat compared to other Warships.

So while players such as yourself demand and expect  CVs to “easily be balanced”, in practice there is no easy way to balance CVs weapons platforms with / against surface platforms. DDs, BBs, and CAs have to put their HP on the line in order to attack battles, and so with Submarines when added. Trouble is CVs can spawn mini attacking units to send into battle at no risk what so ever to the CV itself.

Typical,  There can be no discussion anymore of a class that has been represented in  the game since inception.   Anti-CV brigade comes in and attempts to Hi-Jack every single thread and turn it into a debate.   Truthfully it is getting to be time for these type posts to be moderated IMO.    The OP wanted some advice....  We get it you don't like CVs... your opinion is well known.  

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[PIG]
[PIG]
Members
793 posts
4,434 battles

CVs, the planes are different...

Rocket planes,
IJN, RN, "reticle" is round, they can attack from any side. Japanese are faster but less accurate.
USN, "reticle" is an ellipse, better attack broadside to concentrate the rockets.
KM (Graf Zeppelin) round.

Torpedoes
They are all different, USN 3 torps, IJN 2 torps
Except some of the Premiums, 4 torps (Kaga)

Bombers,
Some are AP bombs (IJN), some HE (USN)
The RN use a kind of "carpet bombing".
Reticle is always an "ellipse" better attack bow or stern
KM Graf Zeppelin kind of "Stuka", very nice.

... Ships are more or less fast, it matters, the slower, the best is to stay away from enemies... I get sunk often as I don't like spend my time bringing planes to the combat area. Sometimes the "auto pilot" doesn't do what I want and the ship is an easy target.

Vs DDs, USN the best.
Vs BBs, IJN the best.
RN, well... A bit in between, torps are not powerful but easy... carpet bombing, well... I have Implacable, seems Audacious, the carpet bombers are better.
KM, Graf Zeppelin... as Saipan, both premium are very different.

You'll get "deplaned" faster with RN, KM Graf Zeppelin and USN Saipan.

In general, you should start with the USN, they are the easiest (my opinion).

TIV are kind of boring, planes are slow, ships weak and slow, etc TVI, TVIII and TX are similar.
Note they are "expensive" to maintain, no choice, buy the "permanent" camouflage... Free to play doesn't exist.
And if you pay, Wargaming does business and develop the game.




 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[PIG]
[PIG]
Members
793 posts
4,434 battles
On 8/18/2019 at 9:30 AM, WanderingGhost said:

So while players such as yourself demand and expect  CVs to “easily be balanced”, in practice there is no easy way to balance CVs weapons platforms with / against surface platforms. DDs, BBs, and CAs have to put their HP on the line in order to attack battles, and so with Submarines when added. Trouble is CVs can spawn mini attacking units to send into battle at no risk what so ever to the CV itself.

That is not true. If CV stays far, planes need a lot of time to reach their targets... and do damage. There are BBs that can snipe from very long distance, CLs that hide behind rocks moving forward to shoot, backwards to hide, etc... Planes do fit in the game. Players who do not agree are the ones who hide behind rocks with their CLs or try to sneak into the other side with their DDs... Of course, those tactics are negated by CVs. That is good because it makes the game fluid. SSs will add even more fluidity torping any Yamato kind sitting behind a rock and sniping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,738
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,621 posts
10,879 battles
5 hours ago, franz_von_goltz said:

-snip-

You may wanna quote the original guy with that response that I agree with and not my quote of his quote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
415
[MPIRE]
Beta Testers
1,782 posts
9,687 battles

I've spend most of my time on the USN and IJN t8 CVs so I'll be basing my answers mostly off of them and the t6s.

USN:
Hulls - generally large, average to poor stealth, and above average AA power.  Hellllooooo bofors.
TBs  - solid workhorses.  The bombers lack in speed, but make up for in HP values.  Torpedoes are slow, but arm fairly fast and do decent damage.
DBs - slot machine heavyweights.  Tanky with average speed, but after the bomb nerfs they're much less reliable versus smaller ships.  Still, if they connect they hurt.  Bad.
Rockets - blazing fast and consistent.  They're significantly faster than rocket planes from other nations, but as a result require more space to attack.  Less accurate but carry enough rockets to always land a hit.  Stretched aiming circle means there is always an optimal approach angle.

IJN:
Hulls - lower profile, excellent stealth, and relatively poor AA.  Not poor enough to make you an easy target however.
TBs - bread and butter. Fast, punchy, and stealthy.  Longer torp arming time but they move fast.  Usable versus any targets, and excellent at zeroing in on unspotted DDs with 6 or 6.7km stealth.
DBs - powerful damage vs BBs. Fast, but not stealthy.  Less reliable versus cruisers, but still capable of nuking them hard.  If you drop at the top of the dive, you can citadel most ships you encounter.  Also don't cost money to replace for some reason.
Rockets - easily applied damage with a circle reticle.  Same speed at the bombers, but squishier.  Fast regen timers make them great throwaway finishers.

Personally, I find the IJN CVs more fun to play because they have a greater payoff in exchange for being harder to get the damage off.  You need to be on top of your drop mechanically, AND position your attack run well.  If the target is aware they can usually prevent the second condition from happening.  But when you do get everything lined up?  Oooohh boy.  With the USN CVs my attack runs never felt quite as impactful.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,616
[RKLES]
Members
11,022 posts
12,551 battles
12 hours ago, RA6E_ said:

 

Typical,  There can be no discussion anymore of a class that has been represented in  the game since inception.   Anti-CV brigade comes in and attempts to Hi-Jack every single thread and turn it into a debate.   Truthfully it is getting to be time for these type posts to be moderated IMO.    The OP wanted some advice....  We get it you don't like CVs... your opinion is well known.  

Perhaps I should clarify, I enjoy all classes of ships, and if one class dominates far too much to the point I can’t rotate what I use at will then there is a problem.

I actually miss when CVs were simple and only had Torps and HE bombs under RTS control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×