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

SE on a CV? Why?

27 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,997
[WOLF9]
Privateers
11,562 posts
4,550 battles

I see several strong recommendations ()  for the Survivability Expert skill on higher tier CVs.

Why?  Once a CV comes under fire, having a few more HP seems unlikely to make a difference.

Are there no better skills for the three points? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,072
[HYDRO]
Members
3,682 posts
5,280 battles

Think it works for planes as well, albeit under the new way AA functions is of limited value. 

Someone who plays CVs more than me should be able to confirm.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
516
[-BRS-]
Members
1,860 posts
9,705 battles
17 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

*snip*

it's for increased plane HP. Theres many skills that carry that serve dual purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,478
[DEV_X]
Supertester
2,204 posts
20,702 battles

It effects the planes HP pool as well. It might buy you some extra hits from the DPM continuous AA or save you from a flak burst.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,997
[WOLF9]
Privateers
11,562 posts
4,550 battles

Ah!  Okay, that makes sense now. 

Just to confirm, Torpedo Armament Expertise has no effect on a CV, right?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
82
[BEWBS]
Members
173 posts
9 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

Ah!  Okay, that makes sense now. 

Just to confirm, Torpedo Armament Expertise has no effect on a CV, right?

 

Correct. That only effects torpedo tubes, not torpedoes in general.

However, Torpedo Acceleration does effect CV Torpedo bombers and can be a rather useful skill for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
516
[-BRS-]
Members
1,860 posts
9,705 battles
1 minute ago, Kuriour said:

However, Torpedo Acceleration does effect CV Torpedo bombers and can be a rather useful skill for them.

Just remember, it also increases the minimal arm distance as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,997
[WOLF9]
Privateers
11,562 posts
4,550 battles

FYI. the Commander Skills table on the wiki ship pages now supports a '0' rating, for Not Recommended.  Zero should reflect the 🚫 indicators in the game client.  I'll hit several ships - the ones that I have, but I've only got a few.

Can you think of any skills non-recommendations that are not the same for all carriers?

 

Spoiler

Screenshot_188.thumb.png.33ded5c9f7143d1a277bfae16587ce43.png  HMS Furious

 

Edited by iDuckman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
138
[-TXT-]
Members
321 posts
5,392 battles

I would rate Concealment Expert as a 3 star on all carriers.  It allows advanced open water positioning or help in getting to island cover.

AFT would be a 2 on a Graf Zepplin (allows for a 9km secondary build, which can fend off DDs)

Demolition Expert is a 3 on British carpet bomb CVs

Demolition Expert is a 2 on American standard bomb CVs

I would rate Sight Stabilization as a 2 on all CVs.  It's been buffed, but all CVs are very functional without it, and the assistance is small.

Torp Accel should be a 1 on non-Jap CVs (the faster torps are canceled by additional arm range) as it only assists in "chasing" DDs with the 5 knot boost to 40 knots

Torp Accel should be a 0 on Jap CVs (the 50+ knot torps don't need the assist and often want the range for playstyle)

Adrenaline Rush should be X (not feasible with current CV design)

Direction Center for Fighters is a 1 for Tier 6 CVs.  It's a 33% fighter increase. (Arguably a 2?)

-----

While there is no "mandatory" in the rating system, I would argue that Air Supremacy (-5% plane regen time), Improved Engines (2.5% speed boost), Survival Expert (bonus health), and Airplane Armor (reduced damage taken) are MANDATORY. 

If there's a way to give them 4 stars to shout "PLEASE PICK THESE FIRST!", I think that would be very helpful for folks that are learning CVs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
138
[-TXT-]
Members
321 posts
5,392 battles
57 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

FYI. the Commander Skills table on the wiki ship pages now supports a '0' rating, for Not Recommended.  Zero should reflect the 🚫 indicators in the game client.  I'll hit several ships - the ones that I have, but I've only got a few.

Can you think of any skills non-recommendations that are not the same for all carriers?

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Screenshot_188.thumb.png.33ded5c9f7143d1a277bfae16587ce43.png  HMS Furious

 

See above.  Forgot to quote you for notification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,997
[WOLF9]
Privateers
11,562 posts
4,550 battles
2 minutes ago, Ahskance said:

See above.  Forgot to quote you for notification.

Thanks!

Say, how would you like to become a wiki editor?  It's very easy (if you have the patience to wait for the :etc_swear: server's frequent naps).  I try my best to leave the ship pages alone since I don't trust my knowledge of many ships (certainly not CVs).  But I've made some structural changes to how the skills table works and I'm back-fitting a few, copying over someone else's recommendations.

The idea of Mandatory skills is interesting, but I think it's best handled in the "Essential Skills" text that is supposed to precede the table.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,997
[WOLF9]
Privateers
11,562 posts
4,550 battles
12 minutes ago, Ahskance said:

Adrenaline Rush should be X (not feasible with current CV design)

Explain.  The skill description is that the squadron speed increases as HP is lost.  I can see that it might not be worth much, but how is it non-functional?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,886
[RLGN]
Members
12,052 posts
21,607 battles
11 minutes ago, Ahskance said:

Torp Accel should be a 1 on non-Jap CVs (the faster torps are canceled by additional arm range) as it only assists in "chasing" DDs with the 5 knot boost to 40 knots

Torp Accel should be a 0 on Jap CVs (the 50+ knot torps don't need the assist and often want the range for playstyle)Y

Where are all the stupid players that let themselves get hit by IJN long range torpedo drops? All I ever seem to see are the ones who always seem to know to maneuver against air attacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
138
[-TXT-]
Members
321 posts
5,392 battles
15 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

Explain.  The skill description is that the squadron speed increases as HP is lost.  I can see that it might not be worth much, but how is it non-functional?

 

AA consists of "Flak" and "Continuous Damage"

Patch 8.5 altered the way Continuous Damage is applied.  Its now applied to the last plane in your squadron until it's dead, then the next to last, etc.  Once the plane dies, the health "total" of the squadron goes back to full... as all the remaining planes are full health.  If one plane is severely damaged... but the other 8 are not, the benefit from the skill is like 2% at best, until the plane dies and it goes away completely.

Flak can damage multiple planes, which COULD trigger the skill, but usually when your planes take severe damage like that they just die shortly after to focus-fire.

Previous to 8.5, damage was randomly spread across the squad, so it was perfectly normal to have a quarter to half-health squad derping around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,997
[WOLF9]
Privateers
11,562 posts
4,550 battles
1 minute ago, Ahskance said:

AA consists of "Flak" and "Continuous Damage"

Patch 8.5 altered the way Continuous Damage is applied.  Its now applied to the last plane in your squadron until it's dead, then the next to last, etc.  Once the plane dies, the health "total" of the squadron goes back to full... as all the remaining planes are full health.  If one plane is severely damaged... but the other 8 are not, the benefit from the skill is like 2% at best, until the plane dies and it goes away completely.

Flak can damage multiple planes, which COULD trigger the skill, but usually when your planes take severe damage like that they just die shortly after to focus-fire.

Previous to 8.5, damage was randomly spread across the squad, so it was perfectly normal to have a quarter to half-health squad derping around.

I see your point.  I have been thinking that the HP decline was that of the ship, but that doesn't make much sense, does it?  I have questions in to the devs,  This might merit one.

BTW, check out https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Indomitable  The table was empty so I followed your recommendation (I think).  See if I was close.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
138
[-TXT-]
Members
321 posts
5,392 battles
24 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

Thanks!

Say, how would you like to become a wiki editor?  It's very easy (if you have the patience to wait for the :etc_swear: server's frequent naps).  I try my best to leave the ship pages alone since I don't trust my knowledge of many ships (certainly not CVs).  But I've made some structural changes to how the skills table works and I'm back-fitting a few, copying over someone else's recommendations.

The idea of Mandatory skills is interesting, but I think it's best handled in the "Essential Skills" text that is supposed to precede the table.

 

I'm honored, but I know myself and I wouldn't put in the required time to make it worth it :(

The only reason I argue for the "mandatory" label on those 4 is because AA is currently balanced to where those are really factored in as if they were mandatory. 

Even with them, you can still have rough games.  I can't imagine a game without them... it would be like 20+% less effective plane health, which might be why some folks rage on the forums to the extent that they do.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
138
[-TXT-]
Members
321 posts
5,392 battles
2 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

I see your point.  I have been thinking that the HP decline was that of the ship, but that doesn't make much sense, does it?  I have questions in to the devs,  This might merit one.

BTW, check out https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Indomitable  The table was empty so I followed your recommendation (I think).  See if I was close.

 

A) I think the Indomitable isn't currently in the game?  I believe that one hasn't been tuned to the reworked CVs.  If it has, I've never seen it in game.

B) I see the Commander Skill table, but I don't see any numbers/stars related to the skills.  I tried in Microsoft Edge and Mozilla Firefox.

C) Happened to notice the Tooltip for Sight Stabilization is incorrect.  It was buffed in the last patch to +7.5% aiming speed for Attack and Torpedo planes.  +15% aiming speed for Bombers

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
138
[-TXT-]
Members
321 posts
5,392 battles
6 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

I see your point.  I have been thinking that the HP decline was that of the ship, but that doesn't make much sense, does it?  I have questions in to the devs,  This might merit one.

BTW, check out https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Indomitable  The table was empty so I followed your recommendation (I think).  See if I was close.

 

Current CVs in the game:

British Tech Tree: Hermes (Tier 4), Furious (Tier 6), Implacable (Tier 8), and Audacious (Tier 10)

US Tech Tree: Langley (Tier 4), Ranger (Tier 6), Lexington (Tier 8), Midway (Tier 10)

Japan Tech Tree: Hosho (Tier 4), Ryujo (Tier 6), Shokaku (Tier 8), and Hakuryu (Tier 10)

German Premium: Graf Zepplin (Tier 8)

US Premium: Saipan (Tier 8), Enterprise (Tier 8)

Japan Premium: Kaga (Tier 8)

British Premium: Ark Royal (Tier 6)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,997
[WOLF9]
Privateers
11,562 posts
4,550 battles
2 minutes ago, Ahskance said:

B) I see the Commander Skill table, but I don't see any numbers/stars related to the skills. 

My fault.  I hadn't saved the changes yet.  No, it's not in game, but the page is there.  Try it now.

3 minutes ago, Ahskance said:

C) Happened to notice the Tooltip for Sight Stabilization is incorrect.

Mmm.  I thought that got changed.  Thanks.

10 minutes ago, Ahskance said:

I'm honored, but I know myself and I wouldn't put in the required time to make it worth it :(

Oh, you don't have to accept an official position.  If you see something wrong, just edit the page.  That's how I got into this mess.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
138
[-TXT-]
Members
321 posts
5,392 battles

@iDuckman

Looks good. 

I would add 1 star in Priority Target, and 2 in Last Gasp.

I would change Basic Firing Training to 0.  The 10% AA damage boost is rare enough to fall under "Meh".  CVs were altered to be mostly unassailable by other CVs, so it wouldn't need the skill.

Edited by Ahskance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,997
[WOLF9]
Privateers
11,562 posts
4,550 battles
5 minutes ago, Ahskance said:

I would

Done.  See, wasn't that easy?  Note the sentence about critical skills.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
82
[BEWBS]
Members
173 posts

@iDuckman Not to say that I know it all myself, this is how I have my British CV captain set up, with the next still in a red box.

 

image.thumb.png.ae55778d660d882d8763c11be530d150.png

 

And looking at this, I can tell you:

Japan: Would not take either DE or Torpedo Acceleration on normal Japanese carriers. I would take it on Kaga though, since it has HE bombs.

USN: My US CV captians are pretty much identical to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,997
[WOLF9]
Privateers
11,562 posts
4,550 battles

Again, I'm not changing any existing recommendations (except one entry that three-starred BoS instead of SE - an obvious error). 

You think recommendation should be changed?  Be my guest.  I filled in Indomitable (unreleased) to see if I understood Ahskance correctly (and vice versa).

 

Edit:  I'm aware that it can be daunting to get started on a wiki.  I was fortunate because I've been editing Wikipedia for years.  If you'd like help, let me know.  A wiki is supposed to be a crowd-sourced document, not the product of a few guys with OCD.

 

Edited by iDuckman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×