Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
DrKuKu

why did they nerf the dive bombers?

15 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
19 posts
8,796 battles

I don't get it. now we have lots of strong AA ships, include DDs. do they really need to nerf dive bombers?

I wonder how they fit the balance. And I want to know why it is needed. They are changing things that you don't have to change each time without any reason or detailed explanation.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


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

It wasn't truly a nerf, more of an exploit being closed, those seconds where your planes were invulnerable aka slingshot was being used to bypass AA. While I think that some ships will need some nerfing to their AA mainly in tier 10 the change was needed as the move was particularly deadly in the hands of above average CV players.

Edited by BrushWolf
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
974
[KAPPA]
Members
3,110 posts
8,196 battles
1 hour ago, BrushWolf said:

It wasn't truly a nerf, more of an exploit being closed, those seconds where your planes were invulnerable aka slingshot was being used to bypass AA. While I think that some ships will need some nerfing to their AA mainly in tier 10 the change was needed as the move was particularly deadly in the hands of above average CV players.

I look forward to seeing them flounder if slingshotting was all that made them good at it. :cap_haloween:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
884
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,028 posts
12,710 battles
4 minutes ago, Shoggoth_pinup said:

I look forward to seeing them flounder if slingshotting was all that made them good at it. :cap_haloween:

I'd bet that slingshotting wasn't any different that battleship AP doing massive damage to DD's.

A lot of very vocal complaining, but after it's removed, there will be no noticeable difference.

Share this post


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

I look forward to seeing them flounder if slingshotting was all that made them good at it. :cap_haloween:

The better players will adapt better and faster. I was never very good with sling shot attacks but at least part of that is my playing different ships with every DB having slightly different distance requirements for a perfect sling shot.

 

1 minute ago, SgtBeltfed said:

I'd bet that slingshotting wasn't any different that battleship AP doing massive damage to DD's.

A lot of very vocal complaining, but after it's removed, there will be no noticeable difference.

No, it was a very effective tactic to preserve planes by taking almost no damage on the way in and only limited damage on the way out which was why we were hearing players of high AA ships complaining about doing no damage because even with all damage focused on a single plane they often didn't do enough damage to destroy it. It was only taken from DB by lengthening the time between attacks and does work with rocket and torpedo planes but not as effectively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
884
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,028 posts
12,710 battles
Just now, BrushWolf said:

The better players will adapt better and faster. I was never very good with sling shot attacks but at least part of that is my playing different ships with every DB having slightly different distance requirements for a perfect sling shot.

 

No, it was a very effective tactic to preserve planes by taking almost no damage on the way in and only limited damage on the way out which was why we were hearing players of high AA ships complaining about doing no damage because even with all damage focused on a single plane they often didn't do enough damage to destroy it. It was only taken from DB by lengthening the time between attacks and does work with rocket and torpedo planes but not as effectively.

True, it's effective at preserving aircraft. But, I don't have a problem running out of planes, I don't use it, and by being careful I can still sneak hits in on high AA ships.

So, at the end of the day, the high AA ships are still getting hit, and they've killed a couple more planes, it really doesn't change anything.

I also normally focus on torpedo bombers, as dive bombers are way too vulnerable to RNGesus.  I find dive bombers useful only under very special circumstances.

Share this post


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

True, it's effective at preserving aircraft. But, I don't have a problem running out of planes, I don't use it, and by being careful I can still sneak hits in on high AA ships.

So, at the end of the day, the high AA ships are still getting hit, and they've killed a couple more planes, it really doesn't change anything.

I also normally focus on torpedo bombers, as dive bombers are way too vulnerable to RNGesus.  I find dive bombers useful only under very special circumstances.

Yeah, I am more of a torpedo bomber person myself and do well with them against BB's and even cruisers but no so well against DD's where I will pull out the rockets for them and if they are even half aware they will make attacking them a royal pain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
974
[KAPPA]
Members
3,110 posts
8,196 battles
10 hours ago, SgtBeltfed said:

I'd bet that slingshotting wasn't any different that battleship AP doing massive damage to DD's.

A lot of very vocal complaining, but after it's removed, there will be no noticeable difference.

Ohh, it'll be noticed. It's less DDs not being penned by BB AP and more easily compared to Smolensk vs Alaska AP post armor rework, with how she can pen you from any angle she can't cit you from due to overmatch.

I feel a lot of CV players might lose 5-10% WR from this, while others will gain much due to never having used it. I, myself, used it enough to be able to do it consistently, then stopped, as it was just plain too strong. It invalidated AA, and that defeats the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
884
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,028 posts
12,710 battles
13 hours ago, Shoggoth_pinup said:

Ohh, it'll be noticed. It's less DDs not being penned by BB AP and more easily compared to Smolensk vs Alaska AP post armor rework, with how she can pen you from any angle she can't cit you from due to overmatch.

I feel a lot of CV players might lose 5-10% WR from this, while others will gain much due to never having used it. I, myself, used it enough to be able to do it consistently, then stopped, as it was just plain too strong. It invalidated AA, and that defeats the point.

Not noticing the AP v/s DD change was that DD survival rates and scores didn't change. So, obviously either it really wasn't significant, or something else took up the DD killing slack instantly. 

Likewise, I doubt that any good CV player will have any issue. at the end of the match, they will have a few less aircraft in the hanger. They won't be deplaned, they will still be doing the same amount of damage. The only people that it will hurt are the one trick ponies that will suffer when someone figures out their trick anyway. Not a chance that you will see a 5% to 10% change in win rate from CV players over this, maybe 1% on just the one trick ponies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
624
[POP]
Members
1,079 posts
9,336 battles
1 hour ago, SgtBeltfed said:

Not noticing the AP v/s DD change was that DD survival rates and scores didn't change. So, obviously either it really wasn't significant, or something else took up the DD killing slack instantly. 

Likewise, I doubt that any good CV player will have any issue. at the end of the match, they will have a few less aircraft in the hanger. They won't be deplaned, they will still be doing the same amount of damage. The only people that it will hurt are the one trick ponies that will suffer when someone figures out their trick anyway. Not a chance that you will see a 5% to 10% change in win rate from CV players over this, maybe 1% on just the one trick ponies.

Actually this will directly affect average damage as it means most dive bomber runs that previously netted 2-3 drops per run will now get only 1 drop before returning to the cv.  This lowers the damage output they can do.  Some CV'S have the hangar size and regen to recoup the losses, some don't (see saipan) and will have to be more careful.  Whether or not that affects win rate will have to be determined over time.  The most impactful damage is still killing DD's and for those that stray away from aa cover this will be no help for them.

The only ships I see benefit from this are the island campers that stay in groups.   Contrary to popular belief more than 1 of most ships if using sectors properly will nuke most dive bomber squadrons.  Using slingshot allowed you to hit them pretty consistently,  without it you likely won't unless you have a land mass to shield your planes from the AA on approach.   Flack not considered,  close range AA is a constant unavoidable damage over time that eats planes regardless of skill.  Stacked AA is nothing but a numbers game.

Edited by HallaSnackbar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
884
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,028 posts
12,710 battles
13 minutes ago, HallaSnackbar said:

Actually this will directly affect average damage as it means most dive bomber runs that previously netted 2-3 drops per run will now get only 1 drop before returning to the cv.  This lowers the damage output they can do.  Some CV'S have the hangar size and regen to recoup the losses, some don't (see saipan) and will have to be more careful.  Whether or not that affects win rate will have to be determined over time.  The most impactful damage is still killing DD's and for those that stray away from aa cover this will be no help for them.

The only ships I see benefit from this are the island campers that stay in groups.   Contrary to popular belief more than 1 of most ships if using sectors properly will nuke most dive bomber squadrons.  Using slingshot allowed you to hit them pretty consistently,  without it you likely won't unless you have a land mass to shield your planes from the AA on approach.   Flack not considered,  close range AA is a constant unavoidable damage over time that eats planes regardless of skill.  Stacked AA is nothing but a numbers game.

Slingshotting reduced most CV's to one run or two anyway. You just got to keep your planes. You're sending every other flight of planes back to the CV.

Pounding on the lone wolves (usually DD's) is what wins games, by achieving DD superiority, and putting the other team behind the curve and making them desperate, where they will make further mistakes.

Hitting DD's also pays better because of how XP is determined.

So, by removing an exploit that allowed you to chuck a few bombs at highly defended targets, and making it an even better idea to do something that wins games, you're gonna hurt CV's win rates?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
624
[POP]
Members
1,079 posts
9,336 battles
1 minute ago, SgtBeltfed said:

Slingshotting reduced most CV's to one run or two anyway. You just got to keep your planes. You're sending every other flight of planes back to the CV.

Pounding on the lone wolves (usually DD's) is what wins games, by achieving DD superiority, and putting the other team behind the curve and making them desperate, where they will make further mistakes.

Hitting DD's also pays better because of how XP is determined.

So, by removing an exploit that allowed you to chuck a few bombs at highly defended targets, and making it an even better idea to do something that wins games, you're gonna hurt CV's win rates?

Sling shotting allowed you to hit targets with too much AA to just fly up to (as I stated above).  The "fix" wg employed added a delay on repeated attacks that causes planes to fly around in AA longer, take more damage and loose more planes.  As originally stated this nerf will make some previously viable targets no longer options and most other targets will net fewer attacks per run ultimately costing the CV dpm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
884
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,028 posts
12,710 battles
22 hours ago, HallaSnackbar said:

Sling shotting allowed you to hit targets with too much AA to just fly up to (as I stated above).  The "fix" wg employed added a delay on repeated attacks that causes planes to fly around in AA longer, take more damage and loose more planes.  As originally stated this nerf will make some previously viable targets no longer options and most other targets will net fewer attacks per run ultimately costing the CV dpm.

I haven't noticed the delay being that significant, as I've either left the AA aura, or had time to turn around while it expired. I was worried about the brits, but apparently the delay isn't long enough to matter to them making quick U-turns.

I've been hitting high AA targets without it. I'd rather not hit high AA targets, but I can do it.

The only time I can see the delay impacting me is when I fly over a group of enemies, and drop on every ship that I can without turning around. It's also something I don't do often either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
19 posts
8,796 battles

I just want to know why WG made this update. bcz no one was complaining about a dive bombers.

and who made these decisions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×