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

What is the most fun Carrier Line to grind if your new to Carriers?

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,256
[WIB]
Alpha Tester
3,978 posts
2,472 battles

First I will say I have never been and never will be a hardcore CV player and it is the least interesting class for me to play but with the changes, I was kicking around with them today and they are kind of fun.  That being the case, I am trying to figure out what line would be the most fun to play.  The key word here is "Fun" not which line is the strongest or most competitive.  I just want to have a CV or two to kick around on now and again.   I have did a bit of research but most info other there is old  here is what I have heard so far.  keep in mind, I know nothing, this is just what I have read.

British - Seem to be the easiest to play.  TB, Fighter and DBs seem very straight forward and easy to use especially with the way their DBs work.  Seems all aircraft are equally good against all ships but your mostly relying on starting and sticking fires to do any damage.   Many said this is frustrating and makes the Brits not very fun or rewarding.

Japan - Supposedly the "Best" or most competitive due to the fact they potentially do the most damage.  fragile planes though.  DB is AP bombs which limits their effectiveness somewhat.  Also supposed to have the highest skill requirement to do well and have fun it.

German - Seems very gimicky.  Each type of plane is supposed to be good at one engaging one type of ship.  AP Bombs and Rockets seem to require perfect positioning.  Torps do poor damage.  These seem to me like they might require a pretty skilled player at the helm to get the most out of them.   Also many seem to think they are in a bad place balance-wise.

American - Overall the stuff I read seems to point toward these being jack-of-all trades, kind of average at everything but not great at anything.  

I don't really have any tech tree CVs right now so can start out fresh with any of the lines.  I do have a Saipan I got in a Santa's Gift a few years ago but have only played it like twice, however having a premium American CV would be a nice bonus if I decided to grind out the US line.  I do also have enough gold to buy either an Arc Royal or E.Loewenhardt if Brits or Germans are recommended.   Can't afford a Kaga though.

So anyway, what do you all recommend?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59
[WOLFB]
[WOLFB]
Members
166 posts
3,589 battles

USN CVs are the best to learn on, generally speaking. Imo, Lexington is the gem of the line. The others aren't bad, but Lex really shines for me. 

The other lines all have gimmicks or specialties that make CV play different, but often take a bit more experience to play well. 

USN CVs - The generalists. All the planes are fairly comfortable to fly and aim and are quite forgiving when you need to turn during a run. Good rockets, good torps and HE bombs. This line lets you learn the other facets of CV play, like watching the mini-map, ALOT, picking isolated targets or digging out a Radar Cruiser, sooner, imo, because the planes are easier to use. 

IJN CVs - They are fragile planes and the aiming is harder, in general. You can't turn much during your attack run, so you have to pick a good line. If you do try to turn, you'll widen the reticle much more than most other ships. This can hamper your contribution until you "gitgud". They are good ships, but for me, personally, they are my worst line and I play all 4 nations. I just need more practice with IJN, moreso than the other lines.  

German CVs - They are AP centric and secondary memes, generally. You can do awesome damage to the right targets, but if they turn just a bit and you don't hit them flat broadside with the rockets, for example, then damage is much less. The AP bombers are a bit different as well with their odd aiming reticle. German torps just seem weak to me, compared to others, fewer floods, less damage, etc. Lastly, you really need to know a reasonable amount about the armor rating of targets to make a big impact with the AP ammo, or you'll pass up good targets and hit bad ones, making you less successful with them. 

Brit CVs - They are mainly bomber-centric. Their gimmick is HE carpet bombing. It's effective, but aims differently than all other bombers with the way the bombs fall and their number. It's not hard to learn, but can impact learning to hit in other CVs, if you get in the habit of Carpet Bombing a lot in UK CVs. They have generally strong planes, but fewer numbers, so you have to be a bit more careful, or you can get deplaned easier.  

If you want a Premium, then Kaga is considered a great ship. I love mine. A literal boatload of fragile planes and great torps. You can deplane a Kaga, but it takes true potato play for that to happen. 

Just be careful with it. The Kaga teaches a bad habit of worrying less about conserving planes and in all other CVs, that will bite you pretty hard.  

Saipan is a tough ship for a new CV player to play. My suggestion is go up the USN line to T8, before you really try to use Saipan. The recent-ish change to the Tiny Tims and their aiming were a nerf to Saipan, who's stuck with them. 

GL! 

Edited by SonicAnatidae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,932
[RLGN]
Members
16,225 posts
28,105 battles

Fun?

None of them; but that’s just me.

Old Strike Bogue used to be ‘fun,’ but it’s gone now.

Easiest to play?

18 minutes ago, Capt_Ahab1776 said:

For a beginner, USN

15 minutes ago, SonicAnatidae said:

USN CVs are the best to learn on, generally speaking. Imo, Lexington is the gem of the line.

As a matter of practicality, I’d have to disagree. The question wasn’t ‘what will be the most useful later on.’

Because of the carpet bombing the RN carriers are the easiest to learn.

Less foolishness with the climb up, screw around with trying to keep the reticle aimed, then dive down. You just fly, point, and drop.

Edited by Estimated_Prophet
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59
[WOLFB]
[WOLFB]
Members
166 posts
3,589 battles
8 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

As a matter of practicality, I’d have to disagree. The question wasn’t ‘what will be the most useful later on.’

Because if the carpet bombing the RN carriers are the easiest to learn.

Less foolishness with the climb up, screw around with trying to keep the reticle aimed, then dive down. You just fly, point, and drop.

I like the Brit CVs, but for me, I learned to aim DBs using USN, so when I started Brits, I could already use the carpet bombers fairly well. Had I done that in reverse, I suspect I would have had another learning curve to climb. Also, a lot of folks would argue with you that the T8 Brit CV is good/easy. 

As far as what's most useful later on, the OP is welcome to ignore that. I included because it's a common factor that a lot of players want to take into account, stated or not. 

 

But hey, thanks for making a showing for the pedants! 

 

Edited by SonicAnatidae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,117
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
3,172 battles

USN planes can each damage everything. It does not punish you for poor squadron management. Rockets are pretty RNG, but HE bombs are awesome...and torpedoes are slow and reliable. Reasonably tanky planes, nice handling characteristics.

British CVs are optimized for fighting light targets...to go after BBs you will be relying more heavily on RNG. You focus on DD and cruiser hunting. Rockets are good, HE bombs are high fire chance but low penetration, and torpedoes are slow and reliable. Very tanky planes...sluggish handling.

IJN CVs rely on aiming skill and good target selection. You can really rack up the damage with these ships. Great torpedoes (high speed, good damage), nice AP bombs...and accurate rockets (less damage than other lines). Fragile planes, good speed...great handling. Good for practicing flak dodging and skilled attack routes.

German CVs...for the CV expert who wants something different. AP bombers which devastate heavy units...with a very accurate attack method (IF you can get the planes to the drop point). Rockets that specialize in hitting cruisers and carriers...hard to use but high alpha if used correctly. Torpedo bombers which specialize in going after DDs and cruisers (high speed, but low damage). Fastest planes, not good handling...very fragile.

Usually I would say try USN first to get a handle on mechanics without feeling frustrated...then either Royal Navy or IJN...then German.

Remember, the Germans play VERY differently from the other 3 lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,932
[RLGN]
Members
16,225 posts
28,105 battles
4 minutes ago, SonicAnatidae said:

But hey, thanks for making a showing for the pedants!

Purely unintentional, I assure you.

More like interpretively literal to the extreme.

Seriously; trying desperately not to go off on my anti-rework soapbox.

(It’s the rework itself I detest, not carriers.)

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,256
[WIB]
Alpha Tester
3,978 posts
2,472 battles

Thanks for the replies all.  Looks like it is about what I thought, either the USN or Brits.   I have the Langley already but I might pick up the Brit CV as well to try it out.  To be perfectly honest, I have strong doubts I will get past Tier 6 with whatever I choose,  I just don't think I will get into them enough to really make the push on them especially since I am prioritizing a couple other lines right now.  

Too bad about the Saipan.  When I first got it, it was considered very OP.  Sounds like it got nerfed pretty badly....or maybe it has more to do with it having a high skill ceiling.  Either way, it looks like I should stay away from that for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59
[WOLFB]
[WOLFB]
Members
166 posts
3,589 battles
18 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

Purely unintentional, I assure you.

More like interpretively literal to the extreme.

Seriously; trying desperately not to go off on my anti-rework soapbox.

(It’s the rework itself I detest, not carriers.)

I noticed in your stats that you played a lot of RTS and about 100 games in rework. I only played a few games in RTS, then ignored them until after the rework. 

That seems to be a fairly common trend with RTS CVers, at least, from what I've seen in forums/threads/reddit/etc. 

I get the hate. It sucks to gitgud then have the Dev team change it entirely. At least it does when that happens to me and it has, in other games. 

Not yet in WG, but I'm not real hopeful with their track record.  ;)

o7

 

Edited by SonicAnatidae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59
[WOLFB]
[WOLFB]
Members
166 posts
3,589 battles
13 minutes ago, Midnitewolf said:

Thanks for the replies all.  Looks like it is about what I thought, either the USN or Brits.   I have the Langley already but I might pick up the Brit CV as well to try it out.  To be perfectly honest, I have strong doubts I will get past Tier 6 with whatever I choose,  I just don't think I will get into them enough to really make the push on them especially since I am prioritizing a couple other lines right now.  

Too bad about the Saipan.  When I first got it, it was considered very OP.  Sounds like it got nerfed pretty badly....or maybe it has more to do with it having a high skill ceiling.  Either way, it looks like I should stay away from that for a while.

If you have fun, then you're doing it right. :)

As far as Saipan, it could be argued as a nerf one way or the other, but the Tiny Tim change def. raised the skill floor from it's past, imo. 

When they hit, TTs hit hard, but the dispersion is just outright trollish for me. For USNs, I mainly use HVARS, since I use rockets mostly to hunt

DDs, or set fires, so I want more rockets to hit, despite doing less damage than TTs. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,347
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,269 posts
12,187 battles

If you find them 'fun', great, I'll never understand how anyone finds this new version fun. But the least aggravating to play is USN and most new player friendly. 

HVAR rockets are OP when used correctly, doubly so vs DD's. After Ranger you actually get 3, then 6 torpedoes per drop - making it easier to get hits and do some heavy damage. SB's are a learned and required skill, USN's bombs have good fire chance and high pen, to say nothing of the fact when your dropping 2000 lb bombs you can actually miss a DD but the blast is still close enough to trigger a det roll and destroy it. 

IJN - having ripped most of the historical accuracy out the line, they are left with frankly mediocre rockets unless it's a light target and you actually get hits, 2 by 2 TB's are honestly a joke for a nation tat relied heavily on them and in game used to be the most devastating with them, and the hilarious historically inaccurate AP DB's while they can be super effective if/when you figure out what ship requires what drop height, are a pain to use because you have to figure all that out while flying in to the heaviest AA. 

UK - RP-3's are inferior HVAR's - still absolutely devastating to DD's, but lack the pen to ruin the day of tougher ships. Hilarious when you consider that the RP-3 is a 6" SAP warhead traveling at a slightly higher speed in mid-high tiers while HVAR is a 5" HE warhead. TB's are again easier to use because you get to 3 a go. The issue really is the level bombers. There's a reason UK never actually did this (the closest was 'glide bombing' ad using shallower dive angles) and that is the lack of accuracy vs ships. You can literally have a noob sailing straight, afk, and miss because the bombs land on every side of the ship and don't have a blast radius to still harm it. Damage vs heavier ships is also somewhat limited, more reliant on starting fires than penetrating hits. 

Germany - poster child of Wargaming having given up doing research on ships, aircraft, and ordnance or listening to player suggestions/feedback. Till tier 10 where you finally get the fictitious AP version o the B.R. 21 (they were working on a 21 cm rocket that could potentially mount an AP warhead at least based on the R4M) that might actually be useful against most things, your stuck with a 3 inch AP rocket and the German word essentially for 'High Explosive' with AP added to the end which is wrong on so many levels, and really only works on perfect broadsides to the lightest of light cruisers. That, and the way the reticle moves when starting an attack run is weird. The TB's are TB's, and the DB's are the same as IJN - or at least they would be if they didn't put the aiming area in the worst possible spot making them harder to use as the point is almost directly below the planes. The line needs some serious usability changes, a swap to all planes using 21 cm rockets, and maybe an exorcist. 

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,347
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,269 posts
12,187 battles
34 minutes ago, SonicAnatidae said:

I noticed in your stats that you played a lot of RTS and about 100 games in rework. I only played a few games in RTS, then ignored them until after the rework. 

That seems to be a fairly common trend with RTS CVers, at least, from what I've seen in forums/threads/reddit/etc. 

I get the hate. It sucks to gitgud then have the Dev team change it entirely. At least it does when that happens to me and it has, in other games. 

Not yet in WG, but I'm not real hopeful with their track record.  ;)

o7

 

For many of us it's not a matter of 'we got good, then they swapped it'. I was in the beta testing, which mixed CV and non-CV players, and you wanna know the most common complaint from day 1 - it was boring. People played 5 games and it got old just flying to and from the target, which usually takes 50-80 seconds on average unless dangerously close to ships as it takes roughly 10 sec/grid square for planes to travel, hit a target a couple times while dodging flak, and then having nothing to do again while waiting to get back in range. Gregory 'Pappy' Boyington once said being a fighter pilot was basically 'hours of boredom and seconds of terror' - for what is supposed to be yet more 'action-y' gameplay for CV's - that's bad design. We have no meaningful interaction with the enemy CV as the fighter consumable is a joke, and because they absolutely butchered the mobility of CV's as well as took any meaningful control of the ship away had to dial AA up that 2 CV's squaring off basically comes down to who got hit by enemy ships more, who has more planes left, or who has better secondaries. 

 

The rework was supposed to make CV's 'more fun and action oriented', easier to access for normal players to increase CV population, it along with the removal of odd tiers was supposed to make it easier to balance, it was supposed to close the skill gap, and it was supposed to fix the spotting issue to name some of the big points. 

It's been over a year and a half, or 50% of the life time of the RTS model on live server, and where are we? Fun and action oriented -debatable at best. Easier to access and increased population - I've encountered players who found it just as frustrating to learn, so again, debatable, and last check it didn't create more CV players it just forced what we had or what replaced what left into a smaller grouping to make them more consistently show up, mostly in low tiers the higher I go the less often I see CV's. Balance - Yeah, that hasn't happened, were still here having to damn well fight over the fact that low tier AA (primarily 3-5, secondarily 6 and 7) is still garbage and a problem, and that some ships, namely in 9 and 10, still have stupidly insane AA, Atlanta of all things actually needs an AA buff, words I'd never thought I'd say both as a CV player and Atlanta owner, ordnance damage is still an issue, +/-2 battles and all it entails is an issue, CV vs DD is still an issue - to shorten this, basically every issue from RTS, some dating back to Alpha and Beta testing, is still a problem and once again, Wargaming is not actually addressing them but trying to fix around them. Skill gap - yeah it's as bad, if not worse than RTS at this point as they keep screwing with how planes function instead of addressing the actual issues - like when they screwed with the mobility and aiming on attack planes instead of nerfing the damn rocket damage on HVAR rockets that are the main obliterater of DD's. Or making use/aiming of ordnance more complicated. And spotting - yeah, they fixed it so good were now on the third or fourth aerial spotting range buff for ships, and were now talking to the insane level of DD's that are already down around 2 km being close to 1 km unless 2 km guaranteed is enforced, and cruisers under 5 km potentially maybe even 4. And what irks some of us the most is that 2 years ago when they announced it, and just under 2 years ago when we were testing it, we told them about these being issues that would and did exist and they have still failed to do anything. 

Other than removing odd tier CV's, when you look at the goals Wargaming looked to accomplish in any of their videos and all on the subject - they've failed, and actually increased the resentment against CV's and themselves. Non-CV and CV players have hated it since day 1, even when they went to announce they were putting it to live, they had to throw out 16% of the responses to the 3rd and final beta for not reaching a certain battle count to reach a pitiful 38% of players approving - the actual number being 32% with that 16%, and keeping in mind that one of the biggest complaints, never addressed in the rounds of testing, was boring gameplay, and not much in general changed from round 1-3.

Yeah, I win more, I have a higher PR, and deal more damage than in RTS - but that's because in RTS I chose to not use manual drops and strafing unless forced by my opponent because it was stupid and unfair to exploit broken mechanics, in the rework, every attack is a manual attack and I've been playing flying games that required dodging some level of flak for about 20 years though all but WoWp's main competition had a time skip for the boring segments of just flying (reasons I don't really play that other game). Seriously no duh I'm going to hit an enemy ship when I have precise control to drop too close for them to dodge, unless it's bombs where RNG can just troll where they land still. But none of that makes this more fun for me. It's just a damage farm, unless the team I'm against A: isn't stupid enough to let me pick them off like a horror movie monster or B: has AA that shreds my planes, occasionally C: both, at which point I'm just flying about in circles trying to light ships - because playing a glorified spotter is so much fun. At least in RTS I could actually control the ship while planes loitered for an opening, or attempt to overwhelm AA by coming from several directions, or mess around using my fighters to deal with the enemy CV planes if my team wasn't in a good AA situation. 

RTS, there was almost always something to do, Rework, half your time is spent waiting and doing nothing at best. 

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,932
[RLGN]
Members
16,225 posts
28,105 battles
31 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

RTS, there was almost always something to do, Rework, half your time is spent waiting and doing nothing at best. 

Bravo. Well said, and so true.

’The more things change, the more they remain the same.’

All WG has really accomplished with nearly four years of effort, (if you count back to 2017, the Year of the carrier,) is changing the mechanics by which carriers bother other players.

‘Boring‘ is an apt description.

Even in the easiest of situations; where I could get the maximum result for the least risk; (Ryujo, in Killer Whale,) the ‘fun’ quickly paled, and it just became repetitive flying and striking.

For players who can easily dodge AA and strike with little risk; I don’t see how beating up on targets that have little real hope of effective defense remains ‘fun.’

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59
[WOLFB]
[WOLFB]
Members
166 posts
3,589 battles

Thank you for taking the time to write up a bit of history. I've been a casual player of WoWs for 4+ years now, but when the CV rework was happening, I happened to be playing WoT, so missed the early stages of it.  

I am, at heart, a support player, so my view on CVs is a little different.

I'm the guy that's usually the main healer in MMOs for PVE/PVP teams. I like to spend part of my time looking at the overall flows of battles, and try to provide insights to the team that are busy with their specific tasks, snipe nearly dead targets, etc. I mained Medic in TF2 and Engineer in Tribes, because they are utility/support classes that are geared more towards what I enjoyed playing. 

That's the approach I take to CVs. I really am more about supporting with CVs. Spotting, dislodging critical targets (Radar cruiser, camping the other side of an island near a cap), using fighters strategically to either spot/psychologically make players avoid an area or for team defense, turning DDs away from caps, contesting caps when I'm the only person that has any chance of getting there in time, etc. I take torp shots @ DDs that are fighting other ships, not expecting to hit them, but to tie up more of their mental bandwidth, since even badly aimed torps have to be dodged and if they are dodging shells, and aiming/firing, etc. this can cause them to misplay and get killed, which is the point. I take the time to type out when DCPs are down, pointing out flanking targets that my teams seems to be ignoring, etc. I tell DDs I'm enroute with fighters, so they can save their smoke, if I'm close and more. I am trying to be a bit of an information center, so they can focus on the game and let me monitor the overall, since I have 40-45-60 secs of time, where I'm just flying to a target. This is the time I use to do all that. 

With this approach, I'm able to stay much more engaged with the game. During flight time across the map, I'm looking at the mini-map, and constantly updating my target choice, based on changes, team needs, enemy pushes, adjusting autopilot for the hull, etc. For me, this is engaging, because it's my WoWs version of the playstyle I tend towards. 

AA is more effective than people really think. Sure, only stupid AA can stop me from making 1 attack run, but if it costs me most of a flight of planes, it was effective, because it's de-fanging the CV.  Hell, I've sacrificed my hull, to pull enemies to my side of the map, because "people" get all giggity-giggity about the chance to kill a CV, while my team crushes the other flank, winning the game. 

 

But, I understand that my playstyle isn't really for everyone. I also agree to a large extent with some of your complaints about the CV rework. WG seemingly has not taken much/any real feedback on CVs from the players RE: this and instead of really focusing on it to fix it, they develop a whole new class in Subs, that from what I can tell, no one wanted or even asked for. Typical company garbage. Chase tomorrow's dollar, while ignoring the issues with the current product line.  

As a CV main, these days, I take more garbage in chat in a day from my "teammates" than I did in any given period of surface ships and I am literally playing to support my team, not damage farm, like most surface ship players.  

Even when I'm "farming dmg", I'm hitting targets that I believe need to be taken out, not just the AFK or Straight-lining potatoes. Try to get a surface ship to stop shooting @ an AFK player, if you feel like wasting your time, but let a CV do it and the chat is suddenly filled with full nappies and spare chromosomes. Even better, when I do kill a target that was low health, because the faster we get enemy guns off the board, the better for everyone, it's kill stealing, even though my "teammate" spent the last 2 mins failing to kill the target. 

 

While WG has a lot to answer for, personally, most of my problems stem from the so-called community of toxic [edited] that can only have fun ruining other people's games, because a CV once focused them, because they were an important target. I rarely focus targets because that is unfun. At least it was when it was done to me, but at the same time, I understood that if I was holding a critical position, not focusing me would be dumb and I didn't really rage at the enemy player that had the tactical awareness to take me out. He did what I would have done. 

 

 

 

Edited by SonicAnatidae
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,256
[WIB]
Alpha Tester
3,978 posts
2,472 battles
2 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

If you find them 'fun', great, I'll never understand how anyone finds this new version fun. But the least aggravating to play is USN and most new player friendly. 

HVAR rockets are OP when used correctly, doubly so vs DD's. After Ranger you actually get 3, then 6 torpedoes per drop - making it easier to get hits and do some heavy damage. SB's are a learned and required skill, USN's bombs have good fire chance and high pen, to say nothing of the fact when your dropping 2000 lb bombs you can actually miss a DD but the blast is still close enough to trigger a det roll and destroy it. 

IJN - having ripped most of the historical accuracy out the line, they are left with frankly mediocre rockets unless it's a light target and you actually get hits, 2 by 2 TB's are honestly a joke for a nation tat relied heavily on them and in game used to be the most devastating with them, and the hilarious historically inaccurate AP DB's while they can be super effective if/when you figure out what ship requires what drop height, are a pain to use because you have to figure all that out while flying in to the heaviest AA. 

UK - RP-3's are inferior HVAR's - still absolutely devastating to DD's, but lack the pen to ruin the day of tougher ships. Hilarious when you consider that the RP-3 is a 6" SAP warhead traveling at a slightly higher speed in mid-high tiers while HVAR is a 5" HE warhead. TB's are again easier to use because you get to 3 a go. The issue really is the level bombers. There's a reason UK never actually did this (the closest was 'glide bombing' ad using shallower dive angles) and that is the lack of accuracy vs ships. You can literally have a noob sailing straight, afk, and miss because the bombs land on every side of the ship and don't have a blast radius to still harm it. Damage vs heavier ships is also somewhat limited, more reliant on starting fires than penetrating hits. 

Germany - poster child of Wargaming having given up doing research on ships, aircraft, and ordnance or listening to player suggestions/feedback. Till tier 10 where you finally get the fictitious AP version o the B.R. 21 (they were working on a 21 cm rocket that could potentially mount an AP warhead at least based on the R4M) that might actually be useful against most things, your stuck with a 3 inch AP rocket and the German word essentially for 'High Explosive' with AP added to the end which is wrong on so many levels, and really only works on perfect broadsides to the lightest of light cruisers. That, and the way the reticle moves when starting an attack run is weird. The TB's are TB's, and the DB's are the same as IJN - or at least they would be if they didn't put the aiming area in the worst possible spot making them harder to use as the point is almost directly below the planes. The line needs some serious usability changes, a swap to all planes using 21 cm rockets, and maybe an exorcist. 

I decided to try out each of the Tier IV CVs just to see how they all played and from my limited view, your pretty much right on the money.

USN CVs at Tier IV are definitely the most fun and easiest to use because everything just works.  The planes are fairly durable and fairly maneuverable, you get a nice two spread of torps right off the bat, the rockets can do some mean damage if you aim correctly and so can the bombs once you get the hang of it.  You also get a decent amount of planes.  USN CVs are just good all arounders.

IJN CVs at Tier IV have fun torps but that is about it.  Rockets are mediocre at best and the AP bombs just didn't do enough damage for how hard they are to get the right hits on the right targets with.  I also expect they have the same limitations as the German AP bombs but more about that later.  The planes were the worst though because of how fragile they were.  With IJN planes, often my entire flight would get shot down after the first run sometimes from a single ship where as with the USN planes, I could always get two runs, even against a Wyoming.  

UK CVs at Tier 4 were the 2nd most fun but what put me off on them was the single torp per run.  Not sure why WG did that but honestly it takes the fun out of using the TBs.  Carpet bombing though was indeed fun but I did find it hard to get consistent damage with them.  The rockets felt much like the USN CVs.  If they had more torps per run, they might be as fun as the USN CVs.

German CVs are special hehe.  I guess for the right player they might be fun but for a newbie they are horrible.   Nothing about them seems to work well or rather I should say that everything was just extremely hard to make work.  You never seemed to have the right type of plane up for the right target and even when you did have the right plane up, trying to get the right set up to get things to work was next to impossible.  I think the most disappointing thing was the AP bombs being only effective against BBs.  I mean I dumped 2 AP bombs right in the middle of the deck on an IJN CV and they over penned for 400 damage each.  I am sorry but I think that there should be something in there for the bombs to get hung up on....deck, hanger deck, sub decks, machinery.....before the bombs pass through the bottom hull.   Same for a cruiser.  Guess this is just game mechanic but it isn't realistic.  Also trying to line up the rockets to actually hit and do damage was a nightmare.  Only the TBs were reliable but the damage was so bad it was just painful.  Newbies should definitely stay away from the German CVs because they weren't fun at all.  

Obviously I haven't played any of the lines past the entry ship so I know things will change, things like the single torp per run the Hermes is stuck going away for example, but if I have to evaluate which line seems the most fun from the perspective of a newbie, the USN CVs take the win hands down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
980
[-TKS-]
[-TKS-]
Members
1,159 posts
8,956 battles
On 8/27/2020 at 12:50 AM, Midnitewolf said:

I decided to try out each of the Tier IV CVs just to see how they all played and from my limited view, your pretty much right on the money.

USN CVs at Tier IV are definitely the most fun and easiest to use because everything just works.  The planes are fairly durable and fairly maneuverable, you get a nice two spread of torps right off the bat, the rockets can do some mean damage if you aim correctly and so can the bombs once you get the hang of it.  You also get a decent amount of planes.  USN CVs are just good all arounders.

IJN CVs at Tier IV have fun torps but that is about it.  Rockets are mediocre at best and the AP bombs just didn't do enough damage for how hard they are to get the right hits on the right targets with.  I also expect they have the same limitations as the German AP bombs but more about that later.  The planes were the worst though because of how fragile they were.  With IJN planes, often my entire flight would get shot down after the first run sometimes from a single ship where as with the USN planes, I could always get two runs, even against a Wyoming.  

UK CVs at Tier 4 were the 2nd most fun but what put me off on them was the single torp per run.  Not sure why WG did that but honestly it takes the fun out of using the TBs.  Carpet bombing though was indeed fun but I did find it hard to get consistent damage with them.  The rockets felt much like the USN CVs.  If they had more torps per run, they might be as fun as the USN CVs.

German CVs are special hehe.  I guess for the right player they might be fun but for a newbie they are horrible.   Nothing about them seems to work well or rather I should say that everything was just extremely hard to make work.  You never seemed to have the right type of plane up for the right target and even when you did have the right plane up, trying to get the right set up to get things to work was next to impossible.  I think the most disappointing thing was the AP bombs being only effective against BBs.  I mean I dumped 2 AP bombs right in the middle of the deck on an IJN CV and they over penned for 400 damage each.  I am sorry but I think that there should be something in there for the bombs to get hung up on....deck, hanger deck, sub decks, machinery.....before the bombs pass through the bottom hull.   Same for a cruiser.  Guess this is just game mechanic but it isn't realistic.  Also trying to line up the rockets to actually hit and do damage was a nightmare.  Only the TBs were reliable but the damage was so bad it was just painful.  Newbies should definitely stay away from the German CVs because they weren't fun at all.  

Obviously I haven't played any of the lines past the entry ship so I know things will change, things like the single torp per run the Hermes is stuck going away for example, but if I have to evaluate which line seems the most fun from the perspective of a newbie, the USN CVs take the win hands down. 

I'm glad you tried all of them out! Yes German is honestly the most challenging for a newer CV captain. American is certainly the most adaptable, as at tier X especially, you can bomb destroyers pretty nicely. 

Are you going to continue down the line?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,683
[CLUMP]
Members
1,910 posts
2,412 battles

US CVs are cursed for me for some odd reason I play IJN CVs :fish_cute_2: IJN CVs are harder to play though :Smile_hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,683
[WPORT]
Members
9,921 posts
14,411 battles
On 8/26/2020 at 8:31 PM, Midnitewolf said:

First I will say I have never been and never will be a hardcore CV player and it is the least interesting class for me to play but with the changes, I was kicking around with them today and they are kind of fun.  That being the case, I am trying to figure out what line would be the most fun to play.  The key word here is "Fun" not which line is the strongest or most competitive.  I just want to have a CV or two to kick around on now and again.   I have did a bit of research but most info other there is old  here is what I have heard so far.  keep in mind, I know nothing, this is just what I have read.

British - Seem to be the easiest to play.  TB, Fighter and DBs seem very straight forward and easy to use especially with the way their DBs work.  Seems all aircraft are equally good against all ships but your mostly relying on starting and sticking fires to do any damage.   Many said this is frustrating and makes the Brits not very fun or rewarding.

Japan - Supposedly the "Best" or most competitive due to the fact they potentially do the most damage.  fragile planes though.  DB is AP bombs which limits their effectiveness somewhat.  Also supposed to have the highest skill requirement to do well and have fun it.

German - Seems very gimicky.  Each type of plane is supposed to be good at one engaging one type of ship.  AP Bombs and Rockets seem to require perfect positioning.  Torps do poor damage.  These seem to me like they might require a pretty skilled player at the helm to get the most out of them.   Also many seem to think they are in a bad place balance-wise.

American - Overall the stuff I read seems to point toward these being jack-of-all trades, kind of average at everything but not great at anything.  

I don't really have any tech tree CVs right now so can start out fresh with any of the lines.  I do have a Saipan I got in a Santa's Gift a few years ago but have only played it like twice, however having a premium American CV would be a nice bonus if I decided to grind out the US line.  I do also have enough gold to buy either an Arc Royal or E.Loewenhardt if Brits or Germans are recommended.   Can't afford a Kaga though.

So anyway, what do you all recommend?

I started with Zuiho.  But that ship is not available at this time.

If you start up the Tech-tree, I suggest beginning with Hosho or Langley.

If you start with a premium, I suggest Ark Royal.

All of the above are "user friendly" and intuitive.

Hermes is nice, but she lacks the two-torpedo drop (last I checked).

German CV's offer nice variety, but learning the basics is best done with Hosho or Langley, I feel.
After you "git gud", and are a terror of the skies with whatever you started with, then you can branch out and get a feel for the others at your convenience.  Each has their virtues.

If you find yourself at Tier-8 and want a premium for whatever reason, then Kaga is a solid choice for CV play and Graf Zeppelin is a nice secondary-battery meme-ship that can also perform the tasks of a CV.  :-)

Saipan has no secondary batteries, has few planes, and is intended for a CV player that is bringing all the tricks of the trade for plane management and preservation while conducting surgical attacks in a tough AA environment. 
Saipan is formidable in a competent player's hands.  But one could be de-planed quickly and endure suffering for the remainder of the match if one makes too many mistakes.

Captain's skills matter.  CV's need 9 skill points at a minimum, to gain access to Aircraft Armor and Survivability Expert for additional plane and ship HP.
You can get by without 9 points if you're in Tier-4 and training-up a ship & Captain.  
By Tier-6, you'll want 9 or more skill points to be comfortable and effective.

Erich Loewenhardt is fun to play in Scenario Operations.  But she's not a Graf Zeppelin in secondary battery accuracy or quantity.  :-)

Welcome to CV play.  Good luck and have fun.  :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,256
[WIB]
Alpha Tester
3,978 posts
2,472 battles

I decided to try them all out and have at least a 10-12 matches in each now and also picked up Arc Royal.

Overall so far they are all fun to play except the German CVs.   Everything about them is a bit retar...ded if you ask me and I never felt so helpless in a ship as I often do in the German CVs.   First of all you have zero answers to DDs.  The Armada briefing said you have fast torps so use them to take out DDs......yeah right.....maybe if their aim times were really quick but compared to all the other CVs I have to start my run at least 2km farther out to get full aim and any course deviation even with the mouse disrupts the aim significantly.   I find myself missing with torps about twice as much as I do with all the rest of them.  Also they are really, really poor damage on top of that. 

Then there are the AP rockets....yeah....hmm....I know I am not that good with CVs but even at low tier, cruiser will start angling the second they see you come anywhere near them and even when you do get a nice broadside,  the amount of overpens are ridiculous.  Aim the way they aim is completely counter intuitive.

Then there are the AP bombs.....these might actually be nice....IF.... there was some sort of aiming guide to assist you with lining up a run.  I mean what you do have sits directly under you where you can't see it unless you point the camera straight down and on top of that you almost have zero run up which means almost zero capability to adjust your aim if your slight off.   

Which leads me to the feeling helpless situation.  The second a cruiser or DD spots me, I am screwed.  I have nothing reliable to answer them with.  Neither bombs or rockets work on DDs and even on cruisers, as I mentioned, good luck getting that perfect broadside.  Also fast or not with the long run up to get full aim on the Torps, good luck getting a DD or a CA to sit broadside to you long enough to land a torp.  

I guess WG might have wanted German CVs to be high skill or something, but there is no way a newbie just starting out the game is going to be anything but frustrated with German CVs.

As far as the rest, all of them are decently fun as I mentioned.

USN and RN CVs are definitely the best for new players and overall the most fun mostly I think because everything they have is effective against everything.   USN is a bit harder because bombing takes a bit more skill than with the RN CVs but so far anyway, I feel both play very similar. 

Also though I am a bit shocked, Arc Royal is amazingly fun surprisingly even when up-tiered.  Even though the planes are slow, there is such a large number of them in each squadron, that even when attacking AA intensive targets, generally at least a few plane will get through and even if you only get one run, the Arc Royal never runs out of new squadrons to launch.  It is definitely worth the buy.  Heck even if you don't want to grind out a line, I think it is probably worth the buy just to have it as a CV for missions and such.  

IJN is middle of the road as far as fun and easy go.  To be honest, they feel great except for the fragile planes.  AA really chews them apart.  The also have AP bombs like the German but they are easier to use and have a proper, usable aiming reticle that allows you to actually line up your drops unlike the German one you can't even see without pointing your cam straight down.  Tons of fun.

So aside from the German CVs which in my opinion need a re-work....again....I think all the CVs can be fun.  I don't think I will ever main a CV but they are nice to break things up bit.

As far as the German CV re-work needs......just two things.  Fix the damn AP bomb reticle so you don't have to point the cam straight down and two, get rid of the AP rockets and give them some HE rocket that can at least do decent damage to DDs and Cruisers without the gimmicky AP restrictions or at least give them HE rocket planes as a squadron choice.  Alternatively, instead of HE rockets, make the torps very easy to use with extremely fast aim times so you can make very quick run ins on DDs and cruisers that they will have trouble avoiding.  Keep the low damage on the torps though.  Anyway that is my two cents on how to make them "Fun".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×