Trying to keep Anti-Air faith.

[Joiea]

 

Here is the question of the day, I am running an Independance and plan to stop at the Ranger.

 

I want to be a benefit to my team, but I fear that my use of the Anti-Air loadout cannot compete with swarms of IJN carriers or just matchmaking issues during low activity.

 

Should I go to the stock flight control? Should I go to the strike control? Or should I keep trying to be anti-air because I might not be seeing the benefit it has?

[armyf35]

I find the stock to be pretty nice all around on the Independence, another thing you can do with the Anti-Air loadout is spot DD's which almost nullifies them since any torps they launch get spotted also. But otherwise the Dive Bombers on the anti-air don't really work at helping to kill anything but destroyers really.

[Crucis]

I'm on the Bogue right now and am having similar issues.  I'm also running the Anti-air loadout (2 ftr sqdns + 1 DB sqdn).  It can do a good job of keeping the skies clear, but the DB sqdn is no substitute for a TB sqdn.  (It's a shame that fighters can't strafe DD's, so that they'd have something they can do when there are no planes to attack.) 

[Piper_VGL]

That's one of the things that has always bothered me about the carrier loadouts. 

For example, at Midway CV6 ENTERPRISE had 1 fighter sqaudron ( really 1.5...)  2 DB squadrons and 1 TBb squadron.. You would think that dive bombers would be more effective, since they carried more DB's.

 

VB-6
18 SBD-2/3 Dauntlesses

VS-6
18 SBD-2/3 Dauntlesses

VT-6
14 TBD-1 Devastators

VF-6
27 F4F-4 Wildcats

[Destin65]

The USN carrier line is just sad all around. The tier 4 IJN carrier can field more planes/squadrons than any USN carrier up until tier 9. Why do they get such powerful low-tier ships when the USN doesn't get anything remotely better until tier 9 which pretty much represents 1945?? The Hosho can field as many squadrons as the tier 8 Lexington. But then people say the game would be unbalanced if you put the Lexington at tier 5 where it belongs? Blasphemy! I really hope Wargaming does something to fix the epic failure that is the USN carrier branch of the tech tree. It's a big joke. But then, Russians hate Americans so it makes sense.

[ingerad]

I find the stock to be pretty nice all around on the Independence, another thing you can do with the Anti-Air loadout is spot DD's which almost nullifies them since any torps they launch get spotted also. But otherwise the Dive Bombers on the anti-air don't really work at helping to kill anything but destroyers really.

 

For the Indy I would agree the stock load out is probably the best.  It is also arguably the best in the Bogue too.  Having some fighters and some muscle is ideal.  You can switch to what you need when you need it.  The single squadron can still provide a challenge for enemy CV's as the only CV that is going to out match you are higher tier ones or ones running pure fighter.  The TB's give you some punch that the DB's lack.

 

Honestly with how bad the DB's really are I'm not sure the bombing load out is anything special on either the Indy or Bogue.

 

That's one of the things that has always bothered me about the carrier loadouts. 

For example, at Midway CV6 ENTERPRISE had 1 fighter sqaudron ( really 1.5...)  2 DB squadrons and 1 TBb squadron.. You would think that dive bombers would be more effective, since they carried more DB's.

 

VB-6
18 SBD-2/3 Dauntlesses

VS-6
18 SBD-2/3 Dauntlesses

VT-6
14 TBD-1 Devastators

VF-6
27 F4F-4 Wildcats

 

First off the game isn't a perfect sim, you have to remember the TB's Enterprise carried at Midway were already very obsolete.  But you are right about the puny punch of the DB's in game.

 

TB's should hit harder than a DB.  A torpedo is (well unless you are very lucky with your shot placement) going to do more damage than a bomb.  But the problem with the DB's in game mostly comes from the fact that we have HE rounds only right now.  Our DB are dropping general purpose bombs on armored ships instead of shore targets that the bombs were designed for.  I heard a while ago they are planning on giving us anti-ship AP bombs.  It was a while ago and I haven't heard anything lately.

 

Since you like history right now our DB's are playing the role of the IJN at Midway, where they loaded up a strike for the island only to turn around and realize they needed to sink CVs.

 

 

Honestly I keep saying it, there is a lot that needs tweaked with CVs.  I still don't understand how they can balance the game correctly without giving at least all the basic tools (AP bombs for DBs).  When/if they come I suspect the US bombing load outs may become even OP as they stand now.

[ingerad]

The USN carrier line is just sad all around. The tier 4 IJN carrier can field more planes/squadrons than any USN carrier up until tier 9. Why do they get such powerful low-tier ships when the USN doesn't get anything remotely better until tier 9 which pretty much represents 1945?? The Hosho can field as many squadrons as the tier 8 Lexington. But then people say the game would be unbalanced if you put the Lexington at tier 5 where it belongs? Blasphemy! I really hope Wargaming does something to fix the epic failure that is the USN carrier branch of the tech tree. It's a big joke. But then, Russians hate Americans so it makes sense.

 

Easy there.  There are a significant difference in the numbers of planes in each squadron.

 

Langley can field 12 planes at once, Hosho the same.

 

Honestly I really think a well played Langley should take a Hosho to town any day of the week.  The couple more TB's the Hosho gets are negated by the wider IJN torp spread so that on each run the US CV and IJN CV will probably get roughly the same number of hits.  Add in the US fighters that will own the sky and well, you see where this is going.  IJN fighters are only marginally more useful than DBs right now.  They can't stand up to US ones till high tiers.

[Schwere_Panzer_205]

my main concern is i feel that DB are to ineffective at taking out ships. A USN carrier can be swarmed quite easily by a IJN carrier of similar tier.

[casperja79]

I actually like the 2bomber 1 torp setup, only problem I e ran into is when two jap carriers rush torp my carrier with 5+ squad, I do t think the two fighter layout would help much unless you catch there planes far off

[Ujenele]

I actually like the 2bomber 1 torp setup, only problem I e ran into is when two jap carriers rush torp my carrier with 5+ squad, I do t think the two fighter layout would help much unless you catch there planes far off

 

[LordCommanderMilitant]

 

Easy there.  There are a significant difference in the numbers of planes in each squadron.

 

Langley can field 12 planes at once, Hosho the same.

 

Honestly I really think a well played Langley should take a Hosho to town any day of the week.  The couple more TB's the Hosho gets are negated by the wider IJN torp spread so that on each run the US CV and IJN CV will probably get roughly the same number of hits.  Add in the US fighters that will own the sky and well, you see where this is going.  IJN fighters are only marginally more useful than DBs right now.  They can't stand up to US ones till high tiers.

 

But the Hosho offers something else, than any strategy game player will know: Flexibility.

 

You can always operate the 2 small squadrons in close proximity as if they were 1 big squadron, but you can't split up 1 big squadron into 2 small ones to attack different targets.

 

[Joiea]

Thanks everyone for the discussions here, so far I've been having more fun with the stock flight control. dive bombers do kinda suck, at present, but they have great potential against cruisers.

[Destin65]

 

Easy there.  There are a significant difference in the numbers of planes in each squadron.

 

Langley can field 12 planes at once, Hosho the same.

 

Honestly I really think a well played Langley should take a Hosho to town any day of the week.  The couple more TB's the Hosho gets are negated by the wider IJN torp spread so that on each run the US CV and IJN CV will probably get roughly the same number of hits.  Add in the US fighters that will own the sky and well, you see where this is going.  IJN fighters are only marginally more useful than DBs right now.  They can't stand up to US ones till high tiers.

 

You are forgetting, when the Hosho is upgraded it fields 3 full squadrons to the Langley's maximum of two. 12 planes vs 18 planes can be a huge difference. Also, the IJN carriers get two full squadrons of torpedo bombers right from the start. USN carriers don't get two squadrons of torpedo bombers until tier IX. That gives the IJN a huge advantage early on as, many people point out, TBs are the big damage dealers while DBs barely can scratch them. Also, the spreads should be the same. The only thing that I am aware of that creates a bigger spread is enemy fire. For example, if your TBs are under pressure from enemy fighters they are not going to go into the attack run as well organized and so the spread will be much wider and less effective. Same when facing stiff AA fire. Course, IJN tier 6 and below don't usually have to worry about such stiff opposition as the developers seem to think that the USN did not invent AA weapons until mid-1944, lol.

 

 

 

TB's should hit harder than a DB.  A torpedo is (well unless you are very lucky with your shot placement) going to do more damage than a bomb.  But the problem with the DB's in game mostly comes from the fact that we have HE rounds only right now.  Our DB are dropping general purpose bombs on armored ships instead of shore targets that the bombs were designed for.

 

I would also have to respectfully disagree with your commentary as well. Particularly this quoted portion above.

 

Yes, in the game TBs hit way, way, way harder than DBs could ever dream of. Historically it was the reverse. DBs were often more effective than TBs. Why? Torpedoes had to attempt to penetrate the armor belt of a ship that was easily a foot or more in thickness. And then add to that the additional feet worth of anti-torpedo defenses and torpedoes were lucky to do any damage at all. By comparison a puny 250 pound bomb could penetrate with ease the 2 or 3 inches of deck armor that even the most heavily armored ships had. That was the key flaw in Battleship design if you remember. The HMS Hood was not sunk in traditional fashion. It was not beaten down by the Bismark in some epic heavyweight slugfest of massive shells. While the Hood actually did shrug off hits to it's belt from the Bismark it was the one lucky shot, on a plunging trajectory, that went through the paper-thin deck armor of the Hood and that one shell sank the ship everyone thought was unsinkable. After that many many nations realized this glaring weakness and so quickly sought to upgrade their BBs deck armors while redesigning BBs still in development.

 

 

[BarronRichthofen]

 

You are forgetting, when the Hosho is upgraded it fields 3 full squadrons to the Langley's maximum of two. 12 planes vs 18 planes can be a huge difference. Also, the IJN carriers get two full squadrons of torpedo bombers right from the start. USN carriers don't get two squadrons of torpedo bombers until tier IX. That gives the IJN a huge advantage early on as, many people point out, TBs are the big damage dealers while DBs barely can scratch them. Also, the spreads should be the same. The only thing that I am aware of that creates a bigger spread is enemy fire. For example, if your TBs are under pressure from enemy fighters they are not going to go into the attack run as well organized and so the spread will be much wider and less effective. Same when facing stiff AA fire. Course, IJN tier 6 and below don't usually have to worry about such stiff opposition as the developers seem to think that the USN did not invent AA weapons until mid-1944, lol.

Sad Thing is even the Iowa Class has less than half it's AA. In game she has (with Max upgrade) 52 Oerlikon, & 44 Bofors. IRL she had 49 Oerlikon & 80 Bofors. The same holds true for most of the USN cruisers & battleships. Under strength AA. In 1942 the USN went hog wild on the AA refits to ALL ships (might have had something to do with a little sneak attack). USN vessels post Pearl Harbor had the heaviest AA ever seen til about 7 years after the war ended. I want to see that in game. In many cases they striped secondary armaments to beef up the AA. The dev's do a fine job of striping that secondary armaments, where they FAIL is giving the USN ships their real AA power.

[Joiea]

That's because AA was evaporating planes at top tier, they want balance too. At most, 20 planes might be swarming an Iowa, but it can take hits like its the end of the world.

[Jevidar]

You are forgetting, when the Hosho is upgraded it fields 3 full squadrons to the Langley's maximum of two. 12 planes vs 18 planes can be a huge difference. Also, the IJN carriers get two full squadrons of torpedo bombers right from the start.

 

I just want to point out that Hosho vs. Langley both ships have 12 planes in the air. Hosho has 3 squads of 4 planes. Langley has 2 squads of 6 planes. Hosho and Langley also don't have any flight control module upgrades anymore. Only the one loadout.

[BattlecruiserOperational]

the USN strike loadouts are a joke(DBs instead of TBs). Stick with the stock one.