Strike CV hate

[Sativola]

So,

 

Up until the Ranger, I ran mostly AS mods with my Carriers. Though in the Indy, I did run the 1/1/1 mod a bit towards the end.

 

Now with the Ranger, I have been running the strike mod over the last couple of days. I've been surprised by how much in game hate there is. Even though I've had some really good matches and ended second on the results screen. I feel in those matches, I contributed.

 

however it seems teams want the cv to be either scouts or AS. But mostly scouts for DD's. While I see the value in the DD scouting, it's hard to do so against an AS IJN carrier, and still cover and protect against their bombing runs. There are just to many squadrons.

 

Now, I'm sure someone will check my stats. I've no idea what they are. I know I'm not a great player, including a CV player. I don't pretend to make such a claim of being good.

 

But - wow, CV captains get a lot of hate if you don't scout and/or go with an AS build.

 

Sat

[CAPTMUDDXX]

I have seen this go both ways ! AS CVs load outs get grief just as well as strike load outs ! I see no reason for each CV to be limited and not have a balanced load out or even a load out customized by the user !

[PelicanHazard]

No matter what loadout you bring, someone's going to have a problem with it.

[Mesrith]

But - wow, CV captains get a lot of hate if you don't scout and/or go with an AS build.

 

Alot of players want you to babysit them so that they can ignore airplanes instead of being attentive and turning towards torpedo bombers.  I run 1/1/1 on my Ranger because I like the utility of bringing some fighters while still dealing damage, but air superiority is one of the least useful things you could possibly do.  People that don't understand how to actually win games will argue with you until they're blue in the face, including many AS players that swear killing 35 planes is an amazing contribution, ignoring the 18k damage and zero kills.

 

I kind of want to look at a bunch of CV player stats and chart out Win Rate vs Planes Killed, but that seems like a lot of work to convince people who will probably still argue anyway.

[IceSerpen7]

So,

 

Up until the Ranger, I ran mostly AS mods with my Carriers. Though in the Indy, I did run the 1/1/1 mod a bit towards the end.

 

Now with the Ranger, I have been running the strike mod over the last couple of days. I've been surprised by how much in game hate there is. Even though I've had some really good matches and ended second on the results screen. I feel in those matches, I contributed.

 

however it seems teams want the cv to be either scouts or AS. But mostly scouts for DD's. While I see the value in the DD scouting, it's hard to do so against an AS IJN carrier, and still cover and protect against their bombing runs. There are just to many squadrons.

 

Now, I'm sure someone will check my stats. I've no idea what they are. I know I'm not a great player, including a CV player. I don't pretend to make such a claim of being good.

 

But - wow, CV captains get a lot of hate if you don't scout and/or go with an AS build.

 

Sat

 

I can tell you why kind of "from the other side of the barricade". Strike CV doesn't make my life any easier, because of two reasons: first, I got my own guns / torps, so I can kill OPFOR ships myself w/o air support; second, strike CV can be easily shut down by opposing AS CV (as you've mentioned). On the other hand, AS CV can keep enemy planes off my back and it can spot for me, which makes it much more useful for actually winning the match.

[Taichunger]

Strike loadouts are pure selfishness, raising your own damage and XP -- and that's assuming you perform well -- while forcing your teammates to eat additional damage and XP as the opposing CV has free rein. It's very hard for me to resist the urge to TK strike loadout CVs -- games with them are almost always losses, the CV is even more worthless than CVs usually are and accomplishes little to nothing, and all I do is eat damage and die early. 

[Burninator_USAF]

If they could find a way to boost credits and/or XP for the typical AS loadout, I think you'd see more play that role. I have a much better winrate and XP intake when in strike mode in the Lexi. I spent most of my time in the Ranger as AS due to not having the 1000lbers, and my winrate and XP are low with Aircraft kills high.

 

[El_Judarino]

When I play strike Ranger (and in my opinion it's the only Ranger, I will not sacrifice an entire active squadron for the "balanced" load out) I try to nuke a forward red DD right at the start. They're usually away from protection/ easy kills and immediately informs my team that I'm not just playing CV to "farm damage". If a second DD get's spotted at that time, I'll sacrifice an empty DB squad to keep it lit for my team to kill.

 

It also helps tip the early game DD balance in my team's favor and well... I like winning, which also allows me to spend the second half of the match farming damage .

[Lonewolfpj]

 

Alot of players want you to babysit them so that they can ignore airplanes instead of being attentive and turning towards torpedo bombers.  I run 1/1/1 on my Ranger because I like the utility of bringing some fighters while still dealing damage, but air superiority is one of the least useful things you could possibly do.  People that don't understand how to actually win games will argue with you until they're blue in the face, including many AS players that swear killing 35 planes is an amazing contribution, ignoring the 18k damage and zero kills.

 

I kind of want to look at a bunch of CV player stats and chart out Win Rate vs Planes Killed, but that seems like a lot of work to convince people who will probably still argue anyway.

 

you bring up a good point but I do disagree with some of your points. I have found that the AS can be just as helpful as a strike package to a team if the player actually works on eliminating the enemy's attacks before they get to the fleet. My win rate is higher when I play AS because I am able to protect the fleet from enemy plans and scout out DD's.

[saagri]

When I play strike Ranger (and in my opinion it's the only Ranger, I will not sacrifice an entire active squadron for the "balanced" load out) I try to nuke a forward red DD right at the start. They're usually away from protection/ easy kills and immediately informs my team that I'm not just playing CV to "farm damage". If a second DD get's spotted at that time, I'll sacrifice an empty DB squad to keep it lit for my team to kill.

 

It also helps tip the early game DD balance in my team's favor and well... I like winning, which also allows me to spend the second half of the match farming damage .

Plus the fact that if you don't sink the DD's, they will come after you.

[El_Judarino]

Strike loadouts are pure selfishness, raising your own damage and XP -- and that's assuming you perform well -- while forcing your teammates to eat additional damage and XP as the opposing CV has free rein. It's very hard for me to resist the urge to TK strike loadout CVs -- games with them are almost always losses, the CV is even more worthless than CVs usually are and accomplishes little to nothing, and all I do is eat damage and die early. 

 

Sounds like you get some really crummy strike players. I find out which way most of the team is pushing, follow near behind them, and assist on the flank they're pushing, ideally helping my team turn that first engagement into a red collapse and we gain power from there. By staying with near my friendlies, red AS can't really stop me thanks to AA from friendly cruisers, he's damage handicapped b/c he's got a limited strike arsenal now, while I'm adding to the difficulties of the opposition at the key point of resistance. 

 

Good AS makes surface ships feel better, good strike helps surface ships win better. Bad CV play either way is.... sub optimal.

 

[El_Judarino]

Plus the fact that if you don't sink the DD's, they will come after you.

 

Enlightened self interest friend, it's good for them, it's good for me, it's bad for the evil red empire of evil.

[Swine_007]

The problem is caused solely by WG's decision to force USN CV drivers to try to make a least bad option choice.  AS = little damage = little XP / Strike = no ability to defend yourself or your team or clear opposing fighters  /  Stock = outnumbered with fewer squadrons and hampered by that.  

 

No matter which choice is made, some part of the team will be angry be it because you can't defend them against other CV planes or you can't contribute damage with AS or can't contribute much with Stock.  You can never make the whole team happy.  

[saagri]

On a side note, I would gladly give up my torpedo bomber if every DB squad gets +2 planes. USN CV's only of course.

And have the accuracy of the saipan dive bombers.

[crzyhawk]

It's like this, your contribution is really irrelevant.  Every surface ship in the game is capable of dealing the damage you do, so your damage is not necessary.  Also, if you do not play a carrier, we don't have to face bombers.  As soon as you bring in a carrier, we're now having to dodge bombers, which may or may not cause us to forego angling and take citadel hits.  As AS at least you make up for this by helping defend us from bombers, and scouting.  Strike?  you leave us hung out to dry while you get avoided by other CVs due to the gentleman's agreement of not sniping enemy CVs.

 

The short version is, we don't need your damage, and we don't want the enemy bombers you bring with you.  So yeah, strike captains can sit and spin.

[Lord_Zath]

Strike is the only way to play the Ranger.  I got really good at learning how to snipe enemy carriers with the Ranger.  Honestly, the defensive fire consumable should have been applied down to tier 7 - that's where the sniping is really bad.  Lexington can handle herself with an AA build, and Essex/Midway get fighters.  Ranger is by far the most vulnerable cv to sniping.  But I digress.

 

Want to clear the skies above your fleet in a Ranger?  Strike their CV right away.  Sadly, I find that this can often lead to the team losing because I'm not spotting/attacking enemy destroyers nearby.  Also, in the time it takes to strike an enemy CV, I could have launched two, maybe three full strikes at closer enemies on the front lines.  Can't be everywhere at once!

[Taichunger]

 

Sounds like you get some really crummy strike players. I find out which way most of the team is pushing, follow near behind them, and assist on the flank they're pushing, ideally helping my team turn that first engagement into a red collapse and we gain power from there. By staying with near my friendlies, red AS can't really stop me thanks to AA from friendly cruisers, he's damage handicapped b/c he's got a limited strike arsenal now, while I'm adding to the difficulties of the opposition at the key point of resistance. 

 

Good AS makes surface ships feel better, good strike helps surface ships win better. Bad CV play either way is.... sub optimal.

 

 

 

Yes, well, fully half of strike CV players are worse than average ;). 

 

[El_Judarino]

 

 

Yes, well, fully half of strike CV players are worse than average ;). 

 

LOL, Math jokes make me smile, good point! Have a +1

[Harkonen_siegetank]

I love strike CV, when I play A/S ones. Yum yum all them planes.

[10T0nHammer]

 

Alot of players want you to babysit them so that they can ignore airplanes instead of being attentive and turning towards torpedo bombers.  I run 1/1/1 on my Ranger because I like the utility of bringing some fighters while still dealing damage, but air superiority is one of the least useful things you could possibly do.  People that don't understand how to actually win games will argue with you until they're blue in the face, including many AS players that swear killing 35 planes is an amazing contribution, ignoring the 18k damage and zero kills.

 

I kind of want to look at a bunch of CV player stats and chart out Win Rate vs Planes Killed, but that seems like a lot of work to convince people who will probably still argue anyway.

^^^

 

You can start with me I run strike on my Indy (honestly, I dont think the Indy performs well in balanced package as even a strike Ryujo will lock your fighters and make them ineffective) and I have a decent enough WR in it. Actually let me pull up my stats:

 

Saipan	7	CV		28	78.6%	45,626	1,663	0.8	14.5	82%	1,117
Ryujo	6	CV		21	81.0%	44,627	1,503	1.0	9.4	86%	1,217
Independence	6	CV		22	63.6%	43,252	1,557	1.1	9.4	77%	1,413

 

I run strike on every CV (Saipans 2/2/0) and honestly, having fighters does affect how ell you play but ultimately, having more striking power = better overall WR. Its a shame the game is so unbalanced when it comes to USN vs IJN CVs though. I think AS is kind of a waste in this game and my WTR in the Indy proves it. Most players run AS and it makes my Indy stats look amazing while the Ryujo, with its superior load outs, just has average scores.

 

I love strike CV, when I play A/S ones. Yum yum all them planes.

 

Your astounding 0 games played in CVs show that.

[Crucis]

So,

 

Up until the Ranger, I ran mostly AS mods with my Carriers. Though in the Indy, I did run the 1/1/1 mod a bit towards the end.

 

Now with the Ranger, I have been running the strike mod over the last couple of days. I've been surprised by how much in game hate there is. Even though I've had some really good matches and ended second on the results screen. I feel in those matches, I contributed.

 

however it seems teams want the cv to be either scouts or AS. But mostly scouts for DD's. While I see the value in the DD scouting, it's hard to do so against an AS IJN carrier, and still cover and protect against their bombing runs. There are just to many squadrons.

 

Now, I'm sure someone will check my stats. I've no idea what they are. I know I'm not a great player, including a CV player. I don't pretend to make such a claim of being good.

 

But - wow, CV captains get a lot of hate if you don't scout and/or go with an AS build.

 

Sat

 

I can tell you why kind of "from the other side of the barricade". Strike CV doesn't make my life any easier, because of two reasons: first, I got my own guns / torps, so I can kill OPFOR ships myself w/o air support; second, strike CV can be easily shut down by opposing AS CV (as you've mentioned). On the other hand, AS CV can keep enemy planes off my back and it can spot for me, which makes it much more useful for actually winning the match.

 

 

Strike loadouts are pure selfishness, raising your own damage and XP -- and that's assuming you perform well -- while forcing your teammates to eat additional damage and XP as the opposing CV has free rein. It's very hard for me to resist the urge to TK strike loadout CVs -- games with them are almost always losses, the CV is even more worthless than CVs usually are and accomplishes little to nothing, and all I do is eat damage and die early. 

 

 

And IceSerpen7's attitude ISN'T "pure selfishness"?  Sounds like a case of the pot calling the kettle black to me.  Or just outright hypocrisy.  You pro AS supporters want CV's to cover your butts so that YOU can pile up lots of XP and to heII with the CV player having his chance to earn a lot of XP.  Oh, I'm sure that a bunch of you will trot out a "teamwork" excuse.  But it's nothing but a smoke screen for your own petty selfishness.

 

[Gavroche_]

Strike loadouts are pure selfishness, raising your own damage and XP -- and that's assuming you perform well -- while forcing your teammates to eat additional damage and XP as the opposing CV has free rein. It's very hard for me to resist the urge to TK strike loadout CVs -- games with them are almost always losses, the CV is even more worthless than CVs usually are and accomplishes little to nothing, and all I do is eat damage and die early. 

Actually play a CV before you form an opinion pls. I can tell you that you're objectively wrong.

[Nachoo31]

If you are running a IJN CV I would be surprised if you were not running a Strike.  Now for the US line. That where I have my problems.  Their strong point is Fighters.  Go and argue. I'm not going to listen.   Last night in my Shim match,  The US CV went strike.  And because of that situation I was forced to play a game with the CV planes of the enemy.  Since we had only 2 DDs, The teams eyes were pretty much neutralized. In Domination game, the caps win the game.   

 

So IJN you better be running Strike

So US you better be running some type of Fighter set-up.

 

[Harkonen_siegetank]

Your astounding 0 games played in CVs show that.

 

I also love judgmental players like you. Lol.

[Seaman_Rookie]

The Ranger, at tier VII, can be tricky.

 

If you're in a VII - IX match, your defending fighters will have a hard time getting to the right spot to defend your fleet before your fleet's AA has taken care of the threat themselves.  However, if you're in a V - VII match, there will be many ships, including tier V and VI BBs and tier V CAs, that will not be able to defend themselves well against attack.

 

For my cv contribution to the battle, I consider one of my torpedo hits on the enemy to be about equal (and opposite) to one of the enemy torpedo hits on my teammates.  Using my fighters to help my torp planes land hits, sure.  Or using my fighters to stop the enemy torp planes from landing their hits, sure.

 

I do a lot more damage against an opponent who runs strike, rather than AS or balanced, at least against tier VII or lower.  Is that more damage than the extra damage you can do with strike rather than balanced?  Maybe.  Your call.