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

Was the Carrier class an after thought addition to this game?

16 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
179 posts
4,071 battles

I enjoy playing carriers in the game, but the tech trees for available ships (Especially USN) looked to have been put together by someone who at most spent a weekend watching History Channel specials on naval warfare or possibly at best spent a night in a Holiday Inn Express. Shoot the US Navy starts off with the USS Langley, which by the time the JN CVL Hosho had entered operational service in 1941, the Langley had been operating as a Seaplane Tender for well over 4 years. Gets more amusing when you have the CVE USS Bogue matched up to JN CVL Zuiho. When you get to tier VI at least they are both CVLs, but then it is a matter of air group strike package issues. Then you get to tier VII and the JN gets the Hiryu and the USN comes up with the USS Ranger. At this point have to wonder why no Yorktown class or even if you have to handicap it, the Wasp class CV. At least at tier VIII and on wards at least there seems to be some apparent historic balance.

 

Finally, what is with the air group strike package options for the USN as apposed to JN air groups. The USN always seems to draw the short straw with strike package options minus any fighter support or all or minimal support fighter support for strike package group. Over all the JN vs USN have more balance to strike package options.

 

In conclusion with the selection of carrier ship classes on both sides available, it just seems that the folks at WG dropped the ball in a big way. Also it might be nice if they made allowance for players to tailor the strike package setup as apposed to arbitrary selections that are currently offered. With carriers being the pinnacle of naval warfare technology during period of warfare which the game covers, it just seems like the ball was dropped on this class of ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,315 posts
27,013 battles

Won't play carriers and have not for months until they fix them and I have all the CVs up to tier (7)  ! ! !

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
957
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
2,488 posts
29,214 battles

Yeah, you kind of have to throw out what you know about carrier development. In pursuit of "balance" they tried to match hanger space more then anything.  The Bogue always seemed an odd fit though.  Still waiting for premium Saratoga with 8" secondaries...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
350
[GROGS]
Beta Testers
1,197 posts
16,102 battles

In 2012 this game was called "World of Battleships".   I was excited..... when the name change happened I was sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,716 posts
8,224 battles

Have not started to play CV's yet, been thinking about it, but every time I look at the tech tree, the scratching of the head starts all over again, especially as you have listed it, Hiryu vs. Ranger, wait, what?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
179 posts
4,071 battles

Yeah, you kind of have to throw out what you know about carrier development. In pursuit of "balance" they tried to match hanger space more then anything.  The Bogue always seemed an odd fit though.  Still waiting for premium Saratoga with 8" secondaries...

 

The CVE Bogue is an odd fit if you consider hangar space aspect, with it only being able to support 11 aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
179 posts
4,071 battles

In 2012 this game was called "World of Battleships".   I was excited..... when the name change happened I was sad.

 

If it had been the World of Battleships, probably would not have even bothered trying the game. Much to limited.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
179 posts
4,071 battles

Yeah, you kind of have to throw out what you know about carrier development. In pursuit of "balance" they tried to match hanger space more then anything.  The Bogue always seemed an odd fit though.  Still waiting for premium Saratoga with 8" secondaries...

 

Not sure why they did not start if off with that hull configuration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
179 posts
4,071 battles

Have not started to play CV's yet, been thinking about it, but every time I look at the tech tree, the scratching of the head starts all over again, especially as you have listed it, Hiryu vs. Ranger, wait, what?

 

Yep, not sure what they were thinking on that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,244
Alpha Tester
4,156 posts
8,061 battles

I enjoy playing carriers in the game, but the tech trees for available ships (Especially USN) looked to have been put together by someone who at most spent a weekend watching History Channel specials on naval warfare or possibly at best spent a night in a Holiday Inn Express. Shoot the US Navy starts off with the USS Langley, which by the time the JN CVL Hosho had entered operational service in 1941, the Langley had been operating as a Seaplane Tender for well over 4 years. Gets more amusing when you have the CVE USS Bogue matched up to JN CVL Zuiho. When you get to tier VI at least they are both CVLs, but then it is a matter of air group strike package issues. Then you get to tier VII and the JN gets the Hiryu and the USN comes up with the USS Ranger. At this point have to wonder why no Yorktown class or even if you have to handicap it, the Wasp class CV. At least at tier VIII and on wards at least there seems to be some apparent historic balance.

 

Finally, what is with the air group strike package options for the USN as apposed to JN air groups. The USN always seems to draw the short straw with strike package options minus any fighter support or all or minimal support fighter support for strike package group. Over all the JN vs USN have more balance to strike package options.

 

In conclusion with the selection of carrier ship classes on both sides available, it just seems that the folks at WG dropped the ball in a big way. Also it might be nice if they made allowance for players to tailor the strike package setup as apposed to arbitrary selections that are currently offered. With carriers being the pinnacle of naval warfare technology during period of warfare which the game covers, it just seems like the ball was dropped on this class of ships.

 

Hosho and Langley: first carrier developed by their respective nation, also lol thinking Hosho entered service in 1941

Zuiho originally was paired up against the Independence, which made them both the first conversion CVL made by their respective nation

Ryujo originally was paired up against the Saipan, making them both the first purpose-built CVL for their respective nation

Ranger and Hiryu were the first designed-from-keel-up carriers for their respective nation

Shokaku class and Lexington class were both some of the largest CVs built during the war with various similarities, and fought each other multiple times as war rivals; way back in Alpha, we also had Akagi at tier 8 who matches up well

Essex and Taiho were the new generation CVs for their respective nations

Midway and Hakuryu(if she had been built) would have been further developments of Essex and Taiho

 

So who knows what about carriers again?

Edited by Seraphil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
179 posts
4,071 battles

 

Hosho and Langley: first carrier developed by their respective nation, also lol thinking Hosho entered service in 1941

Zuiho originally was paired up against the Independence, which made them both the first conversion CVL made by their respective nation

Ryujo originally was paired up against the Saipan, making them both the first purpose-built CVL for their respective nation

Ranger and Hiryu were the first designed-from-keel-up carriers for their respective nation

Shokaku class and Lexington class were both some of the largest CVs built during the war with various similarities, and fought each other multiple times as war rivals; way back in Alpha, we also had Akagi at tier 8 who matches up well

Essex and Taiho were the new generation CVs for their respective nations

Midway and Hakuryu(if she had been built) would have been further developments of Essex and Taiho

 

So who knows what about carriers again?

 

Seeing since the Saipan was just introduce recently as a premium CVL to supposedly counter the Ryujo, definitely faulty logic on your part. Add to that the CV-1 Langley entered service as a carrier in 1923 compared to Shoho 1941.., maybe you should reconsider your breadth and depth of CV knowledge :teethhappy:. Yes most definitely a joke.
Edited by HermanBix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
493
[KVLT]
[KVLT]
Members
2,307 posts
9,146 battles

i actually prefer the USN over the IJN. Love turning ships to ash and slag. IJN planes are just so fragile you cant get a whole lot done with them

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
922 posts
5,325 battles

US CVs in this game used to have viable loadouts. That is until IJN CVs were introduced. WG's reason: "national flavor"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,244
Alpha Tester
4,156 posts
8,061 battles

 

Seeing since the Saipan was just introduce recently as a premium CVL to supposedly counter the Ryujo, definitely faulty logic on your part. Add to that the CV-1 Langley entered service as a carrier in 1923 compared to Shoho 1941.., maybe you should reconsider your breadth and depth of CV knowledge :teethhappy:. Yes most definitely a joke.

 

Saipan was the tier 6 CV in the US tech tree line in Alpha and early Beta.  You may want to actually research the subject a bit more(there are plenty of screenshots around of the old tech trees) before arguing this with someone who has been here and seen World of Warships evolve for the last year and a half.

 

And Zuiho entered service as a CV(in 1940) before Shoho, who was already commissioned as a submarine tender in 1939.  There is no point to you comparing them to Langley's commission date as they are not the same tier.

 

Your assumption that the premium version of Saipan is to counter Ryujo when she is a tier 7 carrier is pointedly wrong, as carriers experience mirror matchmaking(thus a tier 7 is always matched vs. another tier 7.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,689
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
11,858 posts
30,564 battles

I think picking airplane load outs would be a great way of balancing CV play and making it more enjoyable for the carrier players. Sometimes you feel like a torpedo plane, sometimes you don't. This is a game, I understand that sometimes historical facts have to be fudged to enhance gameplay. Heck in the days of war gaming with miniature ships, really big tape measures, and gym floors, we often fudged history and set up battles where the Axis ships (including Bismarck and Yamato) would go up against Allied ships like Big Mo and of course for me, Texas. Nothing historical about it, just a game to have fun. Heck sometimes we used PT boats to attack aircraft carriers mid ocean just for giggles. I assume there is a reason related to game play that WG has assigned the ships it has at the tiers they are at and not necessarily with regards to historical accuracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×