Jump to content

Lameminator

Players
  • Content Сount

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    1347

About Lameminator

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Lameminator

    US Navy CV Changes

    May I suggest that the dispersion for HE and AP bombs should be the same, and between a value between the 2 current values, for example the dispersion for HE be like 2/3 or half of what it is now. The AP bombs if are still the same they they should be nerfed. Another important suggestion would be to be able to switch bomb types during battle. Assuming that the first suggestion is approved then this one should not cause any game break.
  2. Lameminator

    Balance Changes

    Talking about AA mechanics. Could the AA damage be decreased for ships firing from smoke, because this is a true cancerous aspect of the AA mechanics? And do islands block AA projectiles like they'd do with the shells of every other gun? I'm not proposing a CV buff/AA nerf, this is common sense. Not sure if it's hard to implement these, but not impossible i guess.
  3. Lameminator

    KMS Graf Zepplin

    A RN CV line would be more welcome, even from me. We'll have a CV that will be most likely a stand alone premium in her tree, so it's not that tempting as the others, BUT WG finally added some premium CVs.
  4. Lameminator

    Ranked Battles Season 7

    I hope the rank reached in the last season will not be taken into account, and everyone will start from the very beginning, since if someone happens to make it to rank 1 once, then he'll always have an easier time because he has to grind less. Otherwise the no-lifeing will be promoted too much. This is the most fair i think.
  5. Lameminator

    Strafe cooldown ?

    I say locked fighters should be forces to spend some time in the fight, but maybe a cooldown would not be bad idea too.
  6. It would be a huge shame if the other loadout wasn't competitive enough compared to the 2-2-1. A more DB focused one would not be bad if the bombs didn't deal half the amount of damage compared to the other IJN DB and less fire chance if I remember correctly, yet the 2 fighter squadrons are necessary. I'd suggest a buff (fire chance, damage) to the bombs, 1 extra squadron (make it have 2 fighters) for the 'Dive bomber loadout'. If it really have to has 5 squadrons only, then increase the squad sizes, like it was done for the Saipan. Some extra planes in the reserve might be required, which would have to apply to the 2-2-1 too, and for that loadout the extra planes would go to the DB reserve. The 2-2-1 looks good as it is.
  7. Lameminator

    Test 0.6.3 : T4 & T5 manual drop being removed

    Maybe if someone has too good stat and too many matches on a CV like these just implement a screwed up mm for them so they get into higher tier more (More T5 with Langley/Hosho for example), since T5 BBs could deal serious damage to these planes, especially when blobbed up, but it's easier to whine about CVs then use some teamwork which is the best counter to them, but this might require an IQ level where one's not deemed as mentally disabled. I'm not sure if the devs woke up in a morning and made up that manual drop should be removed for T4-5 or they listened to too much whining, made by utter tomatoes who don't know how CVs work and/or the competition (non-cv uniscrub seal clubbers). This sound plain stupid, even though I have sold the Tier 4 and 5 CVs for junk metal.
  8. Lameminator

    AS Ranger in Ranked battles. Is it underappreciated?

    I sold it to get the Shokaku because I could not attend the tier 8 battles during the last season, so I got it for the current one. And I'm not in mood of buying it back, equipping it, and grinding either a stock commanded or retraining one. So I find legitimate reasons to prefer the Ranger over the Hiryu
  9. Lameminator

    AS Ranger in Ranked battles. Is it underappreciated?

    Neither do I think I might get too far, since I won't have enough time, also I won't have the nerve for it. I get a lot of bashing from the Carrier experts in the team chat, but when I finish the losing match as a top player with 400 xp(!) I don't want any complains. I've just reached the rank 9 and went back to 10 due to losses.
  10. Lameminator

    AS Ranger in Ranked battles. Is it underappreciated?

    This is unrelated information. I won't be able to make any replies until weekend, so don't feel like I'm rude or something.
  11. Lameminator

    AS Ranger in Ranked battles. Is it underappreciated?

    That's a good point. Watching over the flanks is truly a problem. I use the fighters to keep the enemy column spotted if possible. Shokaku players use their DBs after they dropped their bombs - that's what I saw in a tournament. If I'm expecting the enemy CV to attack me I have to bring back the fighters and try to keep them both near me and near my allies to be able to intercept wherever they come from - and as you said correctly, I leave the team without spotters. Perhaps I could send in the DBs to spot. It's hard to say what I'd do in certain cases. I'd come up with something but I'd have to see myself how the battle is going and decide according to that. This is very situational, which could be said of the other classes too. There are reasons why I think the Midway/Essex are more promising :/ Perhaps I if I recorded a battle and post it that would have made sense ... but I use potato pc.
  12. So, I'm at rank 10 so far and of course if I play the whole season using the 2-0-2 flight control then it's very unlikely to remain unquestioned during the start of every battle. My favorite was a destroyer player who kept bashing the whole team in the chat, especially me, and due to that he was too busy avoiding torpedoes and attacking the enemy Saipan who was in sight and ended up at the bottom, while I was the one who didn't lose a star. I'd say the kid's name, but I forgot it. I'm not saying anything new if I say it lacks damage potential and it's unable to carry a match that has taken an unfavorable turn, and that's the reason why it could be counted as a drawback for the team. What I'd point out is that we (more like you..) don't take into account the amount of 'damage not dealt by the enemy CV to our team". Well, we have the plane kills in the statistics, but they could be fighters, bombers which dropped their payload and bombers that didn't. It's is just interesting to think about. A lot of times I make the opponent CV end up in the bottom (worse part of the team, not actually the worst) of its team which means I denied large amount of damage from him, not only by shooting down his planes, but also because the opponent hesitates to make a move for the enemy when he know that there are US fighters squadrons waiting for him. Well, defeating a whole wave of Japanese fighters and bombers before the latter could deal serious damage to the allied fleet might take some semi-Korean microing skill, some luck and some strafing. But don't forget that the other ships have responsibility for coordinated team play, because sometimes playing CV is like tanking or healing in WoW, only you can be the one who screws up. Let us compare it to the other CVs The most common enemy: Hiryu 2-2-2 Could be deal with in the air. And equally skilled player could wrestle out air superiority against it. Hiryu players could deal tremendous amount of damage if left unchecked (see any related Youtube channel). The first wave of US fighters can hold of 2 waves of IJN planes if managed well, but after the second wave the Ranger will take so much casualties by then, that it have to refuel the fighter squadrons. In this case throwing away the fighters by sending them into enemy AA is not counted. This refueling section will leave the team vulnerable for the opponent CV since US planes have long servicing time, so don't forget to notify your team to be extra careful. After they're beck in the fight finish off the rest of the Japanese reserves. The Ranger has 50% more fighter reserves than a Hiryu therefore in long term the opponent will run out of planes sooner, but in Ranked even a 1 on 1 trade is too costly, and your teammates will pay for it. Ranger with strike loadout is breakfast, if you can strafe well, since simply engaging them won't be effective enough. I dislike these fighter lacking loadouts more than most of you might dislike the AS Ranger in Ranked battles. They can be good against unskilled CV players in randoms, but I'll note that in Youtube videos about strike carriers the opponent is either full tomato or in most case it's also a strike CV without fighters. Against 1-1-1 still nothing fancy, it's breakfast. The stock loadout or the Ranger good for everything but good at nothing. It's not as good as the Independence for its tier. Saipan 2-2 Challenging, since those planes are much faster, but the fighters are outperformed - outnumbered actually by the Ranger fighters 2 to 1. The TBs are hard to catch, so guard the ship that is most likely to be targeted. Countering and AS Ranger is like sending a thief to catch a thief, you take another AS CV. Any of the 3 will suffice, but note that the usefulness of the 2 CVs will be the same against the other ships, therefore from now on it's up to the other 6 ships to screw it up. While Hiryu and Saipan players are most likely to take the strike loadouts, but there's some chance for the AS to be used, even less for the latter. Fighting against any of these 2 takes the most skill, since 2 of their fighters could lock up all of yours, then the 3rd will strafe you. Note that these are generalising and the player skill is still the most determining factor. Using the AS Ranger. Playing the Ranger with AS is about making the opponent CV become at least as useless for the enemy team as you for yours. I noted the long servicing time of the USN planes. The DBs of the Ranger become ready a few seconds earlier compared to the fighters. You can use the extra few seconds to bring up 1 DB squadron then the 2 fighters, which I used to do, but I realised that the DBs will be chased away by the enemy fighters with much less servicing time, so take up the fighters first and use them as spotters, but try not to get them killed by AA, since they're too vital. What the Saipan with the 3-1 loadout can't do unlike you is that you can deal lots of fire damage by yourself. Attack a BB with 1 squadron and if you set him on fire and he extinguishes the flames you send in the other one - this might require some fighter support. But in any cases (playing any CV), it's good to notify your teammates that which one is ripe for some burning. The Ranger with this setup is also viable against cruisers, since they're not small enough like a DD. If it uses the skill consumable *khm* defensive AA then turn back and don't drop it. Use manual drop! Hints for any CV player. In the first few minutes of the battle you're unlikely to be able to find a proper target (I've seen some fails, so this has to be said). I believe everyone uses flags on their ships to boost their effectiveness, there's a flag for increased AA damage, also the captains of the enemy ships are likely to have lots of skill points that either could be or are actually spent to boost the AA capabilities of the ships, so it is imperative to hunt for lonely targets if possible, and you cannot always know what's in the smoke. Since I'm not selling BS, here are the statistics of mine compared to the average statistics of the EU server (source Warships.today) in Ranked battles WR dmg K/D avg kills and avg plane kills Saipan 53.50% 35,998 2.8 0.8 25.5 Hiryu 52,41% 40213 2.6 0,8 18,4 Ranger 45,52% 32596 1,3 0,5 17,3 Me 62.50% 41424 1,9 0,4 37,1 for 40 battles; WTR 1294, the server average is 884 Note the low plane kills for the Ranger. It is likely to be caused by using stock and strike loadouts, but these 2 setups should increase the average damage we'd think, but since these loadouts are this bad and can be dealt with easily as I said above, the actual damage might be low. TBH the stock setup is more used than the strike. The statistics of the USN CVs are interesting because of the huge differences in the loadouts, which might make them look like they're bad at everything. My lower kill ratio is accounted for being unable to do executing strikes since the 2-2 setup is about dealing fire damage mostly. Thank you for reading.
  13. Lameminator

    U.S.A Aircraft Carriers

    I'd disagree with these loadouts. The only problem are with the strike loadouts in the USN CV line - mostly. Without fighters they can't defend themselves, and no matter how much is the potential damage, the actual damage will be low, unless the enemy CV makes a huge mistake. And as said above even 2 squadrons of these Torpedo bombers are likely to be OP. I've been thinking about a proposing changes to some USN CVs, but I'd meditate on it, so I won't come up with something really OP.
  14. Lameminator

    Update 0.6.1 - Ranked Season Test feedback

    You forget about the Saipans. I don't disagree with T7, but I believe there should be at least one other tier for the season (like the previous one had T6 and 8).
  15. Lameminator

    British CV line for 2017?

    I doubt their appearance in this year. The existence of Campbeltown prem DD and the Warspite suggests me that a destroyer and a battleship line is to be expected sooner than a CV one, even though some of you claim they've mentioned the RN CVs. The best possible outcome for this year is having one premium CV in the RN tech tree.
×