Jump to content


Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


About Pragr

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia
  1. Pragr

    New CVs

    So I collected some stats the other day. I tried to finished mission so I didn't play the CV exclusively. Moreover, I was disgusted enough to play CVs more battles. There are some numbers: 6 games total (5 games with Lexington, one with Shokaku). 2 T8 games 4 T10 games There were exactly 12 T9 and 12 T8 ships (excluding my CV) out of the 96 ships in those 4 T10 games. T8 ships were either Clevelands or another AA specs. DBs were useless because they were unable to get through AA of even a T9/T10 ship that was sailing alone. TBs could dropped a single wave of torps for OP 3 K damage per torpedo hit. AA bursts are so numerous now that no matter how hard I try to avoid them, they still decimate my planes. Thus the only reasonable option that left is spotting DDs and harass them to the death (unless it is something like Jutland, Gearing or other AA DD). At this moment it seems that WG does everything to prevent BB players to be hurt by anything no matter how bad they're playing (I'm exaggerating of course but just a bit). Quite opposite is the situation when T8 CV fights to T6 ships. I can usually farm damage on such unlucky player. That's wrong of course. We simply have to get rid off the +/-T2 games. That's shall be the primary hotfix provided that WG realy wants to make CVs balanced with other classes of ships. Everything else is just a waste of time, since it's almost impossible to balanced the range of four tiers of this weird CV style.
  2. Pragr

    New CVs

    You're actually wrong. The early problems of USN aerial torpedoes were mostly cause by the wrong procedure that forced planes fly as low and slow as possible. The tactic adopted later in the war allowed TBs to initiate high speed shallow dive from about 10 000 ff to 12 000 ft and dropped torpedoes at relatively high speed (for bombers) and altitude about 1 000 feet. This procedure caused that torpedoes were less accurate but on the other hand it made attacking planes almost untouchable by AA defense of ships. IJN TBs dropped their torpedoes at low altitude for whole war, but their top speed for successful drop was above 200 knots.
  3. Pragr

    New CVs

    OK, I had some time to play it a bit more yesterday . I went through about 15 battles mostly with Lexington and few with Shokaku. Exactly THREE of these battles were T8. All the others were T10 and I'm talking about "brutal" T10 games (it means there were up to 3 to 5 T8/T9 ships at best, mostly AA spec). Can someone explain me what's the purpose of such stupid MM?
  4. Pragr

    New CVs

    This actually NEVER was a tactical game. CV reworks was made just because the big portion of BB/CA-L/DD players was/is never able to use mouse and keyboard at the same time. They play arcade game and they were usually, but not surprisingly, outplayed by average RTS player (CV player). In the rare occasions when group of tactical players met the game with CV, the CV was limited to scout and defense most of the time. That doesn't mean that the RTS CV style had no issues. This actually NEVER was a tactical game. CV reworks was made just because the big portion of BB/CA-L/DD players was/is never able to use mouse and keyboard at the same time. They play arcade game and they were usually, but not surprisingly, outplayed by average RTS player (CV player). In the rare occasions when group of tactical players met the game with CV, the CV was limited to scout and defense most of the time. That doesn't mean that the RTS CV style had no issues.
  5. Pragr

    New CVs

    I agree almost to the point. I play mostly T7/T8 ships of all classes since the update. Since most of my CV games in 0.8 are the T8 CV vs T10 other ships I see totally different picture of CV rework. Torpedo bombers are mediocre at best. Particularly the USN ones. I either let them fly straight to narrow their drop pattern (loosing most of them due excessive AA) or try to avoid AA puffs and their patter is almost always wide like three Kurfusts. Dive bombers are useless in general. Whole squadron is destroyed even before the first wave can drop their bombs so they're no valid option. Thus the only "usable" option are strike planes. Man I met Jutland (yes the RN T9 DD) the other day and her AA ruin my day... I mostly play the other classes anyway. I have to say that I've never seen that huge CV problem many are screaming here about. I've hardly noticed presence of planes even in the games with four CV. But I've never played T10 battles. Nevertheless I'm watching Fara's Twitch regularly so I know that T10 CV are the only viable carriers at this moment (with Hakuryu being highly OP while Midway being OK). The others are facing the above mentioned issue fighting mostly in +2 tier battles where their planes are just meatballs with next to none impact (except spotting). To offer some solution I'd change following (in addition to what you mentioned so far): attack with whole squadron and lower number of plane in squadron (four to five) - this solves the issue of whole squadron being massacred in AA for no purpose while there's only minority of planes performing the attack; adjust the damage for the squadron appropriately; ALL planes are vulnerable even when you press the F key - this forces player to planned its egress as well as ingress and forced him to avoid AA even on the return path.
  6. Pragr

    Press F to save your planes

    "F" key issue as almost as stupid as the idea that there are just one to three aircraft performing the attack and the rest of the group is voluntarily flying within the AA enjoying to be killed for no reason...
  7. Pragr

    Planes do not crash and do not change altitude

    With all due respect, this is the on of the most stupid ideas I've read on this forum so far. 1) Plane collisions were very rare occasions. Even during the dogfights. There were few deliberate collisions between enemy planes but even those were just exceptions. 2) Cases of planes hitting the ground are accidental too. There were few of them when pilots miscalculated their altitude during the attacks against ground installations but even in those situations most cases were combined with battle damage. 3) Yes we have collisions between ships. But regarding to real consequences these do no damage. As well as there were way often situations when ships hit the ground accidentally causing severe damage than there were planes hitting the ground. But neither there are ships running aground on unidentified rocks in the game. 4) Your premise that planes are flying at different altitudes shows you have very limited knowledge of how CV attacks were done in real. What you describe is more or less US battle of Midway pattern. It was on of early war tactics abandoned second half of 1942. And the low cruising altitude was used mostly due low performance of TBD Devastators. Late in the war, particularly from 1944 onward, the TBF Avengers armed with torpedoes used totally different attack profile. They had started their run at middle altitude (3 000 to 4 000 m were no exceptions) went down in shallow dive and dropped their torpedoes. According to IJN records these attacks were basically unstoppable by AAA defense since planes were very fast, they continuously changed altitude towards the ships and thus offered the smallest possible target to hit during very short time period only. So what you suggest is totally out of historical experience and even out of game structure. But I think it's another tendency of "Nerf the CVs for all costs!!!". Nothing else.
  8. Pragr


    I have very limited experience with CV play. I finished so far some 250 battles at T6 maximum. Right now I'm about to reach the Ranger (got 62k exp. in Indy). Once I realized the default load out in US carriers is the only usable (for me at least) I have no problems with US CVs. And that's the main reason I think the only way to change of US CVs is to get rid of the current loadout and change it in the way Poster_2015 mentioned. What I'm talking about is to let player choose if he wants HE bombs or AP bombs for his bombers. It would works the similar way like in AP/HE shells for other classes. Let the AP bombs do high alpha with zero or almost none chance of starting fire and with good chance to incapacitated single module (like one main turret) or even get a critical. HE bombs would works the opposite way. Low alpha damage, high chance for fire and good chance to incapacitated multiple secondary/AA batteries (it has some logic, since those are usually less armored or uncover completely). I even like the idea of switch torpedoes and AP bombs for TB. In the best scenario we could switch the bomber's load in during rearming process right in middle of the game (btw once again it would be the same thing like switching AP/HE in other ship classes).
  9. Pragr

    Aircraft Destroyed xp

    I agree, that shooting down planes should be more profitable. I have finished the game with 30+ enemy planes shot down on several occasions, effectively defend my team, but still ended with very few (relatively) experience. On the other hand I have to say that the CV part of game needs to be balanced in general. Right now, the USN fighters are vastly superior to IJN. In one vs one fighter group fight of the same tier fighters, there is no problem for USN to win without a single plane lost. It's so easy to be effective USN fighter it's ridiculous (I have more battles with Langley and Bogue than with IJN CVs). If there would be the boost in experience and money for shooting down planes only, I think we will see the USN CVs almost exclusively. Despite the low reward I can see far more USN carriers than IJN even nowadays.