Jump to content


Weekend Tester
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


About Cou2707

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Birthday 07/27/1994
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    United Kingdom of Great Britain of Northern Ireland
  1. Cou2707

    To much fire`?

    I've noticed that fires have definitely had a major buff with the last patch. Like it has been said some ships seem to cause fires every other hit, and having 4 or 4 fires burning at one is far more common than it was. My most recent game in Dunkerque (52600 hp) i received 32500 dmg from fires, that might have been a one off but certainly my past few games I've had some serious fire rape problems. As for people talking about using repairs etc, that becomes difficult when every other shot causes a new fire. My main concern is that making fires too powerful will only encourage more BB players to take the 'hang as far back as possible' approach which generally makes games less fun imo.
  2. If I've mentioned nerfing US CVs at any point please point it out to me an I'll correct myself. What I wan't is for IJN strike set-ups to be more effective. At times during both the closed and open beta; IJN CVs have varied from being insanely OP (Often being able to carry games provided your team didn't instantly die), to being ridiculously nerfed to the point of being ineffective. Currently that is where I think they are, ineffective. The fact that under AA fire the torpedo spread becomes even worse is something i think I forgot to mention in my first post; which only makes it harder to do any damage with strikes at all. As I side note calling something a ragepost is a good way to try and shut down a point without making any arguments as to why, especially considering that prior to your post we were having a reasonable discussion about IJN CVs. That being said I take on board your point about comparing different carriers, yet as I've just pointed out the US-IJN CV balance is only a small part of the problem with the wider problem being that even an unopposed strike force can only do very limited damage for reasons I've already mentioned.
  3. At first I was disappointed that the devs didn't seem to be doing anything to the IJN CV line, only to then find out they were actually nerfing them more! The only real goal of the IJN line at the moment seems to be air superiority, just finished a game where I shot down over 30 planes But if I wanted to go for air superiority I would have chosen the US line!!! I'm kind of disappointed that the devs haven't given a response, I found a thread similar to this one which was equally neglected. I don't want to be one of those guys who just says remove CVs from the game as I think they make the game more interesting and dynamic; but I've had several games in my other classes with no CVs at all, which I can only assume is due to a lack of people wanting to play them. Honestly it feels like the devs don't really care that much about having carriers in the game at all as they only seem to respond to BB and cruiser players who whine about how unfair being bombed by a carrier is. I think if those people played as a carrier once in a while they'd see how hard it is to pull of a successful strike.
  4. Not sure if this is connected, but my recent games have had very few CVs in them, anyone else experiencing this? Do you think its related to the gameplay?
  5. Cou2707

    US CV Builds

    Try playing as IJN CV, then you'll have something to moan about.
  6. Evidently some people have struggled through this crushing and inhuman task. Indeed, certainly when enemy fighters are damaged by AA this is a great help, but this only deals with a small part of the problem. Even without enemy planes you still have to deal with enemy AA, terrible spread, and enemy ships being able to avoid most of your attacks (including BBs and CVs).Indeed I suppose most of my issue is with how ineffective carrier strikes are, and I'm afraid teamwork just doesn't solve most of the problems. I suspect that's why they changed most IJN setups to include fighters because purely strike setups are borderline useless.
  7. Greetings captains! So I've been playing since the Beta weekends and although I mainly play as BBs; I can't help but feel someone needs to put the IJN carriers out of their misery. Sorry if this sounds like a rant but there really is alot that's been done to them to make them just...not particularly fun to play. To start with, you have the air supremacy of American CVs. I know that the whole idea was for IJN CVs to focus on strikes while the US had Air superiority, this was fine except carrier strikes have so much they have to get through to actually be successful. As an IJN CV if you play against a US carrier with fighters, or an IJN carrier with more fighter squads than you, you basically spend a good deals of the match just playing cat and mouse with enemy fighters; this is of course a matter for the player but I've found this to be tedious and not particularly enjoyable. The solution of course for an IJN player is to divide his many squadrons! Which is fine except when squadrons attack in small numbers, they're of course annihilated by AA fire! I've found recently this has been made worse by the matchmaking changes which have put my tier 7 Hiryu mostly in games with higher tier cruisers and BBs. This is an issue in itself as high tier American ships generally have huge AA batteries, what's more you have the cruiser fighters which serve to tie up whole squadrons and can do some pretty nasty damage. Then we come to the strikes themselves and the Japanese torpedo spread, this means that with a full 4 plane squad you're probably only gonna get 2 hits per squad (with Hiryu thats only 2 torp squads), this is of course without the separate issue that generally BBs and even CVs are fast enough to dodge most torps altogether! The simple fact is that US carriers can do more damage with a single squad of Torp bombers (with better spread and more powerful torps) than the IJN can do with 3 squads. I'm not sure but US torps also seems to be able to be dropped far closer to the target? If thats true add it to the list. So in short US carriers have both better fighters and can have more powerful strikes, so if anyone has any ideas about the purpose of IJN carriers let me know. This being said I do like my Hiryu, but its just not particularly enjoyable to play when each strike does very little damage and costs a dozen planes! Also if anyone knows why IJN torp spread was nerfed but not US torp spread, I would really like to know. So yeah, how are people finding IJN carriers (particularly at my tier ) and most importantly do you find them enjoyable to play?
  8. Cou2707

    Jap CV vs US CV

    Does anyone know why they nerfed the spread on the IJN torp planes but not the USN? US CVs can hit with 5 torps with just 1 squadron, IJN would need 3 squads just to get the same level of damage because the spread usually only lets you hit with 2 torps per squad. Thats not even mentioning the US fighter supremacy!
  9. Cou2707

    Why are Battleships so insanely weak ?

    Hey look, a cruiser player who doesn't think they're should be nerfed! As people have been saying since the closed beta the problem is fires, with such a fast rate of fire cruisers like the Cleveland can basically keep a BB burning until its got no health left. Consider that as as Cruiser, they are able to wreck DDs with their main guns while usually being able to easily dodge torpedoes. What's more they're effectively immune to CVs on account of their massive AA power and manoeuvrability, so that just leaves BBs as the only way of countering them; yet in the game Clevelands can deal so much through fire that on a 1 on 1 basis even if the Cleveland is sunk the BB will typically have very little health left. Its simple that if you're going to have a ship thats so deadly vs carriers and destroyers, it needs to be much less effective against BBs than it currently is. (I haven't played cruisers much above tier 5 so I don't know how they stack up against each other).
  10. Cou2707

    Suggestion: Torpedo nets

    Reading this thread makes you realise that there are a great many [edited] in this community, it a perfectly reasonable suggestion. Although as torpedoes are really the only thing that DDs can do, nullifying them seems like it would essentially make them pointless. As unless they had super long range torpedoes they would likely die before being able to fire off another round of torpedoes, but its an interesting idea.
  11. Cou2707

    HE ammo fire rates

    I think the simplest way would be to reduce fire damage, played a game yesterday where I lost 6000/29000 hp to one fire. Fire damage has been op for a while now, I hope they finally do something about it.
  12. Cou2707

    British RN last to arrive? Really

    Just my personal view, but I think opening nations should have been Britain and Germany. Two of the worlds most powerful navies throughout the first half of the 20th century, then WG could maybe have done an event to commemorate Jutland using the countries that were actually involved. That being said...Yamato.
  13. Cou2707

    Update 0.3.1 Japanese Carriers

    The problem is that by limiting how many torpedoes can hit in one run and therefore how much damage can be done, it obviously necessitates multiple runs. Unlike other ships having to fire multiple artillery or torp salvoes, CVs have a set limit to how many they can actually do. Each run has to go through AA and possibly enemy fighters therefore by increasing the number of runs you'd have to make, it is putting a cap on how much damage a CV can cause due to sheer aircraft loss (and that's not including ships being able to dodge). No other class in the game has this limitation although I don't know what could be done about it. As for the latest patch it does seem to have improved the situation, although only minimally. The changes seem to have come at the cost of increased AA power and increasing the torps spread even more when bombers are under AA fire, and of course the fast turns of most BBs.
  14. Cou2707

    Update 0.3.1 Japanese Carriers

    I can only really repeat what others have said, the new torpedo spread has been devastating to IJN carriers. I was fortunate enough in a game yesterday to come across a stationary St Louis with no player (playing Zuiho), yet with the new spread I was only able to sink it after attacking with 3 torp squads and a DB squad due to the fact that only 2 torps from each squad could now actually hit, fortunately with no player to press repair he flooded. Personally I don't think it should take that much to sink a stationary cruiser two tiers below me. What's more (I can only compare the tier 5 carriers) I can't imagine why this wasn't applied to US carriers as well, form the stats both torps seems to do the same damage; yet the US can (providing none are shot down) hit with potentially 5 torpedoes in 1 squadron while due to spread I'm not sure if IJN squads can hit with more than 2 (and that's on a stationary ship!). When this is combined with the fact that US carriers also generally have air superiority through fighters, there are no redeeming features or qualities for the IJN. I'm not sure if this changes in later tiers or if anyone has had different experiences but the IJN carriers seem, in my opinion, to be almost completely worthless. To be clear I mostly play BBs so I know how frustrating it can be to deal with torpedo planes, but that's also part of playing as a BB and what makes it fun. Yet also form playing as a CV I know how hard it is to actually hit with torpedoes in the first place. This new update seems to frankly be pandering to BB players who can't deal with either sticking near AA ships or avoiding torpedoes (which as I'm sure many players know is very doable, especially for US BBs). But that's just my view, although honestly if anyone could give me a reason to play IJN carriers rather than US I'd genuinely like to hear it.
  15. Cou2707

    Warspite's gun range

    I've only played two games with her but they both went well for me, I destroyed a Fuso . The range is bad and the terrible traverse rate makes it hard to both manoeuvre while keeping your guns on target. What I can say (I don't know if anyone else has noticed this) is that Warspite seems to have a very strong secondary battery, I was able to close on a Fuso and ultimately destroy her. But yes having both terrible turret traverse and terrible range seems a bit harsh, particularly if its not historical.