Jump to content


Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


About MoebeIwagen

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

107 profile views
  1. MoebeIwagen

    Graf Zeppelin Update From Developers

    The time to blame is over, i guess now everyone knows which mistakes happened. Looking forward to help to tweak the Zeppelin, making her a competitive carrier in her tier. Maybe based on historical fact but i guess most people wouldn't be annoyed if she's partial fictional. Question is, how do you want to get all regular Zeppelin owners into that Facebook group ?
  2. MoebeIwagen

    Graf Zeppelin - SOLUTION

    I agree with that, a fix on the AP drop would make her competitive to the other tier 8 carriers. Even if her air groups are slower and have lesser HP than all other carriers at her tier. The trade of three AP drops which seriously make their damage onto ships could compensate her low over all air superiority.
  3. MoebeIwagen

    Graf Zeppelin - SOLUTION

    The Ship and two dive bomber setups aren't bad at all(always with one eye on the historical usage of air to sea torps of Luftwaffe and Marine bombers). But it seems the AP dive bombers are broken. At the first glance the drop pattern of the dive bombers setup with AP bombs look pretty much the same decent like the Enterprise's dive bombers. But then i had to determined that there is a delay between the dive and the hits. So the most ships i tried to bomb went out of the auto drop zone and the bombers hit nothing. No matter if an cruiser or battleship not even an aircraft carrier by itself were adequate hittable with that delay. Only one out of over 50 drops hitted with more than one or two bombs, most of them hit nothing. And strangely, the dive bombers were on their way back to my carrier when the hit count comes in. Like three or four seconds later then their drop was. Not to say that i was unable to land any hit with alternative(manual) drop. Even "landed"(ships which stucked at islands) weren't hittable with that delay. On the other hand the HE dive bomber setup, which i also tried out, works fine. You order the drop, the bombers dive, drop and hit just as usual, including the combat text about the damage amout of the hits came instandly. I guess there is something wrong with the AP dive bomber setup. Seems they don't work as intended.
  4. MoebeIwagen

    [suggestion/s] about plane setups on carriers

    Honestly i only have tech up to mid tier carriers until now. And... i have to train manual drops a lot more but often the bombers aren't able to regroup more then twice without taking major losses while they are circling in AA range of the ships.
  5. MoebeIwagen

    [suggestion/s] about plane setups on carriers

    My thoughts about "fleet wars" aren't for overall public gaming. An also interesting spread out of an map specific amount of available planes for the carriers within the fleet, could be an cut out of all plane within night battles. A possible option for totally other needed setups upon the fleet or capabilities to form light fleets with DD-strike teams. But i'm drifting bit off topic with such thoughts. You're right with the dive bombers, they needed to played for sheeting their effectivities in comparsion to torpedo bombers. But i guess if carrier captain get fully freedom about the planes abord, then the most captains would take as much torpedo bombers as they can, like Ascender said. Personally i would nerf all torpedo damage between -10%-15%, especially the higher tiers torpedos. 8500-9500dmg per hit on three possible (torpedo bomber)hits out of six are easily 25k+ dmg without any further destructions on your ship. Same on the bigger destroyer torpedos, three hits out of six up to ten torpedos are also round about 40k dmg. For higher tier ships between 33000-95000hp are such hits or rows of hits are to devastating overall. Even if you manage to survive one of those attacks, often you're nearly out of the game or a second strike finishes you. That and an slightly increase of the accuracy of the dive bombers, including varying the bomb hit damage in comparsion with the ships deck armor. Could lift the dive bombers closer to the "effectivity" of torpedo bombers and the people would use them if the would have the freedom to made an personal squad setup(in which way ever) for their CV's And as always, with one eye on the balance.
  6. MoebeIwagen

    [suggestion/s] about plane setups on carriers

    Dive bomber work for theirselfs, if the target is slow and big enough. I made some good hits with them, but the hit chance is pretty to low in compare with torpedo bombers. And in my example there are 12 dive bombers you have to take with. If you want them or not. But im pretty sure if the dive bombers would get more accurate and if they would do damage in relation to the deck armor. For example on unarmored flight decks like the most carriers had during the war, they could be much more devastating to top light amored ships. And as hint, try to hit an battleship or and aa-cruiser that is at least two tiers higher then your planes. Maybe you could get one or two torpedos into water if they don't focus your planes. If they focus them, trust me, your planes are all gone before one of them could drop a torpedo into the water(especially in mid-tiers). If that happens two or three times you'll beg for dive bombers. They don't hit that hard like torpedos and they miss often, but they are able to get out their bombs in such cases. But at least you'll lose them on retreat. Edit: and of course all considerations with one eye on the balance
  7. Since the last days i think about to throw fixed squad setups over board. I mean the last patch brings up more setups but some of them seem useless in higher tiers, for me. Like the bombers only setups or two fighter squads + one dive bomber squad. I mean dive bombers are pretty bad on smaller and manoeuvrable ships. Usually the flight chef of the carrier putting the sqauds together based on the available planes aboard. So what about to open the choice of planes to the captains? For example an ~Tier 6 carrier, based on 4 squads: available planes overall: 64> selectable Fighters: between 12-48, selectable Torpedo Bombers between 0-24 and selectable Dive Bombers between 12-32. In that way it would be more like the choice of the "right or favorite" ammunition for an vessel. And pretty much more closer to reality. Also based on that for later gamemodes, like an clanwar in world of tanks, the fleet commander could have an fixed contingent of planes that he has to "manage" on his carrier captains. (For example: more or only fighters for the faster escort carriers and more bombers on the fleet carriers. On the trade of to loosing the air-to-sea/ground strike capability for the escort carriers, but with lesser than maximum planes abord they could be slightly a bit faster(or only more manoeuvrable) and nearly able to follow the fastest ships within flieet.) With that possible adjustments, the capabilities of the developing team to nerf or buff the carriers strike power within "fleet wars" will be much more precise and also could be adapted to specific maps or tiers.
  8. Don't get me wrong, i really like to play does maneuverble light and fast carriers. But for me they are totally wrong placed between the fleet carriers. 1. They are out of the timed line. > Okay, for balance those both could be placed nearby. Without a view on their historical emerge. 2. Mainly they were used to support landing ops, in submarine hunter killer groups and to backup main naval ops. For suggestion(personal oppion): Langley >> Ranger >> Wasp >> Lexington >> Yorktown >> Essex >> Midway Independence >> Saipan And also with a split of lights and fleet carriers it would be possible to introduce the royal navys Incincible and Centaur/Colossus classes. + The half of the japanese carrier fleet based on light carriers.
  9. MoebeIwagen

    What we know about Ships: Updated 05/04/2017

    I guess i had to ajust my monitor or clean my glasses, i'm sry. The Admiral Hipper Class also the Seydlitz looks okay to me in tier 4 in fact of their keel laying but not as BB in same tier with the "mini"-BB of the Deutschland Class. And the fact that game is in earlier state i said it shows up much more then the WoT in earlier states, for example. But there is the same point of decision like in WoT for developers, the spilt between historical correctness and to fill up the gaps in the tech trees.
  10. MoebeIwagen

    What we know about Ships: Updated 05/04/2017

    Interestings Trees, but there are many timelined and characteristics Mistakes within. Like the place of the Yorktown Class together with the Lexington Class known as famous CV-2 and Cruiser based rebuild from the mid 20s, heavy armored, less aircraft capacities in fact of her heavier armor. To place the Lexington Class in the same tier like full conceptional Carriers and much more modern builds like the Yorktown would be foolish, i guess. :) Also if i remember right the Somers Class was a smaller DD only with about 1500 tons build in the 30s. To set it on tier 9 together with much modern and heavier DDs like the Gearing and Fletcher Class. I don't know. Next thing i triped up is the Pensacola and Northhampton Classes shown in that Trees as CL but there were CAs. Also the New Orleans Class, build as CL and upgraded to an CA. Then i miss totally the 1934s and 1936s DD-Classes of the German Kriegsmarine, including the possibility of modernized variants there were enough to fill a DD-Line up to tier 6 or 7. One thing i really wonder about is, that the Seydlitz is placed as BB. But she was truly as CA classified in the "Admiral Hipper" Class, together with the Blücher and the Prinz Eugen. At least in fact that the Seydlitz was never finished, she couldn't hold the "BB"/CA-Class-Name in the German Tree. But overall i have to say, i like what i see. It is tremendously more then the three earlier Tech-Trees at the point as i entered the WoT closed Beta.