Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'carrier'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
    • Comunità Italiana
  • Developers' Section
    • Questions and Answers
  • Historical Section
    • Ships Old and New


  • Community Calendar
  • Deutschsprachige Community
  • Polska Społeczność
  • Communauté francophone
  • Česká a slovenská komunita
  • Comunidad de habla española
  • Türkçe Topluluk

Found 169 results

  1. carrier balance suggestion.

    the carriers need more love and maybe become a little more forgiving so more people will play them. I got a suggestion that will make deleting a battleship nearly inpossible but still balance it out bey making the planes last longer. maybe instead of making AA more prominent make the planes harder to kill but still easyer to desperse. the battleships where actually very well protected from the smaller payload of of the carrier planes. so the carriers can do nearly no damage to the torpedo protection of a battleship but can still do alot of damage to a cruiser (that can dodge more easely). so carriers need to hit the nose or tail of the ship to do damage and cause a flood. so for example grober currywurst: 25% torpedo protection /78% airdropped torpedo protection (on the belt only and also variate the bulge so most protection in the center). and then balance it out by making planes harder to kill. carriers will be able to play a whole game with there squadrons + do alot of damage with floods/fires etc by making a hit on the nose or aft a near certain flood. then ofc the only problem will be the DD,s wont be able to kill the scout constantly lighting them up. u can solve this by making the planes more velnerable the longer they are near the same target. wy woudnt AA crews learn the habits of a pilot after staring at his acrobatics for an extended period of time :-D
  2. Lock symbol next to carrier icon

    Hi there, does anybody know what the lock symbol does? When you play carrier it is next to your carrier icon. Thanks a lot.
  3. To overhaul CV, must discard mirrored MM

    Edit: Added "Man-made Spectacle" post, as promised. It's still not the actual argument having to do specifically with the mirrored MM in a functional sense, but here it is. (I regard those as mundane, trivial, less important than the qualitative arguments, it's just me. Maybe I'll add in again later, if someone really asks.) To-Do: sort out the memories into data in the 1.5 years later thread, make a (shorter) poll out of those data (such as the heavy leaning towards everything with the word "premium" in WG design nowadays)(quite difficult as some of those are open-answer questions in nature), and analyze the data from this thread once the poll reaches at least 100 people. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ I heard WG is planning some CV changes in 2018. It was the same thing we heard for 2017, but possible it's actually the big one this time. (I also got a nice present from WG to log back in ... so one could say I'm a bit more "motivated" to put some attention to WoWs again. =D. Good job. It might just work to bring back some of the old players.) Since we do not know how a form of CV overhaul could work for the current version of WoWs, I would like to make use of this opportunity to engage the English forum in discussion of the possibilities within a CV overhaul. Such that regardless of how the WG version turns out, we will be able to receive it well-informed and prepared. First goal is to reduce the "reactive" discussion to the overhaul, and second is in hopes of reaching conclusions which will be difficult to do once hemmed in by the existing logic of the overhaul. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ The first questions to ask is "what do we aim to accomplish through the CV overhaul": How can the game's mechanics systems, balance, depth, polish be improved from mechanic changes. How do we fix vulnerabilities and shortcomings of existing features. Why would these changes be an improvement to the player experience. (Much comparison to other games in this part.) How do we design the overhaul to be more friendly to future overhauls and expansions in the game's systems and thus possibilities, aiming for continuous improvement. But first, how do we break the stalemate of the current game norm. How do we execute the operation of this overhaul to maximize the data gathered and observe its potential, within reasonable effects to the game. How do we use it to improve player-relations. What is the theoretical amount of potential this can fulfill, what is its unique strengths, and characteristics uniquely suited to WoWs, how do we generate conclusions from those to identify or design possibles future systems. And likely more, but WG probably has it all sorted out. You get the idea. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ The second question to ask is "what would be some ideal states to be in after the CV overhaul". Even if we cannot describe an exact state of affairs, general desirable characteristics of the situation can be used to "triangulate" approximate definitions. Which brings us to the title. In my estimate, mirrored MM for one will no longer be necessary. But in a more ideal case, aka. "victory" scenario, not only will mirrored MM be gone, but CVs will be so balanced, enjoyable, and well-integrated into the game, that even if the teams had one side with CV, and the other side without a CV, the match is still fair and fun. Or, CV from further apart in tiers can play together in more than +2 MM (even if not every tier 1-10 at once). Now that's quite a leap. Normally, one would start with approximate definitions such as "playing CV will no longer be more pressuring and daunting than a normal ship". "CV will not be disproportionately harder to control than a normal ship". "CV will not be more dependent on captain skill requirements than normal ships". "Losing in a CV is no more toxic or humiliating an experience than in normal ships." And obvious ones, such as "CVs will no longer be disproportionally OP in general match conditions than normal ships, or at least their effect will no be felt disproportionally from normal ships". Etc. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ So for the remaining questions, I'd like to ask everyone else's experience with CVs, Why might a CV overhaul be necessary (but if not, then what to do instead), What might a possible overhaul aim to do, and what is your "ideal state" from overhauled CVs. Bonus points if you can explain how you reached those conclusions. And because this is a discussion thread, all opinions, from new and old players, CV and non-CV mains, fans and haters alike, etc. (you get the idea), are valid. Try to be kind to each other's experiences and points of view. Cheers.
  4. Does CV (Carrier) economic need a tweak?

    Does anyone else feel that CV (Carrier) economics need a little tweak in terms of XP and silver? would you say the free XP is enough for the game play?
  5. DON'T trust the auto pilot

    Hello peepz, So I am playing in my Midway. I notice I am going to near to the enemy, time to trun around. I select a point on the minimap and I see a white line from my ship going to the point I want. So I'm focusing on my planes and trust the autopilot to guide my Midway to where I want. 2 Minutes later.... What the actual hell... why didn't my carrier turn around? where did the white line go? Long story short... Am I the only one having problems whit the autopilot? I know the UI sucks and I don't know when they will fix it... but I do wonder if they messed up the Auto Pilot... Or am I doing something wrong? It's just clicking a point on the minimap and when i have my carrier selected there is a white line from the whit Arrow to the point I want. You guys having any problems whit the autopilot? Maybe having some tips to avoid [edited]it up and die... All the best and dear regards, Dex
  6. Dear World of Warships team, It is impossible to ignore the amount of "this ships is op" or "broken" comments that the Saipan receives constantly. The biggest issue in my opinion is the way it can strafe out of a fight without loosing a plane and having the ammo capacity to do it many many times. That in combination with tier 9 planes just being faster and more powerful. And yes, a squad only has 3 planes and the Saipan does not have a big reserve. But a skilled Saipan user will be using the "Air Supremacy" skill for his captain and will know when to strafe out and not loose a plane. I opened a discussion in the forums once and submitted a ticket to the support center on this matter too: https://eu.wargaming.net/support/tickets/2191766 I believe by looking into either of the following suggestions that it would balance the Saipan but not really decrease it's overall effectiveness. -Don't give the saipan the ability to use the Air Supremacy skill (Or, if using the air supremacy skill, they loose the perk of not loosing a plane in a strafe out of combat) -Reduce ammo capacity -Reduce fighter's air speed -Cooldown for Straferuns Thank you for taking the time to read this and I hope that 2018 will be a great year for WoWs! -K4dy
  7. Hello fellow players, The support team has sent me in this direction after my last ticket reply. My question still stands and I was hoping that maybe there is somebody out there who can help me out here. I will be cheap here and just re-use my support ticket: I can certainly understand that it is impossible to predict how a game plays out, so I decided to focus my question on a pure mechanics question. Let's say I am playing a Hiryu and the enemy team has a Saipan with the "Air Supremacy" captain perk and the three fighter squadrons deck layout. The game starts as usual and let's pretend there are equally skilled and strong ships in both teams and they spread out into all directions so you can always send your planes over friendly ships. Let's also pretend that I lure the Saipans fighters into friendly AA range and then fighter lock all three of his squadrons. Here is where I dont know how to beat him because: The saipan can straferun away from my planes without loosing any of his planes while doing so and therefore, getting the fight back on his terms. And since he has ridiculous ammo due to Tier 9 planes he can strafe like 10 times before having to rearm. In the meantime, I can't drop a ship without loosing all my planes since the Saipan can catch my attack planes, take them apart and when my fighters arrive he can just strafe away again. So it is a constant cat and mouse and demolishing my planes until I either run out or the game is lost and no damage is done. In such a situation, what do I do ? Flamu explains this, too. So either Ranger or Hiryu (And Kaga, I musst add) is cought by this situation and no wiki or video explains how to use your advantages againt a Saipan due to them focusing on the "in general" picture. I hope you can understand where I am going with this and can not wait for a solution. I mean... there has to be a mechanic in the game that I can use here. Otherwise this Sub-category is pointless ?!? Thank you for any insights and technical replies, -K4dy That is it from my side. Many thanks to you guys for any answers you are able to provide! :)
  8. this is why carriers are UNPLAYBLE

    Hi guys . today i want to talk about carriers , i am trying to level up the IJN tier6 an t least as far as this tier i am having an " issue " witch is realy realy annoying . and its not directly about game desine , its about players . why in the name of god , would the enemy carrier player ( most of the freaking games ) spend his ENTIRE bloody game chacing after my planes killing them and not doing anything but that . its toxic man , its not fun , why would you ever spend 12 - 15 minutes following my planes and doing nothing to hlp your team , pls WG do something about it . to prevent players from doing just that . i literaly don't want to play carriers ever again, i was thinking this wold change at higher tiers but i dont think it will people are always douchbags .... thanks , and any suggections are welcomed , especialy from carrier players . oh i forgot to ask something , i have watched a video yesterday about a review on a BB , and for the first time i heard that upgrading the hull does give you things that are not montioned ( like new AP ammo that has more pen or more shell speed ) , i wonder if upgrading the carrier hull upgrades anything apart from speed and AA . and shout out to WG for not montioning that ever because i dont bother upgrading hulls in lots of ships ....
  9. Air Craft Carriers

    Air Craft Carriers are the seriously ignored class of Ships in the game. These are the reasons Why 1- In lower tiers its playable, but as one advances , the insane AA makes it impossible for CV players to maintain interest in the game. 2- Every now and then Buffs are coming for different ships except for CVs 3- New ships/lines being introduced are having such insane AA. Others have Defensive AA. 4- Every Player has the ability to increase his captain skills to Be able to increase his AA DPM by basic , advance and Manual skills, yet CV doesnt get any Captain skills for improvement of Squaderent health and endurance. 5- BBs and cruisers who are AA specked are already untouchable, add to that new DDs like KIDD and Grozovoi and US DDs Defensive AA, so CV can actually have no impact in the start of the game. 6- CV does spotting, Defends allies and also at times harldy manages to strike on enemy despite all defensive AA and enemy CV AA planes and at the end the Reward for CV is the worst in all the ship types. 7- New changes to DDs AA is further Humiliation to CVs. Either CVs need to be buffed or AA needs to be nerfed with good rewards at the end If wargaming keeps the same trend , one day people will say, remember when there used to be CVs in the game??
  10. Rebalance CVs

    Hello everyone, ive been talking the last days a lot about CVs (almost entirely with @El2aZeR) and what many people agree upon, that CVs need to change somehow. Its not about nerfing or buffing them, but as they have a high impact on the game by design, they should be represented more and be played by more people but arent because they have a lot issues. A lot of changes ive stumbled upon usually seems to make CV play even more complex which i think would be a step in the wrong direction, yet making them easier to play would be once more balacing around the bottom of the barrel which we are seeing a lot lately. So ive given this a lot of thought (earlier too, but being involved much ive beginning to think about it again: Remove Fighters from CV. (I can hear the outcry, but plz continue to read why i think this would benefit the game a lot, but there would need to be more changes to help CVs also) - CVs are hard to learn, and WG tried to "fix" that by removing Manual Drop from lowtiers because of Sealclubbing. Many people are saying that its stupid (me too), because now u cant learn them until T6 which makes it even harder to learn them. So for lowtiers, removing fighters would give a reason to reinstall Manual drop for DBs and TBs, now new players can learn that mechanic, without getting stripped of their Planes by the enemy CV with strafe. Lets face it, Good CV player can still sealclub, because they have a higher skilllevel. Bait the Fighters over your allied Ship and u most likely will win the Dogfight battle. After that, u can attack the enemy planes and get air superiority, and help your team to win the battle. But with the change, a new CV player has time to learn the mechanics. Before he couldnt because of Strafe, and now he cant because they took it away. Also T5 CVs cant get slaughtered by T6 strafe as it happens right now. Better for learning experience - It helps bad CV players at higher tiers because they get the possibilty to have some kind of impact on the game. Also they dont have that many squadrons so they can focus their attention on the Bombers. Good players will still have the same impact on dealing damage. - Can be used to get Saipan "back in line" without the need to nerf it, as its a game mechanic change where the other CVs wont get nerfed. Ofc he would need a rework on the remaining squadrons. - A reason to spec more for AA. First, it might help attract more people to play CV. Second now the team needs to rely on their strong AA ships to defend each other or defend themselves. BBs wandering of alone can finaly be hold responsible and cant cry about the CV not providing AA. A step towards Teamwork and hopefully a learning experience for bad BBs, because they cant blame the CV. At the same time AA needs an overhaul on many ships (BBs with too much AA, Cruisers with not enough AA). - Good CV players wont lose anything. I think a point i need to bring up in order to not get marked as a CV hater. Fighters do what? Give you air superiority over the enemy CV. They dont help u with killing ships. While i do understand, they are used for spotting then, now u would need to use your Bombers if u want to permaspot a DD, so u can decide if u rather do that, or go to get new ammo. A Good CV player will know when which scenario is best for his team. - +/-1 MM for CVs, its a win-win for everyone. CVs 2 tiers down or up is stupid on both ends. - US CVs need tighter droppattern for Bombs to make them more viable (Maybe a bit like GZ droppattern, but not like a perfect "o" so u need to strike from the front or back). The roles i see for US CVs would be more reliant on DBs, whilest the IJN CVs are more Torpedo based. Amount of Squadrons and planes within them would need to be tested first. Id suggest 1 TB/3 DB for US CVs on higher tiers and IJN maybe 2 TB/1 DB. - Give all CVs Def AA to prevent them from dropping each other, because reason. - Premium CVs can have stuff like AP bombs to make them different from the silver ships. Not sure if i remembered all the points i was thinking about, but i think theres a lot of them. TL;DR Dont balance CVs against each other, make the other ships balance themselves around CVs. New players can finaly learn CVs. Same time some CVs need rework and Buffs, while OP Saipan gets a kick in the nuts without being nerfed.
  11. A tough Choice.....

    Hey there fellas, So I have a tough situation on my hands (somewhat) and I would like to know what you think. should I research the British Battleship Monarch? (For Colonizing anyone and Everything) or the USS Essex? (to prove that the USN CVs can give the IJN CVs a run for their money >:), and so that i can get easy XP when the Musashi comes out, due to her rumored, weak AA. ) I know that Cvs aren't the best class of Ship to play right now, but i need to expand my ability to play other ship classes. (and not only playing BBs) Also, I don't like how some say that the IJN CVs are the only good CVs to play (and thats their opinion) and I want to prove that the USN CVs can deal out some hurt as well ( i know they already can, but i mostly see IJN Cvs in matches I play, which is sad in my opinion :(. ) On the other hand, I'd assume that most will say to research the Monarch, but i feel like the KVG (King George V) is a fun ship to play, and I can tolerate the grind. But being that the only class I usually play is Battleships, (And NO, I don't camp behind the map, I usually try to Push in and play aggressive) I would feel Much more comfortable playing the Monarch, but constantly playing battleships gets stale over time, and I need to expand my gameplay. (as I previously stated) So, what would you fellas suggest I research? I appreciate any advice! :) until next post, USSARIZONA_2015
  12. At the moment there are only two countries that have a carrrier line. Britain isn’t one of them. surely because Britain built the first carrier (HMS Furious, the 457mm gun ship), British lines should have the carriers? Personally I would like to see British carriers before June ‘18
  13. Fighterplane dogfights broken

    Dogfights are totally broken by the fighter strafe orders. You can break out of any dogfight with no penalty by simply ordering a strafe. Enemy fighters will do nothing while you form up in a line, then simply let your planes escape. It's complete and utter bs.
  14. There was a requirement of shooting down 20 planes for the October Revolution mission, so I brought out my Ryujo, in AS setup, which has 3 fighter squads. Trying to control them was a mess. I could not remember where each squad was, and often chose the wrong squad for the action, resulting to hopelessly slow reaction to enemy CV action. Since I was trying to control them from the minimap when possible, I often gave orders to a wrong squad, which made my play a mess. How do better CV players cope with this? Can we please have squad numbers shown on minimap for CV players, so that they can better keep track on their squads ands their locations? I think that this would be very helpful in organizing the squads.
  15. Complete Carrier Guide

    MiniBrit’s Complete Carrier Guide o7 Despite the state carriers are currently in, I thoroughly enjoy them and the gameplay that accompanies them, however this is not a common sentiment and I can understand why; CVs might as well be a separate game, with the different UI, new controls and all the stats you’re used to don’t matter anymore. It is quite daunting, and the point of this guide is to fully explain CV gameplay, tactics and strategy from tier IV to tier X. This guide can be split up into four main sections- 1) Striking a Battleship or a Heavy Cruiser 2) Striking a Destroyer or a Light Cruiser 3) Controlling the Airspace 4) Recommendations Each of these sections contains a very detailed account of all its aspects from USN, IJN, AS, Stock and Strike. This is just a very basic overview, and there are many subtopics I cover, with the aim of making you a better CV player by the end of it. Striking a Battleship or a Heavy Cruiser -Deciding on a target The first thing you ought to do as a CV is to look at the team line-ups, avoid BBs in divisions or with good AA. If you’re at a lower tier it can be useful to find out which BBs have Catapult Fighters and which ones don’t. -Finding your target Now that you have a list of optimal targets, you can either spot, or let DDs spot. At this point, if you are uncomfortable being so close to enemy AA bubbles (or even in them) its fine to let your DDs spot, so long as you keep the enemy CV from counter spotting them. -When to strike This will be more a Do and Don’t list of situations to strike in, so instead of waffle I’ll just give you a straight up list J DO NOT STRIKE: -BB is near a cruiser with DFAA -BB is behind a line of ships -BB is in a group of high AA ships -BB has enemy fighters nearby and ready to defend him -BB is at a bad angle (we’ll get to that soon) -BB is guaranteed to die, whether it be flooding, fire or even just concentrated fire from surface ships. DO STRIKE: -BB is isolated but not irrelevant (camping A1) -BBs in a thin cluster of ships -BB is near a cruiser with weak AA, or no DFAA -BB is a high priority (has a big impact on the game) As you can probably tell, the main points to take away are to be in enemy AA for as little time as possible, and to avoid getting into a situation where your TBs get panicked and drop in a wide spread. -How to strike (tips and tricks) -Select all TBs/DBs and click in the middle of them to “sync” them up, being able to stack torpedoes/bombs -If the enemy fighters are going for a strafe, in the last Second turn your DBs/TBs around, in the direction that the Fighters came from -If you’re IJN, once the DB payload is dropped, you can outrun any other aircraft of the same tier, this is useful for Scouting against AS/stock USN CVs. -IJN has a faster turnaround than USN, so even if the opponent is AS USN, you can sneak a strike in here and there if you ruin his fighters. -If enemy fighters chase your DBs/TBs, split them up into Multiple directions, then converge on the target to prevent A total strafe of your planes. -Don’t cross drop BBs and large targets, you will lose out on Potential damage. -Use squads that dropped their payloads to bait enemy fighters To the opposite side of the map as to where your target is. -Feint moving TBs to one side of a target, the switch to the Other side in the last moment to make him commit to a full Turn. -If enemy fighters are chasing your DBs/TBs they are Predictable, and can be strafed easily. -Doubling up torp squads and coming from the rear angle is the Best way to guarantee hits on a large sluggish target. -Approaching a CA who has DFAA with TBs spooks them, only use One squad to do this, as it is essentially ding dong ditch but If you get caught, you lose striking power -Another way to strike a CA with DFAA is to send a lone DB Squad. Either he blows his DFAA, or you get fire, and even Under panic you will get enough hits to get damage and flood, But beware against god tier AA and higher tiered CAs. -How to strike Since there are multiple loadouts, I will cover these tactics Separately. For a general rule, USN strike and stock are very Similar to Japanese Strike, Stock and AS. USN AS is the odd one Out, as well as high tier Japanese strike. I would also like to Get a couple exceptions out the way. J Exceptions -If a target is low enough that only on bomb squad, or torp Squad is required then do not waste an entire strike on them. -If a target is low enough that the combined alpha of all your Arsenal can kill it, go for all at once, as it reduces plane Losses, which is essential in drawn out games where reserves Tend to run out. -If your striking capabilities limit you to only one wave, or Have no fire/flood capabilities (AP bombs) Here is a list: [Saipan (AS, Strike), Hosho, Enterprise (AP), Graf Zeppelin (AP), AS Bogue, AS Independence] For these options, unless one of the other exceptions apply, It is best to strike with everything in one wave. Generic Strike package The generic strike package consists of one torpedo bomber wave And a dive bomber wave. This can be IJN tier 6-8 is 2TB 2 DB or The USN strike package of 1TB and xDB, and a few others. These Are just some examples. It must be said that an exception may Apply, so be sure to read them over, however assuming you’re All set and ready to kill some ships, here is how. I will use Concepts from here to explain the other striking options, So you might want to read this first, even if it’s not for you. Distractions: If you have fighters to spare (e.g strike IJN up against strike USN) you can lead them in over the target before your strike Planes in case the BB does not manually select a squad, as The automatic AA just chooses the closes target. You can also Do this with spent TBs, but don’t unless you have the planes to Spare. Wave 1: The point of this wave is to trigger their damage control, so It is best to use TBs, since flooding spooks the crap out of any BB, and is far worse than fire as it reduces speed. Approach: You want to be coming at the BB from the side, so that you can Drop your torpedoes slightly from the back, but not so much That the BB can simply turn and go in between them. If the side Is covered by AA, you can come from the front and go to one Side, but if their AA is good, you risk losing planes. Drop: Using Alt (tier 6+) or just auto dropping if you are restricted You must drop the torpedoes as close to the target as possible. The IJN fuse is 3 seconds, and the USN fuse is 3.5 seconds, but After a while you will get used to the dropping distance, but I recommend hovering over the target to see the auto drop. This should give you an idea of how much lead to give at that Distance, so just extrapolate to a shorter lead. Escape: It could well be that a strong AA presence moved in between Your target and you, or enemy fighters have come to intercept. Either way, unless your path is clear do not press F but use Shift + Click on the mini map, the battlefield or (M) the big Map to manually draw a route home, ending in Shift + F so that The planes do indeed end up in your hangar. Otherwise just Select the units and hit F in case they did not automatically Start returning to your CV (they should). Wave 2: The point of this wave is to get permanent fire on your target. Do not initiate this wave until the target has blown damage Control (damage will stop ticking from the flood). If you Didn’t get flooding, see the USN AS strike method if you have Multiple DB squads left over. If not, just dump payload And if the BB repairs let your team know so that they can Use HE to set him on perma-fire, as it is called. Approach: Unlike TBs, you want to approach at a zero-degree angle with DBs (other than GZ TII’s perfect circle) so that the drop Ellipse (We’ll call it drop circle) is most in line and flush With your target. This means you either go directly to the Front or the back of the ship. The TBs may have led to the BB Turning and running away, in which case enduring more AA than Necessary must be endured, otherwise do your best to approach From the front. Escape: Same as Wave 1. USN AS package Other than the exceptions, you have two or more DB squads at Your disposal. In terms of striking power this is very weak, But you will be surprised at the amount of damage you can deal With such a puny loadout. Wave 1: Take all but one DB on this trip, as once you have struck, AA Mounts will be destroyed and the lesser number of planes in the Last squad will not be focused so hard. The point of this wave Is to deal alpha damage, and to set multiple fires, so in case The target may have fire prevention (A popular BB skill that Merges the two fire points on the superstructure into one) you Should aim for the front or rear of the BB, and I you have two DB squads at your disposal and are confident, you can spread Them out, to maybe even get all of the fires ticking. Approach: Same as the previous DB approach. Escape: Same as the previous DB escape. Wave 2: The target may leave the first fires unrepaired, in which case Job done, you lowered his HP considerably and you can now go in And set a bonus fire or two and cash in on that sweet damage. If the target blew his damage control unit, this is your chance To get a perma-fire. Aim the same as wave 1. Approach: Same as the previous DB approach. Escape: Same as the previous DB escape. Tier IX-X IJN Strike package The only difference here is you have access to 3 TBs, so Against weaker AA ships where 2 squads are enough to get Through the bubble, you can reserve a TB squad to maybe cause A perma-flood as well as the perma-fire. This is up to you to Judge based on experience with different AA bubbles. Other than Withholding a TB squad, carry out the approach, strike and Escape exactly as the first TB squads. Striking a Destroyer or a Light Cruiser -Deciding on a target As with BBs, you should look at the line ups and look for DDs without DFAA, with sluggish steering and also DDs that can bully your own DDs. Killing DDs is all about making your DDs’ Lives easier. For Light Cruisers, you should not prioritise them over CAs, BBs and DDs since it is easier for your capital ships to nuke them with AP volleys. For this reason, I will focus more on DDs, but I will include how to deal with CLs. You will only strike a CL if you have to, so I won’t talk about Finding your target etc. -Finding your target You must spot your target, and using fighters to do this will work, but if your DDs need the enemy DD gone quickly, spotting with your TBs is in order, as it gives the DD less time to react and smoke up, but do not do this if there is a strong AA ship nearby, as that will easily foil your plan. -When to strike Same as for BBs, here is a Do and Don’t list, except some of these don’t apply to CLs since you won’t be targeting them unless it’s an emergency: DO NOT: -Strike a DD/CL while DFAA is active -Strike a DD/CL in smoke, unless they ran aground and panic smoked -Strike a DD behind a line of ships -Strike a DD/CL when there is a more important target to strike DO: -Strike a DD that over extended and has no support -Strike a DD that is making your DDs’ lives hell -Strike a DD that your cruisers can’t kill (cover etc) As usual, your main aim is to kill the biggest threat, and to stay away from big AA threats. You do not have to strike DDs, you can just spot them for your team. In fact, many times this is the better option, but it takes longer, so if there is a hurry you’re better off just doing it yourself. -How to strike (tips and tricks) -DD DFAA is very short and doesn’t have insane DPM so you can easily bait it out and wait the 40 seconds (unless they have DFAA mod) without losing many (if any) planes -Gunboats rely on the HP to project their power in caps, prioritise them to remove their advantage. -If there is a smoke cloud, odds are a DD is in it, if you wait for it to dissipate you’ll have yourself a defenceless DD to strike. -DDs are usually very far forwards, so your TBs/DBs do not have to travel far to get to them, so a small distraction is enough to buy you the time needed to delete a DD. -High tier US and Russian DDs may have DFAA, so be careful when Striking them. As well, Russian DDs can easily outrun Cross drops, so drop more from the side -For USN CVs, you can use the threat of torps to make a DD turn into an island, where it will easily be struck by your DBs. -How to strike There are only four different ways to kill DDs with planes. The First is the 2TB cross drop, used from tier IV-X IJN CVs, Then there is the 3TB cross drop, which is exclusive to tier IX-X IJN CVs. Lastly, we have the two USN options, the 1TB drop and the DB drop. I will not delve into much detail other than the approach and carrying out the strike, since they are just DDs. These tactics can equally be used against a CL, since they are very similar to DDs in manoeuvrability. 1TB drop The problem with this drop is that you have no power to make The DD turn so that you can get a drop on them, and their Rudder shift times are small enough that you can’t feint one Side to strike from the other side. Approach: It is best to use this strike whilst a DD is engaged in combat With your ships, as they will be dodging, so you can use these Manoeuvres to strike when the DD is in a full turn, even then There is a chance they can dodge, or just outrun your torpedoes Which is why this is not a preferred method. Due to the massive Fuse time of 3.5 seconds, unless you must drop a DD with torps, Your TB is way better spent on a BB or CA Drop: The problem with the drop is you have to torp close enough to Not give them time to dodge, but equally you must torp far Enough away to give the torpedoes time to arm, and since this Is predominantly a US CV tactic, your fuse is longer, so Finding the sweet spot is very hard and often relies on luck. 2TB drop The generic cross drop used from tier IV to X by the Japanese Line. It is highly recommended you run torpedo acceleration as Many DDs can outrun 35kts, but 40 is a lot harder to outrun. Approach: You want to sync your TBs, and approach the DD from behind, Due To DDs’ high speed, I highly recommend using auto drop since it Also adjusts for any turns they make. Don’t mind flying over a Japanese, German or even main Russian line DD, but when it Comes to USN DDs and alternate line Russian DDs, the AA is Strong enough to kill a plane or two if you approach across Them. Drop: Imagine there is a line Running through the DD, you want to set the TBs to attack from 45 degrees off this centre line, on either side. That’s 4:30 And 7:30 on a clock for the hour hand. Of course it doesn’t have to be so precise, but the idea is to get the torpedoes at 90 Degrees from each other, leaving the DD trapped. 3TB drop This is literally just the 2TB drop but with one more TB squad, which makes it even harder for a DD to escape. Approach: Same as the 2 TB drop, remember to sync up to make the approach Smoother. Drop: Same as the 2 TB drop, but with another TB squad dropping along that centre line. DB drop I would only recommend this for USN CVs because the Japanese bombs do pitiful damage, and you have a cross drop available anyway, so there is no point in wasting your fire sources on doing maybe 2k to a DD. Approach: Due to the dexterity of DDs, you want to come in from behind, As getting the angle right from the front is nigh on impossible And it only gives you one shot. Sync up your bomb squads, and Go over DD AA if you want, it doesn’t matter, one or two less Bombs is less disastrous as one or two less torps. Unlike torpedoes, bombs suffer a severe penalty for auto dropping, so That option is off the table. Drop: Once your DBs are synced up and you are behind the DD, you want To manual click in front of it as fast as possible. The DD is Moving, so keep clicking in front of the DD (one and a bit DD Lengths in front) so that once your DBs have reached the arming Point, there is considerable lead already, and you will nuke The DD. Controlling the Airspace -Protecting against strikes If you have fighters, your primary goal is to prevent the enemy CV from striking your ships. You don’t have to pull off any mad Strafes or be a unicum duellist, you just have to be able to Significantly cripple the enemy CV’s striking power. -Scouting Whether you use fighters or spent DBs (IJN only), scouting Enemy DDs, ships, torpedoes and sometimes even foiling ambushes Is an invaluable service only you can provide your team with. The Japanese line is undisputed king of scouting with DBs, but At some tiers, USN fighters are faster than IJN Fighters, so it Is not as simple as spot and kite. -Air supremacy Your fighters must also prevent the enemy’s fighters from Carrying out these duties. As such, whoever has control of the Airspace gets to decide what happens when. Air Supremacy is key To landing strikes when and where you want to. Strafing What is a strafe? A strafe is the fighters answer to a TB/DB’s manual drop. It Concentrates a lot of damage in a predetermined line, which Once committed upon cannot be changed, so strafes have to be Planned carefully. They can also be used to escape fighter lock But you lose one plane (saipan excluded) and a bit of ammo. When do I use a strafe? Here is a list of situations where strafing is the best option: -You have a fighter disadvantage over neutral/enemy airspace And need to kill some fighters quickly -The enemy strike planes (DB/TB) are headed to your fleet, but You cannot tag them all, strafing will mow them down quickly, But beware it will not panic the spreads. -Enemy is micro managing a strike or something, and they left Some of their planes unattended. A strafe will make short work Of this lapse in concentration. Tagging What is tagging? Tagging is when you click on an enemy squad. If they are Fighters, you enter fighter lock until you or the opponent Either lose your planes or strafe out (If an enemy tags you, You have to tag his planes back before being able to strafe Out, this is a bug) If you tag enemy strike planes you will Reduced their speed by 25% and your fighters will deal a Constant DPM against them. This also makes their spreads panic. When do I use tagging? You want to use tagging on enemy fighters when you can Overpower them, but only in neutral/friendly airspace. You’d Be surprised as to how much of a difference AA bubbles make, so Make sure it’s friendly. You want to prioritise tagging TBs Over DBs, since they pose a bigger threat to your ships. Once a Strike squad has dropped their payload, tag another squad. Dogfighting In this section I will cover all the tactics and strategies I Use to keep Air supremacy over equal, lesser and more powerful Fighter loadouts. I will only talk about tactics with only 1 or 2 squads at my disposal, since anything beyond that is the same Tactic but with more planes. 1 squad You will have only one squad for up to tier 8 Stock USN CVs, Tier IX-X strike USN CVs and tier IV-VI Strike/stock IJN CVs. Let’s get per tier 6 over with since it’s straight forward. Tier IV-V: You cannot strafe, make it your priority to bait enemy planes Over friendly AA and get them in fighter lock. They cannot Strafe out, so make sure you can win since this is a fight to The death. It is the same deal for 2 squads, so there will be No need for a separate paragraph explaining that. Tier VI-X: Strafing is the game, and you must be aggressive to get strafes In with only one squad, you are not flexible, and many times Must in fact rely on friendly AA bubbles and tagging, forcing The enemy CV into losing one plane by strafing out. You’re Better off keeping the squad to escort your strikes and to Thwart enemy strikes. A tactic I use a lot is to play dumb, To feint strafes and to get the enemy CV to go into a strafe To counter my “strafe” then all I have to do is turn and watch Their planes burn with my own counter strafe. 2 squads Tier VI-X There are many more tactics, so I will break it down into Separate descriptions for each tactic, since there aren’t any “official” names I’ll just name them whatever. -Bait ‘n’ Switch This one is easy and simple to pull off, but if the enemy Knows their stuff, they can turn this into a massacre of your Planes by none other than you. With one squad, you tag their Fighters, then line up a strafe with the other squad. In the Last moment, strafe out of fighter lock, this keeps their squad Stuck for a few seconds, where your planes will strafe them. This is well worth losing one plane over, however if you commit To the strafe, and the enemy strafes out of the fighter lock, Your planes are stuck, and will die to your own strafe. That Is embarrassing. -Bait ‘n’ Feint Same as the bait ‘n’ switch, but you will not actually strafe. Approach the fighter lock with your second squadron, and fly up To it. This only works on skilled opponents, as they must be Attentive to notice this. They will of course have to strafe Out to save the rest of their squad from your “strafe”, and “trap” your plane sin your own strafe. All they did though, was Kill one of their planes and lose some ammo. You can the re tag Them with the squad that feinted a strafe. -Strike Bait If the enemy CV is trying to kill your strike planes, use the Predictive flight route to set up a strafe. Simple and effective. -Counter Bait Wait for them to try and bait ‘n’ switch you, then strafe out before the enemy does, but this is really like train dodging, and you could be either too early or too late, so get the timing right. -*Teleports behind you* Using one fighter squad, drawn the enemy fighter away from his fleet, then come in from behind with your second squad. Play very aggressively and you can usually get him into a strafe, so you counter strafe, or you just strafe him outright. -The double team Simple. Isolate a fighter squad and tag him with both planes. This I difficult as he might mistake you for going in for a strafe, so be tactful with the approach. These are just a few standard moves, when it comes to a battle I usually combined them, or do whatever hurt his fighters most on the spot. Think of it as an RTS mini game. For the lower tiers the most important thing is to keep your reserves up, so be as resourceful as possible. Recommendations: These are just my recommendations, from personal experience with carriers. If you don’t think the captain builds suit you then you can look in the wiki for recommended captain points- it’s your game so do with it as you will. Other than Propulsion mod. 2 the upgrades are unanimous as are the signals. I run PM.2 in case I’m caught out by a CV sniping me so I can get to speed as fast as possible. Loadouts: USN: Bogue – AS Independence - Stock Ranger – Stock Lexington – Strike Essex – Strike Midway – Stock IJN: Zuiho – Strike Ryujo – Strike Hiryu – Strike Shokaku – Strike Taiho – Strike Hakuryu – Strike Upgrades: Air Groups Mod. 1 Air Groups Mod. 2 Air Groups Mod. 3 Damage Control System Mod. 1 Propulsion Mod. 2 Concealment System Mod. 1 Captain Skills: This is assuming 19-point captain, but if not, acquire them in the order they are listed. USN/IJN Randoms Aircraft Servicing Expert Torpedo Acceleration Torpedo Armament Expertise Air Supremacy Concealment Expert Advanced Firing Training Dogfighting Expert IJN Ranked Aircraft Servicing Expert Torpedo Acceleration Torpedo Armament Expertise Air Supremacy Advanced Firing Training Basic Firing Training Adrenaline Rush Signals: JWU IX VL NES Grinding: If you feel like the grind is taking a long time, don’t worry. Carriers have a multiplier that makes them earn less xp and credits than other ships, so feel free to mount xp signals to make the process less arduous, especially before tier 6. Unless A hull give you more hangar space, I usually skip it since CVs earn to little silver, I also do not buy the Flight Control Module I’m not using. Hopefully you found this guide helpful and were able to take something away from it J -MiniBrit
  16. My Graf Zeppelin test experience

    I'm actually part of the Graf Zeppelin balancing test. Thus i have two test ships in my harbour : GZ Test 1 and GZ Test 2 Here my experience : The original ship: i made about 50 missions with it Fighters : two squads who are not able to succeed against enemy fighters. Primary role : Cannon fodder Bombers : three squads of dive bombers with the option to equip HE or AP Bombs HE Bombs : These ones are very accurate. Attackting with all squads a - destroyer gives a guaranteed hit, typically causing 5000 to 7000 dmg. This doesn't sink the ship, but hits it hard. If i damage something (e.g. rudder), it often is finished by the rest of the team. For me a really nice feature plus the one and only "goodie" of this ship - cruiser normally gives one or two hits, causing 5000 to 12.000 dmg. not great, but also not bad - Battleship / Carrier up to three hits, normally causing 7000- 20000 dmg. That's really week. Here torpedo bombers are missing if the target burns afterwards, extra damage can be added AP bombs : is wasn't able to hit anything with it, no matter which ship i attacked -> useless feature Then i took part of the test, receiving the two Test versions Fighters : GZ Test 1 has it's fighters on tier 7 with unchanged stats. Here wargaming recommended to combine this with spending one point to the captains' ability adding +10% dmg per tier difference. GZ Test 2 has the same fighters as the original version. Thus the GZ 1 variant is about approximately equal to a Shokaku with 2 fighter squads. For GZ 2 see original version Bombers : the test versions only carry AP Bombs with different stats and accuracy. Here i tested several attacks against various ships without finding real differences between this two versions : - Destroyers : i wasn't able to hit one of them, now and then a nearby hit with < 1000 dmg was possible, which doesn't harm a destroyer captain, before he vanishes out of sight - cruisers : here it depends on the type. Maneuverable ones are like destroyers, the slower ones receive a hit with a similar damage than the HE bombs of the original version - Battleships : here fun begins. Hits of 30000 to 40000 dmg are normal. With these bombs, i don't miss torpedo bombers any more. now a comparision of original and test ship abilities targer original test Destroyer ++ -- Cruiser + - Battleship - ++ Since Graf Zeppelin forces you to decide which bombs the Stukas should carry BEFORE you enter the battle, the decision is easy, regarding two points : - destroyers are the carriers biggest thread. If your carrier spots an enemy ship, it is usually a destroyer, who managed it to sneak to you unseen from the rest of your team - eliminating the enemy destroyers early in the game gives my team an advantage, which an experienced team often can use to win the battle Thus i moved from a big ship hunter (which i formerly was with my mostly japanese carriers ) to a destroyer huntsman. HE Bombs are my favorite choice, even if AP bombs are improved from useless to sub optimal choice. Now a look at the typical enemies : - Shokaku normally has a (2/2/2) setup ( means 2 fighters, two torpedo and 2 dive bomber squads). Fighters :The GZ 1 Fighters are somehow equal to the japanese. GZ 2 is no option for me Bombers : having torpedo AND dive bombers gives the option to attack all kinds of ships. Shokaku's dive bombers are not as accurate as Graf Zeppelins, but are a thread to Destroyers. Torpedo bombers like battleships more. Thus the initial decision with Graf Zeppelin (HE or AP to attack small or big ships) is not necessary. Result : Point goes to Shokaku (3/1/2) Version i didn't see it very often, but if Graf Zeppelins fighters will be improved, this could be a good option to achieve air superiority. Thus Shokaku can also compete to lexington in (2/0/2) setup Here Graf Zeppelin should be inferior. Shokaku pays with a smaller attack punch against ships Result : Point goes to Shokaku - Lexington since GZ is out, Lexington's normally have a (2/0/2) setup. Lexington has better fighters, GZ better dive bombers Tactics for Lexington are easy : shoot down GZ's planes and have fun with the dive bombers afterwards Result : Point goes to Lexington Lexington in (0/1/3) setup When Lexington captain decides to go without fighters, he knows that he is inferior in the air to his opponent and acts accordingly. With his larger hangar ( 83 vs 72 planes) he can loose some of his planes more easily. Hence GZ has an advance which is not bigger than any other carrier would have Result : draw - Enterprise a premium ship, thus it is not seen very often. (2/2/2) setup with tier 7 planes and squads of 5. Fighters are a not as strong as improved GZ Test 1, but squad size is bigger as compensation. Torpedo AND dive bombers also give the option to attack all kinds of ships. Result : Point goes to Enterprise Management summary : GZ Test versions don't score much points in this test. My wish is, that it's fighters get an real improvement e.g. increasing squad size from 4 to 5. AP bombs are for my a nice gimmick ( e.g. if a mission says : sink battleships ) not no real reason to like this ship. I won't miss them if they a no longer available. Thus : if this test is Wargamings last word, refunding the ship would be the master option
  17. Hello there, i just wait a Time before i ask this Question but here it comes... Whats the Criteria to join a Grap Zeppelin Test Run? Only to buy it? - Seriously - I wonder that you dont even ask Guys like Pape or Garfield (at least the good CV Guys i know) or some Guys who reached at least 1000 Carrier Battles to test it? I mean... really... Ive seen Testers who dont have Air Supremacy, who dont know how to Strafe, how to Attack Ships, i even seen Graf Z. players who go for Carrier "Snipe" with AP Bombs... what the Heck? To be fair, i play Carriers myself and im not one of those "very Good" Guys, but at least i know something about CVs. And before someone Googles my Stats in CVs (you can spare that Time) at least im able to keep my WinRatio in every CV i played above 50% beside the Ranger because i rebought it and sadly since the US FlightDeck nerf its a bit meh to play. Isnt there any Supertesters like strangers123 who can do the Testing and some others who got the knowledge of this Ship Class?
  18. Carrier Strafe ability?

    is it just me or i the strafe ability on fighters just extremely annoying, it's doesn't really make sense and it ruins dogfights when they just strafe out of the battle. i play us carriers and just reached the ranger(regret getting it) while i love strafing 4 bomber squadrons out of the air its also extremely annoying and unrealistic(i know the game isn't meant to be realistic) the dogfights are just strafing and nothing more anymore. if i have managed to lock an enemy fighter squadron near an Atlanta for example and they can just run away like nothing happened while for some reason mine won't follow until i give the order. i just feel it should be removed, nerfed or at least done something with. once i wipe an entire rjuio in a single strafe and it was amazing but i feel bad for him.
  19. Authentic "GRAF ZEPPELIN"

    AUTHENTIC GRAF ZEPPELIN Instead of taking their current approach to representing historic warships, I advocate that WOWS would strive to represent historic ships following an "AUTHENTIC" approach. To be sure, I do NOT mean a "SIMULATOR" or "REALISTIC" approach, but an "AUTHENTIC" approach. For those that do not understand the difference between the concepts: · AUTHENTIC - "Conforming to an original and/or the real world so as to reproduce essential features". · SIMULATOR - "A computer simulation (or "sim") is an attempt to model a real-life or hypothetical situation on a computer under real world conditions". · REALISTIC - "Resembling or simulating real life (conditions)". WOWS is NOT striving to be REALISTIC and I do NOT advocate that WOWS should be REALISTIC. Instead WOWS can and should be AUTHENTIC in their approach to historic ships, because if WOWS is not even that, then one might as well start playing some fantasy space combat game and not a game featuring historic ships whose statistics and performance are based on essential features of the real world historic ships.A ship in WOWS can be both AUTHENTIC and GAMEPLAY BALANCED, the two are not mutually exclusive. THE REASON FOR THIS TOPIC I post this topic for the benefit of the WOWS developers and graphical artists who are involved with the re-design of the WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN. When looking at the outward appearance and characteristics of the GAMESCOM GRAF ZEPPELIN it becomes clear that the definitive study on the GRAF ZEPPELIN published by author Ulrich H.J. Israel in 1994 titled "Flugzeugträger Graf Zeppelin" has been overlooked by the WOWS developers and graphical artists. That book is probably the best single source on all aspects of the ship and her armament. Because Ulrich Israel his book in is German and there is no English language translation of it I have made an effort to translate and present key parts of that source, combined with other excellent source material from authors such as Siegfried Breyer, Gerhard Koop, Manfred Griehl, Adolf Galland, the detailed book series "Die deutsche Luftfahrt" (which consists of 35 volumes) and many other sources into this single topic. My goal is to provide as much overlooked data on GRAF ZEPPELIN to the WOWS developers as possible in the English language so that it hopefully is used during the re-design process of the WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN. It is my goal and interest to see GRAF ZEPPELIN, which from a military technological point of view was a truly unique ship, depicted in WOWS in an authentic manner. RELEASE DATE OF THE REDESIGNED WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN It would be best to NOT AGAIN RUSH GRAF ZEPPELIN TO COMPLETION LIKE WAS DONE FOR GAMESCOM. Instead it is better to take the time to get the ship right and display it in an AUTHENTIC manner before release, because experience shows that WOWS ships rushed to stores are usually never authentically corrected in order not to "hurt" the feelings of customers which have already bought the ship. I have bought the ships during GAMESCOM on release date but I do NO want to see the redesigned GRAF ZEPPELIN rushed to completion again, take the time to get her authentic and right! AUTHENTIC GRAF ZEPPELIN An AUTHENTIC German aircraft carrier GRAF ZEPPELIN in a 1943-1945 configuration, which is the equipment state that WOWS representatives have stated will release the WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN in, has some unique ESSENTIAL features which should be represented. These features will be described in the following topic. In WOWS increasingly we see more and more concepts to try and come up "national" characteristics for new ships and ship lines to try and make them unique and interesting. For GRAF ZEPPELIN these "national" characteristics do not need to be made up, since the ship really was a unique design, the main points of which will be listed here. One thing to point out before we present the list is about the Hanger Deck space of GRAF ZEPPELIN, since this is usually overlooked when this ship is discussed. The GRAF ZEPPELIN was a very large Aircraft Carrier, the largest purpose built Aircraft Carrier up till 1942 and arguably up till the end of the war. The real world 1943 GRAF ZEPPELIN at 33,550 tons had 5515 m2 of Hanger Deck space, which was double that of the 36,000 tons LEXINGTON (2674 m2 hangar deck space) and the 25,500 tons ENTERPRISE (3195 m2 hanger deck space) had only 58% of the Hanger Deck space that GRAF ZEPPELIN (5515 m2) had. On 30 May 1942 the Supreme Commander of the German War Navy (Erich Raeder) ordered that the Air-Wing (including reserves) of GRAF ZEPPELIN in 1943 was to consist of 48x naval Me 109 G-6 (later designated Me 155 A-1) and 54x naval Ju 87 D-5 (later designated Ju 87 E-1). Given the Hanger Deck space on GRAF ZEPPELIN of 5515 m2 storing up to 102x Aircraft would certainly have been possible. The Hanger Dimensions are hard indisputable facts when you study the Hanger Dimensions of the Hanger Decks of GRAF ZEPPELIN, LEXINGTON and ENTERPRISE. In WOWS the LEXINGTON gets 72x Aircraft, the ENTERPRISE gets 96x Aircraft and the GAMESCOM GRAF ZEPPELIN gets 72x Aircraft. The ENTERPRISE in WOWS gets to use her RESERVE aircraft which were carried on board in a disassembled state, these RESERVE aircraft however the WOWS ENTERPRISE is allowed to use in a naval battle so there is NO reason to not also allow a redesigned GRAF ZEPPELIN to do that as well in WOWS then. Giving a re-designed WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN the 102x Aircraft (including RESERVES) that were in real life ORDERED for her on 30 May 1942 and which her huge Hanger Deck space could store would be authentic. Balancing could be done for the 102x Aircraft GRAF ZEPPELIN, just as has been done for the 85x Aircraft KAGA and 96x Aircraft ENTERPRISE. Since the Tier 8 Carriers are also often as a result of WOWS Match- Making forced to send their Tier 8 Aircraft against the superb Tier 9 and 10 AAA of Cruisers and Battleships. Having a high number of reserve Aircraft makes both a 85x Aircrft Kaga and a 96x ENTERPRISE fun to play, in like manner a 102x Aircraft GRAF ZEPPELIN will be fun to play which is a good thing for a 50+ real world money ship. Based mainly on the excellent and most probably definitive GRAF ZEPPELIN primary source study published in 1994 by former Fregattenkapitän (Commander) of the DDR Volksmarine Ulrich Israel the following authentic characteristics for a WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN can be listed. Since the book by Ulrich Israel is in German I have translated some of what is in the book into English to make this information available. Converting the authentic characteristics of the real world GRAF ZEPPELIN into WOWS requires making some compromises in order to let the WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN both fit in with the other Tier 8 Carriers and still have the a decent balance between authenticity and game play, the following points are such a authenticity/game play balance compromise which would enable a unique and powerful but not overpowered re-design of the WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN: In 1943 GRAF ZEPPELIN would authentically launch an IN-AIR Carrier-Group (Strike Force) consisting of: 6+8+8 = 22x Fighter-Aircraft (Me 155 A-1) and 8+8+8 = 24x Multi-Purpose-Aircraft (Ju 87 E-1). This authentic data can be translated into WOWS terminology which fits into the current Tier 8 Carrier design. An IN-AIR Carrier-Group for the re-designed WOWs GRAF ZEPPELIN is proposed which consists of 4+4+4= 12x (5+5+5=15x with AIR SUPREMACY Captain's skill) Me 155 A-1 Fighter-Aircraft and 5+5+5=15x Ju 87 E-1 (6+6+6=18x with AIR SUPREMACY Captain's skill) Ju 87 E-1 Multi-Purpose-Aircraft for a total IN-AIR strength of 27x Aircraft (33x with AIR SUPREMACY Captain's skill). This is still less than ENTERPRISE which has 36x IN-AIR Aircraft in WOWS. In WOWS game terminology the authentic GRAF ZEPPELIN 1943 IN-AIR Carrier-Group strength (Strike Force) would translate into 6x Squadrons total: 3x Fighter-Squadrons each with 4x/5x Me 155 A-1 = 12x/15x Me 155 A-1 and 3x Multi-Purpose-Squadrons each with 5x/6x Ju 87 E-1 = 15x/18x Ju 87 E-1. The size of 4x/5x (Me 155 A-1) and 5x/6x (Ju 87 E-1) IN-AIR Aircraft per WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN Squadron is therefore not fully authentic but as close as possible when compared to the other Tier 8 Carriers in WOWS and as such a game-play compromise. GRAF ZEPPELIN would authentically have launched 5x Squadrons with 8x Aircraft per squadron, and 1x Group-Staff Squadron-Flight with 6x Aircraft. The authentic total launched by GRAF ZEPPELIN: 46x Aircraft. It is proposed that in WOWS the GRAF ZEPPELIN would only launch 27x Aircraft (or 33x Aircraft with the AIR SUPREMACY Captain's skill) in order to fit in with the other Tier 8 Carriers in WOWS. Authentically GRAF ZEPPELIN's 2x Fighter-Squadrons and 3x Multi-Purpose-Squadrons each consisted of 12x Flight-Aircraft and 6x Reserve-Aircraft. It is proposed for WOWS to make that 4x/5x (with AIR SUPREMACY Captain's skill) for the Fighter-Squadrons and 5x/6x (with AIR SUPREMACY Captain's skill) for the Multi-Purpose-Squadrons. Authentically GRAF ZEPPELIN's Group-Staff Squadron-Flight consisted of only Fighter-Aircraft: 6x Flight-Aircraft and 6x Reserve-Aircraft. It is proposed for WOWS to make that 4x/5x (with AIR SUPREMACY Captain's skill) for the Group-Staff Squadron-Flight. GRAF ZEPPELIN's 1943 authentic Total Aircraft strength: 54x Ju 87 E-1 and 48x Me 155 A-1 = 102x Total Aircraft. Of that number 8+8+6= 22x Me 155 A-1 and 3x8= 24x Ju 87 E-1 would authentically be IN-AIR and 26x Me 155 A-1 and 30x Ju 87 E-1 would be ON BOARD. That is the authentic real world data. The proposal for the re-designed WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN (with the "AIR SUPREMACY" Captain's skill adding one more Fighter/Dive-Bomber Aircraft) is 3x Fighter-Squadrons with 3x4/5 = 12x/15x Me 155 A-1 Fighter-Aircraft IN-AIR with 36x/33x Me 155 A-1 ON BOARD RESERVES and 3x Multi-Purpose-Squadrons with 3x5/6 = 15x/18x Ju 87 E-1 Multi-Purpose-Aircraft IN-AIR with 39x/36x Ju 87 E-1 ON BOARD RESERVES. Since ENTERPRISE in real life had only 58% of the Hanger Deck space of the 8000 tons larger GRAF ZEPPELIN this is both authentic and workable in WOWS. Especially since the smaller ENTERPRISE in WOWS has 96x Aircraft (36x Aircraft IN-Air) and the KAGA has 85x Aircraft in total. So this proposal would give GRAF ZEPPELIN a maximum of 33x IN-AIR Aircraft and 102x Aircraft total, compared to ENTERPRISE with 36x IN-AIR Aircraft and 96x Aircraft total. The Supreme Commander of the German Armed Forces and the Supreme Commander of the German War Navy in 1942 ordered that torpedo bombers would be GRAF ZEPPELIN's main armament (when she was to be commissioned in 1943). The Me 155 A-1 was the naval version of the Me 109 G-6 Fighter-Aircraft and in 1942 it was ordered to supply GRAF ZEPPELIN with 48x of these Aircraft by 1943. It was designed to be launched from the GRAF ZEPPELIN catapults and specified to have foldable wings. The Ju 87 E-1 was the naval version of the Ju 87 D-5 Multi-Purpose-Aircraft (to be used in the roles of Torpedo Bomber, Dive Bomber, Smoke Laying Aircraft, Mine-Laying Aircraft, Reconnaissance Aircraft) and in 1942 it was ordered to supply GRAF ZEPPELIN with 54x of these Aircraft by 1943. It was designed to be launched from the GRAF ZEPPELIN catapults and specified to have foldable wings. Based on the real world information the AUTHENTIC WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN Air Group setup should DEFINITELY be 3/3/0 (anti-capital-ship) with possible variants being 3/2/1 (all-round) or 3/1/2 (all-round) or 3/0/3 (anti-minor-ship) as alternatives to the authentic 3/3/0. All four options would be interesting to have as permanent options for the ship when the ship is re-released for sale. Releasing GRAF ZEPPELIN with an Air Group which can only fight Capital Ships (Battleships) well is to be avoided, since an Aircraft Carrier like every other ship in WOWS needs to be able to adapt to changing circumstances and Destroyers and Cruisers also need to be be targeted effectively for self-defence. GRAF ZEPPELIN's designed Top Speed in 1943: minimum speed 33.80 knots, maximum speed 34.25 knots. The re-designed WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN should use these authentic values. GRAF ZEPPELIN was designed to be able to launch and land aircraft AT THE SAME TIME. This was probably the most UNIQUE feature of GRAF ZEPPELIN compared to other WW2 Carriers. If the WOWS programming code does not allow that, then adjust the processing times so that GRAF ZEPPELIN Aircraft can land and launch much faster. GRAF ZEPPELIN was designed to be able to launch 1x Fighter-Squadron and 1x Multi-Purpose Squadron AT THE SAME TIME and in HALF the launching time of other Carriers due to the 2x Compressed Air Catapults. If the WOWS programming code does not allow that, then adjust the processing times so that GRAF ZEPPELIN Aircraft can land and launch much faster. GRAF ZEPPELIN could authentically launch her Aircraft from her 2x Catapults without the need to turn into the wind as practically all WW2 Carriers had to do. This again translates into faster Aircraft launching times because GRAF ZEPPELIN could avoid the time consuming turning into the wind manoeuvres. GRAF ZEPPELIN was designed to be able to land 1x Squadron at a time even when Aircraft are being launched. If the WOWS programming code does not allow that, then adjust the processing times so that GRAF ZEPPELIN Aircraft can land and launch much faster. GRAF ZEPPELIN could have a faster rudder response and smaller turning circle than the GAMESECOM GRAF ZEPPELIN due her the 2x Voiht Schneider Shaft Propellers under the keel which could propel GRAF ZEPPELIN at maximum 4.5 knots IN ANY DIRECTION. The inauthentic 2x German War Flags painted on the Flight Deck of the current WOWS GAMESCOM GRAF ZEPPELIN should be removed and replaced with the authentic BRIGHT YELLOW bars which GRAF ZEPPELIN would have had painted on the Flight Deck. See details below. The wrong camouflage colours and pattern which is used by the WOWS GAMESCOM GRAF ZEPPELIN aircraft should be replaced with the authentic camouflage scheme and colours which the GRAF ZEPPELIN Aircraft would have had. See details below. The wrong Aircraft Markings and Emblems on the WOWS GAMESCOM ZEPPELIN (fighter) aircraft should be replaced with the authentic GRAF ZEPPELIN Aircraft Markings and Emblems. See details below. For the authentic lighting arrangements on GRAF ZEPPELIN I refer to the details below. The re-designed WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN should get an authentic splinter camouflage scheme which should be similar to that of the 1942-1943 TIRPITZ, with which she was scheduled to operate together from her ordered berth at Faettenfjord, Trondheim in Norway. Images showing relevant TIRPITZ camouflage will be added to the topic. The 1939-era Fi 167 A-0, Ju 87 C-1, Me 109 T-1 were all outdated by 1942 and the German Air Force had no production lines for these aircraft and their outdated engines any more. The Air Force stated in 1942 that they would not build these aircraft and not equip GRAF ZEPPELIN with these aircraft. Instead the 1942-era Me 155 A-1 and Ju 87 E-1 were developed from then current models, weapons and engines. The torpedoes used by the Ju 87 E-1 were the 650-kg 450-mm German Torpedo Typ F 5 b (40 knot speed/2000 meter range) and the Italian Typ F 5 W (W for Whitehead-Fiume) (40 knot/3000 meter range). The main practical differences between the two torpedoes types were mostly Torpedo drop speed and Torpedo drop height. The 1942-era Ju 87 E-1 could be launched from the GRAF ZEPPELIN Compressed Air Catapult with a bomb load of at least 1000 kg (1x 1000 kg or 2x 500 kg), the older 1939-era Ju 87 C-1 would have been launched with 1x 500 kg and 4x 50 kg bombs. GRAF ZEPPELIN Aircraft would not take off under their own power from the Flight Deck as with most WW2 Carriers, but instead they were launched from 2x 21-meter long Compressed Air Catapults at a rate of 8x Aircraft per 3.5 minutes per Catapult at a speed from 0 km/h up to 140/155 km/h in 3 seconds, so 16x Aircraft would be launched in about 3.5 minutes. At the same time Aircraft could still land and be processed down to the 2x Hanger Decks due to the 3x 6.5 ton Elevators which could still be used when Aircraft were launched and landed. This in WOWS translates into faster Aircraft launching times, launching of 2x Squadrons at the same time and landing of Aircraft while launching. This makes the GRAF ZEPPELIN unique in WW2. German Aircraft used a special starter fuel mixture which allowed their Aircraft to heat their Engine Oil etc. temperature ready for flight in about 3 minutes. This saved both Aircraft fuel and precious time. On USA and other Carriers the Aircraft would have to run their Engines for 20+ Minutes in order to heat the Engine Oil etc. up for flight, wasting both valuable time and fuel. The German starter fuel mixture translates in faster WOWS launch times. Since GRAF ZEPPELIN was designed to also be able to operate alone, so in WOWS it would be authentic to give her 15-cm guns the same range as those of Tier 8 BISMARCK and TIRPITZ especially because she is so easy to spot in WOWS. The GRAF ZEPPELIN 15-cm guns were also intended to be used in an Anti-Aircraft role in case of a massed enemy Aircraft attack. The 15-cm guns would then be used in "Zonenschießen" (=Zone Fire) via "Sperrfeuer" (Barrage Fire). It would be authentic to let the re-designed GRAF ZEPPELIN use her 15-cm guns also in an Anti-Aircraft role. In WOWS the GRAF ZEPPELIN Commander can only be used on GRAF ZEPPELIN since there will be no other German Carriers in WOWS. It would make sense to therefore make that a Unique Commander, a possible name candidate is "Helmuth Brinkmann" the Commander of PRINZ EUGEN. In real life Captain (Kapitän zur See) Helmuth Brinkmann was chosen to command GRAF ZEPPELIN. The GAMESCOM WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN has 2x Shields on the bow and an Eagle on the stern. In wartime not one single German War Navy ship went to sea with these, they were removed and kept ashore and were only to be used in peace time. So since WOWS is an arcade wargame the 2x Shields on the bow and Eagle on the stern should be removed. The Me 155 A-1 was armed with 1x MG 151/20 and the Ju 87 E-1 was armed with 2x MG 151/20. This was a 20-mm 750 RPM auto-cannon which could take down a fighter with only 3-5 direct hits. This weapon and the ammunition it used was harder hitting than any weapon used on the Carrier Fighters of other nations at the time and that should be taken into account when determining Damage Per Second for the Me 155 A-1 and Ju 87 E-1. Another key issue is that the Me 155 A-1, like the Me 109 G-6, would have all the armament in the nose. With nose armament is it much easier to hit an enemy target and fire accurately, that translates into higher DPM than wing mounted armament like on practically all USA fighters for example. Another key issue which translates into higher Hit Point Values for German Aircraft is that the 1942-era Me 155 A-1 and Ju 87 E-1 German Carrier Aircraft (like USA Carrier Aircraft) had both armour plating and self-sealing fuel tanks, while practically all Japanese Carrier Aircraft did not have this. Even the 1939-era Me 109 T-1 and Ju 87 C-1 had armour plating and self-sealing fuel tanks. GRAF ZEPPELIN had an armoured flight deck as well as some other interesting armour arrangements which I will add here when I have time to do so (To be continued...). GRAF ZEPPELIN RELIABLE SOURCES AND AUTHORS WOWS AND ULRICH ISRAEL'S GRAF ZEPPELIN STUDY CHARACTERISTICS OF AN AUTHENTIC 1943 GRAF ZEPPELIN An AUTHENTIC German aircraft carrier GRAF ZEPPELIN as she was scheduled to be commissioned on 1 April 1943 and scheduled to be ready for operations from December 1943 at the earliest and Spring 1944 at the latest some ESSENTIAL features which will be discussed in detail below as well as other relevant data. EDIT: PROPOSED WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN AIR COMPLEMENT AND AIRCRAFT DATA GRAF ZEPPELIN FLIGHT DECK PAINTING GRAF ZEPPELIN FLIGHT DECK LIGHTING EDIT: GRAF ZEPPELIN AIRCRAFT CAMOUFLAGE AND COLOURS EDIT: GRAF ZEPPELIN AIRCRAFT UNIT EMBLEM EDIT: GRAF ZEPPELIN AIRCRAFT IDENTIFICATION MARKINGS GRAF ZEPPELIN AUTHENTIC AIR COMPONENT 1943 GRAF ZEPPELIN HANGER DIMENSIONS AND CAPACITY NO OUTDATED 1939-ERA Me 109 T, Ju 87 C NO OUTDATED 1939-ERA Fi 167 GRAF ZEPPELIN AUTHENTIC IN-AIR STRIKE FORCE EDIT: AIR FORCE ORDERED FIRST PRODUCTION SERIES OF 220x NEW Me 155 A-1 and 115x NEW Ju 87 E-1 CARRIER AIRCRAFT IN 1942 WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN SQUADRON SETUP GRAF ZEPPELIN AUTHENTIC ORGANIZATION OF CARRIER-GROUP GRAF ZEPPELIN 1942-ERA Ju 87 E-1 MULTI-PURPOSE-AIRCRAFT GRAF ZEPPELIN 1943 AERIAL TORPEDO TYPES FOR Ju 87 E-1 GRAF ZEPPELIN 1942-ERA Me 155 A-1 FIGHTER-AIRCRAFT EDIT: HIGH-ALTITUDE FIGHTER Me 109 H, Me 155 B, BV 155 GRAF ZEPPELIN 1943 MAIN ARMAMENT: TORPEDO BOMBERS GRAF ZEPPELIN 1943 Ju 87 E-1 BOMB LOAD GRAF ZEPPELIN COMBINED LAUNCHING AND LANDING GRAF ZEPPELIN AIRCRAFT LAUNCHING GRAF ZEPPELIN CATAPULT LAUNCHING PROCEDURE GRAF ZEPPELIN ELEVATORS GRAF ZEPPELIN SPECIAL AIRCRAFT STARTER MIXTURE GRAF ZEPPELIN NO TURNING IN THE WIND GRAF ZEPPELIN AIRCRAFT ARMING AND FUELLING GRAF ZEPPELIN PROVEN TECHNOLOGY AND TRAVEMÜNDE GRAF ZEPPELIN ARRESTING CABLES GRAF ZEPPELIN ARRESTING CABLE TESTING GRAF ZEPPELIN 1943 TOP SPEED GRAF ZEPPELIN VOIHT SCHNEIDER SHAFT PROPELLORS GRAF ZEPPELIN OPERATING ALONE GRAF ZEPPELIN 15-CM ANTI-AIRCRAFT GUNS GRAF ZEPPELIN 1943 OVERPOWERED GRAF ZEPPELIN AUTHENTIC 1943+ HULL CAMOUFLAGE PATTERN GRAF ZEPPELIN DESIGNATED COMMANDER GRAF ZEPPELIN NATIONAL FLAG ON FLIGHT DECK GRAF ZEPPELIN - NO NATIONAL EAGLE ON STERN GRAF ZEPPELIN - NO NAME PLATE ON SHIP GRAF ZEPPELIN - NO COAT OF ARMS ON BOW MG 151/20 AUTOCANNON ON Me 155 A-1 AND Ju 87 E-1 COLLECTION OF RELEVANT DATA ON WOWS TIER 8 CARRIER AIRCRAFT JAPANESE NAVY WANTS TO BUY GRAF ZEPPELIN IN 1942 AERIAL TORPEDOES AND THE BRITISH, JAPANESE AND GERMAN WAR NAVIES 1941+ GERMAN AND JAPANESE NAVY COOPERATION 1940+ GRAF ZEPPELIN DETAILED HANGER DECKS ANALYSES GRAF ZEPPELIN COMPARED TO USA AIRCRAFT CARRIERS FROM 1936 TO 1945 GRAF ZEPPELIN ARMOUR ARRANGEMENT
  20. Carrier gameplay mechanics

    So, with 12 September Kantai Collection update carriers are receiving huge overhaul. Judging by hints and teasers, CVs in the browser game will become more mechanically advanced and engaging than World of Warship ones. Wargaming, where is the carrier overhaul? Are you really going to be beaten by a browser game? The same as with Russian BBs?
  21. To clarify I’m at the moment at tier VII with my Hiryu, I was there before they included this new mechanic and I’m still there now ( I know I’m slow ). And I’m sure everyone was already in a position where he was locked up in a dogfight, he just wanted not to be in and disengage from it. So you would say: “cool, now I can!”, but yeah… The problem here is that air superiority CV’s, in my case the USN Saipan and Ranger, can use this new gadget to utterly annihilate your planes and if they slightly know what they’re doing, you won’t have a chance and could just leave your planes in the hangar. It was already a challenge to have a good game against them before but now it’s more or less impossible, except you manage to sneak through and sink the enemy air superiority CV at the beginning or got the luck to play with one. I don’t know how it is at higher tiers, which carriers there profit the most from it or if it evan is a big deal. But let’s take a closer look in case of the Hiryu. For example; what I used to do in my Hiryu was that I mad one big formation with the two Dive bomber sections and the two torpedo bomber sections. That formation got a close cover on one torpedo bomber section by one fighter section. The other fighter section I used as snooper which gave reconnaissance, a wide cover and attacked enemy fighters/bombers when they were in range. Like that my bombers were more or less save, sure my fighters would (except with a good strafing run at the beginning of the dogfight) probable lose most of the dogfights but my bombers got through, because I could bind the enemy fighters in a dogfight away from my bombers. Now they can simply disengage and attack my bombers. Also close cover is more or less useless now, because if the dogfight is too close to your bombers he can make a strafing run across them. So you have to make a wide cover with both fighter sections and hope he doesn’t slips through and finds your helpless bombers. Another problem arises with the weird game mechanic were your planes don’t immediately give chase to the disengaging enemy but wait on spot for 2 sec. You can’t even give them a command to do it, they just sit there. Which not only gives the enemy plans a nice lead, which they can use to attack your bombers or really -although seldom- run away. Some smart players use this now to set strafing runs. They get stuck in with one section, try to bind as many enemy planes as possible, then they disengage wile strafing the helpless enemy fighters still sitting there, with the other fighter section. Those are the major issues with this mechanic. Sure you can say that a CV without air superiority layout could use the mechanic too, and your right but he can use it way less effective not only because he has less or/and inferior fighters but also because gaining air superiority is not his primary goal, he wants to do dmg. and so can/will assign way less attention to his fighter sections compared to somebody who practically only plays with them all game. So what this mechanic basically does; is making the air superiority CVs even stronger at their task and the attacker CVs less effective at what they’re doing and so ultimately ruins the balance between carriers completely. As I sad I’m only at tier VII, so I don’t know how it is at higher tiers but down here it just screws the balance over in my eyes. They sure only wanted the best for the game and maybe even saw this mechanic as an answer to the balance problems of carriers. But what they achieved was giving the air superiority CVs a strong tool, with which they can render an attacker CV useless. Not being able to play every second game shouldn’t be the solution and I would definitely welcome it if they would get rid of this Mechanic. Having not played the higher tiers in carriers I would love to hear how the impact of this Mechanic is for the carrier gameplay at higher tiers. And if one of you guys developed a tactic to counter this, I’m happily listening, cause I don’t really know what to do at the moment in those battles to be effectiv. P.S. sorry fo my english
  22. Aircraft carrier improvement suggestions

    Hello , I want to suggest for some impovements. We have to make cv's a little bit more comlex so players can have multiple options in the way inflicting dmg. That will improve the rpg experience . Ofcourse restrictions will ballance the gameplay. 1st . There is an option in controls , Select next squadron but in the other hand there is no option to select previous squadron. 2nd. A carrier is a floating airfield and that means great armory. You have to add more than 2 type of weapons . As example light torpedos , heavy torpedos , ap bombs , incendiary bombs , standar bombs , rockets etc. (the choise of weapponary will taking place ingame from inactive buttons ) 3rd. a special consumable to be add. Long range air radar that will be somthing like an rpf for airplanes. 4th. kamikaze attacks for ijn cv to be available when the team is close to lose. 5th. Add to Fighters 3 alter role. 1st Air superiority (heavy ammo ), 2nd reconnaissance ( light ammo , greater speed , 3rd multirole ( rockets for soft targets(dd's) and low hp enemys will added ) 6th. Evolve map to a tactical level so we can make active planing to avvoid enemy aa bubbles.
  23. I have been doing some battles in carriers lately, mostly in the USS Saipan but when i use the strafe ability, most times the fighter squad just dies, even when attacking a squad of bombers without rear gunners, they just die for no reason, anyone knows if this is a bug or something?
  24. Ich persönlich finde der Gamedesigner der die Flugzeugträger bearbeitet, hat tolle Arbeit geleistet. Sie gefällt mir so gut das ich es unfair finde, den anderen Schiffsklassen gegenüber. Darum wünsche ich mir, daß dieses Team (sollte es keine Einzelleistung sein) auch andere Schiffsklassen mir ihrer tollen Arbeit beglücken. Mir am liebsten währen Schlachtschiffe die meisten Spieler dieser Klasse schreien so schon im Chat oder Forum nach liebe und Aufmerksamkeit das dort etwas getan werden muss. Ja wann weiß man denn das etwas passiert ist, oder woran erkennt man die Tolle Leistung des Entwicklerteams. Ganz einfach: -wenn über ein Jahr lang nur downgrades der Sachlachschiffe kommen -wenn man sie nur noch in jedem 10ten Gefecht sehen kann -wenn sie als Tier 7 Schiff mit Tier 6 Geschützen ausnahmslos in Tier 9 Gefechte geschickt werden -wenn alle anderen Schiffsklassen so angepasst werden das sie automatisch und passive deren Schüsse abwehren -wenn jedes andere Schiffe auf einmal mehr Geschütze hat als sie selber, selbst Flugzeugträger bekommen dann 500Zoll Artillerie Genau dann weiß man das meine Helden die Flugzuträger Entwickler am Werk waren. Ich bin ja der Meinung so eine Tolle Leistung sollte man auch entsprechend Würdigen. Jeder Entwickler sollte nur dann Gehalt ausbezahlt bekommen und in der Höhe seiner Gefechtswertung wenn er mit einer INDEPENDENCE folgendes Szenario erfolgreich abschließt.
  25. Carrier Tier Gaps

    Can I just say. The fact that you can go up against carriers of different tiers is not fair. If you are a Langley you should not be able to fight a Bogue, you may say that you will also have a carrier of that tier on your team but regardless that carrier (if it encounters your planes) will ruin you and make you hate the game. At the same time if you play against a carrier a tier or more below you just dominate them but it is a hollow victory because you KNOW that you are superior to them in every way. What I propose is that the MM make it so only carriers of one tier can fight, having a 2 on 2 is still possible but you don't have 2 carriers that dominate the game and 2 carriers that wish they were never born. Also this is completely off topic but the Bogue is OP AF at its tier, and whenever I see one I quiver in fear and if I had manual drop at tier 5 and 4 still I would suicide off the bat because I know if it is AS it will dominate and even if it is stock it's fighters are ridiculously good (I saw a tier 5 bogue fighter squadron fight a tier 6 zuiho fighter squadron above the zuiho's konig (which has good AA and shreds most tier 5 planes) and the zuiho lost ALL its planes while the bogue left with it's entire squadron intact and proceeded to kill my dive bombers).. This probably sounds utterly Salt-Driven but the amount of games I have in my langley or zuiho where a higher tier carrier dominates me and the enemy lower tier is insane and there is nothing the lower tier fighters can do. And as I said the Bogue comment was salt-driven.