Too many players refer to the 3/3/2 Hakuruy loadout change as a "buff"

[TomBombardil]

I, a top CV player, always played  the 2-3-2 Haka, yeah that's correct the stock loadout. Not the 2-3-3, (due to plane plane reserve distribution)

 

as OP stated an extra fighter to shutdown enemy CV works both way, enemy CV also has an extra fighter to shutdown you. There is MORE  ANTI AIR, in the game than before the 3-3-2 was introduced. And doing dmg to ships or dinying them space, is still the main goal of the game. with the 3-3-2 Haka, cv become more observers to the battle below, than actually participating.

 

Above this the skill gap between cv players is harder punished. With a the Same skill gap, the CV 3-3-2 has more tools to shutdown the enemy cv, making this 1vs1 again more influential.

 

Now I as a top cv player should like to shutdown enemy cv since 8 out of 10 I'm capable of doing it. But shutting down enemy cv doesn't mean you win games, that's why you didn't see the 4-2-2 Haka much around. The AIR to Service capability has diminished (extra fighter dinying airspace). Aka A NERF.

 

so both CV are crap now: Midway to few reserves to battle the massive ship based AA,  (if mirrored midway). And run over in the air by 15 tier x Haka fighters who reload like crazy comepared to midway. Haka , forced to play 3-3-2 to match the enemy's 15 tier x fighters, and to diny airspace as the enemy CV does. 

 

I have  been avoiding Playing Tier X CV games, meaning the LAST Eu CBT Haka receiver/tester, who was still cv main stoped playing tier X. Maby useful for you @Sub_Octavian. WG bullied us all (@Aerroon, @Sharana,  @DanJun84 (Azell?), @iChase (public figure@Ishiro32) away with bad direct and indirect CV "balance" decision. Doesn't build much faith towards cv rework.

 

your regards

TomBombardil

 

[Kenliero]

1 hour ago, PapVogele said:

If you read my first (or second) post, I’ve stated this already, and I’m expressing my opinion from the recieving end of the carrier, an opinion that should be as valid as yours.

 

If they balanced around the opinions of CV only players this game would be destroyed. :)

I haven't played carriers in last 2 years, but I still have 500 games in them and basic principles are still pretty much the same, so your opinion really is not as valid as mine with only 30 matches. 

 

You really should not talk about balancing carriers from "receiving end", if you have no idea what it is like to actually play them. I am by no means top CV player and I probably get some things wrong, but it's still 500 matches with that class, so you learn basic principles. You don't learn them in 30 games. You really don't.

 

PS. This same topic pops up every few months and there is always some unexperienced carrier player saying the same thing about fighters and in the end the result is always the same. More firepower is better.

 

But you are right about one thing. The class should be balanced by players who play ALL classes.

 

They could raise so many skeleton topics about this very same thing...

[WingedHussar_Adler]

2 hours ago, viceadmiral123 said:

Did you even read any post in this thread?

Quick debunking of your false argument:

 

1. Spotting is king, Spotting is the best. HOWEVER, more fighters = less spotting. More fighter means enemy keeps you away from his fleet, and you keep enemy away from your fleet. Net result = less spotting because of stronger enemy anti-air, carrier spotting power is nerfed.

2. You can spot with any plane, it doesn't have to be a fighter. A bomber can both spot and deal damage. A bomber denies an area better by spotting and being able to actually attack ships. Result = less damage available, carrier strike is nerfed.

3. Both these nerfs have a synergistic effect.

 

I have yet to read a reasonable argument that -1bomber/+1fighter is a buff.

 

 

I did read all and even i understand your "bigger" picture but it is clearly that Haku  got buff. 1 fighter traded for 1 bomber is clear buff because now Midway can not protect space and 3TB can strike past usa CV airdefence anytime they want. Midway now can not protect space without AAA help and is again reduced to defencive play and seeking holes in AAA bubles and air domination of Haku. 

 

I just don't get for what reason midway is punisshed with t8 and t 9 planes. 

 

Haku in one deck has 15 t10 fighters, 12 t10 TB and 10 t10 DB against 14t9 figjters, 12 t8 TB and 10 t10 DB.....what in hell Is ao OP in midway that it needs t9 fighters and t8 TB....and much slower reload. 

 

In this patch Haku got serious buff and Midway small nerf but consider usa vs IJN there again Midway basicaly is much worse ship and not competitive at all. 

 

If bouth got nerfed relations in USA vs IJN would not changed but they did. Drastically. 

[PapVogele]

46 minutes ago, Kenliero said:

I haven't played carriers in last 2 years, but I still have 500 games in them and basic principles are still pretty much the same, so your opinion really is not as valid as mine with only 30 matches. 

 

You really should not talk about balancing carriers from "receiving end", if you have no idea what it is like to actually play them. I am by no means top CV player and I probably get some things wrong, but it's still 500 matches with that class, so you learn basic principles. You don't learn them in 30 games. You really don't.

 

PS. This same topic pops up every few months and there is always some unexperienced carrier player saying the same thing about fighters and in the end the result is always the same. More firepower is better.

 

But you are right about one thing. The class should be balanced by players who play ALL classes.

 

They could raise so many skeleton topics about this very same thing...

Of course I should be able to voice my opinion, the impact that any class has over others in battle is something that people will have an opinion about.

 

If someone is a cruiser main with 50 games in BBs and WG decides to increase BB accuracy to Zao levels, even if he does not have BB experience, he should be able to voice his opinion about what it would be like on the recieving end.

 

I won’t speak about the inter CV balance in games as I have no experience, and I haven’t done that really. I’ve spoken about what potential impact it could have on DD gameplay.

[El2aZeR]

5 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

as OP stated an extra fighter to shutdown enemy CV works both way, enemy CV also has an extra fighter to shutdown you.

It's not like it's too different from before. If you had a skilled opponent you'd rarely, if ever fly a strike regardless of whether he has two fighters or three fighters.

 

On the other hand it's more than likely that your opponent doesn't have what it takes to micro three fighters around as many already fail with just two. If you on the other hand can then that's a huge advantage in your favor.

Aka this is a buff for skilled CV players. Again.

[viceadmiral123]

21 hours ago, PapVogele said:

I again disagree, as a DD main my biggest concern is fighters, not bombers, bombers will spot, drop, return. Fighters will more often than not, stay around and spot.

 

21 hours ago, PapVogele said:

If you read my first (or second) post, I’ve stated this already, and I’m expressing my opinion from the recieving end of the carrier, an opinion that should be as valid as yours.

So, as a DD or whatever ship, your biggest concern is fighters, not bombers? You must be a special one. Maybe you will get cross-strafed by those pesky fighters in your smoke, forget the useless bombers.

[PapVogele]

21 minutes ago, viceadmiral123 said:

 

So, as a DD or whatever ship, your biggest concern is fighters, not bombers? You must be a special one. Maybe you will get cross-strafed by those pesky fighters in your smoke, forget the useless bombers.

The question at hand was DBs, not TBs, stop ignoring past posts and cutting out stuff so you can make an argument that seems in your favor.

[WingedHussar_Adler]

Also if bomber is more important for overall game than fighter, why all tournaments are played with AS setup? 

AS setup in tournaments would suggest that air domination IS THE MOST IMPORTANT thing for cv in competitive surrounding, otherwise there would be balanced or strike setups...but we all know only AS is only valid.

 

so in lignt of that, how 1 more fighter and one less bomber in strike setup is not a buff?

[lup3s]

Imo definitely a buff when it's Hakuryu vs Midway; but only a buff when it's Haluryu vs Hakuryu if one player is much better than the other.

[viceadmiral123]

On 5/2/2018 at 12:55 PM, 15JG52Adler said:

Also if bomber is more important for overall game than fighter, why all tournaments are played with AS setup? 

AS setup in tournaments would suggest that air domination IS THE MOST IMPORTANT thing for cv in competitive surrounding, otherwise there would be balanced or strike setups...but we all know only AS is only valid.

 

so in lignt of that, how 1 more fighter and one less bomber in strike setup is not a buff?

Tournaments are played in fighter setup b/c you need at least as many fighters as the enemy to keep the status quo on the field. This does not mean that fighters make carriers powerful, quite the opposite - fighters are anti-carrier weapons. Wargaming increased anti-air by 50% in the strike setup, and blatantly sold it off as a "buff".

Not only did Wargaming increased anti-air by 50% with the +1 fighter in strike mod., but they also decreased strike power by -1 dive bomber.

Does this sound as a buff to you, Adler?

 

On 5/2/2018 at 3:04 PM, lup3s said:

Imo definitely a buff when it's Hakuryu vs Midway; but only a buff when it's Haluryu vs Hakuryu if one player is much better than the other.

Hakuruy vs Hakuruy - it's a full scale nerf of +50% anti-air power and less strike power.

Hakuruy vs Midway - it's definitely gives air-superiority advantage to Hakuruy with strike setup, but also forces him to make use of it to compensate for the 1 less bomber. However, competitive play is 4/2/2 loadout Hakuruy, not Midway, not 3/3/2 Hakuruy, so this is irrelevant.

[viceadmiral123]

On 5/2/2018 at 10:48 AM, PapVogele said:

The question at hand was DBs, not TBs, stop ignoring past posts and cutting out stuff so you can make an argument that seems in your favor.

And where did I mention TBs exactly?

[PapVogele]

6 minutes ago, viceadmiral123 said:

And where did I mention TBs exactly?

Do you usually crossdrop with DBs? If so, shame on you!

[lup3s]

1 hour ago, viceadmiral123 said:

Hakuruy vs Hakuruy - it's a full scale nerf of +50% anti-air power and less strike power.

Hakuruy vs Midway - it's definitely gives air-superiority advantage to Hakuruy with strike setup, but also forces him to make use of it to compensate for the 1 less bomber. However, competitive play is 4/2/2 loadout Hakuruy, not Midway, not 3/3/2 Hakuruy, so this is irrelevant.

 

I understand your point

 

About Hakuryu vs Midway, I was talking about Randoms - my experience with Hakuryu or Midway is nihil (so far .. I'll get there one day ).

About competitive I really can't comment.

[viceadmiral123]

On 5/4/2018 at 3:09 PM, PapVogele said:

Do you usually crossdrop with DBs? If so, shame on you!

You make no sense. I said cross-strafed with fighters, why do you talk about TB cross-drops?

[PapVogele]

2 hours ago, viceadmiral123 said:

You make no sense. I said cross-strafed with fighters, why do you talk about TB cross-drops?

You really just want to argue...

 

Your arguments are so onesided and stupid I’m not even going to participate in your ridiculous shennanigans anymore.

 

have fun with your oh so serious nerf...

[KarmaQU_EU]

An extra fighter is a nerf to CV play in general as they will counter and fustrate each other more. OP is right on this point.

But it's a buff to that specific loadout of Haku granting it better Air control capability.

 

WG's possible direction is to want CVs to focus less on destroying surface ships, and more on making life hell for each other, so the surface ship players will stop whining about op CVs. The 'less planes for Midway' change is also a "balance" in this direction as now Midway will have to be mindful of striking high-AA surface targets. 

 

This nerf against CVs' influence on the surface sphere is the true motive behind these changes, but WG, to borrow OP's words, "has the gall to sell those changes as IJN vs USN balance", telling a different version of the story to the players. 

 

This is why OP is upset by this change. Some ppl can sense something is wrong, but cannot express it quite clearly. Their argument may be flawed, and their expression is crude, but they should not be insulted for that.

 

But perhaps I am wrong to judge WG so harshly, perhaps the CVs were in need of rebalancing, or perhaps the true motive was merely to balance CVs for competitive play or CW/ranked, and not something as sinister as "discourage players from playing CV". But I know better than to trust WG, who likes to play these kinds of tricks on the playerbase. Introducing radar to quell DDs. Introducing Asashio to quell BBs. 

 

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

I am upset too. I used to like playing AS Haku because it was best for supporting the team. I played CV like a support class instead of a clicker-max-self-damage class. I liked the CV because it was variety, creativity, possibility incarnate on this game. Their originally highly varied loadouts reflected this.

 

But no, WG just had to change CVs half a dozen times over till at the end they are still not balanced, still toxicity-inducing, and hardly better than their original forms. CV players have dropped, normal players still hate CVs, and Graf Zepp was called a clicker class, the utmost insult possible for a CV, while the other premium CVs are highly flawed gimmicks. Hell, even the original CVs were not regarded as clickers, and a certain respect went towards the skill needed to play them and the players playing them. 

 

In the end does it even matter if it's a buff or a nerf? The seal was long dead and we are still kicking it.