Midway Torpedo Bombers - wtf Wargaming?

[Varian_Dorn]

TL;DR: a plea to Wargaming to either lower punishment on torpedo aiming while maneuvering in attack mode OR increase the damage on torpedoes. Also please limit cvs to one per team per game.

 

 

So, I've played several games now with the Midway. Overall, I like the ship and its planes. Both the rocket fighters and the dive bombers are well rounded overall. But the torpedo bombers....

 

… Wargaming, you overnerfed them. Increasing the aiming punishment when maneuvering in attack mode AND lowering the damage output of the torpedoes - that's just too much. One of those measures would have sufficed, but with both… let's look at some numbers.

 

So if you maneuver even SLIGHTLY, and I mean so much as touching that button even for a milisecond, the aiming lines either widen or at least stop moving in. They start out ridiculously wide to begin with, so lining up anything, ANYTHING that moves is difficult. If that anything begins evasive action you have no chance to even slightly adapt if you want a narrow attack drop.

Now, you can get a narrow drop AND some Chance to maneuver slightly to adapt. But that means practically starting your attack run on max range, giving the ship you attack PLENTY of time to evade. So, at best, unless the target is 1.) mostly oblivious to you and 2.) very slow or standing still you won't get more than 2 torpedo hits on target on average.

 

And when you DO hit with your torpedoes the damage is anemic. Base damage value for 1 torpedo: 4233. BASE damage. That's before the torpedo protection that almost every ship has in some form is deducted. Just watched a fellow Midway attack a Conqueror. Hit him with 2 torps, Damage: around 5000.

Myself, I attacked a Republique - even scored a perfect hit, got all 6 torps on target, since he indeed was very slow and broadside to my planes. Damage scored: About 12000. 12k Damage from SIX TORPEDO HITS. This basically means that ships like the Yamato, especially when still near full health, can just take even a full on attack from those bombers and shrug it off. Or to do some math: one torpedo from Midway has a chance of inflicting up to about 1910 Damage against Yamato's protection. This amounts to about 11400 damage maximum if you actually land all six fishes.

Now, since we have established that this is only the case in the rarest of scenarios and most of the time you score 2 hits… that adds up to a smashing 3820 damage.

 

And all of that isn't even factoring in the difficulty of finding an isolated or at least less covered target to begin with, let alone accounting for AA. If more than 2 ships are close enough together for overlapping AA you have basically ONE attack run before your planes either get shot down for the most part, crippled so badly that they wouldn't survive a second run or you have to withdraw the remaining wing to keep yourself in the fight longer.

 

So, please, I don't want easy mode, I don't want a one button kill machine… all I want is a somewhat more fair chance at actually dealing damage here. So I humbly request that:

 

- EITHER severely reduce the punishment on aiming for maneuvering in attack mode so there is a good chance you can get any hits in on average and more than 2 on a good run

 

- OR significantly increase torpedo damage so the few hits one is able to score actually do noticeable damage.

 

 

Emphasis on EITHER and OR here. I enjoy the cv rework, it brought me back to playing carriers again, even reaching for T10 when in the old system this was just undesireable for me.

 

In closing, think about this: imagine ANY T10 ship other than a cv right now carrying torpedoes if it would be reduced to such pathetic damage values AND receive a reduction in its firing angles as well. Example: imagine a Shimakaze with an average torpedo damage of about 9k (base damage) per torpedo on any of her fish options. This estimate is accounting for reload and the fact that you have to be a bit more involved in a dd. Just imagine the outcry this would create. And now think About the damage values Midway has available on torpedoes right now. Again, accounting for the fact that "reload" is somewhat faster in comparison and the cv itself usually sits far away from ist target.

 

See my point? What do you guys think about this?

 

 

P.S.: Oh, and Wargaming, I still request you reset the matchmaking so that only one cv is present per team per game. Yes, cv player here that thinks even in the current state the cvs are in one of them per side per game is enough.

[ghostbuster_]

4 minutes ago, Varian_Dorn said:

dive bombers are well rounded overall.

Say that to DDs which get balanced with 10k+ by DBs in one go right at the start of the battle. Well rounded indeed(!) 

[Varian_Dorn]

20 hours ago, ghostbuster_ said:

Say that to DDs which get balanced with 10k+ by DBs in one go right at the start of the battle. Well rounded indeed(!) 

If you're in such a small ship and manage to get hit by dive bombers hard enough for this kind of damage the blame is on you, not the damage potential of the bombers.

 

Or to be blunt here: Edited* with your evasive action if a cv manages to get a hit on your dd like this with freakin' dive bombers.

 

Edit: Watch the language please!

Excavatus

[allufewig]

Damage on these is indeed pathetic when they hit BB belts/bulges. First you think "oh crap.." until you realize you barely lost any health and some of it is even repairable. The actual danger to BBs comes from floodings I guess.

 

And yes its those dive-bombers that are Midways real asset now.

[Flavio1997]

3 minutes ago, allufewig said:

Damage on these is indeed pathetic when they hit BB belts/bulges. First you think "oh crap.." until you realize you barely lost any health and some of it is even repairable. The actual danger to BBs comes from floodings I guess.

 

And yes its those dive-bombers that are Midways real asset now.

Yeap...flooding that does the same damage as fire right now, and that you get on average  1in 8-10 hits.  Problem is that now we are ysed to immediatly damage con flooding, but a flooding without  any reduction right now does 20% of your health  damage ( to bbs and cvs) while a fire does 18%

[Panocek]

2 minutes ago, allufewig said:

Damage on these is indeed pathetic when they hit BB belts/bulges. First you think "oh crap.." until you realize you barely lost any health and some of it is even repairable. The actual danger to BBs comes from floodings I guess.

 

And yes its those dive-bombers that are Midways real asset now.

Then there is this mythical flooding chance on aerial torps, at times I wonder if detonations are more likely than floods. At least these torps notoriously break engines/rudders so

 

And DB always were undeniable asset, same with Lexington

[Miragetank90]

I agree it's a bit much, though I'm not sure I agree with the analogy you used in closing.

 

Personally, I'd rather have the damage on the torps to be decent, and have the aim while manoeuvring take the hit.

 

Part of the skill behind this is predicting where the enemy is going to be before you commit to the attack, and timing it right. If I messed that part up, and I have to make big course corrections, it's only fair that my aim will take longer to settle down as compared to if I had done it right. At the same time, it shouldn't be too punitive, It should feel fair. 

 

At the same time, if it comes together and I pull off a good one, it should be sufficiently rewarding. 

 

Basically what's needed is balance, and as of yet this has not been achieved in CVs.

Work in progress, I guess. 

[Seinta]

20 hours ago, Varian_Dorn said:

If you're in such a small ship and manage to get hit by dive bombers hard enough for this kind of damage the blame is on you, not the damage potential of the bombers.

 

Or to be blunt here: you edit* with your evasive action if a cv manages to get a hit on your dd like this with freakin' dive bombers.

I was able to land 2 out of 2 stock bombs from Lexi on a DD because RNG said so, skill has f*** all to do with avoiding bombs.

 

[ghostbuster_]

20 hours ago, Varian_Dorn said:

If you're in such a small ship and manage to get hit by dive bombers hard enough for this kind of damage the blame is on you, not the damage potential of the bombers.

 

Or to be blunt here: you edit* with your evasive action if a cv manages to get a hit on your dd like this with freakin' dive bombers.

Well if you have no idea about something, dont make any comments about it. You make yourself funny.

 

In that scenario, im not the DD which gets blaped. Im the CV which does that. And if you cant manage to hit DDs that hard with midway DBs, you s.ck with CVs dude.

[El2aZeR]

If you need to heavily readjust your aim with Midway TBs you're already doing it wrong. Make adjustments before you attack, not while attacking.

 

Minor readjustment without worsening aim is possible via mouse otherwise. Under no circumstances should you use AD if you have a near perfect drop lined up.

[Flavio1997]

30 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

If you need to heavily readjust your aim with Midway TBs you're already doing it wrong. Make adjustments before you attack, not while attacking.

 

Minor readjustment without worsening aim is possible via mouse otherwise. Under no circumstances should you use AD if you have a near perfect drop lined up.

Yeap, but for some player ( me for example) using the mouse to aim is incredibly  unnatural and if you play with a high dpi sometimes for no apparent reason your drop pattern just doesnt want to improve.  It's  infuriating how many good drop i have lost thanks to mouse movements. I would love , and already asked, if wg could add the option to remove the mouse control completely

[lup3s]

15 minutes ago, Flavio1997 said:

Yeap, but for some player ( me for example) using the mouse to aim is incredibly  unnatural and if you play with a high dpi sometimes for no apparent reason your drop pattern just doesnt want to improve.  It's  induriating how many good drop i have lost tankes to mouse movements. I would love , and already asked, if wg could add the option to remove the mouse control completely

 

What do you use then to aim / make slight adjustments to your fly path?

 

Are you using a joystick?

 

I remember in BF2 / BF3 I used a joystick for flying the jets, but the mouse for precise aiming with the cannon ..

[hgbn_dk]

6 minutes ago, lup3s said:

 

What do you use then to aim / make slight adjustments to your fly path?

 

Are you using a joystick?

 

Just move your mouse left or right hardly rocket science

[Flavio1997]

1 hour ago, lup3s said:

 

What do you use then to aim / make slight adjustments to your fly path?

 

Are you using a joystick?

 

I remember in BF2 / BF3 I used a joystick for flying the jets, but the mouse for precise aiming with the cannon ..

Usually i lead very well because I'm  accurate from the start, is then the mouse aim that misalign the drop at that point, i would rather not have that tipe of aiming at all, or maybe being able to rebind those small movements to the "q" and "e" key

[elblancogringo]

Well I did a battle in Republique yesterday and at first I tried to avoid torps from the Midway focusing me. In the end I totally ignored him. I mean, Republique torp protection is not that great right? But the torps were clearly not a threat to me to the point of only modifying my speed to not make the 6 hit me was more than enough.

I clearly fear more the DB than the TB. I guess you better target cruisers with torps.

[Varian_Dorn]

I apologise for my harsh words on dive bombers. If you are good enough to consistantly hit destroyers with dive bombers I salute you. But it is on the other hand easier to avoid a dive bomber attack than evading missile fighters. So much so that I consider higher damage on a dive bomber hit balanced, compared to the reasonable amounts rockets deal and the pathetic numbers coming from torpedoes.

 

Regarding maneuvering on a torpedo run:

 

As I said, it is possible to line up a well aimed attack. But in order to get those targetting lines aligned you have to "aim" well ahead of your target and you need at least 6 kilometers of distance. Now, unless the target is very slow and/or not paying much attention to you it has plenty of room and time to initiate evasive maneuvers, thus forcing you to alter your heading.

If you alter your heading any more than a few single meters to the left or right while the targetting lines are still spread, not only do they stop narrowing but immediately fan out to a wider angle. If they are fully narrowed they still like to spread open again fast on the slightest heading change.

 

So you either can line up a perfect drop and hope your enemy is unattentive and/or stupid enough to steam into your torps or you risk missing with all of them. So you alter your heading, targetting goes apesh** and you are lucky if 2 fishes hit.

 

All of this presuming of course already optimal base conditions where you actually managed to find an isolated target and don't find your planes under fire from at least 2 ships.

 

 

@elblancogringo thats what I'm talking about. However, cruisers are more maneuverable and thus the chance of missing them completely is higher.

 

My point remains: having both aiming efficiency and damage potential cut down is one nerf too many. If I deal low damage I at least want good aiming. If I have a hard time lining up a good attack it should be rewarded with solid Damage.

 

 

Right now, I have a hard time lining up a shot and even if I hit the damage is next to ignorable.

 

[Flavio1997]

9 minutes ago, Varian_Dorn said:

I apologise for my harsh words on dive bombers. If you are good enough to consistantly hit destroyers with dive bombers I salute you. But it is on the other hand easier to avoid a dive bomber attack than evading missile fighters. So much so that I consider higher damage on a dive bomber hit balanced, compared to the reasonable amounts rockets deal and the pathetic numbers coming from torpedoes.

 

Regarding maneuvering on a torpedo run:

 

As I said, it is possible to line up a well aimed attack. But in order to get those targetting lines aligned you have to "aim" well ahead of your target and you need at least 6 kilometers of distance. Now, unless the target is very slow and/or not paying much attention to you it has plenty of room and time to initiate evasive maneuvers, thus forcing you to alter your heading.

If you alter your heading any more than a few single meters to the left or right while the targetting lines are still spread, not only do they stop narrowing but immediately fan out to a wider angle. If they are fully narrowed they still like to spread open again fast on the slightest heading change.

 

So you either can line up a perfect drop and hope your enemy is unattentive and/or stupid enough to steam into your torps or you risk missing with all of them. So you alter your heading, targetting goes apesh** and you are lucky if 2 fishes hit.

 

All of this presuming of course already optimal base conditions where you actually managed to find an isolated target and don't find your planes under fire from at least 2 ships.

 

 

@elblancogringo thats what I'm talking about. However, cruisers are more maneuverable and thus the chance of missing them completely is higher.

 

My point remains: having both aiming efficiency and damage potential cut down is one nerf too many. If I deal low damage I at least want good aiming. If I have a hard time lining up a good attack it should be rewarded with solid Damage.

 

 

Right now, I have a hard time lining up a shot and even if I hit the damage is next to ignorable.

 

And even when you do a perfect 6/6 hut run ypu are rewarded with? A spectacular 12-15k damage

[lup3s]

1 hour ago, hgbn_dk said:

Just move your mouse left or right hardly rocket science

 

Just read the post I quoted, hardly rocket science

[Varian_Dorn]

55 minutes ago, Flavio1997 said:

And even when you do a perfect 6/6 hut run ypu are rewarded with? A spectacular 12-15k damage

Indeed. As I wrote in my original posting, 6 hits on a french T10 BB resulted in about 12k damage. And the floodings Wargaming was so eager to adjust happen don't happen as often as one wants to, and even then most players still have their Damage Control Team on standby.

[El2aZeR]

1 hour ago, Varian_Dorn said:

As I said, it is possible to line up a well aimed attack. But in order to get those targetting lines aligned you have to "aim" well ahead of your target and you need at least 6 kilometers of distance. Now, unless the target is very slow and/or not paying much attention to you it has plenty of room and time to initiate evasive maneuvers, thus forcing you to alter your heading.

 

Untrue. You can initiate the attack almost point blank. The reticle shows you the minimum distance you need for your torps to reach minimum spread assuming no maneuvers whatsoever. You can choose to drop your ordinance well before that happens.

Against bigger ships you also don't need your reticle to narrow down completely. At the later stages the drop is usually much tighter than the reticle would suggest. In fact, having your reticle narrow down completely can even be harmful as it gives more maneuverable enemies giant gaps to maneuver through whereas having a little spread ensures proper saturation of the target area.

Attack preparation distance is also affected by speed, meaning that the slower you are, the less distance you need to drop your ordinance.

 

I do agree however that the amount of effort it takes to make these torps work isn't exactly worth their effect.

[Animalul2012]

arent the american CVS flavor the dive bombers and rocket fighters? and isnt japan the one focused on torpedoes? 

[ghostbuster_]

1 hour ago, Varian_Dorn said:

I apologise for my harsh words on dive bombers. If you are good enough to consistantly hit destroyers with dive bombers I salute you. But it is on the other hand easier to avoid a dive bomber attack than evading missile fighters. So much so that I consider higher damage on a dive bomber hit balanced, compared to the reasonable amounts rockets deal and the pathetic numbers coming from torpedoes.

 

 

nope. its hard to miss with dive bombers. no matter how good the DD avoids. you have to time it perfectly and you wont miss.  lol reasonable damage by rockets? with tinytims you can hit DDs for like 7-8k but hitting dds with tinytims are way harder than hitting them with DBs.  are you sure that we are playing the same game?

[elblancogringo]

12 minutes ago, Animalul2012 said:

arent the american CVS flavor the dive bombers and rocket fighters? and isnt japan the one focused on torpedoes? 

That's also what I think now

[Yedwy]

Hmm dont know about midway but i ve been picking off dds with t6 TBs qute nicely last few days, picked off 3 today

[Panocek]

34 minutes ago, Animalul2012 said:

arent the american CVS flavor the dive bombers and rocket fighters? and isnt japan the one focused on torpedoes? 

That doesn't mean they shouldn't be workable. IJN flavor are torps, but that doesn't mean AP bombers are crap. Quite the opposite if you ask me.

 

Lexington torps are worse in potential dmg output, (19401 compared to Midway 25398) but they have so much better handling and aiming. And in case of botched drop, single torp on target deals more than Midway