Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Horin728

Hakuryu's alternative torpedoes being removed

24 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
545 posts
6,310 battles

So this just popped up on the developlment blog:

 

I'd like to share a few thoughts at the expense of being hated by everyone as a "semi CV main."

 

First of all, I know why WG decided to remove the 8 km torps, with the changes done to them to nerf them they are not fufilling the "vision" WG had for them and with the changes tried on the PTS we have the "flying shima" problem back again. The main change I liked was the reduction in arming distance - what I was planning on doing was to use the long range torps as close range ones, since the attack squadron consists of 4 planes/torps.

 

What I don't like about this change is that it comes at a time when all the "major CV balancing is done" and "CVs are ready for competitive play" so no refunds anymore, same with the Midway DB changes (I mean a weapon that intentionally aims for the border of the reticule not for the center? lol...).

 

Furthermore this pushes the Haku into using the 2 planes and 2 torps per drop bombers. This is especially silly, since Hakus planes were never designed to sustain high levels of AA for long periods of time - they are basically made out of paper. How can WG think that the Haku will be able to execute 6 drops (hell even 3 is a stretch) with one squadron is quite beyond my capability of understanding.

 

What more, the thing that made the Haku unique (namely stealth dropping and being able to saturate an area) is now totally gone. When combined with the high volatility (all or nothing priciple) of AP bombers, her (when compared to the other TX CVs) underwhelming rocket planes and overall low plane HP, I simply don't see a single reason to play the Haku, when there are so much better options on display (or maybe just one option, depending on how hard the nerf hammer hits the Midway).

 

Oh and WG is basically saying, that the Blob way is the Best way, and therefore the Only way....

 

As I said I fully expect to be engulfed in AA flame, for defending CVs, but consider this...

French are getting a TX ship that was launched in 1959. Russian (Soviet) navy is getting a TX ship that was launched in 1955. Why is the Midway not in her 1960 config with angled deck, catapults and jets? (Obvious joke at the end of an article is obvious enough I hope, still makes me wonder though....)

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FJAKA]
Players
2,975 posts
477 battles
8 minutes ago, Horin728 said:

So this just popped up on the developlment blog:

 

I'd like to share a few thoughts at the expense of being hated by everyone as a "semi CV main."

 

First of all, I know why WG decided to remove the 8 km torps, with the changes done to them to nerf them they are not fufilling the "vision" WG had for them and with the changes tried on the PTS we have the "flying shima" problem back again. The main change I liked was the reduction in arming distance - what I was planning on doing was to use the long range torps as close range ones, since the attack squadron consists of 4 planes/torps.

 

What I don't like about this change is that it comes at a time when all the "major CV balancing is done" and "CVs are ready for competitive play" so no refunds anymore, same with the Midway DB changes (I mean a weapon that intentionally aims for the border of the reticule not for the center? lol...).

 

Furthermore this pushes the Haku into using the 2 planes and 2 torps per drop bombers. This is especially silly, since Hakus planes were never designed to sustain high levels of AA for long periods of time - they are basically made out of paper. How can WG think that the Haku will be able to execute 6 drops (hell even 3 is a stretch) with one squadron is quite beyond my capability of understanding.

 

What more, the thing that made the Haku unique (namely stealth dropping and being able to saturate an area) is now totally gone. When combined with the high volatility (all or nothing priciple) of AP bombers, her (when compared to the other TX CVs) underwhelming rocket planes and overall low plane HP, I simply don't see a single reason to play the Haku, when there are so much better options on display (or maybe just one option, depending on how hard the nerf hammer hits the Midway).

 

Oh and WG is basically saying, that the Blob way is the Best way, and therefore the Only way....

 

As I said I fully expect to be engulfed in AA flame, for defending CVs, but consider this...

French are getting a TX ship that was launched in 1959. Russian (Soviet) navy is getting a TX ship that was launched in 1955. Why is the Midway not in her 1960 config with angled deck, catapults and jets? (Obvious joke at the end of an article is obvious enough I hope, still makes me wonder though....)

For my perspective AP bombs are the thing that do difference in Haku, not torps....20k strikes on tx cruiser are more of regularity than exception.

Midway is not geting nerf to be honest. It will get nerf to hunting dds. (where he was Op with HE bombers) but will get buff for othher targets (removing aiming penalty in moving).

Also do you remember golden day of Midway when he actualy had jet planes...the sound....ufff....it was totaly OP but fun :) :)

 

right now i see IJN as "alpha" CVs and USA as "dot" ones....RN are mix of bouth worlds.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[XTREM]
Players
1,801 posts
14,043 battles
1 hour ago, Horin728 said:

How can WG think that the Haku will be able to execute 6 drops (hell even 3 is a stretch) with one squadron is quite beyond my capability of understanding.

 

I know what you're saying but the problem stems from the rework in general rather than just Haku.

 

Ever since the beginning this has bugged me. Why the :etc_swear: would a squadron fly though AA to the target, right on top of the enemy, only to have 2 planes or so drop, then fly back out through the AA, come back again for another pass, rinse and repeat?

 

It's retarded. Balance or lack thereof, this whole idea is fundamentally idiotic. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RONIN]
Beta Tester
5,286 posts
24,409 battles

^

 

Imagine this, a destroyer is about 100 m long, using this as the size of the launching area you can squeeze safely 2 torpedo planes, 3 is already a bit too much for a DD, you need at least 20-30 meters for safety between the planes, and this assumes flying straight  no maneuvering to dodge the AA fire which may cause them to bump into each other. 20-30 meters is really close for the speed of a plane.

Dive bombers would have an attack area of 10-20 m (the ships width) which is enough only for one plane, so they would take turns dropping their load. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,428 posts
14,187 battles

Never touched the 4 torp drop lot myself. Can't say I'm struggling In Hak so far either. Feels far more powerful than Midway. Midway feels like swinging a Sledgehammer. Hak feels like wielding a surgical scalpel. Where I can drop a Cruiser with AP DB's for multiple cits and spam torps across a row on BB's. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ROT8]
[ROT8]
Beta Tester
1,509 posts
10,164 battles

haku 2 torp drop is fine against lonesome bbs as you can usually get 3 to 4 salvos of

the 4 drop is so situational and mostly for area spam and as such I don't use em

the ap bombs are another nuke or puke due to rng and hitting the right ship at the right angle but by god they are fun when you blat a cruiser for half its health

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,086 posts
11,852 battles
5 minutes ago, NoobySkooby said:

So the ship I am heading for very soon has been nerfed, I am raging, the stealth torps are what I was looking forward to.,

They never worked as designed. With initial version Flying Shima was so much more efficient and I guess it was the case again on PTS.

 

Besides, for poking from afar "short" range 6km torps are already good enough, as you barely skim into long range while you get 6 attacks instead three on faster torps.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ROT8]
[ROT8]
Beta Tester
1,509 posts
10,164 battles
2 minutes ago, NoobySkooby said:

So the ship I am heading for very soon has been nerfed, I am raging, the stealth torps are what I was looking forward to.,

when I have tried them pal they are very enemy player dependent as any good bb player will always start and move to counter the torps and though you can drop to anticipate this it usually ends up with either all or nothing torps

while on the other side the 2 torps do around 10k per salvo and drop close enough to hit bbs and cruisers quite effectively so your already steadily being forced to use them anyway

I like the haku now I am getting to understand her more but its a lot harder to play her well compared to the midway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,352 posts
1 minute ago, beercrazy said:

when I have tried them pal they are very enemy player dependent as any good bb player will always start and move to counter the torps and though you can drop to anticipate this it usually ends up with either all or nothing torps

while on the other side the 2 torps do around 10k per salvo and drop close enough to hit bbs and cruisers quite effectively so your already steadily being forced to use them anyway

I like the haku now I am getting to understand her more but its a lot harder to play her well compared to the midway

Ok fair enough , would have been nice to have had the chance to try them out though, this nerfing of ships needs to end. Same h thing happened in WoT's, you did the grind for the Type 5 to get the mega derp gun, now it is nerfed, getting pissed off with WG right now:Smile-angry:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,596 posts
12,957 battles
1 hour ago, Miragetank90 said:

 

I know what you're saying but the problem stems from the rework in general rather than just Haku.

 

Ever since the beginning this has bugged me. Why the :etc_swear: would a squadron fly though AA to the target, right on top of the enemy, only to have 2 planes or so drop, then fly back out through the AA, come back again for another pass, rinse and repeat?

 

It's retarded. Balance or lack thereof, this whole idea is fundamentally idiotic. 

Agreed.

 

What bothers me is there still isn't a button to "detach one attack flight of the squad" - where with, in this case, 3 quick button presses you can send half of the squad back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,086 posts
11,852 battles
1 minute ago, Saiyko said:

Agreed.

 

What bothers me is there still isn't a button to "detach one attack flight of the squad" - where with, in this case, 3 quick button presses you can send half of the squad back.

Detaching attack wing, while rest circles and await further instructions would be good enough, though it would require "skill" to not leave them next to Minotaur or somesuch... which explain why WG didn't went that way:cap_book:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
128 posts
29,927 battles

This is a c.v thread an should be locked apparently we have enough of those,please go to the pinned c.v  thread

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,962 posts
16,897 battles
1 hour ago, HMS_Britannia said:

This is a c.v thread an should be locked apparently we have enough of those,please go to the pinned c.v  thread

nah this is discussing PTS stuff. Go to the relevant Dev Block thread istead :Smile-_tongue:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GURKA]
Players
5,321 posts
10,733 battles
3 hours ago, Miragetank90 said:

 

I know what you're saying but the problem stems from the rework in general rather than just Haku.

 

Ever since the beginning this has bugged me. Why the :etc_swear: would a squadron fly though AA to the target, right on top of the enemy, only to have 2 planes or so drop, then fly back out through the AA, come back again for another pass, rinse and repeat?

 

It's retarded. Balance or lack thereof, this whole idea is fundamentally idiotic. 

I would prefer to drop all 12 torps, too :cap_haloween:

You can't design that without losing the realism-trait. If you want drop all 12 at a time, the damage had to be reduced, but then people would come up and say "It's an idiotid idea to have torps, that do almost no damage, torps should deal huge amount of damage"

There are always people, who don't like someones design :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,027 posts
3 hours ago, NoobySkooby said:

So the ship I am heading for very soon has been nerfed, I am raging, the stealth torps are what I was looking forward to.,

It's a Japanese ship...(they don't even want to show the proper ensign, those b****ters...) what else did you expect from WG... Type *cough* 5 *cough*....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
14,106 posts
20,018 battles
Quote

But changing the parameters of the J5N Tenrai Type 91 mod. 8 showed that, as they strengthened, the Japanese aircraft carrier loses this shortcoming and becomes a universal ship, capable of attacking any target.

 

Wait, doesn't that describe USN HE DBs as well? :Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,144 posts
245 battles
3 hours ago, NoobySkooby said:

Ok fair enough , would have been nice to have had the chance to try them out though, this nerfing of ships needs to end. Same h thing happened in WoT's, you did the grind for the Type 5 to get the mega derp gun, now it is nerfed, getting pissed off with WG right now:Smile-angry:

The type 5 and 4 heavies were badly balanced anyways, the mongurors of wot’s. Armour wasnt an issue either its just the 14cm gun was underwhelming and needed a buff but wargaming are too useless to actually buff or nerf the things that actually need doing so.

 

just like the maus, the armour wasnt needed its just the gun needed a buff and maybe a hp buff. Also like how they nerfed global accuracy before the 9.0 patch series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
10,086 posts
11,852 battles
1 hour ago, NoobySkooby said:

So just out of interest, what is the stock Hakuryu like, surely even stock it must be way better than the Atrocious?

Surprisingly decent IIRC, as with upgrades you get only mild hp/speed improvement and two planes extra per TB. And you could argue, stock rockets/bombers are better if you get deplaned in regular intervals due to shorter restock time.

 

Its not like you can check base stats yourself in the port:Smile_smile:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,352 posts
1 hour ago, CptBarney said:

The type 5 and 4 heavies were badly balanced anyways, the mongurors of wot’s. Armour wasnt an issue either its just the 14cm gun was underwhelming and needed a buff but wargaming are too useless to actually buff or nerf the things that actually need doing so.

 

just like the maus, the armour wasnt needed its just the gun needed a buff and maybe a hp buff. Also like how they nerfed global accuracy before the 9.0 patch series.

Well I am happy to say WoT's has well and truly lost this player, as for the Hakuyru, which torpedo set is the best, for speed and damage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
725 posts
12,336 battles
7 hours ago, NoobySkooby said:

as for the Hakuyru, which torpedo set is the best

that is a valid question, I would like to know.

 

It is not WoT forum but when you use gold ammo Type 5 works as previous version would work when not using gold ammo (even slightly better, but I am bad player). Good they nerfed that abomination, I am less happy with Haku lack of changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
823 posts
1 hour ago, Sir_Grzegorz said:

that is a valid question, I would like to know.

2 Torp option

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,331 posts
14,684 battles

Short arming distance is incredibly valuable to have.

Enterprise can drop torpdoes at point-blank range for example, making it hard to miss anything.

 

The Haku 2 torp option has a much much shorter arming distance and even higher speed than the 4 torp option. That makes it way more easy to hit all torps. At the same time the theoretical alpha of each 2 torp strike is like 18.6k, while Midway has like 25.8k on 6 torps.

 

So these easy-to-hit 2xTB on Haku do more damage than a Midway hitting 4/6 torps, which is not bad at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×