General CV related discussions.

[UnterSeeBot]

5 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

. I miss more than half the stuff that I drop on whatever ship.

I don't. My hit rate is around 90%. 50% of my HE bomb drops on dds, including (by) British level bombers, tiers 6 & 8, deal 10k+ dmg/

[BLUB__BLUB]

1 minute ago, OVanBruce said:

Answering to BLUB_BLUB, yeah, Roosevelt is just WG being WG and throwing the balance out of the window to make people spend steel. The ship is too much.

Just when we were beginning to believe they wanted some kind of balance...

Well of course I'll need to have it, eh. 

(I rarely play T10 though so it is just for CB, LOL, to crap on Russian Bias cruisers and BBs).

[OVanBruce]

1 minute ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

It still is high, but different. tater CV players do not get an attack in because they fly into (self-controlled...) FLAK.

And if they survive the FLAK, now they have to aim... autodrop did it for them, in RTS. 

I'd argue that it is not high but for the sake of argument let's just say that it is WAY lower than it was during RTS.

2 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

They just want some MEANINGFUL kind of airplane-deterrent other than RNG-plane-driven-based crap.

There probably won't be. The moment there is a meaningful way of airplane-deterrent there will be a way to completely block a CVs attack and that is entirely against the design of the rework. You yourself said it, if people are already struggling to strike with the current system jjust imagine if there was an actual way to prevent every single squadron attack with 100% certainty. This is the playerbase we have to deal with.

[BLUB__BLUB]

2 minutes ago, LoveZeppelin said:

I don't. My hit rate is around 90%. 50% of my HE bomb drops on dds, including (by) British level bombers, tiers 6 & 8, deal 10k+ dmg/

You are hardly a player that can be called potato though. 

 

I don't deal 10K damage with HE-bombs at all. Even if I drop them on a BB most I get is ~5K. 

Maybe I'll get some fires and damage from that. If I get one fire, well OK usually they leave that. 

But if I get 2, they DCP, others set fires before I am back. Bad results. Dunno how you do that.

Actually I do, and I CAN do it - sometimes. But not generally.

 

With T8 Parseval, rocket attacks usually get mitigated because cruiser turn. 

If I am somewhat lucky I can make a second attack. yes 8K, if the poor sod is broadside. 

Usually though, a flight with rockets results in 4K or so. 

[UnterSeeBot]

6 minutes ago, OVanBruce said:

The moment there is a meaningful way of airplane-deterrent there will be a way to completely block a CVs attack and that is entirely against the design of the rework. You yourself said it, if people are already struggling to strike with the current system jjust imagine if there was an actual way to prevent every single squadron attack with 100% certainty. This is the playerbase we have to deal with.

People are not struggling to "strike" with the current system. CV hit rates among players with 100 + CV battles are exceedingly high.

People are not asking to prevent every single squadron attack with 100% certainty. What they are looking for, are meaningful ways to defend, and then to strike back. AI controlled AA & "justdodging" does not respond to this quite natural and healthy desire. Let's not be arrogant, and dismiss the widespread sentiment among the playerbase of "oppression" and "powerlessness/impotence", which add together to foment widespread toxicity and anger at the presence of CVs in WOWS.

[Panocek]

8 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

EH well, and then WG gave us Roosevelt...

Roosevelt torpedo payload is barely better than Midway. And then being spread on 8 fishes with quite the spread to them makes landing all 8 on target a rather uncommon occurrence, so practical damage per drop against someone who play with screen turned on is probably doing to be lower. Haku with "only" two TB is much more consistent for applying fish damage.

[UnterSeeBot]

4 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

You are hardly a player that can be called potato though. 

 

I aml a filthy casual in every other warship class (dd/ca/bb), except warships that are broken.

4 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Actually I do, and I CAN do it - sometimes. But not generally.

 

of course you can, whan you can be bothered. But be honest, most of the time you are split between a little angel on one shoulder, and a devil on the other, 

angel "give him a chance!"

devil "make him burn!"

and you choose, whether a ship lives or dies is tortured mercilessly.

[OVanBruce]

1 minute ago, LoveZeppelin said:

People are not struggling to "strike" with the current system. 

People are not asking to prevent every single squadron attack with 100% certainty. What they are looking for, are meaningful ways to defend, and then to strike back. AI controlled AA & "justdodging" does not respond to this quite natural and healthy desire. Let's not be arrogant, and dismiss the widespread sentiment among the playerbase of "oppression" and "powerlessness/impotence", which add together to foment widespread toxicity and anger at the presence of CVs in WOWS.

I'm not defending the current system with teeth and nail, after all I was totally ok with the RTS model and asked as well as many other players for it to be reformed to a less polarized system. I was ok with AA barrage destroying entire attacks and was ok with no fly zones too. I'm just putting into perspective the achievements of the current CV system in spite of the playerbase we got. WG just cannot make things any simpler or the CV experience will become completely pointless and boring yet at the same time they cannot make it any more complicated for both ends or the CV playerbase will go back to pre rework levels.

 

As I said, this is the playerbase we and WG have to deal with.

[Ashardalon_Dragnipur]

19 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

nope.. it is not possible unless it is a detonation. 

yes, the possibilities of point blank torp delivery 

pretty amazing since you can basically deliver them so close that the possibility of missing a BB was impossible

 

even cruisers have low luck trying to dodge a CV attack

usually flight time of shells is 5+ seconds and dodging under 10 takes more then a little skill

a CV drops with less then 2 seconds to react

thats basically guaranteed citadels for a BB from the ap bomb CVs, BBs who can only negate damage trough healing now losing the possibility to heal

and for cruisers its just a ton of damage they still cant dodge without showing full broadside to the entire enemy team for the low chance of a less competent CV 

then there are DDs who can dodge but they are spotted so what does dodging matter, they are already dead 

[Excavatus]

10 minutes ago, Ashardalon_Dragnipur said:

yes, the possibilities of point blank torp delivery 

pretty amazing since you can basically deliver them so close that the possibility of missing a BB was impossible

 

even cruisers have low luck trying to dodge a CV attack

usually flight time of shells is 5+ seconds and dodging under 10 takes more then a little skill

a CV drops with less then 2 seconds to react

thats basically guaranteed citadels for a BB from the ap bomb CVs, BBs who can only negate damage trough healing now losing the possibility to heal

and for cruisers its just a ton of damage they still cant dodge without showing full broadside to the entire enemy team for the low chance of a less competent CV 

then there are DDs who can dodge but they are spotted so what does dodging matter, they are already dead 

eermm.. 

I was talking about this one actually.. 

1 hour ago, Ashardalon_Dragnipur said:

doesnt yuro have a video about devstriking all kinds of battleships and cruisers with torp planes 

 

It is impossible to devstrike ship with TBs anymore.. 

Unless it is a detonation. 

[UnterSeeBot]

9 minutes ago, OVanBruce said:

I was ok with AA barrage destroying entire attacks and was ok with no fly zones too.

and this attitude is part of the very problem, you are denouncing among the playerbase (of which you are a representative)

 

10 minutes ago, OVanBruce said:

As I said, this is the playerbase we and WG have to deal with.

WG and "we" have a lot  in common with the playerbase you deride. There is no need for this display of arrogance, and condescending disdain towards others, not least when your statements are of the very quality that you denounce. Your attitude only contributes to the ambient toxicity on this subject, and can only serve to increase anti-CV resentment.

12 minutes ago, OVanBruce said:

WG just cannot make things any simpler or the CV experience will become completely pointless and boring

it already is pointless and boring. I only play CVs as part of my therapy, they help me sleep.

 

 

[BLUB__BLUB]

5 minutes ago, Panocek said:

Roosevelt torpedo payload is barely better than Midway. And then being spread on 8 fishes with quite the spread to them makes landing all 8 on target a rather uncommon occurrence, so practical damage per drop against someone who play with screen turned on is probably doing to be lower. Haku with "only" two TB is much more consistent for applying fish damage.

Problem with Roosevelt is mostly that you do not have to worry about all those torpedo planes disappearing like melting snow...

It will get more of those torps in that Midway for sure. Have mercy on the souls of the poor T8s that will face it... 

And that aim... shiiiiitttt it takes me 5km to line up Midway torps properly. 

 

And yes two torps is easier. Had the same problem with Kaga. 

Damn it has 4 torps but you need to hit 4, too. 

But first problem, you need 4 planes surviving... (or 2 on Kaga). 

 

3 minutes ago, LoveZeppelin said:

I aml a filthy casual in every other warship class (dd/ca/bb), except warships that are broken.

Well, I'd call that "not telling the whole truth".... maybe there's a lot of broken ships, then?

BTW it would mean your North Carolina is more broken than Enterprise... eh. 

 

3 minutes ago, LoveZeppelin said:

of course you can, whan you can be bothered. But be honest, most of the time you are split between a little angel on one shoulder, and a devil on the other, 

angel "give him a chance!"

devil "make him burn!"

and you choose, whether a ship lives or dies is tortured mercilessly.

Well this game is about blowing the reds out of the water. It's not like that DD that finally closes in is gonna think, oh you poor guy. 

Nor will that BB-player when my Cv gets spotted (and I know... often I am that BB player). I am with Satan on that one. 

 

 

[UnterSeeBot]

5 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Well, I'd call that "not telling the whole truth".... maybe there's a lot of broken ships, then?

BTW it would mean your North Carolina is more broken than Enterprise... eh. 

NC is brokenly OP, only bested by Mass. USN bb tier 8 guns..

Apart from one ship on that list, all of the others have fewer than 25 battles played. 

oh and the t61 is OP. As bad as that t6 cv EL (an absolute monster).

 

[BLUB__BLUB]

12 minutes ago, LoveZeppelin said:

NC is brokenly OP, only bested by Mass. USN bb tier 8 guns..

Apart from one ship on that list, all of the others have fewer than 25 battles played. 

oh and the t61 is OP. As bad as that t6 cv EL (an absolute monster).

 

You still have to explain all the rest of the 60%-and-over ships. 

That said, stats by WG are kinda fumbled anyway. Anything between 45% and 55% is "the norm".

Even so, you are clearly a bit above it. And you'll usually meet players that are NOT above it. 

I have seen some that have 30%... now guess who'd win. 

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

59 minutes ago, OVanBruce said:

This brings me back to my first post: Stop expecting and demanding for a ship that can completely block and prevent any plane attack, it won't happen, it goes against the design of the rework; instead concentrate on learning the best ways to minimize the potential damage of a CV's attack so it is an scratch instead of significant damage.

I'm still puzzeled who's demands you are referring to. Your initial post was an answer to BLUB's post, in which no reference was made to anyone demanding no fly zones and airplane obliterating AA.

 

1 hour ago, OVanBruce said:

Yet you don't want to make CVs completely unable to get damage if you want to have a healthy CV population.

A non argument, as making any class of ships unable to do damage is by default DOA.

 

Just out of curiosity: Would you consider current population distribution, where lower tiers are very regularly confronted with 4 carriers per match and higher tiers with occasionally 2 carriers per match, a healthy population?

[BLUB__BLUB]

32 minutes ago, LoveZeppelin said:

NC is brokenly OP, only bested by Mass. USN bb tier 8 guns..

Well maybe you have to look again... North Carolina is bottom-last except Tirpitz.

We know why Tirpitz is last, it was a sort-of give-away at some  time. Was even called a Derpitz... 

But North Carolina OP, and broken too? LOL. 

 

[UnterSeeBot]

26 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Well maybe you have to look again... North Carolina is bottom-last except Tirpitz.

 

USN ships are hugely popular, and USN bbs often a 1st choice tech tree for new players. This naturally drags down the statistics. Tirpitz does badly for similar reasons, hugely popular premium.

Generally speaking, the more battles a ship accumulates, the more the overall player WR tends towards 45-48%.

Except for rework CVs, maybe? I haven't looked in a while to compare battle numbers/wr.

[BLUB__BLUB]

2 minutes ago, LoveZeppelin said:

USN ships are hugely popular, and USN bbs often a 1st choice tech tree for new players. This naturally drags down the statistics. Tirpitz does badly for similar reasons, hugely popular premium.

Generally speaking, the more battles a ship accumulates, the more the overall player WR tends towards 45-48%.

Except for rework CVs, maybe? I haven't looked in a while to compare battle numbers/wr.

Well, you should at least compare tech-tree ships. Even so we can see that NC is powercrept AF. 

I'd say maybe it was broken when it first appeared, now it seems it's overtaken by every other tech tree ship... 

If I'm not mistaken it was one of the first available T8 BBs as well. But I started on the Brits, US line progressed upto T9.

 

Must say the Iowa is a LOT better than NC. But that is also because in NC I got a LOT of T10 games. 

In Iowa so far I get only "pure T9", and some T8 and even T7 games. Very very few are T10.

Maybe it was different when you grinded NC?

 

Same as Hood, which I always thought of as being kinda OP. But when I just had it, I got 90% T6-7-8. 

And that was when we didn't have ships like Baltimore, or Frenchies with MBRB and speedboost.

There were no Russian BBs either. Also you got a LOT of Derpitzes... LOL!

But right now if I play Hood it feels like XXL cannonfodder to a load of supercruisers.

 

[UnterSeeBot]

1 minute ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Maybe it was different when you grinded NC?

NC was a recent grind, I decided to unlock the USN bb tech tree out of boredom. Then stopped at Iowa! The USN t8 405mm guns are superbly forgiving. NC was powercrept by t8 USN bbs Mass and Alabama, but it still shines in a long-mid range dmg dealer role. I hardly think the latest (Champagne) 405 mm t8 premium powercreeps it. NC overall, while not as easy to play as Mass, does well on many key fronts, AA, torpedo belt, armour layout, the GUNS! With CVs every battle, NC is a fairly safe choice.

[mcboernester]

8 hours ago, LoveZeppelin said:

USN ships are hugely popular, and USN bbs often a 1st choice tech tree for new players. This naturally drags down the statistics. Tirpitz does badly for similar reasons, hugely popular premium.

Generally speaking, the more battles a ship accumulates, the more the overall player WR tends towards 45-48%.

Except for rework CVs, maybe? I haven't looked in a while to compare battle numbers/wr.

Im pretty sure Tirpitz and Bismarck are far more popular so this kinda negates it. 

EDIT: yep, last week. 

 

On the other side the currently strongest t8 bb: 

7 hours ago, LoveZeppelin said:

NC was a recent grind, I decided to unlock the USN bb tech tree out of boredom. Then stopped at Iowa! The USN t8 405mm guns are superbly forgiving. NC was powercrept by t8 USN bbs Mass and Alabama, but it still shines in a long-mid range dmg dealer role. I hardly think the latest (Champagne) 405 mm t8 premium powercreeps it. NC overall, while not as easy to play as Mass, does well on many key fronts, AA, torpedo belt, armour layout, the GUNS! With CVs every battle, NC is a fairly safe choice.

 

Firstoff those are 406mm :P The NC is rather precise on T8 already and has super heavy AP, however her shells are very slow ( i think 720m/s) which makes it tricky to reliably hit on longer ranges. There was a time when NC was the go to ship in competitive but this is ages ago and alot has changed since then, you would most likely pic a lenin instead nowadays cause of its tankyness. 

[Deckeru_Maiku]

10 hours ago, OVanBruce said:

You DON'T want to go back to the old RTS were there were indeed no fly zones but a single mistake on a surface ship could mean going from 100% to 0% health in less than a minute if the opponent CV was actually competent. Yet you don't want to make CVs completely unable to get damage if you want to have a healthy CV population.

 

I DO want to go back to old RTS - probably with some changes to make it easier for new players to get things done in CVs, like removing the utterly crappy strafing mechanic and giving back the manual drops for low tier CVs - and as we won't get back RTS back, I want to just have the reeeworked CVs have to play with the same set of rules like other classes. Meaning: If you f*ck up you deserved to get punished. Attack like an idiot and lose all your planes and start look for an enemy that you can ram...

Right now CVs get pampered like mentally challenged babies and it probably will stay like this, at it seems to be the only way for WG to make money with CVs... they only sell if they are horrendously "rewarding" and not really "challenging"

[El2aZeR]

19 hours ago, OVanBruce said:

I'm just putting into perspective the achievements of the current CV system in spite of the playerbase we got.

 

Of which in reality there are none.

[BLUB__BLUB]

19 hours ago, LoveZeppelin said:

NC was a recent grind, I decided to unlock the USN bb tech tree out of boredom. Then stopped at Iowa! The USN t8 405mm guns are superbly forgiving. NC was powercrept by t8 USN bbs Mass and Alabama, but it still shines in a long-mid range dmg dealer role. I hardly think the latest (Champagne) 405 mm t8 premium powercreeps it. NC overall, while not as easy to play as Mass, does well on many key fronts, AA, torpedo belt, armour layout, the GUNS! With CVs every battle, NC is a fairly safe choice.

Well, yes I agree the ship is good enough I kept it, crapbotes I sell...). But calling it "broken OP"... well... is kinda BS really. 

It is on the bottom pile. Maybe in YOUR hands it is very good. That might be, I (rarely...) have such ships. 

Chapayev is one example, I think the thing is brilliant. However... doesn't seem to be so for everybody. 

https://wows-numbers.com/ship/4181636560,Chapayev/

 

And then this, which is correct IMO - therefore maybe you need to realize that you are quite better than average.

As such, yes some ships maybe feel terribly strong FOR YOU but they actually are not. Same with CVs.

 

11 hours ago, mcboernester said:

Im pretty sure Tirpitz and Bismarck are far more popular so this kinda negates it. 

EDIT: yep, last week. 

 

On the other side the currently strongest t8 bb: 

 

Firstoff those are 406mm :P The NC is rather precise on T8 already and has super heavy AP, however her shells are very slow ( i think 720m/s) which makes it tricky to reliably hit on longer ranges. There was a time when NC was the go to ship in competitive but this is ages ago and alot has changed since then, you would most likely pic a lenin instead nowadays cause of its tankyness. 

YEah it's not OP as far as I see it. I think it is still good, but powercrept like hell.

[Nibenay78]

After playing almost 100 battles in FDR, I'm happy to report I'm almost down 100 karma.

I think WG should implement some punishment for such reports! It would ease the suffering of the poor ships which can't do crap against it.

[BLUB__BLUB]

26 minutes ago, Nibenay78 said:

After playing almost 100 battles in FDR, I'm happy to report I'm almost down 100 karma.

I think WG should implement some punishment for such reports! It would ease the suffering of the poor ships which can't do crap against it.

Well I haven't got it yet, but I doubt if I'll lose any karma.

Have been at ZERO ever since I started playing CV... 

 

Minus-points compensating the 2/3rd of other ships I play, easily... OK I also have Smolensk...