To WG: Is there anything being done about the essex/midway?

[Blizzard____]

so you are saying that Japanese carriers do more damage than americans including tier 8?  I loved my lexington cos i could bully the Shokaku and dictate terms.  Surely you have to let the americans catch up on damage.  Indeed the American tiers 9 and 10 were probably the two most succesful carrier designs of the 1940's that actually took to the seas, so they should be good

 

yes. 

http://warships.today/vehicles/eu

 

[lankylad11_lankylad]

right.  so surely it is fair and reasonable that the americans have a couple of tiers where the damage is better than japanese carriers?  or maybe you want to make the two carrier lines exactly the same so its fair across the board

[Leonadios]

right.  so surely it is fair and reasonable that the americans have a couple of tiers where the damage is better than japanese carriers?  or maybe you want to make the two carrier lines exactly the same so its fair across the board

 

No, it's not fair that the T9 and T10 carriers can do 50% more damage than their IJN equivalents, including having the ability to nuke any ship in the game including IJN carriers with ease. Just because mid tier US CVs are unbalanced, doesn't give you an excuse to have an OP ship.

[viceadmiral123]

Midway is getting a nerf with next update. Check the notes. Rather unneeded, but it won't affect random battles.

[FloRead]

Source: http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20151024et/average_ship.html

Stats for EU week ending 24th Oct 2015.

 

Average damage of each tier comparison:

T4: Hosho vs Langley. 36530 vs 23647. Hosho's average damage advantage:  54.5%

T5: Zuiho vs Bogue. 36125 vs 17883. Zuiho's average damage advantage: 102%.

T6: Ryujo vs Independence. 33614 vs 26616. Ryujo's average damage advantage: 26.3%

T7: Hiryu vs Ranger. 46266 vs 39112. Hiryu's average damage advantage: 18.3%

T8: Shokaku vs Lexington. 51805 vs 44255. Shokaku's average damage advantage: 17.1%

T9: Taiho vs Essex. 70292 vs 85818. Essex's average damage advantage: 22.1%

T10: Hakuryu vs Midway. 102467 vs 122846. Midway's average damage advantage: 19.9%

 

 

[FloRead]

Midway is getting a nerf with next update. Check the notes. Rather unneeded, but it won't affect random battles.

 

Flooding nerf is hardly a nerf.

[olmedreca]

Damage comparisons also need to include number of planes shot down. 2 fighter Bogue seems pretty popular and it pretty clearly is not designed to do much ship damage.

[viceadmiral123]

 

Flooding nerf is hardly a nerf.

 

If anything, Midway needs an HP buff on his bombers. Random matches with nabby players are no base for hard changes.

[FloRead]

Damage comparisons also need to include number of planes shot down. 2 fighter Bogue seems pretty popular and it pretty clearly is not designed to do much ship damage.

 

Sure.

Source: http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20151024et/average_ship.html

Week ending 24th Oct 2015 for EU server

 

Average aircraft destroyed comparison

T4: Hosho vs Langley. 6.57 vs 10.84. Langley's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 65%

T5: Zuiho vs Bogue. 8.16 vs 14.83. Bogue's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 81.74%.

T6: Ryujo vs Independence. 11.55 vs 13.05. Independence's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 13%

T7: Hiryu vs Ranger. 16.09 vs 17.50. Ranger's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 8.7%

T8: Shokaku vs Lexington. 15.64 vs 24.67. Lexington's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 57.7%

T9: Taiho vs Essex. 18.93 vs 20.18. Essex's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 6.6%

T10: Hakuryu vs Midway. 21.59 vs 21.94. Midway's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 1.6%

 

Average warships sunk comparison

T4: Hosho vs Langley. 0.82 vs 0.48. Hosho's average warships sunk advantage: 70.9%

T5: Zuiho vs Bogue. 0.73 vs 0.34. Zuiho's average warships sunk advantage: 114.7%.

T6: Ryujo vs Independence. 0.62 vs 0.48. Ryujo's average warships sunk advantage: 29.2%

T7: Hiryu vs Ranger. 0.80 vs 0.67. Hiryu's average warships sunk advantage: 19.4%

T8: Shokaku vs Lexington. 0.76 vs 0.68. Shokaku's average warships sunk advantage: 11.8%

T9: Taiho vs Essex. 0.95 vs 1.23. Essex's average warships sunk advantage: 29.4%

T10: Hakuryu vs Midway. 1.20 vs 1.59. Midway's average warships sunk advantage: 32.5%

 

 

Edit: cut&paste fail...

[Hauptbahnhof]

 

Sure.

Source: http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20151024et/average_ship.html

Week ending 24th Oct 2015 for EU server

 

Average aircraft destroyed comparison

T4: Hosho vs Langley. 6.57 vs 10.84. Langley's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 65%

T5: Zuiho vs Bogue. 8.16 vs 14.83. Bogue's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 81.74%.

T6: Ryujo vs Independence. 11.55 vs 13.05. Independence's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 13%

T7: Hiryu vs Ranger. 16.09 vs 17.50. Ranger's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 8.7%

T8: Shokaku vs Lexington. 15.64 vs 24.67. Lexington's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 57.7%

T9: Taiho vs Essex. 18.93 vs 20.18. Essex's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 6.6%

T10: Hakuryu vs Midway. 21.59 vs 21.94. Midway's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 1.6%

 

Average warships sunk comparison

T4: Hosho vs Langley. 0.82 vs 0.48. Hosho's average warships sunk advantage: 70.9%

T5: Zuiho vs Bogue. 0.73 vs 0.34. Zuiho's average warships sunk advantage: 114.7%.

T6: Ryujo vs Independence. 0.62 vs 0.48. Ryujo's average warships sunk advantage: 29.2%

T7: Hiryu vs Ranger. 0.80 vs 0.67. Hiryu's average warships sunk advantage: 19.4%

T8: Shokaku vs Lexington. 0.76 vs 0.68. Shokaku's average warships sunk advantage: 11.8%

T9: Taiho vs Essex. 0.95 vs 1.23. Essex's average warships sunk advantage: 29.4%

T10: Hakuryu vs Midway. 1.20 vs 1.59. Midway's average warships sunk advantage: 32.5%

 

That is a very interesting way to put the relative IJN vs US statistics.

 

We can clearly see why Japanese low tier CVs need a nerf and torpedoes that do less damage, and we can see devastating US air-superiority on tier 4,5 and 8.

 

Top tier air-air is very balanced but US CVs slightly too powerful in terms of ships sunk.

 

The massive jump when US gets 2 torp bomber squads on T9 is also visible, so this could be solved by giving the Lexington a deck with 2 Torp squads but with torps that only do 70% normal damage. ( so it totally adds up not 2 full squads and smooths out the progression a bit ).

 

And the torps on Essex and Midway could be slightly nerfed to do say 80 and 90% damage with torpedoes.

[lankylad11_lankylad]

Sorry we can't be nerfing midway unless you nerf the air superiority loadout of Hakuryu, so its either 4/1/3 or 4/0/4.  There are always going to be differences between carriers of different nations in play style and ability.  Quite frankly, after playing through the american line while being consistently out damaged by your IJN rivals, you have earned Essex and Midway.  In terms of torpedos, i don't agree that you need to nerf the damage of them.  As jingles said.  "guys, carriers are not over powered, your brain is underpowered".  The fact is at top tier, you have to shoot the aircraft down because they are so fast, and to do that you need to stick together and/or take a cruiser as escort.  That should sort the BB whiners out.  as for Japanese carrier players, you have consistently out damaged the americans right up to tier 9, do you think you should just be better than the americans at every tier?  We can't however have each carrier doing the same damage, the point is, these carriers have different roles in the team, and the roles swap nations at tier 9 and 10.  I bet if you gave Midway/Essex 3/1/1 then the average damage of midway/essex would decrease.  Problem is, the air superiority loadout is so feeble currently, that everyone goes strike, whereas on the Japanese side, they have sensible air superiority loadouts.  this is partly why Essex and Midway outdamage their rivals.  You had to allow USN CV's to have two torpedo bombers at some point, and as soon as they did, two torp bomber squads was going to be better than 3 japanese torp squads, but the air superiority loadouts balance this currently

[FloRead]

 

That is a very interesting way to put the relative IJN vs US statistics.

 

We can clearly see why Japanese low tier CVs need a nerf and torpedoes that do less damage, and we can see devastating US air-superiority on tier 4,5 and 8.

 

Top tier air-air is very balanced but US CVs slightly too powerful in terms of ships sunk.

 

The massive jump when US gets 2 torp bomber squads on T9 is also visible, so this could be solved by giving the Lexington a deck with 2 Torp squads but with torps that only do 70% normal damage. ( so it totally adds up not 2 full squads and smooths out the progression a bit ).

 

And the torps on Essex and Midway could be slightly nerfed to do say 80 and 90% damage with torpedoes.

 

It quite clearly puts the picture into perspective and reinforces why people who have played the top tier matches all have a common agreement, Essex and Midway needs toning down. It's too effective.

 

It also very nicely shows why people view T8 as the most balanced. Lexington is clearly using its USN traits to its best and Shokaku is showing it still can strike. 

 

Edit: also would like to add, the imbalance between Ranger and Hiryu is quite possibly overstated. The real unfair matchup is actually Bogue and Zuiho. 

[Hauptbahnhof]

Sorry we can't be nerfing midway unless you nerf the air superiority loadout of Hakuryu

 

Why? It seems it's very well balanced in terms of air-air as it is? The most balanced air-air of all tiers actually!!!

 

"T10: Hakuryu vs Midway. 21.59 vs 21.94. Midway's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 1.6%"

 

And a nerf just lowering torpedo damage by a flat 10 or 20% of the Midway should still see them ahead "statistically speaking", since they have a 30% advantage over Hakuryu already.

 

as for Japanese carrier players, you have consistently out damaged the americans right up to tier 9, do you think you should just be better than the americans at every tier? 

 

You should be rewarded a medal for selective reading. Ofcourse I think that IJN should outdamage USN at every tier, that's why I wrote "We can clearly see why Japanese low tier CVs need a nerf and torpedoes that do less damage" 

 

What I am trying to say that IJN should not outdamage US CVs against ships, more then USN CVs outdamage them in the air. If the Air-Air is well balanced, so should the offensive air vs ship capabilities be. If not and US have a clear advantage in the air ( such as in tier 8 ), I would expect an equal advantage when going after ship with the IJN CV. Anything else wouldn't be fair.

 

If you want the T9 and T10 US CVs to be 30% better at killing ships, then we would expect the Japanese CVs on these tiers to be 30% better at killing air to compensate, right? ( Right now they are actually even slightly inferior ).

 

That your not properly rewarded for air kills is a completely separate issue ( that is also important, but hasn't that much with balance to do to be honest ). The biggest issue with airkills rewards is that it scales with numbers shot down, so it's actually pretty high for top tiers, and non-existant for low tiers, so hurts the US low tier CVs alot.

 

 

Edit: also would like to add, the imbalance between Ranger and Hiryu is quite possibly overstated. The real unfair matchup is actually Bogue and Zuiho. 

 

Ranger versus Hiryu is pretty well balanced yes. Just 10% difference between how much more lethal Hiryu is vs ships compared to how lethal Ranger is vs air ( minor advantage Hiryu ). It matches perfectly my experience on this tier ( Hiryu have a minor advantage and can impact the game more with sunk ships, while a good Ranger player can compensate and hurt you quite a bit in the air, but normally not enough to make up for the advantage ).

[MeglerSmekk]

The low tier IJN ships dont need a damage-nerf. They need removal of TB aircraft from fighter loadouts. 3/1/1 is still gonna outdamage the US loadout of 2/0/1 With a nerf to how much camage that 1 TB squad does per run. Either that or give the US fighter loadout a 2/1/0 loadout to Balance the IJN 3/1/1 loadout.

[Hauptbahnhof]

The TB aircraft is the iconic IJN attack craft ( as the divebomber is the USN one ).

 

It would be much better to further buff USN divebombers and give them AP bombs so they can do serious damage to Battleships ( citadel hit level damage), at least if you manage to pull of a manual attack.

 

Also some strafing attacks where USN fighters can pay say half ammo to attack light targets like DDs/CLs for some minor damage, or disable AAA weapons on bigger targets so their strike goes through.

[Leonadios]

The TB aircraft is the iconic IJN attack craft ( as the divebomber is the USN one ).

 

It would be much better to further buff USN divebombers and give them AP bombs so they can do serious damage to Battleships ( citadel hit level damage), at least if you manage to pull of a manual attack.

 

Also some strafing attacks where USN fighters can pay say half ammo to attack light targets like DDs/CLs for some minor damage, or disable AAA weapons on bigger targets so their strike goes through.

 

Citadel damage would be a tad OP, especially when hitting BBs with a manual attack is fairly easy with practice.

[viceadmiral123]

High tier game favors IJN for fighters, and USN for bombers. The most imbalanced carrier right now is the 4/2/2 loadout Hakuruy. But not many people care, because it has less torpedo bombers than the t9 and t10 USN CVs. I stand behind the idea that Midway needs a buff for his planes.

[jonasnee]

 

Sure.

Source: http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20151024et/average_ship.html

Week ending 24th Oct 2015 for EU server

 

Average aircraft destroyed comparison

T4: Hosho vs Langley. 6.57 vs 10.84. Langley's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 65%

T5: Zuiho vs Bogue. 8.16 vs 14.83. Bogue's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 81.74%.

T6: Ryujo vs Independence. 11.55 vs 13.05. Independence's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 13%

T7: Hiryu vs Ranger. 16.09 vs 17.50. Ranger's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 8.7%

T8: Shokaku vs Lexington. 15.64 vs 24.67. Lexington's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 57.7%

T9: Taiho vs Essex. 18.93 vs 20.18. Essex's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 6.6%

T10: Hakuryu vs Midway. 21.59 vs 21.94. Midway's average aircraft destroyed advantage: 1.6%

 

Average warships sunk comparison

T4: Hosho vs Langley. 0.82 vs 0.48. Hosho's average warships sunk advantage: 70.9%

T5: Zuiho vs Bogue. 0.73 vs 0.34. Zuiho's average warships sunk advantage: 114.7%.

T6: Ryujo vs Independence. 0.62 vs 0.48. Ryujo's average warships sunk advantage: 29.2%

T7: Hiryu vs Ranger. 0.80 vs 0.67. Hiryu's average warships sunk advantage: 19.4%

T8: Shokaku vs Lexington. 0.76 vs 0.68. Shokaku's average warships sunk advantage: 11.8%

T9: Taiho vs Essex. 0.95 vs 1.23. Essex's average warships sunk advantage: 29.4%

T10: Hakuryu vs Midway. 1.20 vs 1.59. Midway's average warships sunk advantage: 32.5%

 

 

Edit: cut&paste fail...

and notice how all of the ships pre T9 have a sub KD ratio

[Hauptbahnhof]

 

Citadel damage would be a tad OP, especially when hitting BBs with a manual attack is fairly easy with practice.

 

Why would it be OP? There are guns in the game that do just 1000 max citadel damage if they get through it...

 

Ofcourse the damage would be scaled with how easy it is to get, it should do alot more then damage from bombs alone, and a bit less then bomb + full fires.

 

The point of divebombers in reality was to get through the deck armor of bigger ships and put AP bombs inside the citadel of ships. And the deck armor of ships doesn't matter that much in the game right now so need some more use.

 

and notice how all of the ships pre T9 have a sub KD ratio

 

Uhm... no they don't!

 

They have a "less then 1 ships per game sunk" ratio.

 

My main CV for example survives 77% of all games, so only 23% of the games result in me getting sunk. Even if I sink 0.5 warships per battle on average my KD ratio is 2.17 still!

[Shaka_D]

 

Yep Arty in Wot totally OP, i mean they all ve 70%+winrate when playing arty:> arty in wot has different problems due to randomness of hitting/onehots

 

U played 0 battles in CV since open beta, maybe u ve played some in CBT - who knows. U seem to ve generally no expierence regarding what goes through the mind of CV captains.

 

Attackruns need to be planed, sometimes the easy target aint that easy as it seemed to be (unspotted cruiser close to target, enemy cv has fighter nearby) It will take some time  to make the next attack, after u made one.

 

Clicking? mmmh strange, how do u shoot with ur BB, dont u click aswell?

 

 

 

 

 

Didn't see you planning any attack runs in your essex when you dropped torps right alongside 3 ships in a single game, two of them dd's with zero chance of them being able to move. The DD AA did nothing to you and yet you dropped perfect cones right next to each ship and in a second they were dead. Last ship was a BB, and he deserved it, but being able to do this is ridiculous. You literally dropped next to my DD even though I saw you coming from way off and started turning. They do need a desperate nerf in this regard. A little irritated with people like you playing the easy game and the expense of others fun. This had nothing to do with skill, just pure broken mechanics with US torpedo planes and sad that you seem to capitlise on something like this. Hopefully they nerf it in the future and chase people like you to earn your keep instead of gifting it to you.

 

And your reference to WOT arty is delusional. Arty in WoT is a well known issue, has been for years, so you are / were obviously a major arty player? Their winrate in arty had NOTHING to do with anything, so please don't quote something that has no relevance. The issue with arty was the simplicity in it's point and click nature, resulting is major devastation with no skill required - another well known fact. Even the worst players were able to ruin the day of the most skilled player, with no work required. The closeness of the torpedo drop of the US carriers is the same principle and that's all it is, pure and simple. No pretense requiRed. In the general sense CV's are the point and click - no skill required - aspect of WoWS.