0.5.1 IJN CV "fix"

[Mangrey]

Another IJN CV nerf  is coming, they are lowing the Torp damage on the low tir CVs...

but we get less bombe spread (for all IJN CVs)

When are they "fixing" the US ? (and more spread on there bombers when under attack...... aint really a fix for there torp planes it is ?)

 

 

 

mang

[DJ_Die]

Afaik IJN TB should also get inversed spread allowing you to deal much greater damage to BBs if you're good...

And why should US TBs get a nerf? US CVs mostly get only one squad compared to 2-3 on IJN CVs until tier 9

I welcome the buff to IJN DBs because they were very bad and it brings some diversity to the nations

[jonasnee]

Afaik IJN TB should also get inversed spread allowing you to deal much greater damage to BBs if you're good...

And why should US TBs get a nerf? US CVs mostly get only one squad compared to 2-3 on IJN CVs until tier 9

I welcome the buff to IJN DBs because they were very bad and it brings some diversity to the nations

 

japan has 2 squads max of torps till tier 9 aswell.

[Kirasa]

Afaik IJN TB should also get inversed spread allowing you to deal much greater damage to BBs if you're good...

And why should US TBs get a nerf? US CVs mostly get only one squad compared to 2-3 on IJN CVs until tier 9

I welcome the buff to IJN DBs because they were very bad and it brings some diversity to the nations

 

The spread will come later (0.5.2)

[Mangrey]

Afaik IJN TB should also get inversed spread allowing you to deal much greater damage to BBs if you're good...

And why should US TBs get a nerf? US CVs mostly get only one squad compared to 2-3 on IJN CVs until tier 9

I welcome the buff to IJN DBs because they were very bad and it brings some diversity to the nations

 

have you tryed tir 9 and 10 ? 

 

mang

[DJ_Die]

 

have you tryed tir 9 and 10 ? 

 

mang

Not yet but this topic is not about high tiers is it?

[Leonadios]

Midway - 2 Squads of 6 - 12 Torpedo Bombers

 

12 hits x 8500 (average) = 102,000 damage

 

Midway - 2 Squads of 7 - 14 Dive Bombers

 

14 hits x 1000 (average) = 14,000 damage

 

Potential Strike Damage = 116,000 damage (Enough to kill any ship in the game)

and that doesn't even cover fire and flooding damage

 

American torpedo bombers are an absolute joke. It takes 2 IJN squads to equal the strike power of 1 US squad, plus the fact that with the current dive bomber accuracy only dropping 4 bombs is completely useless.

[FloRead]

Oh really?

 

So how do you account for US carriers being so vastly out damaged by IJN carriers from T4-8? 

 

Damage increases with with the number of torpedo bomber squadron because it forces a good player to dodge the first drop so the second drop guarantees hits. That makes the 2nd torpedo bomber squadron so deadly with the Essex and Midway. Just look at my own carrier stats. I'm a crapplayer but using this simple 2 torpedo bomber technique, I magically do so much better. It's not skill, but the OP nature of 2 or more torpedo bomber squadrons.

 

Which is something IJN carriers have from T4.

[Spuggy]

FloRead, on 18 October 2015 - 02:55 AM, said:

 

So how do you account for US carriers being so vastly out damaged by IJN carriers from T4-8? 

 

 

 

Probably because they all use air supremacy loadouts as they're tools... also why can't I type anywhere but in the soddin quote?!

[FloRead]

No, there's no probably. If the US torpedo bomber squadron is as deadly as everyone's been harping about, then why use air superiority? That 1 fighter and 1 torpedo bomber squadron should be ruling the skies as the useless paper made Japanese planes all drop like flies.

 

It does not happen!

 

If the US torpedo bomber squadron is that deadly, it should be effective even with 1 squadron. The damage numbers don't reflect that at all. The only thing that is proven is US fighters are superior.

 

Source: http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20151017et/average_ship.html

 

EU stats week ending 17th Oct.

nation	class	tier	name	players	total battles	average of rates
						battles	win	draw	lose	exp	damage caused	warship destroyed	aircraft destoryed	base capture	base defense	survived	kill / death	point
JP	CV	4	Hosho	10974	61666	5.62	51.94	2.29	45.77	1105	37264	0.82	6.58	0.19	0.51	55.98	1.45	18384
JP	CV	5	Zuiho	9327	54474	5.84	53.39	1.33	45.28	1311	37207	0.74	8.12	0.15	0.46	58.71	1.41	19450
JP	CV	6	Ryujo	4759	29573	6.21	53.52	0.56	45.92	1474	33518	0.61	11.62	0.02	0.14	66.54	1.34	20511
JP	CV	7	Hiryu	1863	13272	7.12	53.40	0.50	46.10	2024	45902	0.84	16.66	0.02	0.11	73.23	1.90	22370
JP	CV	8	Shokaku	538	4913	9.13	50.06	0.06	49.88	2156	49046	0.74	15.53	0.00	0.00	68.67	2.17	23634
JP	CV	9	Taiho	159	1597	10.04	43.01	0.04	56.95	2653	72123	0.98	19.03	0.00	0.00	68.45	2.54	23555
JP	CV	10	Hakuryu	110	1087	9.88	45.37	0.00	54.63	2969	89831	1.05	19.72	0.00	0.00	66.98	3.27	22466
US	CV	4	Langley	20101	115305	5.74	47.39	2.39	50.23	915	23995	0.47	10.80	0.09	0.35	47.84	0.76	17262
US	CV	5	Bogue	14947	87022	5.82	49.26	1.54	49.20	1073	18262	0.34	14.66	0.06	0.31	48.95	0.56	18022
US	CV	6	Independence	5527	36342	6.58	49.78	0.64	49.58	1491	26648	0.48	13.04	0.04	0.11	65.37	1.06	19858
US	CV	7	Ranger	1905	18526	9.72	49.46	0.42	50.12	1807	39981	0.67	17.91	0.01	0.12	62.34	1.65	23200
US	CV	8	Lexington	642	6099	9.50	51.22	0.14	48.63	2184	45222	0.69	24.91	0.00	0.00	69.97	1.94	24512
US	CV	9	Essex	162	2572	15.88	53.35	0.09	46.55	2890	79481	1.21	19.83	0.00	0.00	70.09	3.76	29785
US	CV	10	Midway	108	1657	15.34	51.70	0.00	48.30	3554	112780	1.55	22.07	0.00	0.00	67.57	5.27	29869

 

Myth 1: Langley stomps all over Hosho because Hosho's fighters have no chance. Look at the Hosho win rate, damage scores and ships sunk vs Langley's. The only saving grace is the Langley does shoot down more planes. Myth busted.

Myth 2: Zuiho is crap compared to Bogue with their insane fighters. Wouldn't Bogue love to trade stats here? Myth busted.

Myth 3: Midway is OP and needs nerfing. Look at that insane damage score. What's even hideous is the aircraft shot down by Midway. And most people I know who play Midway use strike decks. No argument from me. Myth confirmed. (I would argue Essex should be thrown in too.)

 

But what is the key factor that differentiate good from useless CV? The magic number 2, attached with number of torpedo squadrons.

[Meneleus]

 

mang

 

You the STALLION mang?

 

Cheers, M

[Leonadios]

Oh really?

 

So how do you account for US carriers being so vastly out damaged by IJN carriers from T4-8? 

 

Damage increases with with the number of torpedo bomber squadron because it forces a good player to dodge the first drop so the second drop guarantees hits. That makes the 2nd torpedo bomber squadron so deadly with the Essex and Midway. Just look at my own carrier stats. I'm a crapplayer but using this simple 2 torpedo bomber technique, I magically do so much better. It's not skill, but the OP nature of 2 or more torpedo bomber squadrons.

 

Which is something IJN carriers have from T4.

 

It's not hard at all to make only 1 squadron work. Especially when you have 6 torpedoes instead of 4. Even when trying to hit a DD, if you're experienced with manual drops it's not all that difficult. Besides, don't try to argue that a Yamato can turn and dodge 6 torpedoes in a tight spread.

 

To add to that, if damage magically increased with more TB squads, why aren't the Taiho and Hakuryu considered OP when they have 3 squads? Oh wait, because Japanese TBs suck.

[Leonadios]

No, there's no probably. If the US torpedo bomber squadron is as deadly as everyone's been harping about, then why use air superiority? That 1 fighter and 1 torpedo bomber squadron should be ruling the skies as the useless paper made Japanese planes all drop like flies.

 

It does not happen!

 

If the US torpedo bomber squadron is that deadly, it should be effective even with 1 squadron. The damage numbers don't reflect that at all. The only thing that is proven is US fighters are superior.

 

Source: http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20151017et/average_ship.html

 

EU stats week ending 17th Oct.

nation	class	tier	name	players	total battles	average of rates
						battles	win	draw	lose	exp	damage caused	warship destroyed	aircraft destoryed	base capture	base defense	survived	kill / death	point
JP	CV	4	Hosho	10974	61666	5.62	51.94	2.29	45.77	1105	37264	0.82	6.58	0.19	0.51	55.98	1.45	18384
JP	CV	5	Zuiho	9327	54474	5.84	53.39	1.33	45.28	1311	37207	0.74	8.12	0.15	0.46	58.71	1.41	19450
JP	CV	6	Ryujo	4759	29573	6.21	53.52	0.56	45.92	1474	33518	0.61	11.62	0.02	0.14	66.54	1.34	20511
JP	CV	7	Hiryu	1863	13272	7.12	53.40	0.50	46.10	2024	45902	0.84	16.66	0.02	0.11	73.23	1.90	22370
JP	CV	8	Shokaku	538	4913	9.13	50.06	0.06	49.88	2156	49046	0.74	15.53	0.00	0.00	68.67	2.17	23634
JP	CV	9	Taiho	159	1597	10.04	43.01	0.04	56.95	2653	72123	0.98	19.03	0.00	0.00	68.45	2.54	23555
JP	CV	10	Hakuryu	110	1087	9.88	45.37	0.00	54.63	2969	89831	1.05	19.72	0.00	0.00	66.98	3.27	22466
US	CV	4	Langley	20101	115305	5.74	47.39	2.39	50.23	915	23995	0.47	10.80	0.09	0.35	47.84	0.76	17262
US	CV	5	Bogue	14947	87022	5.82	49.26	1.54	49.20	1073	18262	0.34	14.66	0.06	0.31	48.95	0.56	18022
US	CV	6	Independence	5527	36342	6.58	49.78	0.64	49.58	1491	26648	0.48	13.04	0.04	0.11	65.37	1.06	19858
US	CV	7	Ranger	1905	18526	9.72	49.46	0.42	50.12	1807	39981	0.67	17.91	0.01	0.12	62.34	1.65	23200
US	CV	8	Lexington	642	6099	9.50	51.22	0.14	48.63	2184	45222	0.69	24.91	0.00	0.00	69.97	1.94	24512
US	CV	9	Essex	162	2572	15.88	53.35	0.09	46.55	2890	79481	1.21	19.83	0.00	0.00	70.09	3.76	29785
US	CV	10	Midway	108	1657	15.34	51.70	0.00	48.30	3554	112780	1.55	22.07	0.00	0.00	67.57	5.27	29869

 

Myth 1: Langley stomps all over Hosho because Hosho's fighters have no chance. Look at the Hosho win rate, damage scores and ships sunk vs Langley's. The only saving grace is the Langley does shoot down more planes. Myth busted.

Myth 2: Zuiho is crap compared to Bogue with their insane fighters. Wouldn't Bogue love to trade stats here? Myth busted.

Myth 3: Midway is OP and needs nerfing. Look at that insane damage score. What's even hideous is the aircraft shot down by Midway. And most people I know who play Midway use strike decks. No argument from me. Myth confirmed. (I would argue Essex should be thrown in too.)

 

But what is the key factor that differentiate good from useless CV? The magic number 2, attached with number of torpedo squadrons.

 

The problem when taking stats from a huge sample like that is it includes every single players that has ever tried carriers. In simple terms, bad players who are not experienced with manual drops drastically reduce the average damage of mid tier US carriers. Jump into any tier 4 or 5 game and observe the quality of torpedo drops. 99% of people use auto drop and if they do use manual, it's usually a pretty terrible attempt.

[FloRead]

 

The problem when taking stats from a huge sample like that is it includes every single players that has ever tried carriers. In simple terms, bad players who are not experienced with manual drops drastically reduce the average damage of mid tier US carriers. Jump into any tier 4 or 5 game and observe the quality of torpedo drops. 99% of people use auto drop and if they do use manual, it's usually a pretty terrible attempt.

 

The averages work both ways. Anything average that applies to Langley applies to Hosho. The averages are simply that, average. Don't pretend that only smart people play IJN CV and thus get higher scores, while idiots only play Langley.

 

As for Taiho and Hakuryu, they are not OP not because they suck. It's because Essex and Midway are far more OP, which I agree on.

[Kronke]

The myth busting doesn't hold true as you are missing the important variable on what decks/style the players are using.  Using as is, is comparing apples and oranges. At best it suggests that IJN are more offensive and USN more defensive.

 

Based on other CV players I have talked to and my own experience when playing a IJN deck you rarely use A2A deck  and go all out so you would expect a high damage rate as that's your focus.  USN play is either more mixed so attention is spread or A2A , this does not always mean more planes shot down as often you are merely warding off the threat of attack and playing cat and mouse.

 

While some players can proficiently do two + things at once most CV players cannot.  Not their fault only human.

 

 

[FloRead]

The myth busting doesn't hold true as you are missing the important variable on what decks/style the players are using.  Using as is, is comparing apples and oranges. At best it suggests that IJN are more offensive and USN more defensive.

 

Based on other CV players I have talked to and my own experience when playing a IJN deck you rarely use A2A deck  and go all out so you would expect a high damage rate as that's your focus.  USN play is either more mixed so attention is spread or A2A , this does not always mean more planes shot down as often you are merely warding off the threat of attack and playing cat and mouse.

 

While some players can proficiently do two + things at once most CV players cannot.  Not their fault only human.

 

 

Langley and Hosho has no deck modifications. It's Langley's 1 fighter and 1 torpedo bomber vs Hosho's 1 fighter and 2 torpedo bombers. You cannot change this.

 

Yet Hosho outdamages Langley, wins more than Langley, sinks more ships than Langley. Langley only shoots down more planes than Hosho.

What are the accusations people level at the US carriers?

1: US fighters are powerful. No doubt about that although it's not that the plane is far superior but that US fighter squadrons have 6 vs 4 in the Japanese.

2. US torpedo bomber drop is OP. Well if that's so, why can't the Langley outdamage the Hosho? The OP US torpedo manual drop vs the useless Japanese torpedo drop. What happens? Hosho's 37264 average damage vs Langley's 23995. And there are no divebombers to skew these numbers in any way.

3. Hosho sucks compared to Langley. Nope, stats don't support that.

 

And the trend goes from T4-8. What magically happens at T9? Why, the US gets that magic number 2. 2 torpedo bomber squadrons. 

Which I repeat: IJN carriers have 2 from T4.

That's the big difference.

 

Edit: By the way, if I want to be facetious, I can with tongue-in-cheek say that Hakuryu is performing badly because most Hakuryu players are going 4/2/2 air superiority. But how different is this argument from the "Bogue/Independence/Ranger scores lowly because most of them go air superiority?"

[Leonadios]

Langley and Hosho has no deck modifications. It's Langley's 1 fighter and 1 torpedo bomber vs Hosho's 1 fighter and 2 torpedo bombers. You cannot change this.

 

Yet Hosho outdamages Langley, wins more than Langley, sinks more ships than Langley. Langley only shoots down more planes than Hosho.

What are the accusations people level at the US carriers?

1: US fighters are powerful. No doubt about that although it's not that the plane is far superior but that US fighter squadrons have 6 vs 4 in the Japanese.

2. US torpedo bomber drop is OP. Well if that's so, why can't the Langley outdamage the Hosho? The OP US torpedo manual drop vs the useless Japanese torpedo drop. What happens? Hosho's 37264 average damage vs Langley's 23995. And there are no divebombers to skew these numbers in any way.

3. Hosho sucks compared to Langley. Nope, stats don't support that.

 

And the trend goes from T4-8. What magically happens at T9? Why, the US gets that magic number 2. 2 torpedo bomber squadrons. 

Which I repeat: IJN carriers have 2 from T4.

That's the big difference.

 

Edit: By the way, if I want to be facetious, I can with tongue-in-cheek say that Hakuryu is performing badly because most Hakuryu players are going 4/2/2 air superiority. But how different is this argument from the "Bogue/Independence/Ranger scores lowly because most of them go air superiority?"

 

So what exactly are you suggesting? That US CVs get 2 torp squads at tier 4? That would give it the strike power of the Midway minus the dive bombers.

[Kronke]

Langley and Hosho has no deck modifications. It's Langley's 1 fighter and 1 torpedo bomber vs Hosho's 1 fighter and 2 torpedo bombers. You cannot change this.

 

Yet Hosho outdamages Langley, wins more than Langley, sinks more ships than Langley. Langley only shoots down more planes than Hosho.

What are the accusations people level at the US carriers?

1: US fighters are powerful. No doubt about that although it's not that the plane is far superior but that US fighter squadrons have 6 vs 4 in the Japanese.

2. US torpedo bomber drop is OP. Well if that's so, why can't the Langley outdamage the Hosho? The OP US torpedo manual drop vs the useless Japanese torpedo drop. What happens? Hosho's 37264 average damage vs Langley's 23995. And there are no divebombers to skew these numbers in any way.

3. Hosho sucks compared to Langley. Nope, stats don't support that.

 

And the trend goes from T4-8. What magically happens at T9? Why, the US gets that magic number 2. 2 torpedo bomber squadrons. 

Which I repeat: IJN carriers have 2 from T4.

That's the big difference.

 

Edit: By the way, if I want to be facetious, I can with tongue-in-cheek say that Hakuryu is performing badly because most Hakuryu players are going 4/2/2 air superiority. But how different is this argument from the "Bogue/Independence/Ranger scores lowly because most of them go air superiority?"

 

You missed the point . Focus .   IJN players know their planes are rubbish and from my experience and others I have talked to/seen in battle they focus on offense.  In a USN CV that focus is not there as unless they run a strike deck.  Focus is spread or mainly on A2A  both with which you will do less damage even if you had the same planes as less of your time is spent attacking ships.

 

1. Yep it's their Brucie Bonus which should preclude the CV been weaker in other areas but a semi skilled CV player can negate that.

2. Your words not mine.

3. Again your words not mine

 

I am merely pointing the analysis is flawed as it is based on incomplete data and basing a CV's worth on damage alone is equally flawed.

 

Taking the Hosho / Langley comparison you could easily argue that the lower survival rate accounts for the variance on other stats.

 

Quick q . Do you know what the value "point" represents from the data you provided ?

[FloRead]

 

So what exactly are you suggesting? That US CVs get 2 torp squads at tier 4? That would give it the strike power of the Midway minus the dive bombers.

 

No, I'm not suggesting anything. The accusation leveled here is why IJN torpedoes are being nerfed at the lower levels. I'm explaining why. T4-8 IJN CVs way outdamage the USN CVs.

[FloRead]

 

You missed the point . Focus .   IJN players know their planes are rubbish and from my experience and others I have talked to/seen in battle they focus on offense.  In a USN CV that focus is not there as unless they run a strike deck.  Focus is spread or mainly on A2A  both with which you will do less damage even if you had the same planes as less of your time is spent attacking ships.

<shortened>...

Taking the Hosho / Langley comparison you could easily argue that the lower survival rate accounts for the variance on other stats.

 

Quick q . Do you know what the value "point" represents from the data you provided ?

 

No, I reject the focus argument. 

 

Hosho vs Langley is 1 prime example, because of the absence of any deck modifications.

 

Another good data point is the Independence vs Ryujo. Independence has 3 squadrons for all 3 decks. It's either 1/1/1, 2/0/1 or 0/1/2. The best deck undeniably is the 1/1/1. Ryujo starts of disadvantaged, with 4 squadrons, and eventually getting 5. And noticeably, I see many Ryujo players are sporting the 3 fighter, 1 torpedo bomber and 1 dive bomber squadron.

 

nation	class	tier	name	players	total battles	average of rates
						battles	win	draw	lose	exp	damage caused	warship destroyed	aircraft destoryed	base capture	base defense	survived	kill / death	point
JP	CV	6	Ryujo	4759	29573	6.21	53.52	0.56	45.92	1474	33518	0.61	11.62	0.02	0.14	66.54	1.34	20511
US	CV	6	Independence	5527	36342	6.58	49.78	0.64	49.58	1491	26648	0.48	13.04	0.04	0.11	65.37	1.06	19858

 

Yet again look at the data. Ryujo still deals more average damage, wins more on average, sinks more ships on average. The aircraft kills are lower than the Independence but not by much. And this consistency is borne by a few important things to remember. First few matches on a Ryujo for a player will be with a 4(16 aircraft) squadron deck. This is a big disadvantage against an Independence that starts off with all 3(18 aircraft) squadrons at stock. How much of a split do you think the Ryujo player base is between the 1/2/2 and 3/1/1 decks? No matter how you split this, Ryujo's average damage is higher. 3/1/1 is clearly inferior to the Independence's 1/1/1 in striking power, but for the average to be that much higher than the Independence's? That's a lot of power the 1/2/2 has to project to make up the difference in the average.

 

And again, that shows the key difference. 2 torpedo bomber squadrons.

 

Quick a. I don't know what that point represents. Tried as I could, could not fathom it.

Stats are all from http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/index.html

[Un1eash]

 

No, I reject the focus argument. 

 

Hosho vs Langley is 1 prime example, because of the absence of any deck modifications.

 

Another good data point is the Independence vs Ryujo. Independence has 3 squadrons for all 3 decks. It's either 1/1/1, 2/0/1 or 0/1/2. The best deck undeniably is the 1/1/1. Ryujo starts of disadvantaged, with 4 squadrons, and eventually getting 5. And noticeably, I see many Ryujo players are sporting the 3 fighter, 1 torpedo bomber and 1 dive bomber squadron.

 

nation	class	tier	name	players	total battles	average of rates
						battles	win	draw	lose	exp	damage caused	warship destroyed	aircraft destoryed	base capture	base defense	survived	kill / death	point
JP	CV	6	Ryujo	4759	29573	6.21	53.52	0.56	45.92	1474	33518	0.61	11.62	0.02	0.14	66.54	1.34	20511
US	CV	6	Independence	5527	36342	6.58	49.78	0.64	49.58	1491	26648	0.48	13.04	0.04	0.11	65.37	1.06	19858

 

Yet again look at the data. Ryujo still deals more average damage, wins more on average, sinks more ships on average. The aircraft kills are lower than the Independence but not by much. And this consistency is borne by a few important things to remember. First few matches on a Ryujo for a player will be with a 4(16 aircraft) squadron deck. This is a big disadvantage against an Independence that starts off with all 3(18 aircraft) squadrons at stock. How much of a split do you think the Ryujo player base is between the 1/2/2 and 3/1/1 decks? No matter how you split this, Ryujo's average damage is higher. 3/1/1 is clearly inferior to the Independence's 1/1/1 in striking power, but for the average to be that much higher than the Independence's? That's a lot of power the 1/2/2 has to project to make up the difference in the average.

 

And again, that shows the key difference. 2 torpedo bomber squadrons.

 

Quick a. I don't know what that point represents. Tried as I could, could not fathom it.

Stats are all from http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/index.html

 

dmg is not everything you can be judge something to be OP (it just 1 of many factor)  suppose i torp 3 DDs and got around 30k dmg while the others guy torp BB around 50k dmg and not even sunk,Which one is better ?

Look at avg exp on ryujo and independence , it almost the same ,So dmg is not everything you gonna talking about for OP

P.S i don't say that something is OP, I just wanna tell you guy avg dmg is not something good to convince another people to agree with you at least Me

[Vulgarny]

That data is really tucked up. Look at avg xp for t6. You kill less ships, win way less, do less dmg but make more xp? like WUT?

[Kronke]

 

No, I reject the focus argument. 

 

Hosho vs Langley is 1 prime example, because of the absence of any deck modifications.

 

Another good data point is the Independence vs Ryujo. Independence has 3 squadrons for all 3 decks. It's either 1/1/1, 2/0/1 or 0/1/2. The best deck undeniably is the 1/1/1. Ryujo starts of disadvantaged, with 4 squadrons, and eventually getting 5. And noticeably, I see many Ryujo players are sporting the 3 fighter, 1 torpedo bomber and 1 dive bomber squadron.

 

nation	class	tier	name	players	total battles	average of rates
						battles	win	draw	lose	exp	damage caused	warship destroyed	aircraft destoryed	base capture	base defense	survived	kill / death	point
JP	CV	6	Ryujo	4759	29573	6.21	53.52	0.56	45.92	1474	33518	0.61	11.62	0.02	0.14	66.54	1.34	20511
US	CV	6	Independence	5527	36342	6.58	49.78	0.64	49.58	1491	26648	0.48	13.04	0.04	0.11	65.37	1.06	19858

 

Yet again look at the data. Ryujo still deals more average damage, wins more on average, sinks more ships on average. The aircraft kills are lower than the Independence but not by much. And this consistency is borne by a few important things to remember. First few matches on a Ryujo for a player will be with a 4(16 aircraft) squadron deck. This is a big disadvantage against an Independence that starts off with all 3(18 aircraft) squadrons at stock. How much of a split do you think the Ryujo player base is between the 1/2/2 and 3/1/1 decks? No matter how you split this, Ryujo's average damage is higher. 3/1/1 is clearly inferior to the Independence's 1/1/1 in striking power, but for the average to be that much higher than the Independence's? That's a lot of power the 1/2/2 has to project to make up the difference in the average.

 

And again, that shows the key difference. 2 torpedo bomber squadrons.

 

Quick a. I don't know what that point represents. Tried as I could, could not fathom it.

Stats are all from http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/index.html

 

It's your choice to reject it and I respect you standing your ground with civility,  this is far too polite for a WG  forum  ;)

  Again though without knowing the decks used  it's apples and oranges trying to compare  the  Ryujo and Indy.   Given the weak IJN planes I would put money that the amount of A2A decks is far lower than Indys but we do not know for sure and both only have anecdotal evidence in that regard.  10k damage difference though could easily be attributed to a DB's the Ryujo having 6 more out than the Indy std deck.  That I'm basing on my Bogue which I exclusively ran a A2A deck and still got ave of 10k per game with just 6 DB's .  Also noting the survival rates are much closer which in turn has made the other stats closer too , the differences again can be easily put down to other things besides TB's. 

 

TLDR  We need more complete data.

 

That data is really tucked up. Look at avg xp for t6. You kill less ships, win way less, do less dmg but make more xp? like WUT?

 

Tier modifier to control leveling and to try and maintain the curve WG want.   Things also cost more in xp to unlock so its all just relative.

[FloRead]

 

dmg is not everything you can be judge something to be OP (it just 1 of many factor)  suppose i torp 3 DDs and got around 30k dmg while the others guy torp BB around 50k dmg and not even sunk,Which one is better ?

Look at avg exp on ryujo and independence , it almost the same ,So dmg is not everything you gonna talking about for OP

P.S i don't say that something is OP, I just wanna tell you guy avg dmg is not something good to convince another people to agree with you at least Me

 

Yet the same metrics are used to justify that Midway is OP and needs nerfing. That's the key. 

 

Same metrics that show that Midway and Essex at T10 and T9 are OP, show that IJN T4-8 are OP compared to the USN T4-8 CVs.

[FloRead]

 

It's your choice to reject it and I respect you standing your ground with civility,  this is far too polite for a WG  forum  ;)

  Again though without knowing the decks used  it's apples and oranges trying to compare  the  Ryujo and Indy.   Given the weak IJN planes I would put money that the amount of A2A decks is far lower than Indys but we do not know for sure and both only have anecdotal evidence in that regard.  10k damage difference though could easily be attributed to a DB's the Ryujo having 6 more out than the Indy std deck.  That I'm basing on my Bogue which I exclusively ran a A2A deck and still got ave of 10k per game with just 6 DB's .  Also noting the survival rates are much closer which in turn has made the other stats closer too , the differences again can be easily put down to other things besides TB's. 

 

TLDR  We need more complete data.

 

 

Tier modifier to control leveling and to try and maintain the curve WG want.   Things also cost more in xp to unlock so its all just relative.

You are welcome, shouting matches lead nowhere.

 

Now let me clarify my stance on carriers though. I don't support a nerf of either Midway or the IJN CVs now. Fact: Battleships are running very rampant and in my opinion, cruisers are at a massive disadvantage. If you go to the higher tiers, the lack of cruisers is extremely noticeable. Is it because battleships are more fun or is it because battleships lack their predators? The CV has an imposed limit of 0-2 per battle. But players will constantly cry about CVs being OP and landing torpedoes everywhere. Why? Lack of cruiser protection is my answer. Yet cruisers are actively hunted to extinction by battleships. The upper tier ecosystem of CV-BB-CA-DD is totally messed up.

 

As much as I have justified the IJN nerf, this is only due to my rationality trying to explain why the devs are doing it. I don't agree with it!

However, looking at the stats on the table week after week, I knew that nerf was coming.