Premium Saipan

[lankylad11_lankylad]

there will be about a 40 kt difference in speed between Hiryu TBs and Saipan TBs

[lankylad11_lankylad]

assuming these are essex/midway DBs, giving it the air superiority skill that makes a squad of 9 1000lb bombs

 

[terios]

 

1 miss/squad at most in normal situations.

Exactly, so it's 4 hits. That's not too much in tier 7. It takes a lot more, to sink a Nagato for example. Hiryu and Ranger has the ability kill a Nagato in a well aimed and coordinated strike using both TBs, DBs plus fire/flooding, the Saipan won't be able to do that.

[Trigger_Happy_Dad]

Exactly, so it's 4 hits. That's not too much in tier 7. It takes a lot more, to sink a Nagato for example. Hiryu and Ranger has the ability kill a Nagato in a well aimed and coordinated strike using both TBs, DBs plus fire/flooding, the Saipan won't be able to do that.

 

Aye, Ranger with strike setup can take a Nagato / Tirpitz ... out of the game with one full attack.

 

3 divebomber squadrons = 18 (*) bombs....enemy BB will have 3-4 fires at least which he has to "repair" or die immendiately....

 

AFTER that your torpedo-bombers strike....6 torpedos....2-3 hits + 1-2 floodings will kill that BB while his repair is on cooldown.... 

 

(*) 21 with Air Supremacy Skill

[DemonSemen]

2-3-0 was promising, but 3-0-1 & 2-2-0 with 3-plane squadrons at tier 7, it's a joke. And no, Saipan really don't have tier 10 planes, but tier 9. Which is compensation for only three planes in the squadron.

 

I will save my doubloons.

 

 

[Fafniroth]

2-3-0 was promising, but 3-0-1 & 2-2-0 with 3-plane squadrons at tier 7, it's a joke. And no, Saipan really don't have tier 10 planes, but tier 9. Which is compensation for only three planes in the squadron.

 

I will save my doubloons.

 

 

 

That's 3/0/1 with 3 planes in the fighter squadrons and 8 planes in the single bomber squadron.

[NoirLotus]

With Air Superiority, 2 fighter squadrons of Saipan are on par with a Lexington using AS, nd they have the speed advantage so the Sapan can choose when he wants to engage enemy fighters.

 

And 8 (or 9) DB with 1000 lb bombs at T7 ? It's completely crazy. How can T5 ships deal with something like this ?

 

 

[Gefreiter_Fritz]

Yes, 3-0-1 is braindead... and 2-2-0 is hardly worth the money. Pls give it at least 3-0-2 and 2-2-1 with 3-flyer squads...

[Poster_2015]

Problem with 1000lbs is, they arent particularly accurate. With 7 bomber group, they do crazy damage on enemy Taiho/Hakuryu, I can see the 9 bomber (with perk) squad doin even 30k damage drops on tier 9 CVs. But anything other then tier 9+ CVs, and the bombers start to suffer from RNG a lot. Even vs tier 5 BBs, you are looking at 10-14k damage, which is a lot on one hand, but it means no fires, and 14k is less then you get with 1 torpedo group of 3. Bombs are really about fires, and with 1 group you cant really do that. 

[NoirLotus]

Yes, 3-0-1 is braindead... and 2-2-0 is hardly worth the money. Pls give it at least 3-0-2 and 2-2-1 with 3-flyer squads...

 

The main problem of saipan is the planes. They are T9 and then outclass almost every planes they can meet.

 

WG should just give it T7 planes with 6 planes per squad and it wwould be really easier to balance it ...

[deadly_if_swallowed]

Maybe WG tries to make the Dogfighting Expert slightly useful again... Choose DFE on your standard T7 carrier for the sole purpose of fighting an AS Saipan

 

[Ishiro32]

 

The main problem of saipan is the planes. They are T9 and then outclass almost every planes they can meet.

 

WG should just give it T7 planes with 6 planes per squad and it wwould be really easier to balance it ...

 

So they should just copy other ships? Come on! Making just another Ranger or Hiryuu would be boring and pointless. Quality and number of wings is interesting way to diverse them a bit, especially since it does change your gameplay patterns.
How powerful/weak some combinations are is different thing. 

[DemonSemen]

That's 3/0/1 with 3 planes in the fighter squadrons and 8 planes in the single bomber squadron.

 

And? It doesn't matter if you have 3, 4, 6, 8 or 20 planes in the one squadron. You have to move it, drop your bombs and pray. Maybe you will hit, maybe not. If you will, you will do some DMG and fire, which will be fast extinguished. And you have to do it again - but before that you have to wait 50 seconds.

 

Every single CV player will agree, that 3 TB squadrons with 9 planes will do FAR more damage than 1 DB with 8 planes. At least you cannot use captain skill for -10% rearming.

[Poster_2015]

I need to remind you again - main reason why t9 strike planes are such jump in quality over t8 is because you get access to additional module giving them hp. Saipan planes wont have access to that, so they will be tier "8.5" not 9. Just the damage potential feels low. With 6 TB, you are looking at 2-3 hits per strike - yes most likely you can hit 2-3 per squad, but you are also gonna lose them on the way and from target AA. Its not like Essex planes are invincible - i often lose 1 from just DD fire on the way, and while its very hard to stop them all, some loses are going to happen. So in saipan with weaker planes, you WILL lose 2 or so from your 2 torp groups - meaning your "strike" will most likely be 14 (BBs) to 20k, assuming you arent running into some heavy interception. Make 4 strikes per battle, and in mostly ideal conditions you are looking a 80k or so damage - and that assumes a GOOD battle. That just feels low.

 

Now AS setup is rather potent - especially when you get the 4th plane - you are basically ruling the sky - often even if you get paired with a t9 CV. But like someone said - its even more boring then AS Essex i played a bit - there is one bomber group so there is no fires or anything to worry about. You just aim for fattest target around and i guess maybe do enough damage to justify yourself over AS ranger. 

 

This 3rd torpedo group meant actually close to doubling Saipan damage potential (your plane loses are somewhat constant, so id say you had 7 left to do a strike as opposed to current 4). I can even believe it was a tad OP with it, but it definitely feels UP without it. 

 

Edit: Did not see your post Carramba. While i agree with 3x3 torps having more damage potential in most situations. this 9DB group can easily 1 shot a tier 7 carrier that has no repair. Thus i had a thought, that if they ever let carriers in divisions, pairing AS saipan with a strike ranger or even hiryu actually can be very potent. You will definitely rule the sky at tier 7, and if you just wait for your buddy to blow up repair on a ship you can headshot it with 9 bombers and 4 fires. But - thats not happening now, I really think AS saipan has some potential in 2v2 CV wars, but 1v1 it just wont produce meaningful damage (and contrary to popular beliefs, some AS setups - especially at tier 9+ are capable of doing well upwards of 100 or even 200k damage), and strike Saipan just doesnt seem worth it. 

[NoirLotus]

 I need to remind you again - main reason why t9 strike planes are such jump in quality over t8 is because you get access to additional module giving them hp. Saipan planes wont have access to that, so they will be tier "8.5" not 9. Just the damage potential feels low. With 6 TB, you are looking at 2-3 hits per strike - yes most likely you can hit 2-3 per squad, but you are also gonna lose them on the way and from target AA. Its not like Essex planes are invincible - i often lose 1 from just DD fire on the way, and while its very hard to stop them all, some loses are going to happen. So in saipan with weaker planes, you WILL lose 2 or so from your 2 torp groups - meaning your "strike" will most likely be 14 (BBs) to 20k, assuming you arent running into some heavy interception. Make 4 strikes per battle, and in mostly ideal conditions you are looking a 80k or so damage - and that assumes a GOOD battle. That just feels low.

 

Come on guys, stop saying BS and look at the math !!

 

Saipan's TB have more than 1900 hp and fly at 155 kn loaded (194 while empty). Hiryu's TB only have 1210 hp, those of Ranger have 1510. So Saipan's Tb have more survivability and also are faster than standrd T7 TBs. They will have very few loss from AAA.

And with their speed, only Saipan's Fighters can intercept them easily, and only if they are loaded. Standard T7 fighters only fly at 166 kn maximum, so that's ony 11 kn faster than the TB when they are loaded. When they are empty, nothing can catch them at any tier : even T10 fighters only go at 181 kn !!

[DemonSemen]

Someone on the NA forum told that fighters fight Saipan vs. Ranger was Rangers win. One or more planes left

 

[NoirLotus]

Someone on the NA forum told that fighters fight Saipan vs. Ranger was Rangers win. One or more planes left

 

If you do the math, 1 squad of Saipan fighters vs 1 squad of Ranger is 50/50 if the Saipan has Air Superiority,

 

Everything depends on who gets the 1st kill during the fight.

 

Saipan still has the speed advantage so he ccan choose if he engages the fight or not.

[Poster_2015]

 

Come on guys, stop saying BS and look at the math !!

 

Saipan's TB have more than 1900 hp and fly at 155 kn loaded (194 while empty). Hiryu's TB only have 1210 hp, those of Ranger have 1510. So Saipan's Tb have more survivability and also are faster than standrd T7 TBs. They will have very few loss from AAA.

And with their speed, only Saipan's Fighters can intercept them easily, and only if they are loaded. Standard T7 fighters only fly at 166 kn maximum, so that's ony 11 kn faster than the TB when they are loaded. When they are empty, nothing can catch them at any tier : even T10 fighters only go at 181 kn !!

 

Yes i look at the math, and i actually own CVs up to tier 10. Yes Saipan planes will survive more, but there 6 of them vs 16 of Hiryu and 12-24 of ranger (talking about strike planes). They are living lets say 33% longer then ranger and 50% longer then Hiryu planes. Thats still not that much when you have 40% of planes of Hiryu and 25-50% of Ranger. You will lose HIGHER % of your planes, but of course in absolute numbers you will lose less of them. 

[DemonSemen]

If you do the math, 1 squad of Saipan fighters vs 1 squad of Ranger is 50/50

LoL? Did you read what I wrote? There was many clashes between Saipan's fighter squad & Ranger's fighter squad (3xT9 vs. 5xT7) and the result is = Ranger won, Ranger won, Ranger won, Ranger won ... ... and Ranger won (with 1-2 planes alive). Not a single win for Saipan.

 

What is here so hard to understand?

[NoirLotus]

And maybe you could be honest and quote me without cuts :

 

If you do the math, 1 squad of Saipan fighters vs 1 squad of Ranger is 50/50 if the Saipan has Air Superiority,

 

 

And considering that Saipan 2/3/0 is removed because even beginners were outperforming with it, stop saying that Saipan was fine and balanced ...

[Poster_2015]

Noir, to be honest i met a few Saipans and they were ALL underperforming. But still i can believe that in general Saipan was too strong. Im just saying with 3 plane squads changing 2/3/0 to 2/2/0 is not a nerf, its a complete and utter removal. It almost HALVES the damage potential. Maybe they should change it to 2/2/0 with 4 torp bombers per squad? Maybe give it 1/3/0 setup AND 3/0/1 ? Im not sure, with such small number of planes/squads its hard to balance. Im just calling 2/2/0 too weak, and not claiming 2/3/0 wasnt too strong.

[Trigger_Happy_Dad]

Maybe this whole "tier 9 planes on a tier 7 CV" concept is flawed?

 

Why not just give it tier 7 - 8 aircraft with "normal" squadron sizes?

[Spellfire40]

Maybe this whole "tier 9 planes on a tier 7 CV" concept is flawed?

 

Why not just give it tier 7 - 8 aircraft with "normal" squadron sizes?

 

Agree fully even if it had a copy of the Ranger airwings it would work well as a crewtrainer without screwing around with squadsizes. Even if they fully balance it now it open up cans of worms later when they bring in new navys each time some small details are changed in either aa or plane surviability.

[Ishiro32]

 

Agree fully even if it had a copy of the Ranger airwings it would work well as a crewtrainer without screwing around with squadsizes. Even if they fully balance it now it open up cans of worms later when they bring in new navys each time some small details are changed in either aa or plane surviability.

You really would like to have copy of ranger? Copy of already bad CV to buy for money? Carrier which plays exactly the same as the others and offers nothing to the game?

If you want to spend money to train crew then just pay for retraining, I would prefer to have something that I would actually enjoy playing from time to time. 

 

I honestly don't get it. They need to check how different sizes and hangars do anyway. Don't dismiss concept just because they balance premium carrier during testing period. 

[Gefreiter_Fritz]

You really would like to have copy of ranger? Copy of already bad CV to buy for money? Carrier which plays exactly the same as the others and offers nothing to the game?

If you want to spend money to train crew then just pay for retraining, I would prefer to have something that I would actually enjoy playing from time to time. 

 

I honestly don't get it. They need to check how different sizes and hangars do anyway. Don't dismiss concept just because they balance premium carrier during testing period. 

 

What is bad about Ranger?!?