Saipan - A glimmer of hope?

[Syrchalis]

I've abandoned WoWs in January this year, due to the awful state of my most-played class, carriers. While overall they were quite balanced, with some outliers to the bottom (Ranger, Bogue) and some to the top (Midway, Essex) - the issue was fun.

• Carrier Sniping as most viable tactic
• AA too weak at 4/5, too strong at 6-8, and mixed at 9/10

There were games in which you killed 8 ships. I'm not even joking, EIGHT. That's 2/3rds of a team. And others were you just died or got AA cockblocked entirely (Independence/Ryujo in a T6-8 game). I know that anyone who plays other classes (especially DDs!) will now argue that their gameplay is the same - pretty hit or miss. I will not argue against that. It's bad. And I hope it changes for other classes as much as I do for carriers.

 

I don't want to go further into detail why carriers were in such a bad shape gameplay wise, because it would take a lot of words. Instead let me focus on something positive instead.

 

The USS Saipan

A premium carrier, first of it's kind. Hm - what should I think about that? I watched some videos, read some stats. Looks like it's performing rather well, not exceptionally but not on the bad side. But more interestingly - a US CV with 3 planes per squads? This tiny? And at T7? Do I really want to spend money on that? 35€ even?

Wait, did Wargaming randomly try exactly what I was thinking would fix carriers back in january?

 

And yes they did! Wargaming did it. And so they became 35€ richer - I do not regret it.

 

The problem I saw with carriers was

• CVs tend to do either really well (8 kills, remember?) or really bad (getting instantly sniped) - there is not much between that
• If one CV snipes the other (which happens a lot) one will have a really bad game, one a really good one, causing this extreme imbalance
• Note that the above is true just for CVs, if a DD or CA randomly dies to a stray torpedo or detonation it doesn't affect the game nearly as much
• Players get really frustrated when they die to a good bomber run, because it feels like you just were excluded from the game because the evil carrier guy decided YOU aren't allowed to have fun

 

So I proposed

• Nerf damage HARD
• Buff reload
• Buff speed/durability

 

The Saipan is the living embodiement of this idea

• Tiny amount of bombers mean low damage per attack run and overall
• T9 planes on T7 CV mean that your planes are very durable compared to the AA you encounter
• Their high speed makes them even more durable and allows more attack runs than usual
• Fast reload time for all aircraft

 

But how can the Saipan compare to Hiryu and Ranger? Both have more than 50% extra planes and twice as big squads (Ranger) or slightly bigger squads with two extra squads (Hiryu)? If we look at the CV Winrates posted earlier in this forum we see that

• Saipan has 56%
• Hiryu 54%
• Ranger 49%

 

What is this magic you may ask? Why does the Saipan fare so well? Is it OP?

No, it simply is consistent. When I played the old Essex I had games ranging from 0 damage (instantly sniped) to 330k damage. Even without the extremes, damage would fluctuate wildly from 70k to 250k. I only got the Saipan today, but in the 7 games I played I never went below 72k damage (my first game with a new ship after 3 months break from WoWs) and never over 120k. This is a really tight spread - exactly what you need if you want balanced and fun CVs.

 

I've never seen such a consistent CV. Though, why is it that way?

• Most importantly, because sniping Saipan is hard. It's small, nimble and even has acceptable AA - this eliminates the very bad games where you die immediately
• Nearly as important - it has low damage, so it cannot snipe other CVs well - which eliminates games where you have absolute air superiority and can wreck havoc among ships
• Even if the enemy CV is a 0/1/3 Ranger (meaning you have absolute air superiority), you cannot do that much damage with just 6 torpedo bombers or 8/9 dive bombers

 

To summarize it:

I believe the Saipan is an experiment from Wargaming, like the russian cruiser Mikhail Kutuzov was an AA experiment and the russian DD line was an experiment as well. And I dearly hope they intend on making all CVs a bit more like the Saipan, because it's honestly the fairest, least frustrating to play and play against and most importantly - most fun CV - I've seen so far.

 

I also want to thank Wargaming to sell premium ships outside of bundles finally. When I left that wasn't the case.

 

 

Edit: Made walls of text into nice and neat lists. And god damn it, I had a 160k dmg game just before I was going to bed. Now my wonderful tight spread is ruined.

[Hauptbahnhof]

For me the fun in Carrier game play is that it works quite similar to history, which means:

 

1.) Massive strikes that can do massive damage, and even one-shot some ships, but you can't pull of many of them and they take time and care to prepare well so you need to prioritize hard about when and where to attack. But you also have the ability to screw up these totally if enemy put of good AA and good fighter interception.

2.) Carriers prioritize sinking other Carriers first if opportunity is given, and CVs are really vulnerable so you need teamwork to defend your Carrier and to be smart to sink the enemy Carrier.

 

If your wishes are fulfilled it means removing most of what I think makes Carrier gameplay fun and historical.

[Syrchalis]

It may be historically accurate, but it is not fun. While I can't speak for you (or other CV captains), I can speak for those who are the victims of your attacks. WoWs is not a simulation, it's still a game, so fun > history.

 

And maybe you underestimate the Saipan a bit - especially it's AS deck has a huge DB squad with 1000lb bombs, which gives you that feeling of a massive strike.

[N00b32]

The problem of the Saipan is simply, that there is no point any more to actually work and manage 7 units at once. No. None. Just buy Saipan and troll the enemy Hiryu with your planes. Because if Hiryus planes spot the planes of Saipan, it is too late for a strafe. They have to turn first, you have to react and so on. Plus Hiryu planes are a lot slower. And Hiryu can never dictate the battle with Saipan floating around. And there lies the consistency of the Saipan. Saipan can do whatever you want. The only balancing factor is the lower damage. But even with that you can be constant, because Saipan can do whatever Saipan wants. 

[Gefreiter_Fritz]

I go with Hauptbahnhof in that point. All or nothing is the core of CV gameplay in my opinion. If all CVs would grow more like Saipan, I would sooner or  later propably loose my interesst in the game, as CV gameplay is the only reason for me to play at all. Dont get me wrong, CV ballance must be changed, cause atm there is a great gap between USN and IJN, but your solution is the wrong way I think.

By the way (that is NO statsbashing) you are in absolutly no aspect a avarage WoWs player. You are so f***ing good at this game, that your results are not really a scale if a ship is ballanced/gameplay works/something is OP. You could propably make a Langley work in a T8 battle.

 

 

For Saipan in special, I am not sure if her stats are really that good. Have a look here:

http://wows-numbers.com/ship/3763320816,Saipan/

Here she seems to  be highly inconsistent and by far weaker than even Ranger.

[Hauptbahnhof]

It may be historically accurate, but it is not fun. While I can't speak for you (or other CV captains), I can speak for those who are the victims of your attacks. WoWs is not a simulation, it's still a game, so fun > history.

 

Actually 73% of my games are NOT in a Carrier so I can speak as a victim too since I am one myself and since I played over 1000 games NOT in a Carrier, and been target of countless Carrier strikes and attacks when playing all classes of ships and in most conceivable situations.

 

And I have not been sunk by Carrier air a single time when it was not due to some mistake I did myself ( failure to detect the strike, failure to react, failure to work with the team ). Or when I was the last ship alive in which case you will be sunk anyway regardless, the Carrier just speeds up the process.

 

To be successful in WoWs you need to have knowledge of your enemies, and the only people who think it's not fun are those who have no knowledge of how Carriers work.

 

The same argument you are making here ( It's not fun ) is also made by Battleships sailing in straight lines getting sunk by Japanese invisi DDs because they don't understand how their enemies class works.

 

If more people understood how Carriers work they would not mind getting sunk by Carriers since they would realize it was due to mistakes they did themself and since they would understand the limitations and challenges Carriers have to pull of such strikes.

[Gefreiter_Fritz]

 

 This!

[Syrchalis]

I agree that CVs should feel like CVs. And that in overall the theme of "few, powerful attacks" should be kept.

 

Let me ask you - do you really think the Saipan doesn't follow this theme? Because it does - we are just so used to flabbergasting alpha damage numbers due to Midway's dominance for months. Hear me out - a BB does get 20-40 salvos off easily in a game, which can do a lot of damage. Even the Saipan with it's quick reload and fast planes does only get 5-6 air strikes, which is not even a third of that. However, they are precise and can do massive damage. You won't oneshot a BB with it, but you can easily take 60-70% of it's HP - if he does a mistake.

 

Secondly, I do not wish all CVs to be as extreme as the Saipan. I just want them to be a bit more like it, a bit less alpha damage, a bit less overall damage potential, but in turn, a bit more strikes.

 

See it as compromise. You don't get to ruin someone's fun completely (by sinking him) with just one strike, but in turn you get the opportunity to do more strikes on different targets, which gives you flexibility. You can still focus on one guy though. More strikes = more fun, sounds simple, but it's true.

 

Do you have the Saipan? I was very sceptical before I bought it, but I don't see me using any other CV anytime soon.

[Gefreiter_Fritz]

Ahm, no, I dont think Saipan follows this concept. With Saipan you have to choose between AS with a more or less useless DB squad (only 1 drop, so no fire) or hard to use TBs with small squads and great gaps between the torps (so most ships can easily dodge some of the torps). So you have the choice between an OP AS (with 5th skill) setup with extrem RNG dependable dmg and a highly skill dependable allround setup with mediocre dmg. High dmg is what a strike Ranger can do... Saipan is more like halfbaked IJN CV without the full spec flexibility of them. I have a Saipan and that is my sight of things. I dont say, she is a bad ship, but I dont find the concept fitting my prefered playstile. 

 

Dont make the mistake to measure the Saipan on YOUR skill, scale is the avarage or slightly above that player. And in their hands the Saipan is even more a burden or at last pointless to its team.

 

And at last, this game is about sinking ships, and most of the time when I am sunk, I have to admit that I (just me myself) have done something wrong, when I am honest!

[SV_Kompresor]

The problem of the Saipan is simply, that there is no point any more to actually work and manage 7 units at once. No. None. Just buy Saipan and troll the enemy Hiryu with your planes. Because if Hiryus planes spot the planes of Saipan, it is too late for a strafe. They have to turn first, you have to react and so on. Plus Hiryu planes are a lot slower. And Hiryu can never dictate the battle with Saipan floating around. And there lies the consistency of the Saipan. Saipan can do whatever you want. The only balancing factor is the lower damage. But even with that you can be constant, because Saipan can do whatever Saipan wants. 

 

[Syrchalis]

I think people just haven't found suitable ways to exploit the weaknesses of the Saipan. Other than that, I don't really see the problem. The reason Saipan can do what it wants is due to the faster and more durable planes - but if all CVs were like it (or at least a bit more like it) then that would mean all CVs have similar planes.

 

Let me put it in different words. The Saipan actually only has faster and more durable planes. They are only classified as T9 to make the dogfighting skill work against it, so this classification is actually just there to NERF it's planes in a fight. What I am trying to say - this T9 classification would become redundant if other CVs had planes with similar durability and speed on it's tier, because the advantage this classification gives to Saipan's enemies isn't needed any longer.

[Hauptbahnhof]

I agree that CVs should feel like CVs. And that in overall the theme of "few, powerful attacks" should be kept.

 

Let me ask you - do you really think the Saipan doesn't follow this theme? Because it does - we are just so used to flabbergasting alpha damage numbers due to Midway's dominance for months. Hear me out - a BB does get 20-40 salvos off easily in a game, which can do a lot of damage. Even the Saipan with it's quick reload and fast planes does only get 5-6 air strikes, which is not even a third of that. However, they are precise and can do massive damage. You won't oneshot a BB with it, but you can easily take 60-70% of it's HP - if he does a mistake.

 

I thought you quit the game because they nerfed the US Carriers and took away their 2x Torpedo bomber squads massive alfa strikes that could oneshot BBs?

 

Carriers now after this nerf seem to be mostly in line and it's quite hard to oneshot DDs and Cruisers, and impossible to oneshot Battleships ( both as USN and IJN ). So I already think the game works the way you want it to work... ( being able to take of 60-70% of the HP of Battleships that make a mistake if you have a strike setup CV ).

 

 

If you can't oneshot the enemy Carrier though no one will attempt it since it means flying around the map twice and spending the first 10-12 min of the game just killing their Carrier leaving no time to do any other damage even if you manage to sink their CV.

[N00b32]

Let me put it in different words. The Saipan actually only has faster and more durable planes. They are only classified as T9 to make the dogfighting skill work against it, so this classification is actually just there to NERF it's planes in a fight. What I am trying to say - this T9 classification would become redundant if other CVs had planes with similar durability and speed on it's tier, because the advantage this classification gives to Saipan's enemies isn't needed any longer.

 

My opinion on Saipain, although I never played one only against it: the fighters would create more fun for the Saipan and the carrier enemy if they were 5 knots slower. Also to add, the only reason to take this skill these days under the current MM would be the Saipan on T VII. On T VIII you have to reskill the captain. And let me add that it is even a bad thing to skill Dogfighting expert, because it costs you Torpedo Acceleration, the one skill that actually made playing carrier fun again. So no, Dogfighting Expert is a real BAD thing to take. 

[VC381]

I proposed in another thread that the balance between a realistic and awesome looking/feeling air strike and a fun balanced game would be making squads much bigger but heavily nerfing individual planes/bombs/air torps to compensate. So lots of planes in the air, lots of air kills but parts of a strike still get through, so less binary (free strike vs. wiped out strike). I'm not sure the answer to imbalance is quite what you suggest, there's a fine line between consistency and boredom. I do think though having more (but weaker) planes would make things look and feel more epic as well as having the effect of smoothing out the average.

 

So far the Saipans I've seen have dominated my games. I do think it's an experiment, but one in mixing up tiers of planes and ships. The current CV progression prevents us having e.g. an early war Yorktown because her plane capacity is Tier 8 level but the planes historically would be tier 5, 6 if you're lucky. So if they can balance the Saipan at a tier where it's capacity is a bit small but compensate with better planes maybe they can do the opposite as well, and that's something that would interest me much more.

[Syrchalis]

 

I thought you quit the game because they nerfed the US Carriers and took away their 2x Torpedo bomber squads massive alfa strikes that could oneshot BBs?

 

You read that wrong, I quit way before that, it only kept me from coming back. I was occassionally reading the patchnotes when I was bored and reading that they replaced a TB with a DB and buffed their damage a little didn't give me much hope, so I stayed away.

 

 

My opinion on Saipain, although I never played one only against it: the fighters would create more fun for the Saipan and the carrier enemy if they were 5 knots slower. Also to add, the only reason to take this skill these days under the current MM would be the Saipan on T VII. On T VIII you have to reskill the captain. And let me add that it is even a bad thing to skill Dogfighting expert, because it costs you Torpedo Acceleration, the one skill that actually made playing carrier fun again. So no, Dogfighting Expert is a real BAD thing to take. 

 

Of course it's bad to take. I was just saying that they are called T9 mostly for that skill and so you can gouge their speed/durability quickly - not because of anything else.

 

I proposed in another thread that the balance between a realistic and awesome looking/feeling air strike and a fun balanced game would be making squads much bigger but heavily nerfing individual planes/bombs/air torps to compensate. So lots of planes in the air, lots of air kills but parts of a strike still get through, so less binary (free strike vs. wiped out strike). I'm not sure the answer to imbalance is quite what you suggest, there's a fine line between consistency and boredom. I do think though having more (but weaker) planes would make things look and feel more epic as well as having the effect of smoothing out the average.

 

So far the Saipans I've seen have dominated my games. I do think it's an experiment, but one in mixing up tiers of planes and ships. The current CV progression prevents us having e.g. an early war Yorktown because her plane capacity is Tier 8 level but the planes historically would be tier 5, 6 if you're lucky. So if they can balance the Saipan at a tier where it's capacity is a bit small but compensate with better planes maybe they can do the opposite as well, and that's something that would interest me much more.

 

The fine line is pretty clear though. If there is many different viable playstyles it's fun. Carrier sniping was the only really viable one for a long time, which made it boring. Saipan has many viable tactics because it can't snipe well and is relatively safe of getting sniped. Consistency on it is in damage and contribution to victory, not in tactics or playstyle. That's the core difference.

[Hauptbahnhof]

I do think that all Carriers using the offensive strike setup ( including Saipan ) should be able to snipe other CVs, and be sniped themself though.

 

Otherwise it takes out a big part of Carrier positioning and map control if you are always safe from getting hit by the enemy Carrier, and it does take away some of the fun of playing an offensive Carrier.

To pull of this the Saipan would probably need a 5:th squad with divebombers in it's strike setup ( for the fire effect ). This would also make sense since it means it's strike setup wouldn't have significantly less planes in the air then it's AS setup has.

 

I'm not sure what nerfs to it's defenses would be needed to make it easier to kill though... But then again I never had any big issues disposing of it in a single strike with my Hiryu strike.

[Drunken_Jedi]

Finally, someone gets the Saipan . After all the bashing and flaming in the Saipan threads I thought this gem in the rough would get overlooked. I love being able to dictate when I want my fighters to engage (unless I mess up and don't keep an eye out). Their speed allows them you to command where and when engagements happen. I love drawing in two squads of fighters just to strafe with my other squad - yeah I lose three planes... whoopie doo. I just knocked out near enough two entire squads lol = profit. And because you're only using three planes per squad you can do that quite a few times before you need to start worrying about reserves. Also you can run rings around enemy bomber squadrons and strafe them too when YOU want to. The fighters are crap in a click and forget fight because of the low ammo capacity. Just get a good strafe and pull them back.

 

I really like my Saipan, still getting to grips with some of it's quirks but like you say it's consistent especially with the 2/2/0 layout. That large dive bomber squadron looks great on paper - but it's just so RNG dependant I'd rather have the certainty of torpedoes over bombs.

[Vanhal]

Idk if that's true from a Saipan captain's perspective, but from the wrong end of bomber payload i noticed that it have vastly different outcomes for different players. Almost like if it was... skill dependant? Some Saipan players i saw were just fodder, losing planes in an instant, missing all torps - looks like zero games CV players that just bought it. Some were devastating and practically carried their teams.

 

But none did what i hate the most in CV - no "i erase you" godfinger.

[N00b32]

Isn't that the definition of unbalanced, that saipan can always dictate the battle ? You see, there has always been this kind of balance of US vs IJN where the IJN has more but US has the faster and better planes. The Saipan is the US thought brought to an extreme with even less and even better planes in the air. And then you split them up. I think that is the problem I have with this carrier. It is the combination of the extremes and a complete carrier without air weaknesses, because you are so much faster. And I think Saipan would have more problems if IJN could split up their planes in 8 groups.

 

It feels very cheating when I think about it. At least to the enemy carrier. To the enemy team as a whole prob. not so much. 

[Ishiro32]

You see, there has always been this kind of balance of US vs IJN where the IJN has more but US has the faster and better planes. The Saipan is the US thought brought to an extreme with even less and even better planes in the air. 

Actually it was never the case. From day one IJN had faster and more numerous planes. There was no instance of USN having speed advantage over IJN. In fact DBs from old Shokaku with ammo were faster than fighters of Lexington by 1 knot. USS Saipan design-wise is much more IJN CV than the USN, especially with good camo and quick reload times. 

[HMS_Worcester]

Anyone know if the Saipan is one of these limited time offer premiums? Or will it be available again in the future? I want it, mainly from a collectors point of view, but can't justify the price at the moment.

Plus knowing my luck the second I bought it they would release Campbeltown!

[Syrchalis]

Isn't that the definition of unbalanced, that saipan can always dictate the battle ?

 

No, I think you missed the main point of the topic.

 

I do not talk about Saipan <--> Other CVs balance here. This is, because I hope that they become more like the Saipan - if they would, balance would be different anyway, so the real question is, why do I hope other CVs become more like the Saipan?

 

Because the Saipan allows more strikes to be made. Less time spent waiting for planes to fly and to land and reload - instead more time aiming, or using tactics, fun stuff. Waiting is boring. The wonderful side effect is that due to more strikes they have to be weaker and this means there won't be this

"i erase you" godfinger.

 

anymore that frustrates ANY player, except for other CVs.

 

Long-term wise that will make CVs less hated among BBs in particular and allow people to see CVs as more of a supportish ship - but not by doing boring things like scouting - you will still bomb the crap out of people, but more like "finishing someone off" or "softening the big BB up" or "taking out high priority targets" instead of just outright 100-0'ing everything you wish.

 

Remember - you will do the above things more often - 5-7x per battle you will "finish someone off" etc. instead of 3-4x "finger of death" - and I think that makes CVs more fun for CV players as well as for any other class.

[N00b32]

@Syrchalis: Yes, that makes sense. I also see it this way. (Although I doubt the hatred of some BB players will ever go.) 

[Hauptbahnhof]

 

Long-term wise that will make CVs less hated among BBs in particular and allow people to see CVs as more of a supportish ship - but not by doing boring things like scouting - you will still bomb the crap out of people, but more like "finishing someone off" or "softening the big BB up" or "taking out high priority targets" instead of just outright 100-0'ing everything you wish.

 

I think you need to play some more others CVs after your break then, because that's essentially how Carriers work right now after the nerfs to US 2xtorp squads and buffs to long range AA.

 

No CV in game can really 100-0 another same tier Battleship without an exceptionally rare magazine hit, and you can't do it to any ship in range of a Cruiser with DF CD either.

 

The only ships you can 100-0 are DDs + Cruisers without DF CD that sail in straight lines, or Carriers that are without escort and without enough experience/skills to keep their fighters in a position where they can detect/intercept your strike early enough.

 

You can't really compare your own skill level with that of the average player ( when you play at your level ), because then you can easily argue that any class is super overpowered and makes the game "not fun" for it's victims. And with the current balance all other Classes can "oneshot" their enemies to a much larger degree then Carriers can.

 

The wonderful side effect is that due to more strikes they have to be weaker and this means there won't be this "i erase you" godfinger anymore that frustrates ANY player, except for other CVs.

It doesn't frustrate anyone that knows basics of how Carriers works. The main issue here is that so few players have tried Carriers, and thus they are frustrated when they get damaged by what they can't understand.

 

I have only been oneshot by a Carrier in my Battleship a single time in this game ( out of 700 BB games ). It was in a tier 7 BB versus a pre-nerf tier 9 Essex CV with 12 torpedo bombers and I made a big mistake by sailing away from the group and any AA support on a solo-yolo mission. It was 100% my own fault, and I 100% deserved to be sunk in that situation. Still wargaming have now nerfed it so if it happened today I would very likely survive with maybe 25-33% hp left, and been able to repair back to 50%ish.

 

I can't see how anyone could think a Carrier ( which can't even one-shot you anymore ) is more frustrating then a Battleship which with some luck will delete/one-shot critadel a Cruiser outside the range which the cruiser can even shoot back, or a Destroyer deleting a Battleship with well placed torpedoes without even getting detected.

[Syrchalis]

It doesn't frustrate anyone that knows basics of how Carriers works. The main issue here is that so few players have tried Carriers, and thus they are frustrated when they get damaged by what they can't understand.

 

I'm totally with you on that. The problem is that how many know something about how carriers work? 10% of the players? Yeah sure, the "reasonable" thing to expect would be that they learn it, but that's not how games work unfortunately, you can't >make< people do something, you can only trick them into doing it.

 

Either way, the problem I see with Essex/Midway changes is that they did it wrong. If I engage an Iowa I lose 6/12 torpedo bombers (as example). Now I would lose 6/6, because an intelligent Iowa would not focus the dive bombers. The difference is out of scale. 6 Torpedos is infinitely more than 0 Torpedos.

If you say you only lose 4 - it's the same story. 4 out of 12 is not much, but 4 out of 6 is nearly everything. That's why the change was so devastating. You didn't lose half your torpedo power, you lost nearly all of it.

 

A better solution would have been to make the torpedo bombers maybe a bit faster and in turn reduce damage by 2-4k. That would have made it impossible to oneshot BBs, but you would still be able to use powerful torpedo strikes.