Have I made an error choosing US CVs?

[tajj7]

So I bought a Saipan a long time ago on discount (never been played outside co-op so far) + had spare US 10 point captain from one of the Xmas boxes, thus I decided eventually I'd have a go at learning to play CVs and grinding a CV line.

 

I'm 6 games into the playing the Langley badly (bad patch I know to start playing CVs at low tier) but looking at the stats the US CVs (Saipan aside) are outmatched at every tier in every statistic going, win rate, damage, XP, kills etc. Pretty demoralising to look at. 

 

Should I quit now and swap to the IJN line? Even though it would be with a fresh captain and no trainer, or is the planned CV changes likely to address this mismatch? 

[Tuuletar]

Well yes if you are not casual player.

 

[Niibler]

The error was not in choosing US CVs but on choosing CVs.

WG doesn't want you to play them. 

Go BBs, can't go wrong with that choice.

[Horin728]

The grind of the USN CVs is a long and painful one, but at the end there is the Midway.

 

I don't get why people do so badly in her, she is an awesome asset.

 

The key to grinding USN CVs is to go for the balanced loadouts. With them, you can contest the IJN CVs and still do enough damage by staggering your dots on a single target. The only tiers that were too much of a pain for me was the T8 and 9 due to constant TX matches, so I used my free xp there... But the Midway was worth it. 

 

 

[Yohane1]

See this difference:

USN cvs are more defensive on its own. Yes, the planes have more hitpoints and you have less squadrons. But that makes playing easier.

You don't want to start right of the bat with the Hakurayu on IJN line tho. (with 8 squadrons and multitasking it can be rather decieving and tough to master)

DiveBombers get really painfull in higher tiers. Dd's in 1á2 drops.

 

IJN however on its own have more squadrons wich makes attacking even little ships like destroyers easier to kill ( if u manage to crosstorp ofcourse (

))

IJN planes are devided in smaller groups then USN line, have less ammo in their fighters. Might be tricky to face USN planes.

Divebombers are not as good as USN, but can still set DoT by fires.
Torpbombers really fk up enemies. wich in the end makes the win for your team.

 

So its hard to say you have chosen the wrong or right type of CV. USN and IJN are really different on its own. Try to play up to tier 6/7 and see whether you like it. Now that Manual dropping have been removed untill tier 6 this basically means USN is stronger then IJN. And after all.. It all comes down to how well you perform in whatever ship/class you play.

 

GL! And fair seas!

[Synth_FG]

The key to grinding USN CVs is to go for the balanced loadouts. With them, you can contest the IJN CVs and still do enough damage by staggering your dots on a single target. The only tiers that were too much of a pain for me was the T8 and 9 due to constant TX matches, so I used my free xp there... But the Midway was worth it. 

 

Early days go balanced but around t8 switching to strike will give you much better results in the USCV's 

Do agree that the Midway is alot of fun to play, the salty curses of BB players being absolutely wrecked by a well placed torpedo strike will liven up any chat

 

[Migulaitor]

As a new player I think the best way to learn how to carrier is the following:

Considering there is no manual drops on tier 4 and 5 play a bit of them, doesnt really matter co op or random games.

When you get the basics free xp until tier 6 take the Indi with balanced setup (1 squad of each) and learn how to manual drop and straffe (on co-op).

Once you feel confident (You can realiably torp BBs and cruisers, drop bombs centered on any ship and straffe) go to random games, for the first games it could be a good idea to division up with a Cleveland or something with good AA. 

 

From tier 7+ take strike config you will need to learn how to dodge the enemy fighters and to sacrifice your bombers.

 

Using US CVs is not a mistake but its the hard way because the IJN balanced loadout is really good. I have both lines up to tier 8 (Saving free xp for tier 9 modules atm) and my favorite CV is Strike Lexington, the amount of damage you can deal is insane. Also the AA is enough to melt any plane thinking about attacking you. 

http://shipcomrade.com/captcalc/0001000000010000001000000001010014

Thats my build, will take CE with 18 points.

[Horin728]

 

Early days go balanced but around t8 switching to strike will give you much better results in the USCV's 

Do agree that the Midway is alot of fun to play, the salty curses of BB players being absolutely wrecked by a well placed torpedo strike will liven up any chat

 

 

I have to disagree on that, getting one DB squadron is just not worth giving up your fighter power. True if we were talking about a TB squadron (especially on the Midway) then it would be a different matter entirely, but for a DB, I'll take an implicit AS over the strike Haku any day.

[Synth_FG]

 

I have to disagree on that, getting one DB squadron is just not worth giving up your fighter power. True if we were talking about a TB squadron (especially on the Midway) then it would be a different matter entirely, but for a DB, I'll take an implicit AS over the strike Haku any day.

 

I thought that way at first, but I find the additional damage output of that 1DB sqn to be significant especially with the increased chances of hits let alone fires, properly stagger attacks around the use of the repair with or without the TB sqn can see significant fire / flooding damage racked up.

 One fighter sqn with is enough to tie up 2 enemy fighter sqn's whilst your strike slips past (unless the enemy is running AS) so what you really give up is aircraft shoot downs and  the possibility of blunting the enemy strikes with your 2nd squadron of fighters, 

 

Its a question of where you put the balance, but I find the increased rate of damage output from strike swings more of an advantage to the teams I am playing with and greatly increases my chances of a win

 

Also it's not like you need squadrons of fighters to cover yourself, the defensive AA consumable on high tier USCV makes any attempt to snipe the carrier expensive and doomed to failure 

 

 

[Azalgor]

Pit planes VS planes and US will down anything 10 times over, 1 US Fighter squad can take out both IJN ones hands down. Yes, with the removal of the 2nd TB squad, US fell behind in damage potential, but still, theyr planes dont drop like flies compared to IJN.

[Kane87]

US CVs are different than IJN ones. However I would argue that they are easier to play though. They are more strategicaly played than their IJN counterparts. In US carriers I found out a bigger importance to the targets that you want to attack. I need to time my attacks properly and watch more when and where to strike. I would not say the US are worse or inferior to the IJN carriers. In IJN carriers you just drop your torpedoes and go for the next run. In US the reload times are so high that you need to focus and select the targets carefully.

Real CV gameplay starts at T6 and you reach the high tier gameplay at T9. T4 and T5 are not realy representative to feel the gameplay of CVs later on.

Ps.: CV stands for carrier vessel historicaly but in WoWs it stands for Carring Victory for your team as a whole ;)
 

[eliastion]

USN CVs generally are inferior to IJN ones but the difference in average stats is inflated by two factors:

 

1. CVs are always matched against same tier CVs. This leads to a situation where if one option outperforms the other, the difference might look much more severe than it would've been between two same tier ships of any other class - it's just that USN CVs have no other ships around to "get back" on from losing against IJN ones. Regardless of nation, the most crucial aspect (well, not necessarily at t4-5 now) is the skill of the player. Evenly skilled, the IJN CV pllayer has an advantage but this advantage is less pronounced than it might seem, especially since...

 

2. The results of USN CVs are brought down by AS loadouts. Basically, in US CVs it's very tempting to load your boat full of fighters and go destroy the opposing CV game, farming sweet plane kills and enjoying unmatched air superiority... but it's a trap. You FEEL like you're winning. You see enemy planes dropping left and right and when the game ends, you see pitiful position the enemy CV has in XP - you did, after all, destroy him in the air.

Only you didn't. Not really. Because the main job of a CV is to deliver heavy damage to big ships and/or to force them to make maneuvers that cause them to stop shooting and/or receive heavy damage from other sources. So, even if you did prevent the enemy from enjoying the match, it's unlikely that he didn't get even 1-2 good strikes in the game. In 12v12 match you just can't be everywhere at once and a cautious opponent will get to manage a couple solid drops more often than not. And your damage will be pitiful due to lack of strike planes that could deal the damage. Result? You spent most of the game fighting enemy CV while said enemy CV influenced the battle more than you did. So, if the teams were otherwise evenly matched, the enemy probably won.

The effect described above can be somewhat lessened by the fact that you're more or less free to do air spotting for your team (since you hold air superiority) but this contribution usually isn't enough to offset the lack of damage. So, despite seemingly winning the air battle, possibly getting more XP than enemy CV, you're actually a burden for the team because you didn't manage to completely shut down the enemy CV while being unable to offset his contribution with your own.

 

The above is the big problem with AS set-ups that brings USN CVs down, especially since their loadouts are more specialized and so someone thinking to play fighters is more likely to pick US CVs. And what's the most sinister about this: many fighter-deck players aren't even aware why they're not winning as much as they think they should. After all, it's very counter-intuitive: you win the air battle, you shot down all enemy planes, the enemy delivers maybe one or two strikes tops... you have a justified feeling of having done a good job. The game even tells you you did a good job: you have big number of planes shot down and solid XP, you're probably much higher in your team than enemy CVs in their. Everything from gut feeling to game feedback tells you that you were an asset to your team... while the reality is that the enemy CV simply contributed more, regardless of what the results show.

This is a very nasty trap for players indeed - basically it takes a bit of pondering over what it means to contribute to your team as a CV to even discover that the story the game and your instincts tell you might be a big, fat, nasty lie. And most players don't play a warship shooter to be so reflective - they pick the loadout to help their team against enemy planes and they do their best to contribute - and by no fault of their own they are lied to by the game that they ARE contributing. Which, unsurprisingly, leads to them repeating the same mistake over and over again, without even realizing that their poor results aren't the effect of either bad luck or even their lack of skill with their CV - they just unknowingly pick the inferior deck composition and place themselves (and their team) at a disadvantage from the first minute of the game.

[Skillet]

That's a really interesting take on CV play eliastion.  I don't play CV's myself because I'm terrible in them but my friend has started his journey on the IJN line and to counter the superior USN fighters he is running an all fighter AS setup and delights in limiting his counterparts activity in the game.  I had never looked at it like this but perhaps it would be better for the team if I defend him with an AA Cruiser and he gets on with attacking enemy ships.

 

That said the last time I did that I got horrendous abbuse from a BB player who felt he should have had my protection.  Can't pelase everyone in a random battle.

[Horin728]

While one Midway Fighter squadron may be enough to tie down both of the Hakus, it doesn't stop Haku from dominating in damage. The balanced loadout does.

 

I have posted quite detailed analysis on this topic in the CV subforum, but TL,DR is that your job as a Midway is to drag out the game as long as you can, by catching the 1st/2nd Hakus strike in a good strafe or to lock it out long enough to limit Hakus alpha, while allowing your dots (and higher hangar capacity) to catch up/overtake.

 

Look up Femenenly on twitch, she is an awesome IJN CV player and everytime she faces strike Midway, she is able to dominate, while the balanced loadout can give her trouble. I base this on hers as well as my games. 

 

One picture to say it all. I have gotten clear skies before in the Midway and find it not that hard to get those, but I'm at work right now without access to the screenshots... Just look up my content if you want more proofs.

 

 

 

[eliastion]

That's a really interesting take on CV play eliastion.  I don't play CV's myself because I'm terrible in them but my friend has started his journey on the IJN line and to counter the superior USN fighters he is running an all fighter AS setup and delights in limiting his counterparts activity in the game.  I had never looked at it like this but perhaps it would be better for the team if I defend him with an AA Cruiser and he gets on with attacking enemy ships.

 

That said the last time I did that I got horrendous abbuse from a BB player who felt he should have had my protection.  Can't pelase everyone in a random battle.

 

One thing to be remembered is that IJN CVs suffer from this choice (AS or strike loadout) to significantly lesser extent than USN ones do - basically, IJN loadouts are much less specialized so that you still get to have fighters on your strike loadouts (so you're not completely defenseless) AND your fighter deck actually still has some punch (although it is significantly weaker, especially since everyone and their mother tends to focus torp bombers with AA).

So, while I believe IJN strike loads to be superior to AS, the latter is imo significantly more viable than US fighter deck.

[Dragnorak]

Id like to learn CV's. I'm useless in them to be honest. Any tips on where to start please?

[Horin728]

Id like to learn CV's. I'm useless in them to be honest. Any tips on where to start please?

 

https://www.twitch.tv/femennenly

[BaronMannerheim]

Saipan is OP but US line CV is strongly underperforming compared to IJN line (and Kaga Premium is going to be released soon). 

With the new patch, no manual control for tier4-5 CVs, so I suggest to free-exp-bypass tier4-5 IJN CVs and start with Ryujo. Alternately you can try with US line but it's really painfull. Maybe it makes sense in a fighter configuration but it's proved that dogfight-config is far weaker: always better try to do more damage possible to enemy ships (and that's the reason IJN's are better: 1 more torp squadron is invaluable).

I've done some ranked battles last season with my Hiryu: Saipan was OP, but vs Ranger... always a domination.

[General_Alexus]

Short answer: Yes

Long Version: Yes and we have alot of Topics who explain why ( if you dont trust statistics to beginn with )

[VC381]

Two words mean "no" in this case: "Strike Lexington"!

[Corvi]

They are quite good up tier Tier 9 if you dont play the "Noob Deck" aka Fighter Setup. Strike Ranger and Strike Lexington are absolutely brutal carriers, Midway however is pretty bad. I rebought myself the Lexi which i loved to play CV, i just cant make Midway work.

[kalamies]

Stopped playing in lexington when US carriers cant match IJN counterparts. IJN has always fighters, tbs and dbs at same time. IJN 2-2-2 vs 2-0-2, 1-1-1 or 0-1-3 you are always outnumbered. US have to choose berween AS and then you cant deal damage enough, or strike and then you cant protect your planes. IJN has more balanced loadouts. Im currently at taiho and i have enjoyed playing IJN more than US. Taiho with 2-3-2 is deadly and can contest essex.

[MoveZig]

How does one play U.S. strike without fighters vs. an AS loadout? Any tips?

[VC381]

How does one play U.S. strike without fighters vs. an AS loadout? Any tips?

 

Basically mind games, positioning and timing.

 

Play the map, be where he isn't. Even the best players would struggle to do a good manual drop on one side of the map while getting a perfect strafe on your bombers on the opposite side. Watch for what he's doing, when he's distracted, when his fighters are harmlessly circling. Also, learn to bait, predict and dodge strafes. Use your team, strike on the side where you have AA ships going aggressive (RN cruisers, Kutuzov and high tier US CAs and DDs are great for this because they usually push and he might not see the AA deathtrap in the smoke until it's too late) and bait his fighters over them.

 

If he is actually running an AS deck you have comfort in the fact he has sacrificed damage output to get those extra fighters, so you can afford to bide your time and strike when there's an opportunity and still out-damage him.

 

Your biggest threat is actually IJN balanced decks but their fighters are squishy and low on ammo. Two missed strafes and they're basically done. If you group all your bombers in a blob and he doesn't strafe, just brute force the strike and he will probably lose more planes than you (massed rear gunners really hurt).

 

Note, all the above based on Shokaku and Lexington experience.

[tajj7]

Yeh what are people's advice about the loadouts.

 

I get AS is a rather pointless exercise, but how do you play strike with zero fighters? 

 

Also is the stock option a way to go? Why don't US carriers have balanced set ups? Like 1-1-1?