Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
MrConway

US Navy CV Changes

25 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[FAM]
Alpha Tester
2,435 posts
7,140 battles

Penetration of AP bombs in Lex and Essex against certain BBs is still totally inadequate. There is no point of using then over HE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAM]
Alpha Tester
2,435 posts
7,140 battles

Weren't we promised an stronger, better AP bomb than Enterprise for Essex and Midway? You won't tell me now that Graf Zeppelin, at tier VIII, will have better AP bombs than Midway at tier X, right?

ap bomb.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PORT]
Modder
1,492 posts
10,981 battles

I like the new setups, feels very much like Enterprise. 

Comparing Enterprise AP-bombs to GZ, i would say that the advantage of the USN is the drop pattern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAM]
Alpha Tester
2,435 posts
7,140 battles
7 minutes ago, Smeggo said:

I like the new setups, feels very much like Enterprise. 

Comparing Enterprise AP-bombs to GZ, i would say that the advantage of the USN is the drop pattern.

 

No real advantage when your bombs can't citadel anything except KM BBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[__]
Beta Tester
734 posts
1,694 battles
52 minutes ago, OVanBruce said:

 

No real advantage when your bombs can't citadel anything except KM BBs.

 

this is why I question why US Dive bombers cannot switch between bomb types will they are on the carrier deck in the same manner that normal ships can switch between AP and HE ammo. I would speculate having that added versatility would be a appetizing trade off to IJN traits.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WGP2W]
Players
1,420 posts
9,954 battles

Did not bother to download testing client, but if AP bombs work same as on Enterprise (I have her)... I will never change that for good dmg + fires of HE bombs. AP bombs in most cases are literary useless against anything except KM BBs.:Smile_sad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAM]
Alpha Tester
2,435 posts
7,140 battles

Gotta love that my big, badass tier X bombers deal 11 hits and 8k damage to Yamato with the bombs that are supposed to be THE anti BB tools

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MASH]
Players
4 posts
6,727 battles
2 hours ago, Mymeara said:

 

this is why I question why US Dive bombers cannot switch between bomb types will they are on the carrier deck in the same manner that normal ships can switch between AP and HE ammo. I would speculate having that added versatility would be a appetizing trade off to IJN traits.

^ This. Giving USN CV's flexibility on the battlefield would be such a positive move. Load the HE's early on to clear out DD's, then AP once the squishies have been removed. Considering the lack of squadrons early on for USN this would be a great equaliser. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAM]
Alpha Tester
2,435 posts
7,140 battles
20 minutes ago, DoktorJ said:

^ This. Giving USN CV's flexibility on the battlefield would be such a positive move. Load the HE's early on to clear out DD's, then AP once the squishies have been removed. Considering the lack of squadrons early on for USN this would be a great equaliser. 

 

I'm willing to bet they don't dare to implement this out of fear of breaking the carrier UI even more than it already is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
140 posts
7,817 battles

Just played a battle where the enemy CV player absolutely didn't know what he was doing. First he killed a Hindenburg (he lost more than 40 planes by doing that but hey... you only lose planes, it's not like you have enough), then he severely damaged a Des Moines (because you know: bad AA on Des Moines). They lost because our CV was even stronger, he lost a total of hundred planes and still had some left... Playing filth seems to get even more rewarded in the future, if that's what you wanted, you're doing a great job (and I'll be out of this game soon).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAM]
Alpha Tester
2,435 posts
7,140 battles

I'm hopeful we'll get a patch mid PTS to introduce new changes to the USN CVs, just like it happened with the 1k pound bomb during the last time USN CVs loadouts were changed. So if possible I think this would be good stuff to try out:

 

- Introduce the new big bad american AP bomb for Essex and Midway to make AP at least something not utterly useless.

- Decrease slightly the preparation time of planes, specially fighters to even the early game more with the IJN

- Significantly decrease, either through a variation of Torpedo Reload Expertise or with a new Captain Skill the reload time of the dive bomber squads.

 

Right now, with the tier VIII torpedo bombers, the proper drop order on an enemy BB is DB HE to destroy some AA and then torpedoes. The long preparation time of DB skews this order so it would be a greatly apreciated quality of life improvement if your squads could go out in a better order as soon as they are ready to be launched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RBMF]
Players
78 posts
15,037 battles

Played Essex unfortunately no BB in game which raises the point that AP bombs are ineffective against CA. The AP DB is lucky to get 1k damage per Bomb on CA my feeling is that you are better off with HE at least you can get a fire and possible follow up flood with TB squad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PORT]
Modder
1,492 posts
10,981 battles

These AP-bombs are twice as heavy as the Enterprise ones.

Haven't tested them further, but shouldn't they break the deck and hurt other BBs than germans too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
12 posts
4,515 battles

It would be nice to have some info about the AP bombs penetration details. For shells, I can activate detailed ribbons, so I can see when a shell over-penned, penned, shattered, bounced, or citadeled. All I know now is that a bomb hit. (Although when an AP does 800 damage, you can guess over-pen). I'm curious to know if AP bombs could be over-penning through the citadel at this stage.  

 

To quote from the AP bomb Q&A Thread : 

Quote

Hello!

AP bombs are similar in their functional principle to AP shells. They have caliber, fuse and speed at the point of impact. They can also penetrate, non-penetrate, over-penetrate, ricochet and just miss:) And they haven't got splash, only direct damage.

So, you are dropping AP bombs on a ship, possibly on a battleship, possibly on a German battleship. Let’s consider life path of one of those bombs.

In case of Enterprise bombers, AP bomb’s dropped perpendicularly to the water plane. This is important remark, because target ship can lay a maneuver at this moment and its deck can be inclined. So, bomb doesn’t always land on a deck at angle of 90 degrees.

Then, AP bomb passes the same checks as a AP shell.

1. Rule ’14,3 caliber’. Of course, AP bomb has a caliber - 305mm for Enterprise’s AP bombs. If the armor thickness is less than 1/14.3 of shell's/bomb’s caliber, a ricochet does not occur regardless of armor encounter angle.

2. Check for a ricochet. As a reminder, the bomb doesn’t always land perpendicularly on a deck. If a ricochet happened, then makes check for fuse arming.

3. Calculation of armor-piercing, if there was no ricochet. Current armor-piercing of the bomb is compared with effective armor. Effective armor is armor with the angle of impact taken into account. If there was no penetration, then the bomb explodes immediately. And if it happened inside the ship, damage would be done to the part where it exploded.

4. Check for fuse arming. If the bomb is arming, then after a while it will explode.

So far, fuse delay is pretty much the same as for ordinary AP shells. If it’s arming on deck, AP bomb is able to get into the citadel and explode there.

On ‎8‎/‎8‎/‎2017 at 1:10 PM, Tuccy said:

Borrowing from @Sub_Octavian :)

Enterprise AP bombs arm at 70 mm and penetrate around 184 mm. So horizontal armor of a target really matters - overall ships . Later, we may add AP bombs with different values and they will interact with other ships differently. I have passed the question along, but by default I guess the superstructure does count both in the penetration and in the arming.

The difference between auto drop and manual is around 20. However, the angle of approach really matters, as the drop pattern is very stretched - in any case using manual drop still increases significantly chance of hitting not necessarily the target itself but the vulnerable areas on the target.

 

As for the difference, shock and awe of instant damage might be the thing needed to put enemy BB out of combat (and preventing him from healing). Similar tot he British cruiser AP effect on battleships, sure it does not trigger the fire, but... ;)

 

As coded, the AP bombs have a very narrow range, 70mm to arm, but only 184mm penetration.  With fuse delay, does the shell explode inside the citadel or exit the ship (thereby over-penning through the citadel)? Not to mention ships where there doesn't seem to be a 70mm plate from between the deck and the keel. I'm just speculating at this point, because it isn't clear to me how AP bombs are behaving. 

 

In any event, if the AP bomb is molded on an in game 305mm AP shell, its arming threshold is way too high. Even 410mm AP does not need 70mm to arm. 305mm AP shells should arm somewhere in 40mm range. As a practical matter, most t7+ BB decks are 32mm so the AP bombs should arm at that level. That would help their general utility as well. 

From the wiki 

Quote

As of patch 0.3.1, the armor thickness necessary for AP shell fuzing was as follows (caliber - armor): 410mm - 68mm, 356mm - 59mm, 203mm - 34mm, 155mm - 26mm.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SKRUN]
Players
96 posts

The AP bombs work like a charm... vs Cruisers. Just slammed some Charles Martel, a Des moines and some other t8+ cruisers with them (1 shots with 2 squads for the most part!). They are literally anti-cruiser bombs as they didn't do anything on dds or bbs.

The new loadouts are not really good either, except maybe on the midway, which can hunt japanese dds even better now (and just about nothing else, just  like before).

The single fighter loadouts of Ranger and Lexi can't keep up in most cases and forces to play very defensively, as in only intercepting over friendly AA, as any other engagement will end in defeat vs ijn. At the same time it lowers the potential damage of the strike, as the strike setup is now missing a bomber. 

Most of the modules (upgrades) are even less viable with the changed loadouts now. 

The change to damage  control is nice however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[5D]
Players
475 posts
20,593 battles

they really need to increase the AP bomb damage when they go up to tier 9 and 10. otherwise theres not point taking AP bombs on anything past the Lexington. also i really wish they would get out of the habit of down tiering planes. its makes dropping anything above a tier 8 (which in a midway will be very often) extremely irritating. the midways torps will be absolutely lethal to dds but even they can rip the planes apart after the cv nerf.... oops sorry i mean the destroyer AA "change" (pointless buff)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
25 posts
1,347 battles

May I suggest that the dispersion for HE and AP bombs should be the same, and between a value between the 2 current values, for example the dispersion for HE be like 2/3 or half of what it is now. The AP bombs if are still the same they they should be nerfed.

Another important suggestion would be to be able to switch bomb types during battle. Assuming that the first suggestion is approved then this one should not cause any game break. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-DNA-]
Players
92 posts

Very funny CV game, i dont even need to make a manual drop....28k damage with 2 dive bombers AP, with auto drop. Im not playing CV and i feel that this is a big buff to CVs, and i think after update i start to play them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
122 posts
13,249 battles

 I dont like the plan for Essex.  I really like the ship in its present state, i use the 1-1-3 setup. New setup is not really balanced against Taiho.. Nerfed figthers,  torp bombers and just 2 DB squadrons.. I  have better idea, need  to add + 1 figter squadron to 1-1-3 setup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAM]
Alpha Tester
2,435 posts
7,140 battles

Indeed. I think Essex comes out worse with thischange thanks to downtiered fighter planes and downtiered torp bombers which have less chances to drop and hit thanks to not being able to crossdrop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
122 posts
13,249 battles
5 hours ago, OVanBruce said:

Indeed. I think Essex comes out worse with thischange thanks to downtiered fighter planes and downtiered torp bombers which have less chances to drop and hit thanks to not being able to crossdrop.

:Smile_sad: Yep, you see thought  as  i. Need to change flight control mod, + 1 div bomber and  remove T8 planes, or T8 planes + 3 DB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAM]
Alpha Tester
2,435 posts
7,140 battles

No changes to the USN AP bombs. Essex is still the same with downtiered planes that make her a worse version of the one we currently have in the game.

 

There is no point on playng this PTS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAM]
Alpha Tester
2,435 posts
7,140 battles

For the love of God, don't release the Essex like it was in this PTS. The ship is worse than the previous 113 version. At least give it tier IX fighters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×