|
As bad as carriers can be now, it was a nightmare in beta, especially if you were playing a ship that had poor AAA. You'd get cross-dropped and there was nothing you could do except watch your stupid rear end explode. If you survived, the DBs would come in like a summary kick to the jaw to finish you off.
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 15:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 14:05 |
|
|
JuffoWup posted:This was also before ijn torpedo bombers got the drop pattern they do now (where the torps angle to a single point). So both CV's had the same wall of torp drop pattern. The old IJN pattern was pretty lovely for hitting all the US battleships before the NC though, the spread was wider than a standard battleship was long, so it wasn't even physically possible to connect with more than 3 of the 4 per squadron.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 15:52
|
|
|
I wonder if it's possible to "counterbattery" a carrier's position based on where the planes are coming from, under certain circumstances like trying to chase one down in an empty corner of the map and having the shitbird just panic-launching everything at you from just outside detection range. I'd love to be able to just hose down a spot with HE and get the fire notification.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:I wonder if it's possible to "counterbattery" a carrier's position based on where the planes are coming from, under certain circumstances like trying to chase one down in an empty corner of the map and having the shitbird just panic-launching everything at you from just outside detection range. No, you can not. Unless the carrier is spotted, you won't see the planes until after they have taken off. And most likely some time after launching. Either way, the planes take over far ahead of the carrier if you were to spot them on launch. However, plane detection range is such that if you are spotting the planes right at launch, you are already spotting the CV as they don't have that great a concealment. So I was thinking about ap bombs and the idea that perhaps in the future, there might be a time where usn cvs would be best in AS configuration. And that got me thinking. The tier 2 and 3 skills have a must have for any cv captain. But in usn as, there are no torpedo bombers. What would you even take as a replacement in that situation though. I'm also looking at the as because rightly understanding, there has been mentioning that the meta does better if you have 2 fighter squads. One to strafe escape if locked while the other strafes in to clean the enemy fighter squad away. For the tier 2 captain skill replacement, expert gunner seems to be the only other real choice. T3 is worse though. Would DE give ap bombs a small fire chance? Or just go bft to up your AA defense screen against getting midway-ed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
JuffoWup posted:So I was thinking about ap bombs and the idea that perhaps in the future, there might be a time where usn cvs would be best in AS configuration. And that got me thinking. The tier 2 and 3 skills have a must have for any cv captain. But in usn as, there are no torpedo bombers. What would you even take as a replacement in that situation though. I'm also looking at the as because rightly understanding, there has been mentioning that the meta does better if you have 2 fighter squads. One to strafe escape if locked while the other strafes in to clean the enemy fighter squad away. For the tier 2 captain skill replacement, expert gunner seems to be the only other real choice. T3 is worse though. Would DE give ap bombs a small fire chance? Or just go bft to up your AA defense screen against getting midway-ed. If it's anything like AP shells, they'll have a fire chance of -500% or something to prevent that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:The old IJN pattern was pretty lovely for hitting all the US battleships before the NC though, the spread was wider than a standard battleship was long, so it wasn't even physically possible to connect with more than 3 of the 4 per squadron. But this didn't matter in the slightest because you could pretty easily drop them point blank to land those three torps every single time. 6-9 torps killed whatever you chose to poo poo on. Cross drops didn't matter as much at the time because you had short range manual drops to more easily guarantee hits. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Jun 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
kaesarsosei posted:Speaking of CVs, I got a very rare combination of achievement today - Arsonist against a destroyer. He must have just repaired and was still at high health when I manual dropped an Essex DB on him and got 3 fires - I don't think I've ever seen or had 3 fires on a DD before. Ask me about getting a triple US DB strike on my Tashkent at the start of a match for 14k damage and three fires. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
I don't understand why japanese carriers are able to put fires out
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:The old IJN pattern was pretty lovely for hitting all the US battleships before the NC though, the spread was wider than a standard battleship was long, so it wasn't even physically possible to connect with more than 3 of the 4 per squadron. IJN CVs have had 3 different drop patterns now, so you're both right. Way, way back (and I don't even recall if it made the jump to launch) they effectively had the same drop pattern as US torpedo bombers, except with 2 less torpedoes due to the smaller squadrons. Then they had that lovely wide pattern. And now they have that slightly converging pattern.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:I don't understand why japanese carriers are able to put fires out IJN carriers damage control should put out the fires the first time, but the second you use it your ship explodes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:As bad as carriers can be now, it was a nightmare in beta, especially if you were playing a ship that had poor AAA. You'd get cross-dropped and there was nothing you could do except watch your stupid rear end explode. If you survived, the DBs would come in like a summary kick to the jaw to finish you off. AP bombs are gonna be real stupid. At least with torpedo bombers you have to aim, there are ways to juke them by cutting speed and so forth. DBs vs battleships is just a dice roll.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
CitizenKain posted:IJN carriers damage control should put out the fires the first time, but the second you use it your ship explodes. They should put it out the first time and then the next time you try and use it a voice tells you all the firefighters died in the engine room.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
I still like when Yamato AAA shoots down planes in this game. It's like a weeaboo what-if simulator.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
Minenfeld! posted:I still like when Yamato AAA shoots down planes in this game. It's like a weeaboo what-if simulator. Pretty much every ship in the game is a what-if on the "what if they had a good fire control" level. Main battery hit rate is something like 10x historical.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
Historically main battery hit rates were in single digit number. Lower part of those numbers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
Plus we get 100% calm seas, even in the middle of a "cyclone".
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
Yeah it would be much more fun if you drove for 126 hours solid then got deleted in the first salvo. Poopsocking x1000000%
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
Minenfeld! posted:I still like when Yamato AAA shoots down planes in this game. It's like a weeaboo what-if simulator.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
Burt posted:Yeah it would be much more fun if you drove for 126 hours solid then got deleted in the first salvo. Isn't there some submarine game that is like this?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
Lady Morgaga posted:Historically main battery hit rates were in single digit number. Lower part of those numbers. Historical figures going back to the Tushisma has hit rates between 1-3% when ships fired without radar controls. At Jutland, the only significant battle between fleets of comparable battleship/battlecruiser fleets had major calibre hit rates between 2-4% for the Germans and 1.5-4% for the British depending on which squadrons where involved. World War 2 ships with radar guided guns suggest a hit rate of 5-10% was possible against moving targets. Though several engagements still had significantly lower numbers. Besides technological advancements, procedural changes improved as well between the two wars. The RN at Jutland used to range targets in entire salvos moving back and forth till they found the right range. However, they had centralized fire control directors so better coordinate fire once the range was found. The Germans used independent fire individual turret commanders but used a more logical approach to ranging in shots, different shots were fired at different ranges in the opening salvos to more quickly find the range. Both fleets quickly adopted each others techniques. Visibility in the game is just nothing like what the fire directors had to do in real life. Visibility at 14000-15000 was miserable at Jutland and fire directors had instances where they were scared they were firing on friendly ships. By the same token though, planes in this game have it super easy. No torpedo bomber squadron flies in perfect formation to within 1km of a target and releases a perfect spread. You might as well be lining up for the execution squad. Doing something like that would be suicidal for the TB squadrons which historically took insane casualties even with dispersed approaches and constant small direction changes to try and throw off gunners. Planes just didn't drop perfect patterns like they do in the game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
Except by that same token individual ship AA is far more effective than it was in real life, along with their maneuverability. A single ship alone, even many late-war US ships let alone anything else, being attacked by multiple squadrons was going to take heavy hits, not just shoot them all down. And this isn't even getting into the absurdity of DP mounts being able to fire at both ships and planes at the exact same time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 00:03
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:Except by that same token individual ship AA is far more effective than it was in real life, along with their maneuverability. A single ship alone, even many late-war US ships let alone anything else, being attacked by multiple squadrons was going to take heavy hits, not just shoot them all down. And this isn't even getting into the absurdity of DP mounts being able to fire at both ships and planes at the exact same time. Not disagreeing with you but from a gameplay perspective, its a definite advantage to CVs/planes which can 1 shot BBs and DDs and simply lose a few planes in the process. If AA hit rates/DPS was lower but planes weren't allowed to just perfect drop at will, It would a be a lot less obnoxious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 00:09
|
|
|
Insert name here posted:Don't forget KM AA, most notable for being unable to stop a bunch of old lovely biplanes, is contender for best AA in the entire game Hey now. Let's be fair. Who thought planes could fly below a certain height?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
Burt posted:Yeah it would be much more fun if you drove for 126 hours solid then got deleted in the first salvo. But enough about Eve Online
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
MikeC posted:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_Prince_of_Wales_and_Repulse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ten-Go#Battle Torpedo bombers unopposed by enemy aircraft could smoke surface vessels. Vengarr fucked around with this message at 01:54 on Jun 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
quote:At around 1140, 17 Nell torpedo bombers (two squadrons from the Genzan Air Group) approached the two capital ships. Eight concentrated on Repulse, while nine attacked Prince of Wales, sending eight torpedoes speeding towards the flagship (one plane aborted its run on Prince of Wales and peeled off and attacked Repulse).[36] One Nell was shot down and three more were damaged by the Prince of Wales anti-aircraft fire during this attack. This first wave of torpedo attackers however managed only one, ultimately catastrophic, torpedo hit on Prince of Wales (and none on Repulse), right where her outer port propeller shaft exited the hull (some historical accounts[37] state there were two hits in this attack, but an extensive 2007 survey of the hull of the wreck by divers proved there was only one) So out of 49 torpedoes, more than half of which were occured after the Prince of Wales could no longer shoot AA fire due to electrical issues and against a damaged 16kt target, the Japanese report 8 hits but only 6 confirmed against 2 targets. That is a 16% hit rate at best. A Kaga could easily hit 5 of 10 torpedos no sweat in the game. The Yamato had to fend off against 500 US aircraft dropping constant waves of bombs and torpedoes and suffered something like 10 hits The hit rate of torpedo bombers in the game is severely inflated. I am not against it for historical reasons though, I am against CVs becuase of the bullshit unfun factor. VVV Not sure how that is funny VVV MikeC fucked around with this message at 03:56 on Jun 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 03:52
|
|
|
quote:At 13:33, in a desperate attempt to keep the ship from capsizing, Yamato's damage control team counter-flooded both starboard engine and boiler rooms. This mitigated the danger but also drowned the several hundred crewmen manning those stations, who were given no notice that their compartments were about to fill with water. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 03:52
|
|
|
Those poor shipmen :[
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
Not really funny thats kinda hosed up dude. Drowning is quite possibly one of the most terrifying ways to die imo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
Less funny that all those dudes died, more funny that Japanese damage control was atrocious. Every decision was the worst decision.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:Less funny that all those dudes died, more funny that Japanese damage control was atrocious. Every decision was the worst decision. When you're going up against 500 enemy aircraft there are no right decisions. They did keep the ship floating for longer, even though it was futile. The DC guys jobs is to keep the ship floating, and thus the larger part of the crew alive. When poo poo goes wrong it's always the snipes who die. The fact that they were able to keep the ship afloat as long as they did with as much damage as it had is frankly amazing, damage control on their ships was famously bad but I'd wager they had some of their smarter cookies on the flagship of their entire empire. orange juche fucked around with this message at 04:11 on Jun 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
Hot take: War really, really loving sucks. Like, Extra history just did a thing on sinking the Bismark. The Prince of Wales took an overpen that didn't explode, but killed all but 3 people in the room it punched through. When somebody in the room below asked if everybody was alright, blood started coming out of the voicepipe. Same deal with.. what was it, the Indianapolis that got sank by a submarine and the crew had to survive sharks? You kind of have to be a hard motherfucker to serve on a ship while in active war. Edit: Oh drat, I almost forgot. quote:Yeah, I'm probably being reckless on reflection. How do you record/upload replays? And if I can get it working, what would be useful for you? Like 2-3 replays, perhaps one showing a victory and another a loss? https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/38798-enabling-replays/ As for what type of replays, defeats, or rather, games where you get destroyed and get poor results are what I'm looking for. Edit again: Here's a site you can upload to. https://wowreplays.com/ Rorac fucked around with this message at 10:11 on Jun 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 04:22
|
|
|
The navy is safer overall than being in the infantry, but if you're on the wrong side of a fight, there is nowhere to hide, you can't count on being able to hide in a foxhole or whatever and hope for the enemy to miss you. Especially in World War II you had a really good shot of dying violently if you were in the naval services of the world.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
Rorac posted:Same deal with.. what was it, the Indianapolis that got sank by a submarine and the crew had to survive sharks? You kind of have to be a hard motherfucker to serve on a ship while in active war. The thing that sticks with me about the Indianapolis comes from some old program I was watching, ages ago. They were interviewing a sailor that was present when they began picking up the survivors. He recounted how when they tried to pull men from the water, their skin sloughed off in the hands of their rescuers. Something about being in the water too long, or the oil.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 05:07
|
|
|
orange juche posted:The navy is safer overall than being in the infantry, but if you're on the wrong side of a fight, there is nowhere to hide, you can't count on being able to hide in a foxhole or whatever and hope for the enemy to miss you. Especially in World War II you had a really good shot of dying violently if you were in the naval services of the world. After reading a few books about the early Pacific Island campaigns, I was amazed just how many navy personnel died compared to marines, it was something like a 3/1 ratio for sailors. Then again when you are fighting capital ships with destroyers it never really ends well. There's also a really good description of what happens when radar guided 5" guns firing HE get 200 hits on a Battleship that basically just describes blood sluicing off the ship like it's water in a heavy sea. Let's just all agree that being shot at by anything other than a foam ball is going to be poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 11:34
|
|
|
MikeC posted:Historical figures going back to the Tushisma has hit rates between 1-3% when ships fired without radar controls. At Jutland, the only significant battle between fleets of comparable battleship/battlecruiser fleets had major calibre hit rates between 2-4% for the Germans and 1.5-4% for the British depending on which squadrons where involved. World War 2 ships with radar guided guns suggest a hit rate of 5-10% was possible against moving targets. Though several engagements still had significantly lower numbers. Besides technological advancements, procedural changes improved as well between the two wars. The biggest barrier to getting Darkrenown fucked around with this message at 12:40 on Jun 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 12:23
|
|
|
Insert name here posted:Don't forget KM AA, most notable for being unable to stop a bunch of old lovely biplanes, is contender for best AA in the entire game To be fair they had no problems hitting the biplanes, it's just that they were so old and lovely it was like battleships shooting destroyers, overpens galore but no explosions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 13:16
|
|
|
I remember reading a book about Jutland and apparently one of a RN ship's guns fell through (?) its trunnions after a hit and crushed some poor sods. I want to say it was HMS Lion but I don't have the book in front of me so take it with a pinch of salt. The book was also slightly on the older side, I believe.Rorac posted:Hot take: War really, really loving sucks. Firstly, that voice pipe anecdote is horrific.  Secondly, thanks! I'll try to get a replay or two up for you to look at, though I won't be able to do it right away.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 14:45
|
|
|
orange juche posted:Not really funny thats kinda hosed up dude. Also bad: getting cooked like a lobster because a round ripped open a steam line in the engine room. Between that and generally being the last ones to hear the order to abandon ship (if at all), I think the engine room is the last place I'd want to serve on a WWII warship.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 14:05 |
|
|
MikeC posted:So out of 49 torpedoes, more than half of which were occured after the Prince of Wales could no longer shoot AA fire due to electrical issues and against a damaged 16kt target, the Japanese report 8 hits but only 6 confirmed against 2 targets. That is a 16% hit rate at best. A Kaga could easily hit 5 of 10 torpedos no sweat in the game. The Kaga in the game also isn't allowed to launch all her planes at once. And the aerial torpedoes do way less damage than they could/should. quote:The Yamato had to fend off against 500 US aircraft dropping constant waves of bombs and torpedoes and suffered something like 10 hits The hit rate of torpedo bombers in the game is severely inflated. So is the power of ship AA. The sky was darkened with planes and the Yamato and her escorts still only shot down 10. Less if you believe the story that the Yamato blew up SO HARD that it downed a few planes. If you don't care about the historicity, why did you bring it in as a defense? The whole ship/plane balance is video gamey. Making aerial torpedo spreads RNG isn't going to make the game better, just make playing carriers even more unfun. It would also make dodging torp waves shittier, since simple RNG might dictate that there is nowhere to run which only a perfectly-placed and timed drop can achieve right now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:16
|
|