Given that they're apparently half as effective there. But can they still be used in a viable way? Especially after update buffs carrier fighters.
Are carriers useable in the pacific at all?
- Thread starter currylambchop
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
They are still very effective in damage reduction from enemy NAVs, which when playing high difficulty can shred a non-CV TF in days. The CV fix in the patch notes I believe is for the "proper naval battle" issue with CV/non-CV NAV/CAS vs CV fighters. So in a way, CVs used in an offensive role are even less effective I believe (even though its a proper bug that was fixed).
Once this TOD issue is fixed for the Pacific and they think they have all CV bugs corrected, they need to go back and re-balance. Increase the CV Strike aircraft damage from x5 to x10, or have them sortie twice as often (although that's not historically accurate, even modern CVs can only sortie 2-4 times per day which does include night ops). They need to start with the baseline that a CV Fleet vs a BB fleet, all using late war doctrines, should result in the BB Fleet being decisively defeated - and then work backwards.
Once this TOD issue is fixed for the Pacific and they think they have all CV bugs corrected, they need to go back and re-balance. Increase the CV Strike aircraft damage from x5 to x10, or have them sortie twice as often (although that's not historically accurate, even modern CVs can only sortie 2-4 times per day which does include night ops). They need to start with the baseline that a CV Fleet vs a BB fleet, all using late war doctrines, should result in the BB Fleet being decisively defeated - and then work backwards.
Ironic that the so-called ‘naval rework’ only made navy even worse. Man the guns was generally a failure.
Great ideas, but poor implementation in several key facets. Subs were one of them, but I feel much better today about the convoy war than when MtG launched. CVs however are still incredibly poorly modelled. This includes CVEs (which can be decently modelled via production using a stripped down CV) however, the +50% sub detection and 5.0 base sub detection they added is worthless as CVs can't carry sonar or "float planes" - and their aircraft can't seem to spot. CLs, which historically never hunted subs or rarely if ever were equipped with sonar, can out sub-spot a CV all day long.
Yeah, maybe in the next update since planes give recon now they’ll be better. But the Time of Day bug is pretty glaring and stupid. Though admittedly it is hard to fix. The problem with MTG is carriers worked much better before it came out. So it was literally a step backward.
If they change the sortie times to, say, 0300 0900 1500 2100, it should result in 2 sorties a day anywhere in the world.
We should ask podcat to consider this solution. It's simple enough that it could be snuck into the 1.9 patch. Though he might have already considered it.
We'll have to wait and see if CV Aircraft on Carrier Mission give recon or region naval intel or anything at all. Considering podcat said that recon is achieved while in battle, aircraft not engaged may not do anything at all. I hope was he really meant was any aircraft on mission. As this would drastically help the CV, this would also help NAVs on Naval Strike (even though they sit using zero fuel untl finding a ship) - then NAVs will more simulate the reality, that they themselves were their own recon element. They spot the ships, and then call in the entire airgroup for a strike.
If that isn't what happens I would mod it in. Same as with making 4 strikes a day to fix the problem of Time of Day. In fact I will add that to my bugfixing mod after the La Resistance.
Use carriers in the pacific a lot. Works like a charm and it sinks most of the enemy ships.
I also find MtG improved naval warfare a lot.
I also find MtG improved naval warfare a lot.
I find this response confusing. As has been well documented in threads such as this, CV fighters do virtually nothing to protect a fleet. Thus CVs are not effective at damage reduction from enemy NAVs.
Bitmode identified that one of the bugs that was causing this was (I believe) due to CV wings always starting at minimum air efficiency due to the newly arrived penalty. This has been fixed, so after LaR drops CV fighters should now be a whole lot better at protecting a fleet from enemy air.
In answer to the OP, the most effective use of carriers right now is to put 100% NAV on them, though carriers in general are still a poor choice in general from a 'meta' view.
Another reason to hate man the guns, honestly I prefer the original naval system because that at least had range as a factor, and carriers actually worked. Man the guns just made everything worse
I think good use of carriers could be setting the fleet not to engage, adding some cls and subs with good spotting to the fleet and using cv naval bombers to bomb the area
and while historically CV doctrines won out, making something as expensive and specialized as BB fleets just auto-lose to a CV fleet, is a great way to just take more choice out of the game.
we already have a pretty concrete meta for ground warfare thats considered so much more than optimal that choosing literally anything else in multiplayer groups gets you kicked, why make naval just as bad by making any research that isnt towards CV fleets an exercise in masochism?
if theyre both using the proper doctrines for their fleet type, then they should both come out with somewhat equal bonuses. what needs to happen is they need to have more ancillary researches for each of the ships, CV *and* BB; with perhaps BB being somewhat more expensive to research due to not needing plane research and production to supplement.
but BB and CV should be equally viable assuming both fleets are equal and fully researched.
I made a mod which fixed the issue of aircraft carriers only launching planes once per day:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ng-one-sortie-per-day-in-the-pacific.1337934/
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ng-one-sortie-per-day-in-the-pacific.1337934/
Are carriers useful in the Pacific?
Not when I fly 1000 heavy fighters in the air region.
Not when I fly 1000 heavy fighters in the air region.
How did it make it worse? It made subs usefull for raiding. And raiding impact trading a lot more.
It remove the BB doomstack which killed everything. It introduced the ship designer and brought in admiral traits.
I agree, BB fleets vs CV fleets should be able to win when playing to their strengths.
CV fleets win in the open ocean where there is no land based aircraft. BB will be stronger if the enemy can't use hostile aircraft.
This isn't World of Warships, there's no real reason to gimp carriers just to balance ship types so everyone can have fun with their favorite ship.
The Italians still won't need carriers because they're operating within range of land bases, the Soviets similar. But yeah, if the Japanese try to rush an American carrier force with a battleship force it should be a complete blowout.