Carriers are too strong by themselves. Their strength should be the planes they carry, and weak by themselves.
They have 75 hp, which is absurd, the same as a Battleship. A level one carrier has 10 naval strength when attacked, which means they hit as strong as a cruiser when attacked. They have 5 anti-sub strength when attacked, which is better than a destroyer. I'm guessing it would take around 8 subs to sink a carrier all by itself.
I'm surprised no one else has brought this up. It really doesn't make much sense.
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
44 Replies
4 Apr 2016, 22:27
Zazmio wrote:
Carriers are too strong by themselves. Their strength should be the planes they carry, and weak by themselves.
They have 75 hp, which is absurd, the same as a Battleship. A level one carrier has 10 naval strength when attacked, which means they hit as strong as a cruiser when attacked. They have 5 anti-sub strength when attacked, which is better than a destroyer. I'm guessing it would take around 8 subs to sink a carrier all by itself.
I'm surprised no one else has brought this up. It really doesn't make much sense.
Carriers were heavily armed armoured throughout the war and still are today. If there is one thing you do not want to attack, carrier group or not, it is a CV.
4 Apr 2016, 22:54
Interesting. In any case, remember bring escorted aircraft carriers with cruise ships or warships!
"I came, I saw, I conquered" Written in a report to Rome 47 B.C., after conquering Pharnaces at Zela in Asia Minor in just five days; as quoted in Life of Caesar by Plutarch; reported to have been inscribed on one of the decorated wagons in the Pontic triumph, in Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Julius, by Suetonius. "Alea iacta est" Gaius Julius Caesar.
4 Apr 2016, 23:29
Quasi-duck wrote:
Zazmio wrote:
...
Carriers were heavily armed armoured throughout the war and still are today. If there is one thing you do not want to attack, carrier group or not, it is a CV.
They were not as well armored as battleships, and couldn't go toe-to-toe with a cruiser at short range, like in this game. In this game, if a cruiser runs into a single carrier with no escort, the carrier will win because of their very high hp. That wouldn't happen in real life. Carriers were also sunk by single subs in the war, something that will only happen in this game if you attack a sub with a carrier (they have 0.5 anti sub attack strength).
4 Apr 2016, 23:36
Zazmio wrote:
Quasi-duck wrote:
Zazmio wrote:
...
Carriers were heavily armed armoured throughout the war and still are today. If there is one thing you do not want to attack, carrier group or not, it is a CV.
They were not as well armored as battleships, and couldn't go toe-to-toe with a cruiser at short range, like in this game. In this game, if a cruiser runs into a single carrier with no escort, the carrier will win because of their very high hp. That wouldn't happen in real life. Carriers were also sunk by single subs in the war, something that will only happen in this game if you attack a sub with a carrier (they have 0.5 anti sub attack strength).
Don't forget, the CV also do not get any stronger as they level up and eventually become relatively weak. Don't forget either that they have no range, while others can bombard them from afar (except for subs).
4 Apr 2016, 23:37
Quasi-duck wrote:
Zazmio wrote:
Quasi-duck wrote:
Zazmio wrote:
...
Carriers were heavily armed armoured throughout the war and still are today. If there is one thing you do not want to attack, carrier group or not, it is a CV.
They were not as well armored as battleships, and couldn't go toe-to-toe with a cruiser at short range, like in this game. In this game, if a cruiser runs into a single carrier with no escort, the carrier will win because of their very high hp. That wouldn't happen in real life. Carriers were also sunk by single subs in the war, something that will only happen in this game if you attack a sub with a carrier (they have 0.5 anti sub attack strength).
Don't forget, the CV also do not get any stronger as they level up and eventually become relatively weak. Don't forget either that they have no range, while others can bombard them from afar (except for subs).
Correct!
Maximilien wrote:
Interesting. In any case, remember bring escorted aircraft carriers with cruise ships or warships!
And remember this!
"I came, I saw, I conquered" Written in a report to Rome 47 B.C., after conquering Pharnaces at Zela in Asia Minor in just five days; as quoted in Life of Caesar by Plutarch; reported to have been inscribed on one of the decorated wagons in the Pontic triumph, in Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Julius, by Suetonius. "Alea iacta est" Gaius Julius Caesar.
4 Apr 2016, 23:50
Quasi-duck wrote:
Zazmio wrote:
Quasi-duck wrote:
Zazmio wrote:
...
Carriers were heavily armed armoured throughout the war and still are today. If there is one thing you do not want to attack, carrier group or not, it is a CV.
They were not as well armored as battleships, and couldn't go toe-to-toe with a cruiser at short range, like in this game. In this game, if a cruiser runs into a single carrier with no escort, the carrier will win because of their very high hp. That wouldn't happen in real life. Carriers were also sunk by single subs in the war, something that will only happen in this game if you attack a sub with a carrier (they have 0.5 anti sub attack strength).
Don't forget, the CV also do not get any stronger as they level up and eventually become relatively weak....
Not true. The anti-sub defense remains the same, but the anti-ship defense goes up. A level 6 carrier has 20 anti-ship defense strength, while a level 6 cruiser has 15 attack and defense strength. The carrier actually hits harder at higher level than a cruiser of the same level.
Carriers have 3 times the hp of a sub, so even though the anti-sub defense does not go up, level 6 carriers still have little to fear from single level 6 subs.
Yes, other ships have range. But the fact remains, if a cruiser moves onto a single unescorted carrier, the carrier will win. And the fact remains that it takes a lot of subs to take down a single carrier.
5 Apr 2016, 08:54
Though I agree with the analyses, there are some options with both subs and surface ships to explore to counteract all this
Subs: Have it placed at a standstill - as a carrier moves over it, voila. Dont press the attack button
Cruisers and all: requires some activeness, attack, retreat, attack, retreat etc.
That said, the sub defense of the ship should be very low, as it has naval bombers onboard to dispatch subs. Im fine with the HP, though perhaps a wee bit less then battleships (say 50 or 60 HP)
5 Apr 2016, 16:47
Zazmio wrote:
if a cruiser moves onto a single unescorted carrier, the carrier will win
That is why you bombard it. If you do, it is helpless.
5 Apr 2016, 16:51
Quasi-duck wrote:
Zazmio wrote:
if a cruiser moves onto a single unescorted carrier, the carrier will win
That is why you bombard it. If you do, it is helpless.
Correct information!
"I came, I saw, I conquered" Written in a report to Rome 47 B.C., after conquering Pharnaces at Zela in Asia Minor in just five days; as quoted in Life of Caesar by Plutarch; reported to have been inscribed on one of the decorated wagons in the Pontic triumph, in Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Julius, by Suetonius. "Alea iacta est" Gaius Julius Caesar.
5 Apr 2016, 23:03
Maximilien wrote:
Quasi-duck wrote:
Zazmio wrote:
if a cruiser moves onto a single unescorted carrier, the carrier will win
That is why you bombard it. If you do, it is helpless.
Correct information!
Yet, my point still stands -- if you move a cruiser into a carrier, the carrier will win, which is ridiculous.
I'm not even talking about the bombard range. That's irrelevant. Why keep posting irrelevant things? Are you just posting to get "likes" and raise your post count?
miech wrote:
Though I agree with the analyses, there are some options with both subs and surface ships to explore to counteract all this
Subs: Have it placed at a standstill - as a carrier moves over it, voila. Dont press the attack button
Cruisers and all: requires some activeness, attack, retreat, attack, retreat etc.
That said, the sub defense of the ship should be very low, as it has naval bombers onboard to dispatch subs. Im fine with the HP, though perhaps a wee bit less then battleships (say 50 or 60 HP)
Finally, a voice of reason.
Yes, I was thinking along the same lines as you. I realized that if the carrier moved onto the sub -- was the attacker -- that the sub will probably win. Still, we shouldn't have to do something like that to win with a sub -- a single unescorted carrier with no planes should die when attacked by a sub or two. Just like a battleship does.
6 Apr 2016, 06:26
Zazmio wrote:
miech wrote:
Though I agree with the analyses, there are some options with both subs and surface ships to explore to counteract all this
Subs: Have it placed at a standstill - as a carrier moves over it, voila. Dont press the attack button
Cruisers and all: requires some activeness, attack, retreat, attack, retreat etc.
That said, the sub defense of the ship should be very low, as it has naval bombers onboard to dispatch subs. Im fine with the HP, though perhaps a wee bit less then battleships (say 50 or 60 HP)
Finally, a voice of reason.
Yes, I was thinking along the same lines as you. I realized that if the carrier moved onto the sub -- was the attacker -- that the sub will probably win. Still, we shouldn't have to do something like that to win with a sub -- a single unescorted carrier with no planes should die when attacked by a sub or two. Just like a battleship does.
Why?
6 Apr 2016, 06:53
Zazmio wrote:
Carriers are too strong by themselves. Their strength should be the planes they carry, and weak by themselves.
They have 75 hp, which is absurd, the same as a Battleship. A level one carrier has 10 naval strength when attacked, which means they hit as strong as a cruiser when attacked. They have 5 anti-sub strength when attacked, which is better than a destroyer. I'm guessing it would take around 8 subs to sink a carrier all by itself.
I'm surprised no one else has brought this up. It really doesn't make much sense.
you are kind of right on this I hate to say
☠️☠️The☠️☠️Dark☠️☠️Void☠️☠️
6 Apr 2016, 07:00
Quasi-duck wrote:
Zazmio wrote:
miech wrote:
Though I agree with the analyses, there are some options with both subs and surface ships to explore to counteract all this
Subs: Have it placed at a standstill - as a carrier moves over it, voila. Dont press the attack button
Cruisers and all: requires some activeness, attack, retreat, attack, retreat etc.
That said, the sub defense of the ship should be very low, as it has naval bombers onboard to dispatch subs. Im fine with the HP, though perhaps a wee bit less then battleships (say 50 or 60 HP)
Finally, a voice of reason.Yes, I was thinking along the same lines as you. I realized that if the carrier moved onto the sub -- was the attacker -- that the sub will probably win. Still, we shouldn't have to do something like that to win with a sub -- a single unescorted carrier with no planes should die when attacked by a sub or two. Just like a battleship does.
Why?
Really? Does a carrier have depth charge racks? So you see nothing strange about carriers easily wasting subs, better than destroyers.
But, by all means, keep posting your pointless one word responses. I'm sure you'll get your post count above 1,000 by the end of the month.
6 Apr 2016, 14:53
Zazmio wrote:
Really? Does a carrier have depth charge racks? So you see nothing strange about carriers easily wasting subs, better than destroyers.
They have a helluva lot of MG's and dual purpose guns. Subs aren't too well armoured.
Zazmio wrote:
But, by all means, keep posting your pointless one word responses. I'm sure you'll get your post count above 1,000 by the end of the month.
Hopefully.
9 Apr 2016, 07:13
Why the hell aren't you engaging carriers at range? Jesus H christ buddy, range is your friend. You have to gang up on carriers, or simply render it useless by destroying its aircraft
If you're using cruisers for attacking other ships since the CV update, you're an idiot. Its widely known that they're completely redundent.
Just gang up on carriers, like they had to do during the war. Most people prefer to keep their CV alive, the higher the plane count, more likely they are to try and save them. So just hunt the bastards down, use subs to shadow them and lay traps.
"If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."- H.Guderian "Hit first ! Hit hard ! Keep on hitting ! ! (The 3 H's)" Admiral Jackie Fisher "The 3 Requisites for Success – Ruthless, Relentless, Remorseless(The 3 R's)" Admiral Fisher Crates: a Term used to define any unwanted and unneeded feature in CoW Game Username: LordStark01
9 Apr 2016, 21:53
I'm not looking for advice on how to kill carriers. I'm simply pointing out that their stats are out of whack, which is obvious. I have yet to see a reasonable argument for why they're so strong against subs ("subs are weakly armored??" you do know sub is short for "submarine"? Getthafuckouttahere). Would you care to offer one?
Stop trying to read between the lines of my original post. This isn't a whine because I lost some ships attacking carriers, or something. Carriers' defensive stats are clearly unbalanced when the other ships are reasonably balanced... and that is ALL the OP is about.
9 Apr 2016, 22:26
Zazmio wrote:
Yes, other ships have range. But the fact remains, if a cruiser moves onto a single unescorted carrier, the carrier will win. And the fact remains that it takes a lot of subs to take down a single carrier.
I had a level 2 carrier ambushed by a single level 1 sub and I could not out run it. I could do nothing. My planes would not take off until the carrier was sunk, then they simply patrolled the area even though they were within reach of an airfield.
Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean someone isn't out to get you.
9 Apr 2016, 22:43
Did your carrier move into the sub? If so, it means that your carrier was the attacker, which means its sucky anti-sub attack strength (0.5) was used, which is why the carrier lost. At least, that is my understanding of how combat works in this game.
I attacked a carrier with three subs once, and my subs were losing. I had to bring up battleships to shell the carrier to win the battle.
10 Apr 2016, 16:45
Zazmio wrote:
I'm not looking for advice on how to kill carriers. I'm simply pointing out that their stats are out of whack, which is obvious. I have yet to see a reasonable argument for why they're so strong against subs ("subs are weakly armored??" you do know sub is short for "submarine"? Getthafuckouttahere). Would you care to offer one?
Stop trying to read between the lines of my original post. This isn't a whine because I lost some ships attacking carriers, or something. Carriers' defensive stats are clearly unbalanced when the other ships are reasonably balanced... and that is ALL the OP is about.
First of all, I'm not reading between the lines- I'm offering some help, like these forums are for. But I can clearly see you don't don't need any help.
Second, Carriers are strong the defence because they have little attack power. Subs got nerfed to shit about three weeks ago, rendering them near useless. Thats your answered: carriers are powerful, Subs are just useless.
"If the tanks succeed, then victory follows."- H.Guderian "Hit first ! Hit hard ! Keep on hitting ! ! (The 3 H's)" Admiral Jackie Fisher "The 3 Requisites for Success – Ruthless, Relentless, Remorseless(The 3 R's)" Admiral Fisher Crates: a Term used to define any unwanted and unneeded feature in CoW Game Username: LordStark01
10 Apr 2016, 21:41
Subs are not near useless. I don't remember their exact stats before the nerf, but their usefulness has barely changed. But that's getting off topic.
"Carriers are strong on defense because they have little attack power" does not seem like a logical reason to have the stats they do. Why should they have strong defensive strength just because they suck on attack? The carrier's role is supposed to be a platform for aircraft, not a defensive behemoth.
I'm not quite sure if you think that their stats are fine, or if you agree that they're off, or you don't care. If you don't care, why post? If you agree, why not just say, "yeah, I agree, their stats are off." If you disagree... then I don't get it.
