Love this vid. Well thoughtout and well explained. Sure the typical content tempo isnt there, but this is more of a research paper type of deal. I do see your points. I had some previous notions that the flapjack was as good or that the wolf was slightly better, based on the assumption of plane travel speed difference. Good to see more extensive testing. I personally only tested first wave enemy planes CH 15-4, which was 5 enemy planes and I did about maybe 5 tests using of AP rockets, flappy, wolfe, and no gear. This resulted different, and it showed that flapjacks were slightly weaker based on HP pools that were visibly indicated. I however did not do pixel math or run full battles. TBF I was mainly looking at AVI stat variance then the actual plane impact and only did other planes for consistency. This is def a strong arguement. While I remain skeptical and a lil sus about pixel math, I stil think this is a solid point. In my own testing, as it was only 1st wave enemy planes, it would make sense that the initial burst damage of a stronger plane would lead. Always thought that there was a possiblity longer form fights would show different evident data, but out of lazyness never chased the research. Really loved how you explored the healing timing too. That is something people talk about, but never really breakdown. It's really something I respect a lot that you did. It's also really interesting to see how that timing is so wide by 10s roughly that segway into another heal. I would ask this tho. Does using flapjacks over wolf matter? Sure for min/max maybe.... but wolf are cheaper and easier to get. If the impact value of flapjack over wolf isn't a make or break... then I would surmise, wolf could still be very reliable. Granted this is a dynamic question as people have a range of account strenght. Cheers hope to see more content.
(this post is mainly for me to reflect back on later when i can retest ch15 stuff) I, a random person on the internet, just want to say out loud, to nobody in particular, that: I think the testing was done with good intentions in a suboptimal way, likely due to the fact that there were no incentives for you to tryhard so much. As someone looking for a better optimization for AA fighters, I think that the ideas and concepts of the video (such as theory vs reality) were very well explained. However, my fault with this is largely due to vanguard rng on auto being almost unplayable for gathering precise data(from my worthless perspective), along with equally rng aspects like evasion and such. (Manual also allows me to control the damage i wish to do to the boss, so i do not have to worry about the boss dying too quickly. Exiting the node allows me to preserve ship HP, which prevents consistency issues) I would(eventually, hopefully, will) have done a manual test with the following things: 1. Simply enter the map->go to the first node-> kill the first couple of waves, then record hp values without healers, then exit the node to save the mobs. Then record this around 20x 2. Obviously vanguard on manual but no movement, and to account for the different plane location rng spawns, this would be done with the vanguard in 4 places(or 6): middle(+variations), back left+right+middle. This would be done a lot more than 20x to get a decent unbiased sample. 3. Turn off evasion for main fleet 4. Ideally dont bring healers since i would be resetting first node. The point for me would be to test AA, not test how good unicorn is with AA. This is a valid argument against me not considering an almost mandatory case to be mandatory, but simply do this test again(aka simply farm ch15) with unicorn and that point is moot at the cost of 2k more oil. 5. For the boss node, I would use my boss fleet to take everything out, then use my testing fleet to spam retry the boss, just like with the first node. All in all, I thought I would share this long wall of text because I wanted to, and I hope to spread the idea of exiting nodes to test, as I think that is the best way of testing. However, i completely get that there is no motivation for anyone to do so
Someday I hope to test 2 flapjack(mandatory for timing+hp) +4 fw (other fighter doesnt seem worth it over fj). Flapjack does seem mandatory for timing, it's more a question of how many is optimal. It could be that all flapjacks at +13 are simply better than 4 fw at +11. At the least, this test shows that the other two cheap planes are useable, and so there is no need to further test cost effectiveness but rather other stuff. This post could also very well become obsolete with the new PR7 releasing a perfect UR fighter that allows you to farm 15-4 for exp at long last with a full part of 5 randoms and 1 unicorn, or maybe 1-1 unicorn san diego core, but that's another topic
This is a decent plan to focus on the fighters alone, but it fails to consider realistic runs of the whole fleet. For example, if your vanguard with no RNG movement catches a lot more planes than usual, then the fighters have a different under kill or overkill effect relative to a real fleet on auto. My testing suffered from low sample size and lack of fleet/reload variation. Random notes 2. Enemy planes sent by the map (not enemy carriers) pass over your vanguard. If your vanguard is in the middle then enemy planes will be in the middle. 3. Evasion doesn't affect plane crash damage, and you're avoiding enemy BBs so it's not relevant 4. Maybe you can substitute the healers with other carriers with similar interception count and reload time. Like centaur to replace unicorn but remove catapults because centaur does more damage
I think one aspect that get's forgoten and might explain the good performance of the flapjack is that the enemy planes also shot at your planes and might shoot down lower HP planes like Skyrocket and Fw-190.
Seems like a few enemy planes have AA. But I don't think they don't deal enough damage to outright kill any single plane. The high HP is a good point though, I am guessing that high HP does yield better survivability against the akizuki AA ships. I said that AA ships delete planes, but I think that they might have a quota of HP that they can delete per shot. And it's based on the plane's max HP, so chip damage from enemy plane AA doesn't matter here. So maybe the AA ship can delete one fewer plane per shot if it had to spend more quota on a flapjack.
I would like to add@@Suchiguma IIRC plane damage also scales off remaining hp of planes too. While this isn't too important, it does help in PVE vs enemy planes. Lower enemy plane HP through staggered crash damage, can allow later legged planes to take less damage, therefore reducing enemy plane hp further. It feeds on itself.
@@yummychips_ I looked at the code and plane vs plane damage uses the standard damage formula. So current HP does not matter for damage on either side.
Maybe you are thinking of this, the more airplanes get hit by one attack, the less damage each plane takes. I didn't say this in the video but it applies to airplane AA guns too, with their splash radius of 10 units. azurlane.koumakan.jp/wiki/Combat#Anti-Air_Guns
@@Suchiguma I was referencing the crash damage on the combat page in the jp wiki. It doesn't seem like I can post link here. In the combat page, at the "end screen damage" section the formula uses % of remaining hp. It also stated "End of screen damage is only applicable in PVP and for enemy planes in PvE." whiche I had assumed crash damage affects active enemy planes. It's good to know the nuances. I may have miscontrued its meaning, or perhaps typed what i said earliar without mentioning crash damage. I've never actualy tested it nor do I know a way to test it accurately when pertaining to crash damage. Curiously enough, do you know if support planes do crash damage or not?
since your preamble touches on how timings can drastically affect how plane waves function, would running a different backline significantly change these results? Or is there just something about flapjack innate behavior that just makes it inherently superior (I read somewhere that it flies a bit slower so it might double fire on some waves, not sure how true that ended up being)
Timings will indeed change, but I don't believe it will matter much. The support fleet has three carriers, and each of them has a different RLD. So they are slightly staggered from each other and cover a range. If you use different carriers, that range might shift by a second or more, but the range still roughly covers the same times.
@@Suchiguma I just swapped over to pancakes myself and yeah they're just somehow *better* no idea why, statwise they seem so much worse than the fockes. If reloads are staggered as it is there must be some other factor that makes it perform better beyond mere timing differences
@@oldDrunkLightning note that flapjack has a faster interception reload time of 9 seconds to focke's 11.37 seconds. That's quite a big difference. Also flapjack has the highest HP of all planes, that could be another factor. There's a discussion on plane HP under another comment on this video.
In the AA DPS formulas for planes i don't see anything about the stats of the CV launching said planes, unless i'm missing something at least, does this mean i can just leave my support CV's at lvl 70 and max limit break? Would certainly save some time and resources if getting them to lvl 125 doesn't do anything. Also thanks for the informative videos! Probably gonna use the XF5F's as those are the most resource efficient for me, perhaps switching to the 190's in the future if i end up having issues.
No, it uses the same damage formula of ship to ship damage. Your plane inherits the stats of the carrier who launched them. Ship level and ship AVI are important. Although they are in the formula, hit and luck are not important because enemy planes have 0 eva
great video, maybe i will be able to upgrade to flapjacks someday but as for right now crafting 6 fw 190 a5 didnt cost any important resources at all and for them beeing slightly worse then flapjacks is ok for me, I think using resources to make the UR AA will have a bigger impact on performance for now.
I luv ur vids and voice! It’s relaxing and easy to watch. Also, can you make a guide on how to maximize the prints for rainbow guns? It will also be very helpful if you were to make a guide on Opsi as well 😅🙏
Love hearing an old man drone away 😨 Research projects - check this website and sort by blueprints per hour, that gives almost the optimal strategy azur-stats.lyoko.io/ I won't do general opsi guides because it's just "click interesting symbol, clear the zone" and I would rather tackle difficult content like the Hard Arbiter. Arbiter would kind of be a fleet/gear explanation, which I like
@@ismailabdulq1492 safe mode is already available if you defeat the third boss multiple times, I think it's 16 times total. But there is currently no auto-search and no oil cost limit. Clearing mode shouldn't affect difficulty besides lowering the Air Supremacy number, so combat-wise, we already have access to the easiest version of chapter 15 already.
@@ismailabdulq1492 that's good because flares make your fleet worse. They force your BBs and CVs to target the revealed enemy, usually at the front, instead of killing the more dangerous enemy BBs in the back. For coin farming, chapter 14 and 13 have nearly identical coins per oil, with chapter 14 taking more time per sortie and being harder. So there is no reason to farm chapter 14 unless for the ship drop or for a slightly larger pittance of cognitive chips drop.
![[Azur Lane] The MOST IN-DEPTH Fighters Guide](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/6u05bEUNOO4/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Azur Lane] The MOST IN-DEPTH Fighters Guide](/img/tr.png)
so tldr all flapjacks on fighter slots? no mix and match on support fleet, correct?
That's what I'll be running from now on
Love this vid. Well thoughtout and well explained. Sure the typical content tempo isnt there, but this is more of a research paper type of deal.
I do see your points. I had some previous notions that the flapjack was as good or that the wolf was slightly better, based on the assumption of plane travel speed difference. Good to see more extensive testing.
I personally only tested first wave enemy planes CH 15-4, which was 5 enemy planes and I did about maybe 5 tests using of AP rockets, flappy, wolfe, and no gear. This resulted different, and it showed that flapjacks were slightly weaker based on HP pools that were visibly indicated. I however did not do pixel math or run full battles. TBF I was mainly looking at AVI stat variance then the actual plane impact and only did other planes for consistency.
This is def a strong arguement. While I remain skeptical and a lil sus about pixel math, I stil think this is a solid point. In my own testing, as it was only 1st wave enemy planes, it would make sense that the initial burst damage of a stronger plane would lead. Always thought that there was a possiblity longer form fights would show different evident data, but out of lazyness never chased the research.
Really loved how you explored the healing timing too. That is something people talk about, but never really breakdown. It's really something I respect a lot that you did. It's also really interesting to see how that timing is so wide by 10s roughly that segway into another heal.
I would ask this tho. Does using flapjacks over wolf matter? Sure for min/max maybe.... but wolf are cheaper and easier to get. If the impact value of flapjack over wolf isn't a make or break... then I would surmise, wolf could still be very reliable. Granted this is a dynamic question as people have a range of account strenght.
Cheers hope to see more content.
(this post is mainly for me to reflect back on later when i can retest ch15 stuff)
I, a random person on the internet, just want to say out loud, to nobody in particular, that:
I think the testing was done with good intentions in a suboptimal way, likely due to the fact that there were no incentives for you to tryhard so much. As someone looking for a better optimization for AA fighters, I think that the ideas and concepts of the video (such as theory vs reality) were very well explained. However, my fault with this is largely due to vanguard rng on auto being almost unplayable for gathering precise data(from my worthless perspective), along with equally rng aspects like evasion and such.
(Manual also allows me to control the damage i wish to do to the boss, so i do not have to worry about the boss dying too quickly. Exiting the node allows me to preserve ship HP, which prevents consistency issues)
I would(eventually, hopefully, will) have done a manual test with the following things:
1. Simply enter the map->go to the first node-> kill the first couple of waves, then record hp values without healers, then exit the node to save the mobs. Then record this around 20x
2. Obviously vanguard on manual but no movement, and to account for the different plane location rng spawns, this would be done with the vanguard in 4 places(or 6): middle(+variations), back left+right+middle. This would be done a lot more than 20x to get a decent unbiased sample.
3. Turn off evasion for main fleet
4. Ideally dont bring healers since i would be resetting first node. The point for me would be to test AA, not test how good unicorn is with AA. This is a valid argument against me not considering an almost mandatory case to be mandatory, but simply do this test again(aka simply farm ch15) with unicorn and that point is moot at the cost of 2k more oil.
5. For the boss node, I would use my boss fleet to take everything out, then use my testing fleet to spam retry the boss, just like with the first node.
All in all, I thought I would share this long wall of text because I wanted to, and I hope to spread the idea of exiting nodes to test, as I think that is the best way of testing. However, i completely get that there is no motivation for anyone to do so
Someday I hope to test 2 flapjack(mandatory for timing+hp) +4 fw (other fighter doesnt seem worth it over fj). Flapjack does seem mandatory for timing, it's more a question of how many is optimal. It could be that all flapjacks at +13 are simply better than 4 fw at +11.
At the least, this test shows that the other two cheap planes are useable, and so there is no need to further test cost effectiveness but rather other stuff. This post could also very well become obsolete with the new PR7 releasing a perfect UR fighter that allows you to farm 15-4 for exp at long last with a full part of 5 randoms and 1 unicorn, or maybe 1-1 unicorn san diego core, but that's another topic
This is a decent plan to focus on the fighters alone, but it fails to consider realistic runs of the whole fleet. For example, if your vanguard with no RNG movement catches a lot more planes than usual, then the fighters have a different under kill or overkill effect relative to a real fleet on auto. My testing suffered from low sample size and lack of fleet/reload variation.
Random notes
2. Enemy planes sent by the map (not enemy carriers) pass over your vanguard. If your vanguard is in the middle then enemy planes will be in the middle.
3. Evasion doesn't affect plane crash damage, and you're avoiding enemy BBs so it's not relevant
4. Maybe you can substitute the healers with other carriers with similar interception count and reload time. Like centaur to replace unicorn but remove catapults because centaur does more damage
I think one aspect that get's forgoten and might explain the good performance of the flapjack is that the enemy planes also shot at your planes and might shoot down lower HP planes like Skyrocket and Fw-190.
Seems like a few enemy planes have AA. But I don't think they don't deal enough damage to outright kill any single plane.
The high HP is a good point though, I am guessing that high HP does yield better survivability against the akizuki AA ships. I said that AA ships delete planes, but I think that they might have a quota of HP that they can delete per shot. And it's based on the plane's max HP, so chip damage from enemy plane AA doesn't matter here. So maybe the AA ship can delete one fewer plane per shot if it had to spend more quota on a flapjack.
I would like to add@@Suchiguma
IIRC plane damage also scales off remaining hp of planes too. While this isn't too important, it does help in PVE vs enemy planes. Lower enemy plane HP through staggered crash damage, can allow later legged planes to take less damage, therefore reducing enemy plane hp further. It feeds on itself.
@@yummychips_ I looked at the code and plane vs plane damage uses the standard damage formula. So current HP does not matter for damage on either side.
Maybe you are thinking of this, the more airplanes get hit by one attack, the less damage each plane takes. I didn't say this in the video but it applies to airplane AA guns too, with their splash radius of 10 units.
azurlane.koumakan.jp/wiki/Combat#Anti-Air_Guns
@@Suchiguma
I was referencing the crash damage on the combat page in the jp wiki. It doesn't seem like I can post link here. In the combat page, at the "end screen damage" section the formula uses % of remaining hp. It also stated "End of screen damage is only applicable in PVP and for enemy planes in PvE." whiche I had assumed crash damage affects active enemy planes.
It's good to know the nuances. I may have miscontrued its meaning, or perhaps typed what i said earliar without mentioning crash damage. I've never actualy tested it nor do I know a way to test it accurately when pertaining to crash damage. Curiously enough, do you know if support planes do crash damage or not?
since your preamble touches on how timings can drastically affect how plane waves function, would running a different backline significantly change these results? Or is there just something about flapjack innate behavior that just makes it inherently superior (I read somewhere that it flies a bit slower so it might double fire on some waves, not sure how true that ended up being)
Timings will indeed change, but I don't believe it will matter much. The support fleet has three carriers, and each of them has a different RLD. So they are slightly staggered from each other and cover a range. If you use different carriers, that range might shift by a second or more, but the range still roughly covers the same times.
@@Suchiguma I just swapped over to pancakes myself and yeah they're just somehow *better*
no idea why, statwise they seem so much worse than the fockes. If reloads are staggered as it is there must be some other factor that makes it perform better beyond mere timing differences
@@oldDrunkLightning note that flapjack has a faster interception reload time of 9 seconds to focke's 11.37 seconds. That's quite a big difference. Also flapjack has the highest HP of all planes, that could be another factor. There's a discussion on plane HP under another comment on this video.
In the AA DPS formulas for planes i don't see anything about the stats of the CV launching said planes, unless i'm missing something at least, does this mean i can just leave my support CV's at lvl 70 and max limit break?
Would certainly save some time and resources if getting them to lvl 125 doesn't do anything.
Also thanks for the informative videos! Probably gonna use the XF5F's as those are the most resource efficient for me, perhaps switching to the 190's in the future if i end up having issues.
No, it uses the same damage formula of ship to ship damage. Your plane inherits the stats of the carrier who launched them. Ship level and ship AVI are important. Although they are in the formula, hit and luck are not important because enemy planes have 0 eva
Level 120 is good enough
Great vid!!! Take my like good man!
Aquila is better with torpedo bomber or fighter? Preload vs healing
Always fighter healing in campaign. Preload is only good for fast farming easy content like operation siren
great video, maybe i will be able to upgrade to flapjacks someday but as for right now crafting 6 fw 190 a5 didnt cost any important resources at all and for them beeing slightly worse then flapjacks is ok for me, I think using resources to make the UR AA will have a bigger impact on performance for now.
I luv ur vids and voice! It’s relaxing and easy to watch. Also, can you make a guide on how to maximize the prints for rainbow guns? It will also be very helpful if you were to make a guide on Opsi as well 😅🙏
Love hearing an old man drone away 😨
Research projects - check this website and sort by blueprints per hour, that gives almost the optimal strategy azur-stats.lyoko.io/
I won't do general opsi guides because it's just "click interesting symbol, clear the zone" and I would rather tackle difficult content like the Hard Arbiter. Arbiter would kind of be a fleet/gear explanation, which I like
@@Suchiguma ok, that’s alr. Tyvm! 😁🙏
Hello sir.
Is clear mode avaiable on World 15 yet?
Not yet. I didn't watch the JP stream, don't know if it mentioned a general time frame
@@Suchiguma Aw man.
Well, I hate failing so just gonna wait till Clear/Safe mode release.
Ahaha
@@ismailabdulq1492 safe mode is already available if you defeat the third boss multiple times, I think it's 16 times total. But there is currently no auto-search and no oil cost limit. Clearing mode shouldn't affect difficulty besides lowering the Air Supremacy number, so combat-wise, we already have access to the easiest version of chapter 15 already.
@@Suchiguma No oil cap yet? Ah man... World 14 ai didn't pick flare so I stuck auto-farm gold on world 13 I guess.
@@ismailabdulq1492 that's good because flares make your fleet worse. They force your BBs and CVs to target the revealed enemy, usually at the front, instead of killing the more dangerous enemy BBs in the back. For coin farming, chapter 14 and 13 have nearly identical coins per oil, with chapter 14 taking more time per sortie and being harder. So there is no reason to farm chapter 14 unless for the ship drop or for a slightly larger pittance of cognitive chips drop.
Dayyuuum, gotta farm OpSi