Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'aa'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 73 results

  1. RedBellyBlackSnake

    AA instantaneous damage

    I usually wait for planes to come into range of my AA before I turn on priority sector. This applied instantaneous damage to the planes. My question: "Has instantaneous damage been taken away?" I don't see it in the AA stats of ships anymore. I would like to know if it still works, because it determines how I will use my AA. If there is no instantaneous damage anymore, then I will probably turn on my priority sector a little earlier.
  2. There's been a lot of heated discussion about CV counterplay, and frustration at the lack of tools ships have to counter aircraft attack. The thought struck me, what if, instead of the simple 'port' and 'starbord' choice for priority AA sector, we assign a torpedo like interface to the '4' key? It's not a fully formed idea, but at the same time, what if priority sector was gradient rather than a flat +50 damage in 180 degrees, and players could choose the exact direction? I don't know if this would be an improvement, but it's an idea. I don't know how this concept would interact with DFAA. I just know that a lot of players want more tools and options for counterplay against carriers, and perhaps adding more of a skill element to AA might be an improvement?
  3. This AA Magic Flak Cloud that disintegrates everything with the push of a button to bring AA to full alert IS NOT REALISTIC. Space Invaders from the 1980's used Smart Bombs to obliterate everything on the screen. Is this what WOWS wants? They could have saved a ton of money by purchasing the Space Invaders code and modifying that. Even when I am playing Cruisers and I bring my AA to Full Alert status, I cannot believe what I see when with just the push of that button, everything in the sky within my defense radius is obliterated. And this is without having defined an AA defense sector. I don't use it. So how about it WOWS. Lets get rid of the Magic All Disintegrating Flak Clouds. Why do I call them Magic? Because they float in the sky waiting for planes to fly through them before they burst. TOTALLY UNREALISTIC FOLKS. You want these "special" features for the "special" loaded diaper set who complains incessantly anytime they see a Carrier? Then develop a Kiddy Court where they can play their rubber ducks in the tub and complain without end about how life ain't fair.
  4. A Liberty ship-ful of VT shells costs 6,500 coal in the armory, and is able to equip 5 ships to max capacity of VT shells. These VT shells cause 100% more aa damage to aa gun calibers of 3 inch and above (75mm). When carrying VT shells, there is a higher chance of fire (increase by 20%, decreases proportional to shells left in magazine) on the superstructure area. The ammunition type of these 3inch and above aa guns can be switched by the player from regular flak shells to VT shells. Once switched to VT shells, each use of the vv shells is default limited to 3 salvoes for each gun. For example, a Iowa class battleship has 10 5inch guns. So one switch to VT shells will use at max 30 shells of the ship’s vt shell storage. a VT shell factory can be built for 75,000 coal, which produces a default of 5 shells per 10 minutes when the game is open. The factory operates for another 2 hours after logging off at and increase default rate of 8 shells per 10 minutes. This can be increased by using credits to upgrade the factory. There will be a daily ship that sails into your port with a small amount of VT shells for free. On the ship will be a small market where you draw three options to buy things that will be drawn randomly, such as a lot of credits for a gold camo Just some thought and imagination. Coal could be changed to like 2,000 stele for factory and like 500 steel for a liberty class shipload if Wg wants more people to play ranked and stuff like clan battles
  5. dad003

    WHAT is AA ?

    What is AA ? apparantly it doesnt work they say ! MIne work so well ! https://youtu.be/GL47HtrmxUE
  6. My Ranger's F4F found out the hard way. And flak, on a dd?
  7. It Would be Pretty Cool if HMS Bellona was Added to the Game. So, remember when I said that while no ship needs to be added to the game, HMS Sirius really ought to be added to the game? HMS Bellona does not really need to be added to the game, but it would be pretty cool. Also, because Bellona is not the slam dunk that Sirius is, I must think a bit more about how it would be implemented and more importantly what the flavor of the ship would be. For Sirius, it was simple, extrapolate values from existent ships and characteristics and make it conform to British light cruisers. I know that it will be acceptably balanced (well, maybe some things need tweaking) and not meta breaking or making because that meta already exists. If I do the same thing for Bellona, that would be boring. So, same format as before, I’ll talk about the ship’s history, why this ship in particular needs to be added, the stats of the ship and expected playstyle, and then who will want to buy it. So, without further delay. HMS Bellona: A Primer. HMS Bellona was ordered as a standard Dido class cruiser in 1939 as a part of 5 war emergency ships. Construction continued until there was a pause in May of 1940 due to the fears of invasion, with the material and expertise being moved elsewhere. This allowed time for the Directorate of Naval Construction to look at what could be adjusted on these ships to make them more efficient. The chief thing on their mind was removing the topmost front turret. If they did that, it would give them the following benefits. 1. They were no longer fighting as much with the KGV’s for turrets. While less of a issue the further into the war they got, initially the Dido’s were finishing with 4 turrets and getting their 5th later because the KGV’s had priority. Less turrets in general meant this was less of a issue. 2. The overall height of the ship could be dropped. For their dimensions, the Dido class was tall, because the top of the bridge had to see over the third turret. With that turret removed the overall height could be removed, and these weight savings could be transferred to improving protection and AA armament, speaking of... 3. A mid-range AA gun could be added that covered the front arc of the ships. Any air attack that was not a torpedo run would go down the length, so a close in AA mount that could cover that angle was very desirable. So, the gun was removed. The remaining guns had their mounts improved with more power available from an additional generator to increase their rotation rate from 10 to 20 degrees per second. Added into their connection with the high angle Control system and radar, and the main armament became much more flexible against enemy aircraft. The funnels were straightened, and more 20mm cannons were added for close in air defense. In all, these ships could engage enemy aircraft much more effectively at the cost of effectiveness against surface units, but the trade was deemed to be a good one. So, at the end of October 1943 Bellona commissioned into the Royal Navy. With less than 2 years left in the war one may be forgiven for thinking that her career was uneventful. To the contrary, it was packed. At the start though, it was not looking good. Electrical faults kept it from joining the fleet until January of 1944, where it joined the English Channel force 26 as flagship, charged with keeping the German destroyers and E-boats bottled up as invasion preparations were set in motion, as well as attacking any convoys it ran across. In March, it finally ran across some E-Boats on the 15th in a mutually inconclusive action. At this point HMS Black Prince relieved it, and they prepared for supporting the invasion. During the invasion Bellona deployed off Omaha beach, providing naval fire support as well as AA picket duty, where during a night attack it got a confirmed aircraft kill. By mid-June, she was sent to reserve, and prepared to move to the Norway theater. She covered a carrier attack on Tirpitz in July, then returned to Plymouth and force 26 to hunt E-boats. In August, Bellona started racking up some kills. On the night of the 6th, she ran into a pair of convoys sinking 2 minesweepers, a patrol boat, and an aircraft repair ship as well as disabling 2 more vessels. with the help of the 4 tribal class destroyers she was assigned with (one of them being Haida). In September, she was refit, with more 20mm slapped on wherever possible. In October, she escorted Implacable for airstrikes in Norway. In November she joined force 2 with HMS Kent and 4 destroyers, running into a German convoy and sinking 2 merchantships and 2 minesweepers. December brought a trip to the arctic convoys. January, another anti shipping strike, with a force of one heavy cruiser, 2 lights (the other being Dido) 10 destroyers and 2 escort carriers they ran into a convoy of 8 ships, 4 being destroyers. All the merchantmen but one was sunk, no word on the destroyers. She would spend the rest of the war alternating between arctic and Norwegian duty. Clearly, Bellona’s service was worthy. But why add in a Bellona, and why this one considering their extensive postwar career with the New Zealand navy and Pakistani navy. Why Bellona. Bellona, in a perfect world, or at least one where I made the ships for WOWS, would be a tier 6 premium for the RN. The reason for her inclusion would be more than just because of her career or to add a Dido (remember in this perfect world we already have Sirius), it's to be a premium for a new line of Royal Navy anti-aircraft cruisers. So, this premium is also a sneak peek at how I would expect to balance this entire line, which by virtue of the ships included would already have a fair few parameters attached to them that make balancing tricky. Those parameters are as follows. 1.The lowest or really close to the lowest HP in the tier for cruisers, based on their small displacement. 2. Pretty uninspiring armor. 3. The highest or really close to the highest concealment for a tier based on the dimensions of the ship. 4. The highest or really close to the highest agility for a tier, based on the dimensions of the ship. 5. Mediocre to average speed at best. 6. Really good for tier AA, with lots concentrated at range. 7. Short-ranged cannons that are small for their tier. With these factors baked in, there is not a whole lot of room for balancing them via consumables. You’ll just have to see how I handle it. Oh, and as to why Bellona as opposed to the other modified Dido’s, Bellona has the most interesting career in the RN, and the lamest career postwar. Leave the others to a Pan Asian or Commonwealth tree. So, what does Bellona look like in World of Warships? HMS Bellona in World of Warships Armor: The armor on HMS Bellona required much more thought than I initially expected it to, but ended up with a answer that was a lot easier than I thought that it was going to be. The general layout is the same as on my proposed Sirius. The citadel is completely underwater, with the roof over the magazines being 51mm thick, but the roof over the engines being a measly 13mm. at the engines and boilers, the belt armor is 76mm thick, but once you punch through that your odds of a citadel are decent if your fire is plunging. The roof of the auxiliary room armor is 51mm as well, and the end caps are 25mm. So where is the more thought than initially expected? That comes from Norman freedman’s book “British Cruisers: Two World Wars and After.” This has the weight of armor for the Dido class as 718 tons, and the Bellona’s as 860. Where did this extra weight go? The answer is into splinter protection. Near misses from bombs, it was discovered, could cause flooding from splinter penetrations outside of the main belt. Therefore, splinter protection was improved on the Bellona’s, which had time to update for this. In game, we will model this as the ship having 16mm plating everywhere exempting the superstructure. Therefore, unlike with Leander and Fiji, Bellona will not have 8-inch shells autopen if they hit bow or stern. Such a small mercy, but this ship is not supposed to be the most survivable ship. This is reflected in her HP pool. With Sirius weighing in at 6850 tons deep load compared to Bellona’s 7200, she would have marginally more HP than 26000, but less than the 28700 of Leander. Making it simple, 27000 seems right. Armament: The good news is that now some of those stats from the KGV secondary’s start to become relevant again, bad news is that one of the other stats now needs massaging down to tier 6. That’s range. While I would love for the 13.5 km range of my proposed Sirius to still be in force it now outranges Leander, Perth, and Huang He. I can’t abide that. That means that this ship will have a pathetic range of 12.7 km, at best 13.1. Ouch. As to the gun’s stats, the AP remains similar to what I said for my proposed Sirius, with the 133mm shells doing 2700 damage on a citadel hit. On Bellona and the AA cruisers, the special RN AP with much improved auto-bounce and fuse times gets replaced with a regular old AP shell. This means that this ship will not be able to rely solely on AP for its damage. The HE shell can be lifted directly from KGV’s secondary battery’s. With 1900 damage per shell and a 8% fire chance, all that’s needed is the 6 round per minute fire rate to start comparing its potential DPM and fire-starting chances to the other cruisers at tier 6. As far as AP DPM goes, things are in theory not bad. With 80 rounds of max 2700 damage per minute, it clocks in at 5th out of 20 ships. HE looks better, coming in third overall with 152000 potential damage per minute and not being far behind the two ahead of it. However, when considering the smaller gun caliber and thus the reduced amount of things it can penetrate at this tier, this high potential HE damage is needed. Coming in 7 out of 20 as far as fire-starting goes, she does not look to be too disturbing on that count. However, we need to add in the effects of fire flags and IFHE. This ship, like most ships below 152mm at this tier just need IFHE. With that, the deck armor of most tier 6 and 7 battleships as well as the armor plating of tier 8 American and German heavy cruisers becomes penetrable. So, when factoring in IFHE on all ships that would benefit from it, as well as DE and fire flags, Bellona sits pretty much in the middle. Without IFHE Bellona crawls her way to the middle of the pack. Pretty clearly so far Bellona’s battery is not exceptional in any way apart from her extremely fast 20 degree per second stock turn rate. Whoop de do. Something of a sticking point, however, would be her angles of fire. Her turrets are alleged to be able to turn 340 degrees according to Norman Friedman, However the firing angles listed by the Armor Layout for Dido has her only being able to shoot on 280 degree arcs. What this means gameplay wise is that the ship has to be angled 40 degrees in order to get all of its guns on target, way out of the autobounce angles. The only respite from these crappy angles is that given that the guns can traverse to greater angles than they are limited to fire, the firing arcs of X turret can be increased to 320 degrees based on there being no physical obstructions to it having these firing angles. This means that the ship would only have to angle 20 degrees off the bow for it to get 3/4 of its armament on target. She also has a torpedo armament, and these should just be a direct copy of what’s on Fiji. For reference, that’s 8 km, 72 second reload, 15867 max damage, and 61 knots with ability to single fire. Concealment: Being based on the Arethusa (represented in game by Huang He) and being essentially the same height and length, I propose that Bellona have a standard detection range of 9.55, going down to 8.34 km. Agility: Bellona has a top speed of 32 knots. She should keep the incredibly high energy retention in turns of the other RN light cruisers, but not retain the absurd acceleration. Her turning circle should be as I proposed with Sirius, 620 meters, able to put her rudder hard over in 6.7 seconds, giving her a rotation rate of 7.86 degrees per second. Again, average speed at best, but very agile. AA: Bellona should have good AA. In real life, she entered service with 6 dual 20mm, 12 single mounts, 3 quadruple pom-poms, and the 4 twin 5.25 in cannons. After number crunching, she should do 189 DPS at 2 km (from 8.1 dps per single based on Nelson and 13.5 dps per double based on Edinburgh), 105 dps at 2.5 km (from 35 dps based on Haida, and 120 dps per second at 6 km (my made up number again). These base values are best in tier for continuous damage. Her flak barrage would be 4 bursts at 1617 per burst. Consumables: Alright, that covers our main stats. now that we have our meat and potatoes, time to give it some flavor. Which just means some consumables and any other stat modifiers. The main thing that will cover the flavor of this ship is the fact that this, and this line, is supposed to be AA cruisers. They are supposed to be exceptionally good against enemy carriers. So, it stands to reason that one of the consumables should be defensive AA. Fair enough. And now comes the disappointing part. The ship cannot carry any aircraft (none of the RN AA CL’s can) so catapult fighter and spotter aircraft make no sense. Engine boost just does not feel right, all of the RN ships are slow. Main battery reload booster, no, already using the reload rates firing pell mell. Torpedo reload booster? Don’t make me laugh. So now we have as our final contenders the most cancerous consumables. Radar, repair, smoke, and hydro (which to be fair is not that bad). So, before we get much further, lets rule radar right out and argue about the last 3. Repair is a decent choice; it helps with the issue of this ship having a low HP pool and crappy armor. That and the fact that all the other RN tech tree cruisers have it make it an obvious move. Smoke also isn’t bad. It allows the crappy short ranged average guns to sing without as much fear of retaliation. And hydro paired with smoke makes for a potent combo, allowing you to charge down people in smoke if they are inattentive, or get out of dodge when a wall of skill comes at you. But only one of these things helps to shoot down aircraft. And that is what these are all about. So I would give it smoke. Yes, that means that this premium, and this line, is all going ships that sit in smoke and spew HE. Before you get out any pitchforks, hear me out. I think that one of the main issue with every cruiser that has been introduced with smoke so far is the fact that they all get hydro. This allows them to sit comfortably with the knowledge that they are likely safe from a marauding destroyer ending them with a wall of skill. I do not intend for that to be an option for this ship. I want to have the player have to worry in their cloud of smoke unless they have taken the care to be sure they cannot have this happen to them. I think that would go a ways to making this feel a little less… cheap. Further, smoke allows this ship to perform better against carriers, seeing how Bellona could just pop smoke to frustrate the carrier’s attacks and continue to fire away at the planes. Yes, perhaps this would just make for bad meta, but I am not currently convinced. Ok, rant out of the way, I would propose this smoke to sit between RN destroyer and RN light cruiser smoke, with 5 charges of 15 second emission and 50 second duration, and a cooldown of 100 seconds. Pretty much dead between the two in all stats. Finally, as a last bit of added flavor, I wonder if perhaps these would be better against aircraft if their flak bursts were less accurate? Currently, flak bursts try to appear most in the area directly ahead of the incoming squadron. If you don’t turn, you get massacred. If you do turn, odds are with you that you will avoid most of the damage. Right now, 80% of the shells go to this A zone, the rest to the B zones at the sides, incidentally, where a plane would turn into. If the odds of a shell appearing in A were reduced to 50-50, would this make it more likely for a maneuvering squadron to eat flak bursts? If so, that would be an important part of the ship and the lines flavor, taking this from a decent AA ship, to pretty terrifying. And that, I think, is all there is to discuss with Bellona. Why people would buy Bellona Man, remember when Sirius had everything going for it? It filled a role that was currently not filled in game in a satisfying way, was a historical ship with a good career that collectors would really be interested in, and had an anime tie in that weebs would trip over themselves for? Bellona fills a role that does not currently exist (trainer for a non-existent tree), has no anime tie in, and is a historical ship with a good career, but frankly just not as good as Sirius. There’s only one good reason to include her in game, and that would be blunted if there was already a HMS Sirius added. I would get 2 didos (honestly, I would as many as they would offer to me) but a lot of people would have that collector itch scratched at one. Perhaps if ranked went to tier 6 (does it?) it could be quite powerful, but I don’t know. Really this is about testing a playstyle. So, what do you think? How does this thing sound to you?
  8. Count_of_Kaloki

    Subs need Guns!

    Submarines have there AA and secondary guns turned off because they do not a have a High enough caliber. But thats not true they have the same caliber of destroyers of there tier and its better to do some damage then no damage. Carrier will be another major threat to surfaced submarines and most submarines have 2 AA guns, they are not ment to shoot down the hole squad they are met to do some damage, to deter the plane from flying over the submarines. If you agree leave a message Thanks you!
  9. The current implementation of "Improved Secondary Battery Aiming" requires the player to Ctrl-Click on ships' tag to enable / select target manually. That's not logical, and inconsistent with remaining interface. Instead, I propose to use key "4" to enable this ability, then you "shoot" a ship to "lock target" so the secondaries gets the buff. Should be enabled in "Free view" mode as AA ability currently do. The same implementation should be done to dual-purpose turrets, including DD's main batteries: To enable "AA mode" Primary/Secondaries, player press "4" (or 5) then "shoot" in direction of planes. And this new "AA mode" is cancelled both by timeout, or if player selects 1 or 2 (HE/AP) and (AIM? shoot?) a ship or land target. So if you select "weapon 4" and "shoot" at ships, secondaries focus at that ship, while if you "shoot high" in planes' direction, you focus all main/secondaries/AA guns in those planes. This would result in a much more consistent controls implementation of an "attack feature": Key Action / weapon 1 HE/SAP 2 AP 3 Torpedos 4 Improved Secondaries Aiming (AA mode if planes) 5 AA mode (separated) Of course keys can be remapped, keeping that out for clarity sake.
  10. To begin, a brief summary of the current discourse regarding CV and AA balance: Surface Ship Player: CVs are OP. No matter how many planes we shoot down, they get a drop off. Our AA does nothing. CV Player: Are you kidding me? If I get uptiered at all, I get shredded. I'm launching half-strength squadrons two minutes in. Now, a brief history lesson: AA guns were not placed on ships to shoot down enemy aircraft. Fleet aircraft were the primary weapon against enemy aircraft. They were emplaced to protect the ship. If every aircraft of an enemy squadron survived, but they were unable to drop effectively due to the intensity of the AA fire, the primary mission of the gunners was a success (although the secondary mission, to attrite enemy men and materiel, would be a failure). Similar to covering fire during an infantry movement, ship AA was dependent upon the self-preservation instincts of the enemy pilot to be fully functional. This is (partially) why the kamikazes of WWII and the Exocets of the Falklands were such effective weapons: neither a missile nor a man bent on self-immolation has much of a penchant for survival and as such, the AA battery must destroy the incoming threat, as it cannot be deterred. But what does this have to do with my arcade game? Prior to update 8.0, the DFAA consumable affected incoming aircraft in the same way that intense AA fire would have historically. It dispersed the incoming attack, reducing the probability of a successful attack. 8.0 took the CV player off of the bridge and into the cockpit, and DFAA was likewise changed to a simple DPM boost. The surface Ship now had no option but to shoot down the entire incoming squadron, which now functioned like guided missiles, rather than planes. After all, it would make no sense if shots the player fired directly suddenly scattered just because their intended victim activated a consumable, would it? Enter Dazzle Under update 10.0, a mechanic has been introduced which temporary increases the dispersion of incoming fire when activated. DFAA can, and should, function the same way. Whether this is is accomplished by increasing the size of the aiming reticle, by increasing the dispersion of the ordinance dropped, or by shaking and buffeting the squadron (such that a CV player could learn to pilot through it, thus adding an element of skill to CV play), I will leave to the developers. This provides warship players with a more effective counterplay, without drastically increasing the numbers of aircraft lost during strikes, all while retrieving some of this historical accuracy the game has lost over the years.
  11. Being a big fan of Jingles......
  12. JTM78

    AA vs Planes

    Why is it that CV can make two to five against enemy ships while losing little to nothing? I am finding that the AA of equal tier ships vs planes still allow 3 or more runs and god forbid if the ship is two tiers lower. There is something seriously wrong with the balance of AA vs planes. Maybe CV should lose health for every plane that gets shoot down?!
  13. Litigo_1970

    This CV [edited] HAS to stop

    /Rant on Decided to play some tier 4 for the 5 Epochs campaign. 4 CV game after 4 CV game after 4 CV game. Unbelievably frustrating. Most t4 ships have effectively ZERO AA. Even your own CV can't drop fighters to help you at that level, so you are literally just a floating target barge with no defense or counterplay. NOT FUN. I got so frustrated I gave up on the low tiers. Figured I would take out an AA boat and at least have some defense. Dusted off Gearing and loaded her up with a 19 point AA specced captain, AA equipment, AA flags, and Defensive AA. First game, the enemy Midway hits me in the first 30 seconds. I was maneuvering, had priority AA sector up correctly, Defensive AA up, AA flags, AA equipment, AA 19 point captain, and all of that AA did exactly NOTHING. The enemy CV took more than half my hps in one strike, within the first 30 seconds of the game. For a DD that can't heal, losing more than half your HP in the first 30 seconds, with no defense, is just [edited]. WG, the CV rework FAILED. CVs are BROKEN. STOP adding MORE overpowered CVs (FDR, MvR, I'm looking at you) and FIX WHAT IS BROKEN before you lose your entire playerbase. /Rant off
  14. I had this happen yesterday, and I've watched this replay a couple times to determine what (if anything) I could have done differently here to mitigate the ultimate outcome. Loaded into a match with Hawkins as I decided to earnestly start the British CA line grind. I begin heading toward A cap, intending to support pink Farragut, stay on the flank and deter any push outside of the islands and target any enemy DD that heads that way to start the match. Enemy Weser spots me 45 seconds into the match, flying in with AP Rockets. I turn toward the rockets to ensure he doesn't have the ability to citadel me broadside and engage AA priority sector. I see my Priority Target indicator light up and climb quickly; I immediately hit the brakes to juke incoming BB fire, which I know is coming. First wave of rockets hit but do minimal damage; first round of salvos from enemy BBs arrive and miss due to throttle cut. Weser approaches from the west for AP rocket pass number two, as I've successfully shot down one plane. I engage AA priority sector again and head toward smoke the Farragut has laid for me; however, in doing so not only would I provide too much broadside to Weser's AP rockets, but I narrowly avoid a BB salvo aimed squarely at where I would have entered the smoke had I continued in that direction. AP Rockets hit the stern and rear of the ship for minimal damage. Less than three seconds later (which means the salvo had likely already been fired at that distance), AP salvo from Giulio Cesare finishes me in a Dev Strike before any enemies are even within striking distance of my ship. I finish the match with a total of 4 planes shot down, 0 total XP, and reported for being AFK. I'm genuinely curious – barring not choosing to play this particular ship, and staying where I spawned or attempting to hug the Texas who decided to head east (and still may not have stopped the rocket attack), what actual possible counterplay was there in this situation? I'm always attempting to improve my gameplay, I've watched the clip several times and I just can't think of anything different that could have been done here to prevent what happened, because even if I had stayed in spawn many of the enemy BBs had the range to strike me when spotted at that distance. What do you think?
  15. Double CV games are completely unbalanced...When will this STOP?!? There is no counter when both CVs focus 1 ship and you have clueless teammate CVs that will not provide fighter support. A supposed AA strong ship cannot punish the planes when the enemy CV player can keep rotating squadron types and burn and flood the focused ship in a couple minutes. This is with other ships providing overlapping AA support. Any trash player that learns the basic game play mechanics can suffer no consequences by throwing their planes away. I'm so sick of this like many other players are. So tell us...when will it stop???
  16. Aircraft carriers are extremely underpowered. There aircraft are weak in both armor/HP, accuracy, and armament. The armor of aircraft is non-existent. There health pool is very low as well. Ship AA is easily able to destroy a squadron of fighters before a single attack is launched when multiple ships are together and only one attack can be launched when a ship is by itself. Destroyers are the only reliable target for carriers as they have a low AA defense, but are nimble enough for 90-100% of the attack to miss, and the 10% of the time that if does hit, typical damage is around 700 for rocket attack planes, 900 for dive bombers, and 1000 tor torpedo planes. For armament I will start with Torpedo planes. Why are carriers the only class of ship with an arming distance on there torpedoes, Destroyers can launch torpedoes onto the deck of another ship and kill them instantly, while CV torpedoes deal 1,400 damage and maybe a flood on a cruiser. The same torpedo on a destroyer of the same tier does 11,733 damage, while the carrier torpedoes do 5,567 (Ranger compared to Farragut) in fact the tier 2 destroyer the Sampson's torpedoes do 5,900 damage stock. The dive bombers do the most damage with 9,200, but there accuracy leaves mush to be desired. From a fully "zoomed in" attack from bow to stern, 2/3 bombs will hit. the 3rd bomb is teleported outside the aiming circle and is dropped in the water, regardless of the circle being inside the ship. rocket attack planes are fast, low HP and are very inaccurate. This is realistic as they are dumb fire rockets. and I have only one complaint at that is the arming timer, why must I wait to fire my rockets? I wish Wargaming would buff carriers and/or nerf AA.
  17. I've been playing the dogs out of Kaga for the past few weeks. Trying to get better. I have a good number of matches in her (148), 1502AD and avg DR of 2.0. Average, maybe slightly below. Damaged caused to reds at 8.1M. So so. But I can tell this morning, just starting today, the AAA(AA) is freaking insane. My average damage to ships is 54,777. In a Tier X (ix and x with a bismarck, nc and myself as the lone t8's) I earned a whopping 28K damage to ships. The Halland when built is exceedingly OP in the AA business. Exceedingly. Rockets and dive bombers? Forget them, vaporized. Torp bombers can approach for one drop, that's it. In contrast to normal Kaga business, I found I was losing planes during the TB run. Everywhere I went to attack my planes were obliterated. So... May I suggest you dive into your spreadsheet data to see just how OP the AA is on ships like Halland? They are almost untouchable by air. One would think attack planes, which can travel faster, would at least be able to reach the ship. Nope. Alternatively, I'm suggesting (again) you revise carrier tiers to play from the top down, so that T8 will see 8/7, T6 sees 6/5 and T4 sees 4/3. Cause T10 carriers are outrageously expensive to play (I have all of them) but hey, they are always top tier, right? Maybe just some buffs to Kaga's planes, otherwise? It's going to be very interesting to see how the German carriers play this game with AAA(AA) against ships like the Halland. tia
  18. The title gets across the gist of it. As I'd imagine a lot of you know, the two most widely used and effective AA guns mounted on American ships during WWII were the 40mm Bofors and the 20mm Oerlikon. I'd also imagine that a lot of you know that those were Swedish and Swiss guns, respectively, purchased by and built for the U.S. military. The question I have is this: Why go to foreign designs? I'd imagine that it wasn't cheap for the States to get their hands on these designs, and that money possibly could have been used to improve the U.S.' existing AA designs or to come up with new ones entirely. Likewise, selling weapons to the Allies must have presented a terrible risk to neutral Sweden and Switzerland. By 1941 both countries were completely surrounded by Axis territory (since Finland joined the Axis when Operation Barbarossa began), and the pretense of stopping the selling of weapons to their enemies would have presented a golden opportunity for Germany and Italy to invade. However, since I know I'm not even close to the most well-versed history buff here, I now turn over the mic to those among you who are: Why did the United States purchase Swiss and Swedish AA guns and their designs as opposed to trying to improve on/create their own? Thanks in advance to anyone who answers my question. Sincerely, 1Sherman.
  19. mundaneken

    AA is Broken

    The practice of pitting tier 8 CVs against ships with tier 10 AA is not only completely broken but unrealistic. I sent all three types of planes against a tier 10 DD trying to cap our base, and all three type had their entire squadron shot down before they could get a single shot off. This ridiculous mismatch and inability to shoot most tier 10 ships happens in every game I’ve played in such circumstances. There’s no way a single DD could do that in real life, and it’s utterly frustrating and demoralizing for the CV player.
  20. I am dead serious about tier 3 and 4 ships needing higher AA DPS values, somewhere on par or just short of the tier 5 ships. ( ~10% less then tier 5 per tier ) Here are: "Baby seal pelts for the spreadsheet God" if that is not sufficient i will have to "procure" some more. P.S. Yes you are seeing it correctly 187k~192k damage with torps only, while losing 15 planes total.
  21. Howdy sailors, first off hope your all doing good and are healthy! Now, I'd like to suggest a buff to the AA guns Mod 1! Reason being is because 1: In its current state it literally doesn't do anything to inspire players to pick it over other mods in its catagory. and 2: even with sector aa activated, it does little to help protect against air attacks to begin with, thus making this buff all but useless which is why I'd like to ask WG to please consider either giving it a +10% damage per second buff or a range boost buff of .5 Km. or maybe even both. What's your thoughts on the matter though, what buffs would you like to have on this equipment? or do you think it's fine as is? please comment below! until next time, I'll C'ya on the Seas! P.S. please check out my USS California Event Thread Suggestion and maybe leave a comment on there as well!
  22. Granted, the British did it in the span of a few months and it took me since Open Beta, but still. Pretty fun. The Atlanta was the first premium ship I ever purchased way back when, and has she been power crept into near oblivion? Absolutely. But is she still fun? You bet. And the 'Splinter Camo' version on the Modstation is pure awesome. 07 to all my stalwart Atlanta Captains.
  23. Give them a separate consumable slot for DFAA. is is a much more comprehensive way to address the power creep they have experienced than buffing their reload, and makes them actually viable as AA cruisers again.
  24. Okay, I've really hit my breaking point on people using AA ratings and bringing them up. If you look at the AA ratings, it's such an obscure number with so little meaning you think your AA is one thing yet you slaughter or get slaughtered by planes. So I'm going to give an overly simplified way to get an idea what your going to do to a CV's planes but it will require math on your end (unless I figure out an easy way to do it on a google sheet and/or people are willing to donate cash for the amount of time it will take me to run through every ship, CV, possible setup) Simply put what truly determines if your AA is good is how long planes are in your AA, and how much damage is done every second. It's why Kremlin at tier 10 outperforms Montana at downing planes, and Yamato seems pathetic. longer range is better and obviously, more damage is better, but truth be told you want both. Also, these are a general guideline - not insanely specific numbers (some planes will be faster, slower, more HP, less HP). Tier Speed (km/s) HP per plane 10 .5 km every second 2000 8 .45 km every second 1800 6 .4 km every second 15-1600 4 .35 km every second ~1400 So lets take Benson, tier 8 USN DD and put it against a tier 6 CV. You have the B hull, no flags/skills/modz. Long range is 5.8 km at 77 damage every second, short range is 2 km at 60 damage every second. Tier 6 average is .4 km and 1500 HP on the low end. Your long range AA will fire at them on the way in 14 times at 77 damage, and short range 5 times at 60 - roughly 1378 on the first attack run, just short of knocking a plane down. The C hull while taking away a little from long range and a lot from short range adds 49 DP at 3.5 km, meaning 8 seconds of damage - the overall change being an increase to 1525 - a better chance you down a plane in the first pass. Obviously DFAA (50% more damage) and sectors (varies) increase or decrease these numbers, but that is your rough baseline of what your ship can do against a CV of the tier without you doing anything. For any who want to do all the math for the most specific numbers - aircraft damage = AA Range/([plane speed in knots*2.6854]*1000) * DPS. The first part gets you time in AA, and then you multiply it by DPS number for that range. It's also a good idea of how long till a CV can hit you again - and to track them down by range. The number in the chart are if a CV can maintain maximum speed on planes (usually done on attack runs) - so generally, if a CV is hitting you every 90 seconds and is tier 6 - odds are he's roughly 6-9 grid squares away in the direction of the planes. Basically while there is some map size overlap - takes roughly 10 seconds for plane at a tier to cover a grid square in their tier range at top speed. That little chart is easier, and while not perfect - will give you a far better idea just what your AA can do against a CV than the nonsense port rating ever will.
  25. After a brief search seems the strongest AA at tier 4 is on Giussano, maxing her AA is enough to hurt t4 squadrons badly?