Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'anti-aircraft'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Player Gatherings and Events
    • 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
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Master Archive
    • The Pigeon's Nest
    • Closed Beta Test Archive
    • Alpha Test Archive
    • For Development and Publisher Only
    • QA AUTO
    • Contests and Community Events
    • Super Test
    • Newcomer's Forum
    • Contest Entries
    • Questions and Answers
    • Contest Entries
    • New Captains
    • Guías y Estrategias
    • Task Force 58
    • Livestream Ideas and Feedback
    • Árboles Tecnológicos
    • Fan Art and Community Creations
    • Community Created Events and Contests
    • Community Staging Ground
    • Forum Reorg 2.0 Archive
    • Noticias y Anuncios

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Discord


Twitter


Website URL


Instagram


YouTube


Twitch


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 3 results

  1. As it stands, controlling my AA sectors feels clunky and ineffective, and I can understand why a lot of players feel like leaving sectors at 100%/100% is "good enough". Here are a couple things I've noticed about the new AA interface and what I think can (or should) be done to improve it: 1. Anti-Aircraft Overlay: The Issue: This is my biggest non-balance related complaint about the 0.8.0 and 0.8.0.1 AA system. The AA sector UI overlay simply blocks vision of the rest of the screen and takes too many APM to effectively change sectors. Possible Solutions: There are several ways I would go about fixing the AA sector overlay. First and foremost, I would add an option to Ctrl+Click on the compass to set up a reinforced AA sector, thereby bypassing the overlay. While this would stop the UI from covering up the whole screen, it also slows reaction time by forcing the player to draw the cursor from the center of the screen to the bottom left. My other suggestion is this: Allow the player to change AA sectors using the keyboard. Create two new keybinds - one for port reinforcement and one for starboard reinforcement - and have them change AA sectors without pulling up the sector UI. That way, changing AA sectors feels significantly more fluid and costs fewer actions (one keypress versus a keypress, mouseover, and a click). This is my ideal AA change. 2. Sector Change Feedback: The Issue: The game currently offers no feedback as to when sector reinforcement is currently changing save for a countdown timer on the AA Sector Overlay. As someone who releases the '~' key as soon as I click the sector to reinforce, it feels very uncomfortable not having visual confirmation that my input went through. Possible Solution: Add a sector change indicator to the compass. The easiest fix I can think or is to change the green AA sector indicator to yellow as the AA reinforcement shifts away from the current sector. 3. Sector Change Interruption: The Issue: This can be seen as both a gameplay and balance thing, and as such, is not high on my list of priorities. After initiating an AA sector switch, there is currently no way to cancel or interrupt a sector change. This makes the sector system feel more sluggish than it actually is. Possible Solution: While it would be nice to be able to cancel AA sector changes, I understand that the ability to do so may change balance, so if that is not possible, at least allow the surface ships to queue a sector change. These are the three biggest issues I have with the current AA sector system and probably my biggest complaint about 0.8.0 overall since balance can and is being changed. WuYixiang --- Bonus: Sanshikidan for IJN CAs and BBs So this is 100% a joke. But it'd be cool if IJN CAs and BBs could have a DefAA that turns flak clouds at long range into massive explosions that do very little damage. Just for a nice pyrotechnic display.
  2. I put a video together in understanding the anti-aircraft after update 0.8.0. Granted it covers a lot for ship setup, however I wanted to make sure I covered the subject completely for discussion. I sorry for using the text to speech in the video, however I don't have a microphone for decent audio quality. I hope this helps players in understanding the changes. Update: I realize a hotfix has been released, however the tips and tactics are still a valued core in principle.
  3. As in keeping with my other posts, below I will detail some possibilities of post war Japanese ships that could fit World of Warships. As usual most controversial pick will be saved for last, to keep the drama queens reading. All of the ships below are real ships that saw service with the JMSDF. JDS Harukaze History: Harukaze was the first Japanese produced destroyer after the end of the Second World War, and also the head of her class. Being a part of the JMSDF, she saw no combat, but she was an important precursor to the later re-militarization and growth of the JMSDF. She was laid down on 12/15/1954, launched 9/20/1955, and commissioned 4/26/1956. She was finally decommissioned on 3/5/1985. Size and Displacement (and a comparison to Fletcher): Harukaze had a length of 106 meters, and a beam of 10.5 meters. She had a standard displacement of 1700 tons and a full load of 2340 tons. As such, she's slightly smaller and slightly lighter than a Fletcher class destroyer. She had a top speed of only 30 knots. Armament: Sadly, Harukaze is not the best armed destroyer, with only three single 5"/38 cal MK12 guns in MK30 mounts. She lacks any torpedo armament whatsoever, but did have both radar and sonar equipped. These guns are dual purpose, and have a rate of fire of about 15 rpm (closer to 20 if the mount had an integral hoist.) As such, if every gun is in play, she'd have an output of 45 to 60 RPM. Her medium AA is comparable to Fletcher's at eight 40mm Bofors guns in four twin mounts. However, she lacks any light AA. In game: She'd be a tanky gun boat at a lower tier than Fletcher, and especially if she receives both radar and sonar consumables. However, as she lacks any torpedo armament and only has three main guns, I think I'd place her at tier 7, or 8 at the highest. She'd only work at tier 8 with hydro, radar, and smoke though. JDS Ayanami: History: Ayanami was one of the following destroyer classes after the one-off, Harukaze. Again, these destroyers saw no combat, but served the JMSDF for a number of years. Ayanami was layed down on 11/20/1956, launched 6/1/1957, and commissioned 2/12/1958. She was decommissioned on 12/25/1986. Size and Displacement: In size and displacement, she is rather similar to Harukaze. She had a length of 109 meters and a beam of 10.7 meters. She displaced 1720 tons standard and had a full load of 2,500 tons. Armament: Ayanami has a rather interesting armament. Her main armament consists of six 3"/50 dual purpose guns in six dual mk33 mounts. These guns have a rate of fire of 45-50 rpm, making her total output at least 270rpm! These are the same guns as used as AA on the Des Moines On the Des Moines, two of the same twin mount do 55.8dps, so if the same value were kept, Ayanami would have a total of 83.7 DPS. In addition, the Ayanami had a torpedo armament of four 533mm torpedo tubes (MK32 lightweight in MK2 over-the-side launchers). She has no light or medium AA aside from her main guns. Like her predecessor, Ayanami had both Radar and Sonar. In game: Ayanami would function well as a supporting ship, providing AA, spotting, and radar and/or hydro support to her team. She's got absurdly high fire rate on her main guns, but the penetration would be incredibly lack luster. As such, she's harder to tier. JDS Murasame: History: Murasame was lead of the class following Ayanami. She was launched in 1958 and remained in service until 1988. As an interesting side note, a UNCF cruiser in the anime Space Battleship Yamato 2199 is named after her. Size and Displacement: Murasame had a length of 108 meters and a beam of 11 meters. She had a standard displacement of 1800 tons. (unfortunately I lack data for full load this time, but I'd assume over 2500 tons) Armament: Murasame had a primary armament of three 5"/54 guns in single MK16 mounts. These were capable of a rate of fire of 15-18 rpm. In game, the same guns are used in dual mounts by Montana as secondaries. Her torpedo armament (two racks of 21" torpedoes) was sadly only meant for use against submarines. She had a secondary and AA armament of two twin 3"/50 gun mounts of the same type used as primaries for Ayanami. Between these and her main guns, Murasame had rather effective AA. In game: Murasame would probably have health similar but slightly greater than her predecessors and Fletcher. Her gun armament is strong, but the arrangement favors kiting over forward engagements. It's iffy if WG would give her her torpedo armaments, and if so what stats they would get. Regardless, her guns and AA values are her highlights, aside from the possibility of recieving Radar and/or Hydro. JDS Akizuki/ Teruzuki: History: Akizuki was the lead of this class, but since WG is unlikely to add another destroyer with the same name, all details below will relate to Teruzuki. Teruzuki was laid down 8/15/1958, launched in 6/24/1959, and commissioned 2/23/1960. She saw no combat, and was decommissioned in 1993. Armament: Teruzuchi has the same gun armament as Murasame. She had four 21" torpedo tubes though. She also had Sonar and Radar like her predecessors. Size and Displacement: Teruzuchi was 118 meters long, and had a beam of 12 meters. She was faster than the previous destroyers with a maximum speed of 32 knots. She had a standard displacement of 2,350 tons and a max load of 2,890 tons. In game: Similar to Murasame above, but with a larger health pool. JDS Yamagumo: History: Yamagumo was one of the designs that followed Akizuki. She was lighter and slightly shorter. She was the first of her class of six ships. Yamagumo was laid down 3/23/1964, launched 2/27/1965, and commissioned 1/29/1966. She served for 30 years until she was decommissioned in 1995. Size and Displacement: Yamagumo was slightly shorter and lighter than the preceding Teruzuchi. She was 114 meters long and had a beam of 11.8 meters. She had a standard displacement of 2,050 tons. Armament: Yamagumo, being lighter had a reduced main battery in comparison with Teruzuchi. She had two twin 3"/50 mounts- one fore and one aft. She had a different torpedo armament however, with a total of six 324mm torpedo tubes in two triple mounts. My guess is that these would be firing a version of the Mark 46 Mod 0 Torpedo, but I've not found any conclusive details on what torpedo would have been used. These torpedoes were meant mostly for use against submarines, but would would probably serve just fine in game, though the explosive charge is a bit lacking. In game: Yamgumo would have more health than a standard load Fletcher, but be far more lacking in gun and torpedo power. She would have the rate of fire advantage, but only has two turrets in a balanced arrangement. Thus, to get more than one turret on target, she must be at least angled. Her shells are far lighter than Fletcher's, and would have trouble even penetrating decks and/or superstructure at higher tiers. Her torpedoes are also rather lackluster, and that's assuming WG even gives them to her. That being said, at least she has six of them in a reasonable configuration. Placing her tier wise, I'd be tempted to place her as an alternate tier 7 if she receives radar, but perhaps as low as tier 6 if she only gets hydro. Either placement could allow her to be rather tanky and at least have the potential to deal damage with her guns. More to follow
×