Themed commander for US Anti Air. Cruiser or Battleships?

[Vaporisor]

It is a fairly simple question.  From a pure combat play, I don't enjoy the US line as much as others, but I do like their anti air capabilities. I have been thinking though that their AA would make them a fun line to play just for that purpose.  But now comes the question, do I go cruiser or BBs?  I initially went battleships, but then I really started looking at the cruisers again.  That combined with their defensive AA fire seems pretty potent.  So with limited time to develop a new line as I keep with my current line, which route should i go and why.

 

So I pose the question, which is better from a pure AA build standpoint?  The battleship line or the cruiser line and why?  This is taking into account a commander with a skills focus on the AA supporting skills.  Not every battle will have carriers though, so I do need to account for it's ability to still be effective....  What sorts of considerations in that regards?  Essentially how effective can a no skill commander cruiser be compared to a no skill commander battleship...

[Grevester]

It's not as easy as saying BB or cruiser line. The USN battleships have great AA compared to the other nations, this really comes into play at Ncarolina. For cruisers, again USN cruisers have some of the strongest AA out there, however the British cruisers have comparable AA strength at tier 9 & 10 without DF, and Hindenburg is exceptional in AA as well. Japan & Russian cruisers aren't proficient in AA, despite being cruisers.

[WanderingGhost]

It's not as easy as saying BB or cruiser line. The USN battleships have great AA compared to the other nations, this really comes into play at Ncarolina. For cruisers, again USN cruisers have some of the strongest AA out there, however the British cruisers have comparable AA strength at tier 9 & 10 without DF, and Hindenburg is exceptional in AA as well. Japan & Russian cruisers aren't proficient in AA, despite being cruisers.

 

The high tier IJN and RU cruisers are way better at AA then people think, especially certain premium ones. At least they are after the latest round of buff AA/nerf CV.

 

Put simply, assuming your the same tier as the CV

Tier 6 - Cleveland is OP as hell when it comes to AA because it has tier 9 AA guns. NM has a decent AA suite.

Tier 7 - Upgraded Colorado can be a threat, Pensacola after again, AA buffs/CV nerfs, is more of a threat, still not on Cleveland's level.

Tier 8-10 - basically USN ships, including the damned DD's borderline on no fly zones. If your lucky, you lose planes, if your unlucky, you lose EVERYTHING. And god help you if you are a bottom tiered CV or even -1 because I have seen the BB's run solo and wipe out entire USN attack forces from a strike set up - and those are literally the most durable planes in the damned game so you can imagine what it does to IJN paper. It's hard to tell if these are AA build BB's or what, but I basically hope any time I choose a CV that sees tier 8-10 the number of USN ships is limited.

 

But if nothing else when it comes to captain skills BFT/AFT is still a fairly good choice given it buffs your AA DPS/range and your secondary battery DPS/range.

[Vaporisor]

It's not as easy as saying BB or cruiser line. The USN battleships have great AA compared to the other nations, this really comes into play at Ncarolina. For cruisers, again USN cruisers have some of the strongest AA out there, however the British cruisers have comparable AA strength at tier 9 & 10 without DF, and Hindenburg is exceptional in AA as well. Japan & Russian cruisers aren't proficient in AA, despite being cruisers.

 

Thanks for the prompt reply.  I do have the RN line worked on.  I limited it to the US simply because In reading on their playstyle, there wasn't as much to match how I do enjoy playing, but I do want to get into the US line all the same and have a reason to play them.  For that, their AA attracted me for those days I feel like playing div or just as a support role.  The NC is why I initially looked at and started playing the BB, but then I looked closer and saw the cruisers were quite potent plus the Defensive AA consumable.

 

So I guess with more detail into the choice, would need to add that bit of info.  That I am wanting to get into the US line and AA is what attracts me to them.  So it is less US for AA, more that I want to use US and AA is what I like about them.  But ships get pricey with silver and I want to maximize my return on that support style play and the investment into the commander.  I don't want to be blinded just by a high NC AA stat though.  There is the other aspects, such as consumables, how they perform aside from the anti air and such.  Stuff that the numbers might not tell everything.

 

Other factors I was considering is speed, detectability, and maneuverability.  I would think these are quite important in support play to intercept and cover, but some stuff I really only can tell by playing.  Acceleration and speed through turning are some big ones for me.  Some ships I notice lose speed fast in turns and take a while to accelerate up again which can sort of negate it's performance.

 

Back to the NC and comparing it to the New Orleans and where I sort of can get stumped.  Surface, the NC and other US line BBs seem to be all around superior for the AA making it no contest for an AA bias until I started thinking about it more.  The NC has a bit more range, and a default insane AA.  Though it is slower and more detectable.  I feel I would be relying on having a poor opponent CV to make use of it.  The coverage area isnt that big compared to the map and usual ship spread.  That with the large detection is making me think that while I have a powerful AA suite, I really would never use it, especially when it would count the most, versus skilled and experienced CV players.  The cruiser on the other hand is inferior, but then I do have the defensive AA fire which would give at least short burst of high AA when needed plus the shot scattering.  The cruiser speed combined with perhaps concealment would allow more opportunities to maneuver and intercept.

 

That is all just my own theorizing though.  Theory and practice tend to be different.  My main concern is that If I go the known face value potent AA, it will be tough to apply.  If I go for where I think I can apply it more, it won't be potent enough.  Is the damage output enough to be useful vs potentially uptiered carriers? Ignoring commander (assuming AA specced) will one of the lines be less effective?  All stuff that the only way I can find for myself is to build both lines, but unfortunately the time and silver limits me to only one of the trees at the moment.

[Sotaudi]

Vaporisor,

 

Bear in mind that DF doesn't just give you burst damage for AA, it also affects the drop spread of any Torpedo or Dive bombers in range while it is running.  Thus, you don't just melt planes faster with it, you also disrupt their drops, making any aircraft that do get through miss more.

 

 

[Vaporisor]

Vaporisor,

 

 

Bear in mind that DF doesn't just give you burst damage for AA, it also affects the drop spread of any Torpedo or Dive bombers in range while it is running.  Thus, you don't just melt planes faster with it, you also disrupt their drops, making any aircraft that do get through miss more.

 

 

 

That was a major part I was factoring in too, I have used it with my russian cruisers to reasonable effectiveness, but that is more of a side perk versus focus of a build.  But thinking on that comparatively, it has made significant bonus in the early tides of battle even with my lower AA russian cruisers.  That said, the US line does seem to have less range though it can be at least a little improved with the AA mod upgrade I guess.  Thinking to the russian cruisers actually now has given me alternative perspective.  Especially currently in ranked, the speed and maneuverability has allowed me to reposition and intercept flights of planes and prevent those early headshots.  Maneuvers and positioning that would be impossible with slower battleships despite the longer range guns.

 

Kind of leads back around to the cruisers and wondering (peeking at the more immediately possible penski) is how they would play with less invested into combat commander skills.  My majority of mid to high tier cruiser play is with the russian ships that rely more on HE and as such demolition expert and related.  How reasonable is the damage from the US cruiser line in terms of the AP.  Reading it sounds like the pensacola AP is pretty effective, something about US line heavy shells or something?  Also reads as though pretty reasonable range.  Plus a better base fire chance though fewer RPM.

 

Thinking on it and typing it out really does have me leaning more towards the cruiser line.  That is kinda my bigger holdout now is combat effectiveness.  How does the US line scale through the tiers?  Does lower tier give reasonable comparison of play to the higher tiers?  Aside from the cruiser torps, is there any form of sharp transition of play from tier five to say tier eight or is it fairly linear?