Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Madwolf05

Des Moines AA vs Conqueror

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,538
[OO7]
Alpha Tester
6,734 posts
3,490 battles

Was wondering if I could get some weigh in on this from @Sub_Octavian and the team.

 

Last night we played a Tier 10 match, which we won, against an enemy Conqueror and a Midway on Tears of the Cruiser playing... the mode with the circle in the center divided into 3 parts.

 

Anyway, long story short I stayed with the fleet, and shot down 11 aircraft. Then the Conqueror hits me with a single salvo of HE, and it wipes out over 300 AA guns! I was then bombed by the CV (DF was down) and only shot down 2 planes, despite them being focused, and having max AA build (besides BFT, Manual AA, andthe +20%AA module.) I shot down a single plane the rest of the match despite being constantly in range.

 

The worst part was I was struck twice more by the Conqueror that game and last every single secondary and AA gun on my ship.

 

With AA already being modules and skills wasted in every match without a CV, is War Gaming looking into this brutal stripping of this investment by the RN BBs? I was very frustrated as I literally wasted 4 Captain points, a flag, an accuracy module (by instead extending my range), and probably something I'm forgetting, because of a base line mechanic.

 

I honestly hope there is something in the works to make taking AA not only more attractive, but less punishing before the crazy RN HE is even brought into play.

 

Cruisers can currently not fully spec AA, and have the range, concealment, and effectiveness that ships like a BB would have very little trouble with by losing. A Des Moines isn't nearly as effective without the range upgrade, and much more likely to be killed. Without Concealment it's survival is again much worse. It has to take DE to remain competitive in the current BB heavy meta, taking increased AA survival is a joke in slot 1. It offers very little improvement, and not taking it can have severe consequences. BFT and AFT aren't really 3 and 4 cost skills for Cruisers, the range isn't there, the damage isnt there, and only ships like the Des Moines really benefit and that's if CVs are present. Same with the 20% AA module, it's simply not a good choice over other options there. Manual AA is generally worse than AFT, even on the Des Moines, and you'd have to give up Concealment, or Super Intendent which severly gimps Cruisers. I'm still perplexed why Manual Secondaries and Manual AA are separate when they're the same guns.

 

I look forward to the CV rework, which I'm sure will greatly affect the Cruisers role as well. I'm just very frustrated about how that string of events went last night. AA picketing is already a thankless job, but making the investment, and then being stripped naked of my AA in essentiall 1 minute of play time from a ship (and I was set on fire 4 times but I channeled by inner BB), just isn't a rewarding experience. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,267
[SEP]
Members
3,723 posts
14,941 battles
10 minutes ago, Madwolf05 said:

having max AA build

 

 I find it hard to believe that you had Auxiliary Armaments Modification 1 + AA Guns Modification 2 + AFT + BFT + manual AA  + double catapult fighters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,497
Beta Testers
6,868 posts
4,189 battles

Catapult fighter is peasant AA.  It helps disrupt aircraft attacks, but it's not AA.

 

There isn't much point getting manual AA on the Des Moines because the second long range bubble where all the damage is doesn't count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,433
[-K-]
Members
5,251 posts
9,096 battles
16 minutes ago, m373x said:

 

 I find it hard to believe that you had Auxiliary Armaments Modification 1

This is definitely a must if you're wanting your small guns to survive any kind of focused HE spam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,969
[SYN]
Members
14,444 posts
10,425 battles
21 minutes ago, Ace_04 said:

This is definitely a must if you're wanting your small guns to survive any kind of focused HE spam.

That module doesn't even help.

+30% HP on an AA mount module that only has what...? 400HP to begin with
Secondaries only have 1000HP to begin with

So AAM1 boosts AA mounts to 520HP and secondaries to 1300HP, but Conqueror's HE will deal 2400dmg per hit

Which means no module that benefits from AAM1 can survive being in the blast radius.

Hell, 2400 dmg per hit also means that destroyer main weapons will die in 3 hits, since DD turrets are 4000HP, 6000HP with MAM1, while the torpedo mounts are even less than 4000HP.

and no destroyer, not even khab, has enough armor to absorb 419mm RNBB HE shells.

Edited by MrDeaf
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
393 posts
3,430 battles
5 minutes ago, MrDeaf said:

That module doesn't even help.

+30% HP on an AA mount module that only has what...? 400HP to begin with
Secondaries only have 1000HP to begin with

So AAM1 boosts AA mounts to 520HP and secondaries to 1300HP, but Conqueror's HE will deal 2400dmg per hit, which means no module that benefits from AAM1 can survive being in the blast radius.

I don' think that;s how things are calculated. That seems too imbalanced. 
Can someone with good knowledge about this explain how AA and secondaries are damaged

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,969
[SYN]
Members
14,444 posts
10,425 battles
6 minutes ago, theanhtb said:

I don' think that;s how things are calculated. That seems too imbalanced. 
Can someone with good knowledge about this explain how AA and secondaries are damaged

Why do you think everyone is complaining about RNBB HE?

and, for the record, HE will deal damage to modules caught in its blast radius. BB HE has larger splash damage radius when compared to smaller sized guns on Destroyers and Cruisers.

The HP of the modules, I'm not entirely sure of. The only ones I know are 4000HP for DD turrets and 1000HP for most secondaries.

Edited by MrDeaf
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,433
[-K-]
Members
5,251 posts
9,096 battles
29 minutes ago, MrDeaf said:

That module doesn't even help.

+30% HP on an AA mount module that only has what...? 400HP to begin with
Secondaries only have 1000HP to begin with

So AAM1 boosts AA mounts to 520HP and secondaries to 1300HP, but Conqueror's HE will deal 2400dmg per hit

Which means no module that benefits from AAM1 can survive being in the blast radius.

Hell, 2400 dmg per hit also means that destroyer main weapons will die in 3 hits, since DD turrets are 4000HP, 6000HP with MAM1, while the torpedo mounts are even less than 4000HP.

and no destroyer, not even khab, has enough armor to absorb 419mm RNBB HE shells.

Sorry, my mistake.  I meant the module that guarantees 100% survivability to secondary and AA armament.  Can't remember the name offhand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,969
[SYN]
Members
14,444 posts
10,425 battles
3 minutes ago, Ace_04 said:

Sorry, my mistake.  I meant the module that guarantees 100% survivability to secondary and AA armament.  Can't remember the name offhand.

Even those don't help...

+100% to 400HP is still 800HP

+100% to 1000HP is still 2000HP

Conqueror's 419mm HE does 2600 dmg to modules caught in its blast radius.

still not survivable for the modules being hit.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,538
[OO7]
Alpha Tester
6,734 posts
3,490 battles

Yep, thank you for explaining that. Plus, you lose the benefits on using the actual useful module, and for the Des Moines, who can have her turrets penned by her own shells, this is a must have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,433
[-K-]
Members
5,251 posts
9,096 battles
47 minutes ago, MrDeaf said:

Even those don't help...

+100% to 400HP is still 800HP

+100% to 1000HP is still 2000HP

Conqueror's 419mm HE does 2600 dmg to modules caught in its blast radius.

still not survivable for the modules being hit.

I thought the benefit was 100% survivability of those mounts, and not a percentage increase?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
781
[NG-NL]
Members
5,015 posts
8,240 battles
3 minutes ago, Ace_04 said:

I thought the benefit was 100% survivability of those mounts, and not a percentage increase?

Read it again. It doubles the HP, not the survival.

 

@Madwolf05 What's wrong with losing AA to HE rounds? It's necessary so CVs get softer targets. Even with laser accuracy killing AA with AP is a fire-and-pray.

 

Honestly, I'm waiting on the CV rework before I decided whether to run Haku again or drop down to Taiho. The sheer number of potatoes at high tiers has been discouraging, and having to face CV mains all the time is wearying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,538
[OO7]
Alpha Tester
6,734 posts
3,490 battles
3 hours ago, Reymu said:

Read it again. It doubles the HP, not the survival.

 

@Madwolf05 What's wrong with losing AA to HE rounds? It's necessary so CVs get softer targets. Even with laser accuracy killing AA with AP is a fire-and-pray.

 

Honestly, I'm waiting on the CV rework before I decided whether to run Haku again or drop down to Taiho. The sheer number of potatoes at high tiers has been discouraging, and having to face CV mains all the time is wearying.

 

It's not that losing them is so bad, but losing every single AA mount on the Cruiser with the most AA guns in the game in just 3 HE salvos, and most being dead after just the first attack? I think that's more than worth mentioning.

 

I'm a very big supporter of CVs, and making them not just fun to play, but fun to play against without being OP or UP. The problem is that AA is the only punchback a ship has until you can find and close on a CV. If you're losing the majority of your defenses in a single volley as the most powerful AA Cruiser in the game, how does play out over the course of a battle?

 

Whatever there is to be attacked in the last 5-10 minutes of the battle will be so stripped of AA they will be nothing more XP pinatas for CV attacks with no protection against it.

 

There needs to be a reasonable balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
781
[NG-NL]
Members
5,015 posts
8,240 battles
34 minutes ago, Madwolf05 said:

 

It's not that losing them is so bad, but losing every single AA mount on the Cruiser with the most AA guns in the game in just 3 HE salvos, and most being dead after just the first attack? I think that's more than worth mentioning.

 

I'm a very big supporter of CVs, and making them not just fun to play, but fun to play against without being OP or UP. The problem is that AA is the only punchback a ship has until you can find and close on a CV. If you're losing the majority of your defenses in a single volley as the most powerful AA Cruiser in the game, how does play out over the course of a battle?

 

Whatever there is to be attacked in the last 5-10 minutes of the battle will be so stripped of AA they will be nothing more XP pinatas for CV attacks with no protection against it.

 

There needs to be a reasonable balance.

The balance is your ability to avoid the BB in the first place.

 

However, as I understand it, Conquerer can get cruiser-level concealment, so it is more challenging. Kinda one reason to use teammates as meat shields.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,154 posts
6,917 battles
1 hour ago, Reymu said:

The balance is your ability to avoid the BB in the first place.

 

However, as I understand it, Conquerer can get cruiser-level concealment, so it is more challenging. Kinda one reason to use teammates as meat shields.

11.2km? or something concealment currently.  I think they are nerfing it to 12.8km(same as NC).  The DM has 10.6km concealment.  Which means, it is possible for you to spot each other fairly easily around the same time, if no one is scouting for you.  Imagine if it was a player that used AP as well as HE, instead of HE only. It would lead to a world of hurt for the DM player.  Of course on tears of the cruisers, there isn't much cover for a DM if they want to be semi useful.  and with a CV, both the conq and the DM will be spotted fairly often, even if the DM is behind one of the islands. 

TBH, i dont like BBs getting cruiser concealment in general.   Cruisers in general could use some love, and have their concealment knocked down.    I feel really bad for those tier 6 cruisers though.   They more than likely dont even have their 10 point captain yet, and they can face BBs with better concealment and firepower who can lulpen them at any time and angle. 

HIgh tier maps are just garbage on the whole.  a few decent maps, but maps like ocean, tears, okinawa, atlantic, and mountain range come to mind.(hotspot would be better if the spawns in the middle weren't [edited])  get a decent map and the cruisers fair better. 

 

as for the OP.  HE spam is a valid strat vs high AA ships to help your CV out.  It is something i try to do myself.  Just like how i focus radar ships to help the DDs out.  WIth that said.  the HE on the conq is ridiculous.  Not suprised you lost a lot of AA after one salvo.  I remember half my DM being broken by a single salvo on the same map.  The conq could just shoot each ship once on the enemy team, and most of their AA would be gone, if it was a decent salvo.  Luckily CVs are rare. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,187
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,799 posts
10,299 battles
6 hours ago, MrDeaf said:

Even those don't help...

+100% to 400HP is still 800HP

+100% to 1000HP is still 2000HP

Conqueror's 419mm HE does 2600 dmg to modules caught in its blast radius.

still not survivable for the modules being hit.

http://shipcomrade.com/news/321/fun-and-engaging-science-part-fivish.html

There's some kind of RNG factor, so in your example a Conq 419mm HE might do 2600 +/- ??%, if it were say -50% it might only do 1300, putting it below the 2000, but above the 1000 HP and conferring some kind of benefit.

The ?? is unknown but less than 100%, it's also unclear if it's a random roll or if it might be biased down. If it's biased down then seeing -50% or -75% might actually be commonplace.

 

Still not great survivability but an improvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
605 posts
7,221 battles

Correct me if I am wrong but I thought non-casemate AA had 200 HP (20/25mm, Bofors) and casemate/secondary AA had 400 HP and with module boosting to 400 and 800 respectively?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
347
[ZIPPO]
Members
1,554 posts
3,539 battles

I feel for you, I was hit by a Conquer in my Bismarck and it knocked out most of my secondaries on one side of my ship

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56
[JASH]
Members
385 posts
5,245 battles

I wish I knew more about all these fine details like HP on secondaries, and the overmatch calculations by heart, but I sadly just don't.  I wing that $hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
220
Beta Testers
1,158 posts
5,295 battles

Module destruction is a bit too easy, even in my Hindenburg I tend to knock out 20 or so AA mounts over the game while firing HE on bow in BBs.  Once deep water torps come out, I probably won't care as much as I will be switching away from AA and more into anti torp anyways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×