Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Trademark_15

CV Rework addition: Manual Control of AA?

14 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3
[TMDA]
[TMDA]
Members
27 posts
5,293 battles

I posted this in response to a youtube Video about the CV rework in progress:

"Why cant they just allow non-CV players to go into 3rd person view of their AA guns to fend off planes with manual firing? Get rid of the RNG of it all and pit skilled AA gun players against skilled CV plane players. If you want to defend yourself against planes then you are distracted from other ship threats from afar. This would be realistic too because I doubt warship commanders of WW2 were less worried about aircraft bombing them than a ship in the distance shooting at them. So, the player switches seats from driving and using artillery to warding off air attacks! Now that... would be engaging... and players would stop blaming CVs for lack of support. Now, they can become skilled at aiming their AA guns =). The RNG would take over if you chose not to manually defend... but it could never be as good as manual... unless you just suck at manual control of AA defense."

I know this would be a lot of work but it would be fun venting that "aircraft attacking me, PLEASE HELP" frustration out where it belongs... on the player piloting the enemy plane squadron attacking you!!!!

Just an idea that I would love to see come to fruition!

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,262
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,796 posts
15,175 battles

These are the AA stats for Fujin: right out of the Wiki ... tell me how you're going to manually AA that, OK? CVs need to protect their team mates from red CV attacks in the game. Period.

AA Defense
7.7 mm/80 Type922 х 1 pcs.
. . . Average Damage per Second3.2 
. . . Firing Range0.99 km.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
872
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,437 posts
8,085 battles
1 hour ago, Umikami said:

These are the AA stats for Fujin: right out of the Wiki ... tell me how you're going to manually AA that, OK? CVs need to protect their team mates from red CV attacks in the game. Period.

AA Defense
7.7 mm/80 Type922 х 1 pcs.
. . . Average Damage per Second3.2 
. . . Firing Range0.99 km.

That and the team needs to use there heads as the CV can't be every with fighters all the time. Your example might as well have chosen Ark Beta that has no AA at all. Where as the new IJN gunboats can do decent damage against planes, not even getting into what USN DD's can do to them as they go up the tiers.  Myoko, one of the lightest AA cruisers at the tier is 150 DPS stock, and jumps to 450 at the press of a button against planes with around 1500 HP max, while lowering their accuracy pretty well, especially DB's. KGV useful base is around 200 DPS. This doesn't get into things like Iowa with a 450 DPS base line on top hull. Or the 20% that BFT adds, the 10% the flag adds, the 30% from selecting a target, the 100% to any gun 85 mm or more, and at tiers where an option 25% to AA from slot 6 upgrade. 

 

I think the removal of actual fighter control in the rework is stupid, most of the rework actually is cause it's not really going to fix any of the issues Wargaming's even trying to, but only no ability to steer the ship is dumber. And I'm actually the guy saying we need to add later, higher AA hulls to the lower tier ships, albeit, something like Fujin is a bit more debatable. But there's a certain point a team needs to play like a team. Cause if the CV has to baby sit you, that means his planes are likely not harassing the enemy the same way. And if the fighters are having to rearm and come back, or worse shot down, or you've gotten into a red ships AA that's knocking fighters down, they can't cover you. Most of the useful AA is ranged base line at 3.5-5 km. So even without taking skills or upgrades to improve that, with most maps being 42 km x 42 km, meaning a square is 4.2 km by 4.2 km, all you really have to do is be withing 1 grid square of another ship, and both your AA, and his, are shooting at planes. Not to mention that while I'm all for actually lowering aerial spotting ranges some, something like Fujin, before adding any stealth, has a base of 3.12 km from the air meaning on that 4.2 km square, I can actually fly past it without ever seeing it. Turning AA off, if you have long range AA unlike Fujin, can help make it that the planes you can see at least 8 km away if nothing else spots them, never even see you. Not to mention that while it may not help Fujin planes can't see anything in smoke, not even a Des with DF AA running, so planes can be pecked away at by the usually slightly better AA of other DD's. Or buy time for fighters/something with AA to get in range.

 

Fujin running off on it's own with CV's about? He better know his :etc_swear: when it comes to dodging. Cause even if the CV wants to help them, may simply not be able to. Especially given at tier 4 and 5 all the enemy CV has to do is lock your fighters as strafe, and exit strafe, do not exist there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3
[TMDA]
[TMDA]
Members
27 posts
5,293 battles

I don't think it would be a bad idea to rework everything regarding aircraft. They are changing the whole RTS aspect of a CV so they might as well make it more fun with gameplay and allow players to sit in the seat of AA guns. Pulling up any stats of AA is not even worth mentioning because all of it can be modified for the new 3rd person perspective of AA guns. It would be cool if they at least did it for BB warship players that spend most of their time waiting on a reload anyway. If it works out... expand it to other ship classes.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,488 posts
5,479 battles

I see one problem with this idea considering other games which had manual AA player control. If you do man a machine gun  which is centrally mounted you can shoot pretty much 360 degrees around but when you have machine guns on the sides and restricted can you hop from one gun position to another?  I mean if a squad does a flyby you would want to change positions as one gun position cannot engage anymore so you want to change over to another. Another is some ships have lots of AA stations...will they ALL be available to access?  Don't know if the Devs are crazy about this idea.   Don't get me wrong I'm all for this...if it were maybe 4 stations. 

Edited by dionkraft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,262
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,796 posts
15,175 battles
8 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

I think the removal of actual fighter control in the rework is stupid

and I think it's one of the smartest things they could have done as it makes one less thing for everyone in the game to worry about. CV no longer have to worry about what will now be a fourth class of planes while DDs and CLs won't have to worry about being permaspotted. I give the devs Kudos on that move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
872
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,437 posts
8,085 battles
33 minutes ago, Umikami said:

and I think it's one of the smartest things they could have done as it makes one less thing for everyone in the game to worry about. CV no longer have to worry about what will now be a fourth class of planes while DDs and CLs won't have to worry about being permaspotted. I give the devs Kudos on that move.

Unless they added an extra squadron to each ship, which, would at best be unlikely, and unless they break the ever living hell out of historical accuracy, would likely be a USN only thing, till we get UK, maybe Germany, and near obligatory RU CV's - would likely be an option thing, like AP bombs, on 1 or 2 CV lines. Or could be what separates USN main and split lines. So, adding a 4th type really doesn't do jack, save maybe give us another option like how we got with AP bombs. Hell, if memory serves, most, if not all the USN TB's tier 7+ (counting the removed ones that should be returned while removing Midway's 2,2,2 setup), were capable of carrying rocket so could be an alternate to torpedoes. Allows a player to make choices that could focus more on anti DD/possibly sub though still have effect by burning down other ships, or, much as damage needs to be toned down, what would be all the BB killing alpha of torps and AP bombs. Or run a mix like rockets to clear out AA with AP bombs, or the old school HE and torps for mixed targets. 

 

The only way they are perma spotted is AA going or for whatever reason, the CV has time to waste staying in range of the ship, albeit many cruisers are spotted around their max AA range which, no one wants their planes in. The two most likely causes of that time are 1: the opposing CV is sunk, and therefore the air is uncontested, which is easier to do in the rework cause we can't dodge, and 2: deplanning, something they hope to fix in the rework, but could just as well be fixed in the current system. Which again, as I said above - just lower the aerial spotting ranges. Make DD's 0.5 km give or take depending on nation, make cruisers around 3 km meaning shutting off AA gives you that much more stealth and to keep you spotted they have to be in some of the heaviest. There are ways to solve that without removing fighters. Especially cause now, your telling teams and people, who already can't figure out how to work as a team, to keep themselves or the team safe by using grouped AA, that they have to do the one thing they won't do even with fighters that can help. Your telling CV's, that already lack faith in teams, they have to put even more in them because it is 100% up to the team to defend themselves. We've been down this road before - when two strike Lexington's would face off - and it did not end well and as much as CV players were asking for a change to have a fighter added, non-CV players were going as far as to demand removing that setup and force us to play AS only in a much more rage filled tone. It's doomed to fail because it already has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3
[TMDA]
[TMDA]
Members
27 posts
5,293 battles
10 hours ago, dionkraft said:

I see one problem with this idea considering other games which had manual AA player control. If you do man a machine gun  which is centrally mounted you can shoot pretty much 360 degrees around but when you have machine guns on the sides and restricted can you hop from one gun position to another?  I mean if a squad does a flyby you would want to change positions as one gun position cannot engage anymore so you want to change over to another. Another is some ships have lots of AA stations...will they ALL be available to access?  Don't know if the Devs are crazy about this idea.   Don't get me wrong I'm all for this...if it were maybe 4 stations. 

Im not sure what would be the best way... seems to make sense to swap between various AA mounts on each side maybe... so four mounts... Bow, Stern, Port, and Starboard sides. It is all just an idea really.

When your on one side of the ship... you could be aiming several gun mounts in 3rd person view... but normal RNG would handle the other 3 sides (at a disadvantage) if attacked by multiple squadrons/CV players... unless you switched to that side. 

I could see this working and being very fun. I think it would make AA defense much more engaging and less toxic in chat as players would stop blaming friendly CVs for every time an aircraft bombs them. Players need to feel like their actually doing something to defend their ships from air power. Oh... and let CV players control their ships still and give them the same AA 3rd person views for defense.

Heck, they could even allow secondaries to be controlled the same way but still with that bad dispersion to keep it balanced.

Edited by Trademark_15
added some text

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
277
[CVA16]
Members
2,266 posts
9,841 battles
14 hours ago, Trademark_15 said:

If you want to defend yourself against planes then you are distracted from other ship threats from afar. This would be realistic too because I doubt warship commanders of WW2 were less worried about aircraft bombing them than a ship in the distance shooting at them.

Terrible idea. Too much task overload. Suddenly your ship is on autopilot, guns silent because you have to man the AA guns? (which gun would that be? 5", 40mm or 20mm?) Remember, in game, DP mains and secondaries can fire at ships AND planes at the same time (and not lose a beat, that is some trick). You may pick a target for your secondaries but you don't have to fire them. Normally you have hundreds of crew on a ship. Multi-tasking is easy. In game, steering the ship and firing the guns can be too much for many as they play bumper cars with team mates and run aground. They are talking about letting you pick which side of the ship to concentrate AA on ( I assume this would weaken it from the other side) but that shouldn't be much more difficult than designating a target squadron. This game is primarily a ship vs ship shooter game. Aircraft should NOT become the primary focus. If it becomes such, I think a lot of players would leave. As the IJN found out at Leyte, trying to conduct surface combat while under air attack is a terrible idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
277
[CVA16]
Members
2,266 posts
9,841 battles
12 hours ago, Trademark_15 said:

as well make it more fun with gameplay and allow players to sit in the seat of AA guns

How would this make it more fun? Blasting away at planes (if you ship has decent AA) while being pummeled by all the red ships (and the aircraft) since you just stopped dodging anything. Does anybody pick a ship solely based on its great AA? It is at least third or fourth down the  list after good guns, armor (concealment),  and speed. Lots of popular ships have lousy AA. Few have bad guns and those that do usually have great torps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
149
[ICBM]
Members
334 posts
5,065 battles
14 hours ago, Umikami said:

These are the AA stats for Fujin: right out of the Wiki ... tell me how you're going to manually AA that, OK? CVs need to protect their team mates from red CV attacks in the game. Period.

AA Defense
7.7 mm/80 Type922 х 1 pcs.
. . . Average Damage per Second3.2 
. . . Firing Range0.99 km.

At least it would be easy to control. lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,488 posts
5,479 battles
1 hour ago, Trademark_15 said:

Im not sure what would be the best way... seems to make sense to swap between various AA mounts on each side maybe... so four mounts... Bow, Stern, Port, and Starboard sides. It is all just an idea really.

When your on one side of the ship... you could be aiming several gun mounts in 3rd person view... but normal RNG would handle the other 3 sides (at a disadvantage) if attacked by multiple squadrons/CV players... unless you switched to that side. 

I could see this working and being very fun. I think it would make AA defense much more engaging and less toxic in chat as players would stop blaming friendly CVs for every time an aircraft bombs them. Players need to feel like their actually doing something to defend their ships from air power. Oh... and let CV players control their ships still and give them the same AA 3rd person views for defense.

Heck, they could even allow secondaries to be controlled the same way but still with that bad dispersion to keep it balanced.

I'm thinking about this compromise scenario. You can go for AA Manual or Automatic. Automatic is when the ship AI takes over just as it is now - no changes. But if we go Manual you can take over one station from a bot and also maybe as four choices chose which station you can man and fire from. When done you eject yourself and it goes back to automatic bot mode. Now if the Captain chooses to use AA what does the main guns do?  I'm thinking they go silent I guess OR they fire go  into bot mode and fire with AI. I dunno about that idea tho....its a toss up. Sometimes too much automation is not good for sportmanship.  maybe they should go silent as you decided to use AA in lieu of ships main guns for the moment.   Thats all debatable  LOL!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50
[KNFA]
Beta Testers
214 posts
3,333 battles

Manual AA control would be pointless because even if you get to point the guns at the squad it will still result in their fire being spread all over the place like you see in the CV rework video otherwise they will be to over powered and basically resulting in a player being fully defenseless if they are focused on 3 or 4 other things and forget to aim and use their AA. Either way RNG would have to play to large a part so manual control would still feel pointless.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×