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

Proximity/VT fuses How would they work in game.

72 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,878 posts
11,515 battles

In another post about flak being conceptually wrong, I chimed in with some historical facts about VT/Proximity fuse/Funny Fuse. Historically work on a type of proximity fuse had been going on since 1939 in the UK and then was refined into a working model in 1940 in the US and tested successfully in 1942 via the Uss Cleveland and enter service scoring its first kill aboard the Uss Helena. The concept was probably the most complex fuse ever created. Each shell had a micronized radar unit in the shell. When the shell was close enough to the target it would explode, generally underneath the plane, and shower the target with shrapnel. When testing aboard the USS Cleveland they had to cut the test short because they ran out of drone planes to target. It seems the system destroyed all the test drones they had allocated in less than 2 days of a week-long trial.

The vt system was not the only system to be experimented with. Radio, Optical, Acoustic, and magnetic were also experimented with. The Germans had done extensive work on the capacitive effect for aa fuses in the 30's only to cancel the project in the 40's They did, however, test a radio version for air to air missiles which helped inspire new ways to conduct aerial dogfights.

Even the soviet union had a stolen working model of the VT fuse supplied to them by the notorious spy Julius Rosenberg.

France, Japan, and Italy had no known proximity fuse programs.

 

Now that the history part is done. How could WG model the impact of VT fuses in game. This is a rather difficult bit of speculation for several reasons. 

  1. VT fuses took the average amount of shells fired 2500 to down a single plane and reduced it to 50 to 60 which is a 2500% increase in effectiveness.
  2. VT fuses were restricted to the size of the gun only gun systems of 3 inch, 76mm, or higher could even hope to use such a fuse
  3. VT fuses were able to knock planes out of the air at over 10km.
  4. VT fuses realistically would only be found on t7 an above USN and UK ships and t9 an above USSR ships. One could also argue Germans at t9 would have a similar system but less effective. 
  5. With over half the nations denied access to the VT fuse system Cv's would have a new set of engage and avoid in terms of ships to engage.

So now we know the issues how could this be implemented and should it be? The short answer is yes it should, but how becomes the real problem. As it stands there are two schools of thought when it comes to aa in the game at current. AA is too OP and AA cant do squat in a 1v1 for many ships vs a CV. VT fuses would not effect the constant damage but would in fact make Flak burst more lethal. Flak a system that in its current form is 100% avoidable thus negating 2/3rd of a ships aa. So the simplest and probably the most effective solution when it comes to VT and flak would be to have long range flak be able to deploy at medium and short ranges and medium-range flak being able to deploy at medium and short ranges. This would also have the added benefits of lessening the impact of certain exploits that cv's have been using to bypass most of the aa auras, Catapulting. 

Now it does not take a math genius to see that such a system would be extremely punishing to cv's. So to compensate for this for each aura a flak system is operating in that is not its native aura the system would suffer a 50% penalty. So to give you an example using the Worchester. the long range flak is about 2174 at the medium range it would add only 1087 and at short range 543. It is important to restate the obvious here. Flak is avoidable. By adding the VT fuse system the biggest gain would be to the close in aura, which is currently an area that the use of the catapult exploit is able to find great success.  What wont change are planes that are constantly maneuvring and then dropping down at about 3km for a torp run, while they make take a bit more damage they will still be able to get a payload or 2 off.

The vt fuse system would cause more aa damage via flak and would probably lessen the 100% avoidable down to 75% avoidable. While this may seem rather meek it could easily change many aspects considered toxic in our current gameplay. "Blobbing" As it stands most players lemming or blob to negate a cv, because 1v1 they have no chance to negate much damage and most of thier aa kills comes post-launch and thus aa is not doing what it is meant to do, defend a ship. In its current form aa is more an economy penalty to a cv not much of a deterrent, exceptions to this are known see Worchester. The vt fuse would do nothing more then increase the amount of flak the closer the planes get and even then that increase comes with multiple decreases in values that for the most part will make the cv player a bit less accurate due to maneuvering and probably lead to a 10%-25% increase in aa kills. This, of course, is speculation as no real system to test such a thing exist currently and is a far cry from the historical importance of such a system actually was in terms of Naval aviation deterrents.

It should also be stated that the current method of diminishing returns for stacking aa would also apply to VT fuses.

So now here comes the best part. Which ships would get the vt. 

T7-10 USN Cruisers

T7-10 UK Cruisers

T8-10 USN Battleships

T8-10 USN Destroyers

T8-10 UK Battleships

T9-10 USSR Cruisers, Battleships, Destroyers @ 60% diminished return for nonnative aura

T9-10 German Cruisers, Battleships, Destroyers @ 60% diminished return for nonnative aura

Arguments can be made for France, Italy, Pan Asian, and Japan at t10 to have a proximity fuse @ 60% diminished return for nonnative aura or greater. 

Now here is where wg can really have some fun and have some new tools for balancing for newer ships they are pushing down our throats. These values can be changed a bit for newer ships they are looking to sell or offer via steel and coal to create some pretty unique platforms. Older already existing ships could also have some of these changes applied which would be classed as a buff and thus not really negating their non nerf premium ships ideology they claim to follow.

 

In closing. I think VT fuses can and should be tested, balanced, and implemented. They would be a great QOL adjustment and with the client moving to 64 bit dx10 be able to handle it rather nicely. Yes, it will make the skies a bit more unfriendly but would help negate some of the toxic exploitive play currently being applied by many cv players. VT was a technology that was born from naval AA that changed the war dramatically and to not have it represented in this game feels extremely depressing. 

 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,495
[ARGSY]
Members
18,281 posts
12,732 battles

If you give something like the Worcester, Salem, Neptune or Minotaur VT shells, you might just as well introduce first-generation surface-air missiles (e.g. Seacat, Terrier BW-0) into the game because the lethality would be about equivalent inside about six miles.

The only way you could even come close to balancing it is to make the availability of VT fuzes an alternative to DFAA. No. We don't need that in game.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,359
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
25,359 posts
13,880 battles

Functionally we have proximity fuses for flak now and flak was not super deadly until the proximity fuse unless you were really unlucky and one of the shells spammed in your direction was perfectly on target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,988
[PVE]
Members
3,818 posts
16,329 battles

This is simple to answer:  the same or very similar as WG did in World of Tanks !  The "Golden Bullet"......  A real world money premium consumable or a micro-tranactional at use premium for ships that have HE Spam guns ! 

If you pay for it, you can play it !  And, I'd add:  if that cruiser has radar, and it is active, your PROX/VT Golden Bullet value triples and then, degrades back to a lesser value while the consumable is in action w/o radar on; and then, back to a 10% increase in AA value when the consumable is used up......  I am surprised that WG hasn't introduced micro-transactional "skins" (we can call the camo) that defeat radar, hydro; or, increase stealth or torpedo accuracy and can be paid for "at use" to an open charging account.....  Boy, are they way behind on this technology.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,878 posts
11,515 battles
27 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

If you give something like the Worcester, Salem, Neptune or Minotaur VT shells, you might just as well introduce first-generation surface-air missiles (e.g. Seacat, Terrier BW-0) into the game because the lethality would be about equivalent inside about six miles.

The only way you could even come close to balancing it is to make the availability of VT fuzes an alternative to DFAA. No. We don't need that in game.

Im not sure if you read the whole things, which I will admit is a bit of a read......

 

vt would not effect constant damage, this is where DFAA affects

VT would effect flak. At long range, the effect is not seen. At medium, there would be a decent increase in the amount of flak as you would be adding a the medium flak burst at a damage reduction to medium. and at close, you would get the same as the medium but at an even greater reduction. to simplify. at medium, you would add 12 more burst but at 50% damage, this would give the medium 24 shots per side while making some flack do 1600 and other 1k. at the short range however you would have 12 flak hitting for 530 and some hitting at 800. this would be probably the greatest danger zone in terms of for most planes, which would be accurate to historical facts. This does not change the fact that cv's can still actively dodge the strongest portions of flak at range or stop them from using the catapult exploit to close the gap with complete aa immunity. It would, however, make the attack run suffer a bit which is what aa is meant to do. So realistically this would account for maybe 25% effect against planes coming in for an attack. As it stands most cv players avoid a Worchester like the plague so the impact a system like this would have is even more diminished. On other ships, however, say like Montana. You only get 10 guns this would apply to in the form of the 127's Montana for its medium aura as 40mm Bofors which would not be VT viable. they would not be able to transition to short range aura. As for the 127mm guns, they would be 1680 at long 840 at medium and 420 at short range. Will this have the effect of making the Montana immune to cv planes. Not even in the slightest. Will it give a bit more punching power in defense as aa should be. YEP.

Realistically the ships that benefit from this the most are the ones that are already avoided the most. Where things get interesting is when you get to USSR ships of t9 and above. The extra aa firepower, KREML. It may not stop the drops but they would 100% kill most of those dropping before they could get away. What makes this also kinda laughable is the systems that would punish you the most in the short-range aura which are the systems that get destroyed first by your teams gunnery and HE spam, so while in theory, this could be devastating, simply waiting a bit for your team to soften them up a bit will negate this possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,864
[WOLFG]
Members
8,599 posts
7,013 battles
6 minutes ago, The_Chiv said:

 

Realistically the ships that benefit from this the most are the ones that are already avoided the most.

So CVs will go after IJN DD' even more?

Good luck with that sell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,878 posts
11,515 battles
12 minutes ago, DrHolmes52 said:

So CVs will go after IJN DD' even more?

Good luck with that sell.

Not much of a sell when you consider the amount of aa guns available and the fact that as a DD you get smoke. Now if you opt for torpedo reload booster then that is 100% on you as it was your choice.

 

That said this would infact boost up ijn dds. The shimakaze has a 1540 long and nothing middle and short is constant fire. This would give it 616 at medium and 246 at short and thus increase its aa potential, not a great amount, but still and increase, this, of course, is not using an aa build which in theory could make this greater. as for the Haragumo, 616 added to medium, and 246+ 392. Again not super strong but still and increase. This system would put out more flak at medium and short ranges as a defensive tool. Yes cruisers would be more punishing but that's technically the job of a cruiser. DDs would have a greater amount of potential though mostly avoidable damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,878 posts
11,515 battles
1 minute ago, Wombatmetal said:

This is just a buff to ships that don't need a buff

And for the record, it's Worcester. 

would buff far more than the Worchester. The only thing this buff would do for the Worchester is making Flak something that is impactful unlike its current role of a drunk driving test. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,266
[WO0KY]
Members
4,104 posts
3,189 battles
9 minutes ago, The_Chiv said:

would buff far more than the Worchester. The only thing this buff would do for the Worchester is making Flak something that is impactful unlike its current role of a drunk driving test. 

I pointed out Worcester because it is chronically misspelled these days

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,733
[TDRB]
Members
4,434 posts
12,590 battles
22 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Functionally we have proximity fuses for flak now and flak was not super deadly until the proximity fuse unless you were really unlucky and one of the shells spammed in your direction was perfectly on target.

In game I would say more like proximity AA. While I agree the proximity fuze made AA super deadly, we must remember a bomb or torpedo run was deadly enough before the proximity fuze.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,878 posts
11,515 battles
3 minutes ago, Wombatmetal said:

I pointed out Worcester because it is chronically misspelled these days

ahhh you are right it seems. My spell checker goes Ape crapwhen it doesn't have an H.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,878 posts
11,515 battles
31 minutes ago, kgh52 said:

In game I would say more like proximity AA. While I agree the proximity fuze made AA super deadly, we must remember a bomb or torpedo run was deadly enough before the proximity fuze.

Thats kinda the point actually. I want aa to be a bit more of a challenge so that there can be a realistic discussion about increasing alpha damage of cv's. The problem is just increasing numbers of current stats wont solve the issue in any way shape or form. So I looked at it from two perspectives. The average cv player, ME. and the above average cv player like Gaishu. When I looke at it from the Super Unicum level what I could envision was more deterrent then outright punishment. When I looked at it from the average cv player I saw some punishment, but I also saw a greater impact being made by cv's.

Fact is WG is playing pretty damn loose when it comes to historical fictions. The j5 was meant for anti b29 interceptions and never meant to carry a torpedo, the skyraider was actually used long into the vietnam war where as the BTD was more of a test platform that never saw combat and used torps designed in the 1920. An then there is the Mary sue of planes the WYVERN. Outside of the fact it was a single engine contra-rotating turboprop and not a 2x engine heavy fighter, the fact is in a single game you can shoot down more of them than were ever produced is hilariously funny. The line of believable fiction here is extreme.

So why is something that actually existed so repulsive to people? I just don't get it. Im not saying my concept isn't without the need for balancing or testing, but to automatically disregard it because it would make a weapon system more effective, FLAK, then it currently is seems rather silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
671 posts
2,542 battles

@The_Chiv

I compliment you for your research but as it is right now, it won't make into the game, reason being that the AA power for the ships is already high enough and this buff would absolutely kill CV gameplay.


I understand that it'll only change flak but flak in itself isn't 100% avoidable, there are times where the ship fires literally a flak wall right in front of you and there is nothing you can do to dodge it, even worse, the flak reload is way too fast for the guns some ships carries, it would also completely break T8 CV gameplay since those rarely do something against some T10 ships. Flak also takes skill to avoid and by avoiding it I spend more time in the AA zone, this is the main idea behind WoWs' flak, you either spend more time in the AA zone or YOLO attack, risking losing all your squads due to a "lucky flak".

This also wouldn't solve the blobbing problem since It wouldn't 100% neutralize air strikes, blobbing has been active since the start of the game and will always be where there is a CV because we can punish isolated targets (unless it's an AA boat).

Other thing would be, if this proposal gets approved, other ones would also be and we'd never see the end of it until we get to the end of war and how the USN ships would be the best in the game, CVs are currently very weak because we can't make devastating strikes anymore, the maximum amount of damage would be 3 T10 IJN AP bombs and it would still score less than 30k while still being hard to do so (Not midway torps because of torpedo belt in most ships and how easy it's to dodge it).

All in all, you did a very good research and I praise your efforts, but as it is, we can't have those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,733
[TDRB]
Members
4,434 posts
12,590 battles
Quote

I compliment you for your research but as it is right now, it won't make into the game, reason being that the AA power for the ships is already high enough and this buff would absolutely kill CV gameplay.

I doubt if it would ever make it into the game also. We already have enough controversy surrounding the CV rework. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,733
[TDRB]
Members
4,434 posts
12,590 battles
Quote

So why is something that actually existed so repulsive to people? I just don't get it. Im not saying my concept isn't without the need for balancing or testing, but to automatically disregard it because it would make a weapon system more effective, FLAK, then it currently is seems rather silly.

I believe the answer to your question is the overall low, maybe very low opinion, many, if not most, have of the CV rework.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,878 posts
11,515 battles
2 hours ago, ALROCHA said:

@The_Chiv

I compliment you for your research but as it is right now, it won't make into the game, reason being that the AA power for the ships is already high enough and this buff would absolutely kill CV gameplay.


I understand that it'll only change flak but flak in itself isn't 100% avoidable, there are times where the ship fires literally a flak wall right in front of you and there is nothing you can do to dodge it, even worse, the flak reload is way too fast for the guns some ships carries, it would also completely break T8 CV gameplay since those rarely do something against some T10 ships. Flak also takes skill to avoid and by avoiding it I spend more time in the AA zone, this is the main idea behind WoWs' flak, you either spend more time in the AA zone or YOLO attack, risking losing all your squads due to a "lucky flak".

This also wouldn't solve the blobbing problem since It wouldn't 100% neutralize air strikes, blobbing has been active since the start of the game and will always be where there is a CV because we can punish isolated targets (unless it's an AA boat).

Other thing would be, if this proposal gets approved, other ones would also be and we'd never see the end of it until we get to the end of war and how the USN ships would be the best in the game, CVs are currently very weak because we can't make devastating strikes anymore, the maximum amount of damage would be 3 T10 IJN AP bombs and it would still score less than 30k while still being hard to do so (Not midway torps because of torpedo belt in most ships and how easy it's to dodge it).

All in all, you did a very good research and I praise your efforts, but as it is, we can't have those.

im sorry but outside of flying into multiple aa zones flak is avoidable. I notice how you brought up blobbing but didnt mention catapulting. I guess not shining light on something that should not be a thing and is exploitive and benefits only you is your idea of balance. Now I probably should have also put this in but the constant dps that happens in the game would also be reduced. This feels way too much like a holdover from the previous version and done because WG knows Flak is nothing more then a skill test that many great cv players are able to overcome without much issue.

As for usn ships being top, they weren't already? Seriously go look at the pre 8.0 stats for cb and see which was the preferred cruisers. And that was in a cv free environment. So really your argument is kinda moot there. 

Also your argument fails to address the fact that aa guns can be supressed pretty consistently by your team. After all this is a team game. Thats the problem with this new flock of cv players. Complete entitlement beyond the scope of reality.

So I do not agree with your breakdown 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
671 posts
2,542 battles
1 hour ago, The_Chiv said:

im sorry but outside of flying into multiple aa zones flak is avoidable. I notice how you brought up blobbing but didnt mention catapulting. I guess not shining light on something that should not be a thing and is exploitive and benefits only you is your idea of balance. Now I probably should have also put this in but the constant dps that happens in the game would also be reduced. This feels way too much like a holdover from the previous version and done because WG knows Flak is nothing more then a skill test that many great cv players are able to overcome without much issue.

As for usn ships being top, they weren't already? Seriously go look at the pre 8.0 stats for cb and see which was the preferred cruisers. And that was in a cv free environment. So really your argument is kinda moot there. 

Also your argument fails to address the fact that aa guns can be supressed pretty consistently by your team. After all this is a team game. Thats the problem with this new flock of cv players. Complete entitlement beyond the scope of reality.

So I do not agree with your breakdown 

"Catapulting" is a method to overcome the disparity in AA and flak because it's faulty, flak also has a lot of bugs where they spawn right inside your planes etc etc, it's an "exploit" to pass over a faulty system, and to be fair, I never used it since the animation is really irritating and if it were that useful you'd be doing great in CVs, which isn't the case. A skill test that many great CV players are able to overcome is the same for ships captains on angling, the only thing being we have to actively maneuver in order to receive less damage and deal damage while people with their bow on just keep on advancing and firing...and they call that "skill".

I see a lot more T10 DDs of other nations, together with a lot of republiques, yamatos and Henris, my "argument" was just that if you implement the Proximity Fuse because "it existed" i could also be thought as "Ship X shouldn't be in the game because I DIDN'T EXIST" or that "Yamato" should be nerfed because she never saw "actual combat".

AA guns can be supressed by the team, but only small calibers that make up for short range AA, most ships have a lot of AA damage coming from mid range and those are the medium calibers....including guess what? Some ships main battery that are dual purpose and that will never be knocked out.

 

Quote

I guess not shining light on something that should not be a thing and is exploitive and benefits only you is your idea of balance

The same could be said to your idea, where you basically want CVs to be gone because you can't handle them, my idea of balance is simple, if it's to have ships single handleing an entire air group because it has OP AA, this one should be nerfed, specially when it also boasts high status in other areas such as survivabilitiy, damage, torpedoes, concealment...etc etc.

The balance I seek is the T8 and T10 AA balance only, because when I play T6 battles the balance is in the damage, and not the AA and it's completely stupid to see the main force of WWII having to take on scraps because someone thought that greatly reducing our damage capality and increasing AA power (that is automatic) would be a good idea.


Tl;dr: Dodging flak is a skill, you can't say "it's easy" because pro players do it with ease.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,878 posts
11,515 battles
2 hours ago, ALROCHA said:

"Catapulting" is a method to overcome the disparity in AA and flak because it's faulty, flak also has a lot of bugs where they spawn right inside your planes etc etc, it's an "exploit" to pass over a faulty system, and to be fair, I never used it since the animation is really irritating and if it were that useful you'd be doing great in CVs, which isn't the case. A skill test that many great CV players are able to overcome is the same for ships captains on angling, the only thing being we have to actively maneuver in order to receive less damage and deal damage while people with their bow on just keep on advancing and firing...and they call that "skill".

I see a lot more T10 DDs of other nations, together with a lot of republiques, yamatos and Henris, my "argument" was just that if you implement the Proximity Fuse because "it existed" i could also be thought as "Ship X shouldn't be in the game because I DIDN'T EXIST" or that "Yamato" should be nerfed because she never saw "actual combat".

AA guns can be supressed by the team, but only small calibers that make up for short range AA, most ships have a lot of AA damage coming from mid range and those are the medium calibers....including guess what? Some ships main battery that are dual purpose and that will never be knocked out.

 

The same could be said to your idea, where you basically want CVs to be gone because you can't handle them, my idea of balance is simple, if it's to have ships single handleing an entire air group because it has OP AA, this one should be nerfed, specially when it also boasts high status in other areas such as survivabilitiy, damage, torpedoes, concealment...etc etc.

The balance I seek is the T8 and T10 AA balance only, because when I play T6 battles the balance is in the damage, and not the AA and it's completely stupid to see the main force of WWII having to take on scraps because someone thought that greatly reducing our damage capality and increasing AA power (that is automatic) would be a good idea.


Tl;dr: Dodging flak is a skill, you can't say "it's easy" because pro players do it with ease.

if they can do it you can do it too. The only difference is your experience and dedication. Imagine if you were in a 5k race, but you are lazy and complain so much that you only had to run a block while the rest of the participants have to do the full 5k. Is that fair to them? Thats what it feels like every time a average or below average cv player discounts a cv player who took the time to learn the class and play it correctly.

as for aa suppression try adding in the aa mod and watch your 3 inch and 5-inch guns go bye bye. It happens more then you think and ap rounds fired by bbs can easily nuke these on cruisers. So yeah they can be suppressed.

I never once said anything about wanting cv's to be gone. I have been enjoying playing them and from that perspective, I can tell you Flak is a joke. I also learned pretty quickly how to use my throttle to steer and avoid the first bit and then use circular vectoring to avoid the rest. yes a take more constant but am less likely to get most my planes knocked out by flak. What I think we see here is you are projecting your angst. yes most people dont like to play against cv's there is a very legitimate reason. You may not see this or are willfully ignoring this due to lack of skill level, but fact is almost every Super unicum you ask about cv's will say the same thing. EZ.

As for catapulting it is an exploit. Exploits should be removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
671 posts
2,542 battles
2 hours ago, The_Chiv said:

if they can do it you can do it too. The only difference is your experience and dedication. Imagine if you were in a 5k race, but you are lazy and complain so much that you only had to run a block while the rest of the participants have to do the full 5k. Is that fair to them? Thats what it feels like every time a average or below average cv player discounts a cv player who took the time to learn the class and play it correctly.

as for aa suppression try adding in the aa mod and watch your 3 inch and 5-inch guns go bye bye. It happens more then you think and ap rounds fired by bbs can easily nuke these on cruisers. So yeah they can be suppressed.

I never once said anything about wanting cv's to be gone. I have been enjoying playing them and from that perspective, I can tell you Flak is a joke. I also learned pretty quickly how to use my throttle to steer and avoid the first bit and then use circular vectoring to avoid the rest. yes a take more constant but am less likely to get most my planes knocked out by flak. What I think we see here is you are projecting your angst. yes most people dont like to play against cv's there is a very legitimate reason. You may not see this or are willfully ignoring this due to lack of skill level, but fact is almost every Super unicum you ask about cv's will say the same thing. EZ.

As for catapulting it is an exploit. Exploits should be removed.

Your first statement is telling me "you're just a noob, learn how to play" when I even made a guide to "Surging", which is the same as "catapulting" and can be done up to 8~9km...but again, I find the animation really wonky and don't use that, specially because it's unfair for the other ships.

Secondly, "try adding in the aa mod and watch your 3 inch and 5 inch guns go bye bye"...wha? I think you wanted to say is that if you don't take the mod that increases main weapon survivability they're weak, but you still have the commander skill and you don't need secondary survivability mod for those AA boats since their main DPS comes from the gun anyway...also, if those guys are getting shot at, they're doing something really wrong.

I saw your stats in order to check your statement of "Flak is a joke" and the "use circular vectoring to avoid the rest. yes a take more constant but am less likely to get most my planes knocked out by flak"....you've never faced T10 AA and most T8 matches you ever faced had at most 1 high AA boat on the other side, do you know how punishing it gets when you go for T8 CV? Do you know how strong the AA gets from T8 to T10? Many other topics stating the absurd increase of AA power and you want to increase even more? C'mon....you did good research on the proximity fuse but none at the current AA problems.

 

Quote

What I think we see here is you are projecting your angst. yes most people dont like to play against cv's there is a very legitimate reason. You may not see this or are willfully ignoring this due to lack of skill level

I'm ranked 57th with Shokaku in NA after the nerfs

image.thumb.png.d52d145428f0bee3656c0e8235f60c28.png

I'm ranked 61st with Lexington in NA

image.thumb.png.885b86bdd15c4498ef8e7d53e9ddd6d4.png

I still haven't finished 20 matches with Furious but those are my stats and the top 1 in NA
image.thumb.png.a8a01fb4b71f87c2ed62a03be66a62fe.png
 

My worst CV at the momment is the T10 Hakuryuu after the nerfs and with stock modules but I'm still doing average with it.


Believe me, it's not the lack os skill or dislike of CVs since I've been maining it since CBT, actually since before WoWs with Navyfield and for a while on Steel Ocean...what I dislike is that the balance of AA is set in order to balance ships like Midway and RN CVs that have a lot of HP while the IJN ones suffer from everything, from damage to HP.

And here you're trying to add even more damage to enemy AA where a 12 DB squad couldn't even reach a lone Worcester in the end game, he just capped everything and laughed while I tried everything to destroy him....with T10 (even though stock) planes...

 

 

Exploits should be removed, I even reported in the bug feedbacks some problems that still persists and gives CV advantages because I want a balanced game, not an one sided game where the one with the best "AI Controlled AA" wins over the CV.

Things that should be removed are simple, dual purpose gun if you're firing against enemies, increases in AA survivability and long range/mid range AA values, it's absolutely disgusting to see one of my planes getting red just because I spotted a Worcester or Minotaur or flying through a flak wall with no way to avoid it unless pressing F and seeing all my planes die because of [edited] AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,878 posts
11,515 battles
8 hours ago, ALROCHA said:

Your first statement is telling me "you're just a noob, learn how to play" when I even made a guide to "Surging", which is the same as "catapulting" and can be done up to 8~9km...but again, I find the animation really wonky and don't use that, specially because it's unfair for the other ships.

Secondly, "try adding in the aa mod and watch your 3 inch and 5 inch guns go bye bye"...wha? I think you wanted to say is that if you don't take the mod that increases main weapon survivability they're weak, but you still have the commander skill and you don't need secondary survivability mod for those AA boats since their main DPS comes from the gun anyway...also, if those guys are getting shot at, they're doing something really wrong.

I saw your stats in order to check your statement of "Flak is a joke" and the "use circular vectoring to avoid the rest. yes a take more constant but am less likely to get most my planes knocked out by flak"....you've never faced T10 AA and most T8 matches you ever faced had at most 1 high AA boat on the other side, do you know how punishing it gets when you go for T8 CV? Do you know how strong the AA gets from T8 to T10? Many other topics stating the absurd increase of AA power and you want to increase even more? C'mon....you did good research on the proximity fuse but none at the current AA problems.

 

I'm ranked 57th with Shokaku in NA after the nerfs

image.thumb.png.d52d145428f0bee3656c0e8235f60c28.png

I'm ranked 61st with Lexington in NA

image.thumb.png.885b86bdd15c4498ef8e7d53e9ddd6d4.png

I still haven't finished 20 matches with Furious but those are my stats and the top 1 in NA
image.thumb.png.a8a01fb4b71f87c2ed62a03be66a62fe.png
 

My worst CV at the momment is the T10 Hakuryuu after the nerfs and with stock modules but I'm still doing average with it.


Believe me, it's not the lack os skill or dislike of CVs since I've been maining it since CBT, actually since before WoWs with Navyfield and for a while on Steel Ocean...what I dislike is that the balance of AA is set in order to balance ships like Midway and RN CVs that have a lot of HP while the IJN ones suffer from everything, from damage to HP.

And here you're trying to add even more damage to enemy AA where a 12 DB squad couldn't even reach a lone Worcester in the end game, he just capped everything and laughed while I tried everything to destroy him....with T10 (even though stock) planes...

 

 

Exploits should be removed, I even reported in the bug feedbacks some problems that still persists and gives CV advantages because I want a balanced game, not an one sided game where the one with the best "AI Controlled AA" wins over the CV.

Things that should be removed are simple, dual purpose gun if you're firing against enemies, increases in AA survivability and long range/mid range AA values, it's absolutely disgusting to see one of my planes getting red just because I spotted a Worcester or Minotaur or flying through a flak wall with no way to avoid it unless pressing F and seeing all my planes die because of [edited] AA.

No I mean take the mod from aslain and watch your aa disappear.

I was a nf2 player as well and the system they use here in comparison is lol. IN NF2 aa ships were a thing and could easily protect flanks. Moltke ftw.

You dont like dp guns? WOW how about this if you see the worcest you can do two things hit "A" or "D" while holding "W" and save most of your Flight.If you push to say 5km you are screwed, everyone knows this. So again not the system but the player. Im sorry your ego refuses to accept that the problem maybe you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
671 posts
2,542 battles
5 hours ago, The_Chiv said:

No I mean take the mod from aslain and watch your aa disappear.

I was a nf2 player as well and the system they use here in comparison is lol. IN NF2 aa ships were a thing and could easily protect flanks. Moltke ftw.

You dont like dp guns? WOW how about this if you see the worcest you can do two things hit "A" or "D" while holding "W" and save most of your Flight.If you push to say 5km you are screwed, everyone knows this. So again not the system but the player. Im sorry your ego refuses to accept that the problem maybe you.

MOD from aslain? Wha?

If you were a NF2 player you'd know that with 1 DB squad I could wipe out any ship in sight and I'd still manage to dodge AA where here it's just impossible to dodge AA (only flak) and the damage is so low that some ships just ignore your planes.


Now for the bolded part, again, It would be fine if not for the Worcester still able to dish out 5k damage because of [edited] detectability range and [edited] long range AA, even worse when you are in a match with a lot of worcesters, A.K.A. T10 matches.

Most ships have strong mid range and weak short and long range, but this isn't the case for those ships, and that's where lie one of AA problems, some ships are absolutely OP in AA aspect with indestructible AA guns, and even worse, they're godlike in fighting other ships really well where other ships are weak in everything else. And when the last player of the match is a CV vs a Worcester, it shouldn't be a victory for the worcester just because I can't get near him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
671 posts
2,542 battles
13 hours ago, Pyrofiend said:

@ALROCHA You played Navyfield CVs?

Yep, NF1 and NF2

On NF1 I "rage quitted" after seeing how P2W the game was with "Premium Elite Boosted Banzai Ace Pilot" where every affix is money you have to throw away.

And also that there were no balancing, a weak ship would always meet high tier ships in their battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,878 posts
11,515 battles
7 hours ago, ALROCHA said:

MOD from aslain? Wha?

If you were a NF2 player you'd know that with 1 DB squad I could wipe out any ship in sight and I'd still manage to dodge AA where here it's just impossible to dodge AA (only flak) and the damage is so low that some ships just ignore your planes.


Now for the bolded part, again, It would be fine if not for the Worcester still able to dish out 5k damage because of [edited] detectability range and [edited] long range AA, even worse when you are in a match with a lot of worcesters, A.K.A. T10 matches.

Most ships have strong mid range and weak short and long range, but this isn't the case for those ships, and that's where lie one of AA problems, some ships are absolutely OP in AA aspect with indestructible AA guns, and even worse, they're godlike in fighting other ships really well where other ships are weak in everything else. And when the last player of the match is a CV vs a Worcester, it shouldn't be a victory for the worcester just because I can't get near him.

In nf Db could not nuke a BB sorry they didnt. They could hurt it yes, they could finish a weakened one off, yes but 100% kill nope. AA in NF for most ships was automatic fires and thus did very little however there was a large enough community of aa players farming credits to have on average 2x aa ships per side...Mind you this was back in like 2005-2008. Eventually with the release of Subs a new aa ship came out. THE KM FLAK SUB and OH BOY WAS HE FUN TO WATCH, He could also use his aa to kill any cruiser while surfaced which was funny af and could even kill many lesser tier bbs with it. This too was nerfed. Now in NF there was something else you could do that you can not due here. HAVE A CV dunk on another cv. That happened pretty consistently. 

As for the Worcester. There will always be a supreme ship that excels in certain fields. Yammy for constant alpha strikes, DM for constant range HE spam, and the Worcester for AA. The fact that once you know where a Worcester is you can simply avoid them focusing on other areas instead really negates most of its potential aa. As it currently stands however a Midway can fly in and get 2x torp drops on a Worchester before he loses all of his planes. Most of those planes lost are post drop not pre drop thus aa is not much of a defensive measure but an economy punishment for cv's. This ideology is where most players feel aa is not working right. And when we see literally 2/3rd of our aa potential not being useful it's pretty sad. No you bring up the aa range and spotting range even though this was nerfed for the Worchester. Before this I would give the point as I would wait to sucker cv players in then turn on aa and watch them panic and die. So much fun. Now however the moment you see me I can aa you is actually pretty fair considering there is like a 3 second delay between you crossing the threshold and when my guns actually fire. This 3 seconds is enough to ensure all your t10 planes can turn and avoid the inc flak pretty damn consistently.

As for the mod. Yes, there are mods via Aslain you can use that show you how many of your 2ndary guns are still up and aa guns are still up. There is nothing sadder than watching half my 3 inches disappear from a noncitadel ap shot from a bb. Or even 8 inch HE shells. So yes your team can suppress the hell out of aa ships this is why you as a CV have access to the F3 key. Unlike a cv AA does not regenerate so in the long term eventually the Worcester aa can be negated to such a degree that it can be farmed by a cv. Your problem is you are only seeing initial contact and not the whole of the game. This oversight makes any basis of balance from you a bit askew.

Right now top tier mm is so slanted to heavy aa because well players like Gaishu exist and having played against him more times then I care to admit and with him several times I can tell you this. A great cv player is a massive threat. So players will do whatever they have to do to win. Playing heavy aa ships and blobing is just part of that. I mean when you think about it we went from a 20% or less chance of Cv to a 100% chance of cv. What did you think was gonna happen. 

 

As it stands right now CV's excell at so many things, the fact there are 2 ships that can cause them grief that they can 100% avoid seems like a very weak argument. Every player knows that a bb can easily nuke a cruiser, a light cruiser can easily farm a dd, and a dd can easily farm a bb. When it comes to a cv they don't nuke but they definitely damage farm bbs, they are the bane of most dds and are able to knock 1/3rd of their life off pretty consistently or more if using the DB exploit. They are able to provide an unrealistic vision for gun sighting to the rest of thier team. And in every 1v1 situation, minus 2, ships have a distinct advantage that no amount of captain skills or module upgrades can change. This has been shown time and time again. As it stands there are some 235 Unicum or better midway players in NA, 360 in EU, 65 Unicum or better hak players in na and 109 in EU. Now those numbers may look small, because in comparison to other ships that have been out longer they are. With enough time and effort, the cv population will grow in terms of unicum and super unicum. That comes with practice and experience for most. Now if you ask any of the Super unicum or unicum about aa and certain ships they tend to complain about them far less then the average person on a forums, They learned pretty quickly that plane that can boost to 230kts can easily outrun ship that only goes 34.6kts Once they know where the ship is they avoid it. Most if not all also have last seen turned on for their minimap so they are reminded of where they last were so they can vector around these dangers. So you trying to make a mountain out of a ship that you can avoid till it softens up a bit is not only laughable it shows you are probably the least qualified person to offer an opinion in terms of balance. In games where Im playing against these SU players, I can tell you right now our Monty's and gearings get more aa kills then I DO and in fact, they avoid whatever side I'm on till im dead. Remember you can regen planes. The worchest has limited heals and those heals don't regen aa mounts that are destroyed. So sorry a molehill is a molehill sir, stop trying to make it more.

And again this is another attempt by the cv brigade to silence any discussion that involves aa and their damage output, even though by changing one we could increase another to where there is a greater satisfaction of effort for the other. Fact is the VT fuse method would have a marginal increase in medium and a marginal increase in short range. It would not be increasing constant damage but would, in fact, allow for constant damage to be decreased as the lethality of flak would have increased. This would mean that your planes that spot a Worcester are more likely to get away suffering little damage. The only time this would be an issue would be if you were to try an attack a Worcester at the start of the game, which no offense is a pretty daft thing to do no matter what system would be in use.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×