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

Can we please get the DFAA bloom effect back?

30 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,843
[-K-]
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,182 posts
7,718 battles

I like DDs. I enjoy contesting caps, screening for my team and providing vision, hunting isolated enemy ships, and so on. In short, I want to be playing DDs the way they are ostensibly meant to be played. Some players will claim that I should "just" constantly stick to a big clump of ships in a destroyer, but at that point, why not just play a cruiser instead?

Since there are carriers in most games now, initially I thought that until the meta becomes a bit friendlier to DDs somehow, I'll just try to stick ships DDs with DFAA (which, for the likes of Gearing, means sacrificing engine boost). However, to my dismay and for reasons that are not entirely clear to me, WG decided to remove the DFAA bloom effect in the carrier rework, i.e. increasing reticle size for the carrier when the DFAA is active. This is a big game changer. Destroyer DFAA was never meant to kill all the airplanes before they dropped, and it still can't do that, as long as the carrier player knows how to avoid flak -- which is a slightly above average skill at best. A DFAA Groz, one of the best AA DDs in the game, is still not really capable of preventing at least two passes by same-tier airplanes, with losses of ~quarter HP per pass on average (sometimes more than half and rarely none). Heck, even DMs can't really prevent strikes on themselves at the moment, which is why we're seeing this ship clump meta.

Instead, DFAA on DDs and cruisers with weak AA was always meant to be a temporary deterrent, because it lowered CV strike accuracy. CV either had to wait it out, giving you some valuable time (for example at a cap), and losing tempo; or the CV player would go in for a sub-optimal attack, which would do some damage, but probably not that much. Having DFAA on your DD or being in front of a cruiser whose DFAA could potentially cover you was a big part of DD counterplay, that's missing from the game right now. I strongly believe that if the bloom effect came back, the meta would become somewhat more favorable for DDs, and playing them would become much less frustrating.

  • Cool 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,631
[DAKI]
WoWS Wiki Editor
8,213 posts
7,205 battles

I think that DFAA should put a cap on how much the reticle can shrink. So say that the smallest possible reticle size with the current squadron is 100%, being inside an AA aura of a ship that triggered DFAA would now limit that to 75%, or another percentage that could easily be tested and adjusted. One could also adopt a different value for Destroyers, or give USN ships their own reduction bonus, etc.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
392
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
1,901 posts
10,901 battles
5 minutes ago, vak_ said:

I like DDs. I enjoy contesting caps, screening for my team and providing vision, hunting isolated enemy ships, and so on. In short, I want to be playing DDs the way they ostensibly meant to be played -- some players will claim that one should "just" constantly stick to a big clump of ships in their destroyer, but at that point, why not just play a cruiser instead?

Since there are carriers in most games now, initially I thought that until the meta becomes a bit friendlier to DDs somehow, I'll just try to stick ships DDs with DFAA (which, for the likes of Gearing, means sacrificing engine boost). However, to my dismay and for reasons that are not entirely clear to me, WG decided to remove the DFAA bloom effect in the carrier reword, i.e. increasing reticle size for the carrier when the DFAA is active. This is a big game changer. Destroyer DFAA was never meant to kill all the airplanes before they dropped, and it still can't do that, as long as the carrier player knows how to avoid flak  -- which is a slightly above average skill at best. A DFAA Groz, on of the best AA DDs in the game, is still not capable of preventing at least two passes by same-tier airplanes, with losses of ~quarter HP per pass on average (sometimes more than half and rarely none). Heck, even DMs can't really prevent strikes on themselves at the moment, which is why we're seeing this ship clump meta.

Instead, DFAA on DDs and cruisers with weak AA was always meant to be a temporary deterrent, because it lowered CV strike accuracy. CV either had to wait it out, giving you some valuable time (for example at a cap), and losing tempo; or the CV player would go in for a sub-optimal attack, which would do some damage, but probably not that much. Having DFAA or being in front of a cruiser whose DFAA could potentially cover you was a big part of DD counterplay, that's missing from the game right now. I strongly believe that if the bloom effect came back, the meta would become somewhat more favorable for DDs, and playing them would become much less frustrating.

The bloom is there in one manner, it's just not directly tied to Defensive Fire.

If aircraft are being hit with AA, it takes longer for the drop area to shrink down. With enough AA, it won't shrink at all. It doesn't make an attack that has already stabilized widen though.

So if aircraft start the attack run further out, they will get one pass with fairly good aim, start a run close in, or over another ships AA, the  torps and rockets will go everywhere. DIve bombers are resistant to it, but they have to fly though all the AA, so there's a trade off.

Against a DD, you can't start the attack run too far back, because you can't even see the DD, plus the DD can turn at the last moment and mitigate a lot of that damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,980
[OO7]
Members
4,237 posts
10,903 battles

So much this!!! Make it be a chance of dodging an attack with DEF AA. Currently a CV can force the attack through on the first or second attempt pretty easily. If they get increased dispersion on those initial drops it makes it harder for them to get the later drops as well when they have fewer planes to sacrifice in the squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,843
[-K-]
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,182 posts
7,718 battles
1 hour ago, SireneRacker said:

I think that DFAA should put a cap on how much the reticle can shrink

I like that.

1 hour ago, SgtBeltfed said:

Against a DD, you can't start the attack run too far back, because you can't even see the DD, plus the DD can turn at the last moment and mitigate a lot of that damage.

It might be confirmation bias, but maneuvering doesn't seem to be effective against attacking airplanes. It's nowhere near as effective as what DFAA bloom used to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
281
[-TDF-]
Beta Testers
610 posts
3,860 battles
2 hours ago, vak_ said:

(which, for the likes of Gearing, means sacrificing engine boost).

Also good point being that the Gearing needs a buff. Ability to run both DEFAA and SB plus the YY Hull instead of the current super fat one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
392
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
1,901 posts
10,901 battles
37 minutes ago, vak_ said:

It might be confirmation bias, but maneuvering doesn't seem to be effective against attacking airplanes. It's nowhere near as effective as what DFAA bloom used to do.

I've seen many DD's swing the back end of the ship out of what would have otherwise been a well aimed rocket attack, resulting in one hit, instead of getting 5 or 6 hits.

Torps aren't much of a threat unless you're aground or camping in smoke.

AP bombers are at most a nuisance, I have reset caps and actually finished off a DD with them, but they're not really a weapon.

Standard HE dive bombers, a quick turn right before release might save you some pain, if you do it right, the bombs end up in the water, do it too early, or too late, and the bombs end up in you.

British level bombers, a hard turn after they drop and you can clear the area of where they hit because they take so long to land.

The DFAA bloom screwed every CV except the Saipan's dive bomber blob, which would just laugh at you for your DFAA and blow you up anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,843
[-K-]
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,182 posts
7,718 battles
7 minutes ago, SgtBeltfed said:

1) I've seen many DD's swing the back end of the ship out of what would have otherwise been a well aimed rocket attack, resulting in one hit, instead of getting 5 or 6 hits.

2) Torps aren't much of a threat unless you're aground or camping in smoke.

3) The DFAA bloom screwed every CV except the Saipan's dive bomber blob, which would just laugh at you for your DFAA and blow you up anyway.

1) I don't play CV after the rework, but I do play reasonable amount of DDs. I'll repeat what I wrote above: maneuvering, be it steady turns, or last minute deceleration and turn doesn't seem to be an effective countermeasure, at least for me. Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but other DD players seem to be sharing my sentiment.

2) Yeah, torps are less of a threat now, but they never were unless you were against a competent Haku, or a very completent CV of another type.

3) 3/1 Saipan in randoms wasn't effective, and I never really minded seeing one as a DD, because it meant that the Saipan player probably wasn't good.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,843
[-K-]
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,182 posts
7,718 battles
49 minutes ago, Stand_Alone97 said:

Also good point being that the Gearing needs a buff. Ability to run both DEFAA and SB plus the YY Hull instead of the current super fat one.

Yeah, maybe giving Gearing an ability to run DFAA and engine acceleration at the same time would be good, especially considering that newer DDs with DFAA seem to get that treatment (looking at you, Groz).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
814
[FML]
Members
2,463 posts
11,866 battles
3 hours ago, vak_ said:

 strongly believe that if the bloom effect came back, the meta would become somewhat more favorable for DDs, and playing them would become much less frustrating

As I have stated elsewhere, I think that the damage output of Def AA is a bit on the low side of about right. It shouldn’t be so strong as to prevent a carrier from attacking you, because immunity shields in games are unbalanced. 

But I think a panic effect would strike the right balance between protecting the ship and not increasing AA damage causing more plane losses. 

It would also be only temporary protection; if a carrier recalled the sqn and sent a new one, def AA would likely be over. But that gives another 20-45 seconds for heals, smoke, repair party etc to come up, or enables you to drive closer to friendlies, or finish capping etc. But unlike the old def AA, it wouldn’t kill 30 planes, which would neuter the carrier for the rest of the match. 

Subject to balancing considerations, I think panic effect would strike a good balance between protection and damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
410
[-WTP-]
Members
1,095 posts
2,098 battles

As long as DFAA works on incoming torps to scatter them too.  All of these threads are the same "I want to be able to freely torp all the ships in the world with no counter to me"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24
[CLAWS]
Beta Testers
105 posts
8,211 battles
1 hour ago, Stand_Alone97 said:

Also good point being that the Gearing needs a buff. Ability to run both DEFAA and SB plus the YY Hull instead of the current super fat one.

YY is a Sumner class DD. Gearing was the evolved version of that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
971
[CAFE]
Members
1,680 posts
12,197 battles

If you want DF AA panic back, you are going to have to buff CV alpha to compensate. I do not think many would want to agree to that kind of buff for the panic nerf... CV average damage is already on the low end and any lower will just result in people not playing the class again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,843
[-K-]
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,182 posts
7,718 battles
21 minutes ago, NoSoMo said:

As long as DFAA works on incoming torps to scatter them too

It did before, though I'm not sure how it would affect the wide-angle drops some CVs have right now.

I wrote my original post first and foremost from a DD player's perspective, but cruisers with weakish AA would surely appreciate that change.

7 minutes ago, JustAdapt said:

If you want DF AA panic back, you are going to have to buff CV alpha to compensate

You will have a hard time trying to convince me that CVs will need any sort of damage compensation against DDs as things currently are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,072
[XBRTC]
Members
2,720 posts
8,695 battles
16 minutes ago, HLS30 said:

YY is a Sumner class DD. Gearing was the evolved version of that. 

Gearing was a lengthened sumner hull. As in, same beam, but longer. In-game Gearing model is far, far fatter than YY's in-game model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
971
[CAFE]
Members
1,680 posts
12,197 battles
3 minutes ago, vak_ said:

It did before, though I'm not sure how it would affect the wide-angle drops some CVs have right now.

I wrote my original post first and foremost from a DD player's perspective, but cruisers with weakish AA would surely appreciate that change.

You will have a hard time trying to convince me that CVs will need any sort of damage compensation against DDs as things currently are.

No, but cruiser DF panic is a thing too, which means whatever you try to strike is going to panic your planes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
115
[A_C_F]
Members
198 posts
3,193 battles
5 minutes ago, vak_ said:

You will have a hard time trying to convince me that CVs will need any sort of damage compensation against DDs as things currently are.

DFAA seems rather readily available on a large number of ships now.  I'm not entirely against having DFAA create that bloom again but if its going to be harder for us to hit targets a small damage buff would be nice.  Torps would probably been the most heavily affected and they don't do large amounts of damage.  I'm finding myself relying more on the fires and floodings to get more damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,843
[-K-]
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,182 posts
7,718 battles
9 minutes ago, JustAdapt said:

No, but cruiser DF panic is a thing too, which means whatever you try to strike is going to panic your planes...

As a stopgap measure, even returning the panick to just the DD DFAA would be fine by me, it would at least make USN and RU DDs much less helpless against CVs. Selfish, I know, as I said at the start of the thread I like playing DDs :)

In the long term things should be re-re-worked again (though I do think the airplane arcade system has much better potential than the old RTS stuff).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
410
[-WTP-]
Members
1,095 posts
2,098 battles

DD torps need a 8-10k top damage --  torp spam is the fastest 1 salvo mechanic outside of a BB 1 shotting a 72k HP ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
945
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,112 posts
4,926 battles

WASD hacks are a form of play and counter-play that can come out in MANY ways depending on each player's skill, predictive ability, and just plain luck. They're a tool, and a useful one, but not always one that works from my experience.

I'm personally not sure if the DFAA "panic" bloom is still there for air strikes, I don't feel like it is, but I also wouldn't be opposed to it coming back or making itself more known if it's still there.

This is one of those things that reworked AA has been lacking: Some kind of feedback that tells the targeted player "yes, your AA IS being effective" besides falling planes and a damage counter ticking upward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
710 posts

Aircraft already have maneuvering bloom, adding another on top could get way out of hand.  DFAA already does a lot, adding a bloom on top of what it currently does might be a step to far.  I miss the old panic on DFAA too, but I keep in mind the current DFAA is different from the old one in more then just that one way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
410
[-WTP-]
Members
1,095 posts
2,098 battles
3 hours ago, Landsraad said:

This is one of those things that reworked AA has been lacking: Some kind of feedback that tells the targeted player "yes, your AA IS being effective" besides falling planes and a damage counter ticking upward.

That's not true -- you see your aircraft damage ticking up, if you're watching the aircraft you see hit point counters coming off of them just like ships.  The ribbons are for downed aircraft, not aircraft damage. Similar mechanic to ships.  Your AA will be working on them, if there's another ship near you, it could be scoring the "kills".  I can get 100k+ plane damage, which unquestionably shows AA is effective.  T8 cruisers shred enterprise planes like they're made of paper. T8 aircraft are in the 1,700 hp range, some less, some more.  That 100k damage is from T8 ships in T8 CV battles. That's a lot of damage for a single ship to deal to a CV.  My ship alone was able to down over 40 aircraft, and damage significantly more.  Its not even kit'd for AA which is the funny part.  AA is broken.

Edited by NoSoMo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
945
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,112 posts
4,926 battles
1 minute ago, NoSoMo said:

That's not true -- you see your aircraft damage ticking up, if you're watching the aircraft you see hit point counters coming off of them just like ships.  The ribbons are for downed aircraft, not aircraft damage. Similar mechanic to ships.  Your AA will be working on them, if there's another ship near you, it could be scoring the hits.  I can get 100k+ plane damage, which unquestionably shows AA is effective.  T8 cruisers shred enterprise planes like they're made of paper. T8 aircraft  in the 1,700 hp range, some less, some more.

You don't see that HP counter if you're on the surface. And it's one thing to watch that damage number go up, but downing planes themselves is another thing entirely thanks to the snowball effect and how squadron HP is handled. You can do 50k AA damage in a match and still not down a single aircraft yourself as AA is right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
410
[-WTP-]
Members
1,095 posts
2,098 battles
3 minutes ago, Landsraad said:

You don't see that HP counter if you're on the surface. And it's one thing to watch that damage number go up, but downing planes themselves is another thing entirely thanks to the snowball effect and how squadron HP is handled. You can do 50k AA damage in a match and still not down a single aircraft yourself as AA is right now.

In order of games played recently, my ship driving is CV, CC, DD, BB so I'm proficient in how the mechanics of AA operate from both the aircraft side, flak and continuous damage, and the cruiser side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
637
[MIA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,480 posts
8,156 battles

If surface ships get to completely twart all air strikes at the press of a button then CVs should be able to blow ships up from the face of the earth in one strike again. After all, this was what the bloom effect was made to deter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×