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

DD AA is awful.

26 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

186
[BOTES]
Members
213 posts
10,437 battles

So is there a good reason that DD AA has to be so bad that it can't deal enough damage to shoot down planes circling around me for over a minute straight at around 3km or less until after they've dropped multiple times, despite being two tiers below my ship, a ship specifically designed to be an AA DD? One that has been toggling AA off when out of air-spotting range, swapping sectors where possible, has some AA captain skills, and trying to dodge as much as a ship with a BB-tier turning circle can do. 

Are DDs so OP of a class that we need CVs two tiers below them to be able to effectively ignore their AA so long as they're not dumb enough to fly through flak clouds? 

shot-19.06.23_13.14.40-0108.jpg

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,152
[DEV_X]
[DEV_X]
Members
1,759 posts
18,959 battles

What's your captian and ship build?

Hairy Gumballs AA power is in its flak and not DPM.... that might have something to do with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,132
[SALVO]
Members
21,719 posts
22,030 battles
29 minutes ago, Hotel_a_QT said:

So is there a good reason that DD AA has to be so bad that it can't deal enough damage to shoot down planes circling around me for over a minute straight at around 3km or less until after they've dropped multiple times, despite being two tiers below my ship, a ship specifically designed to be an AA DD? One that has been toggling AA off when out of air-spotting range, swapping sectors where possible, has some AA captain skills, and trying to dodge as much as a ship with a BB-tier turning circle can do. 

Are DDs so OP of a class that we need CVs two tiers below them to be able to effectively ignore their AA so long as they're not dumb enough to fly through flak clouds? 

shot-19.06.23_13.14.40-0108.jpg

Umm, maybe it's because DDs are so damned small compared to larger ships that there's no freaking ROOM to mount enough AA to scare a flock of pelicans, let alone bombers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,447
[WORX]
Members
5,043 posts
15,593 battles

DD are fodder for CVs... Some DDs and BBs are immune... As long as CVs have the "slingshot" exploit to minimize plane loss to next to nothing... No one is liking the current meta..

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,734 posts
2,514 battles
44 minutes ago, Hotel_a_QT said:

So is there a good reason that DD AA has to be so bad that it can't deal enough damage to shoot down planes circling around me for over a minute straight at around 3km or less until after they've dropped multiple times, despite being two tiers below my ship, a ship specifically designed to be an AA DD? One that has been toggling AA off when out of air-spotting range, swapping sectors where possible, has some AA captain skills, and trying to dodge as much as a ship with a BB-tier turning circle can do. 

 Are DDs so OP of a class that we need CVs two tiers below them to be able to effectively ignore their AA so long as they're not dumb enough to fly through flak clouds? 

shot-19.06.23_13.14.40-0108.jpg

It's the multi-strike, spam launch, rapid flight, that is the problem. Topped with catapult exploit.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,140 posts
4,530 battles

Inb4 cv apologists fail to realize the ultimate issue. Cvs outclass DDs, and there is no counterplay besides delaying your death. 

Dont even give me the "Just dodge, Positioning, etc"

Im a unicum in dds. 

  • Cool 2
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
501
[ANZ4C]
Beta Testers
1,190 posts
8 minutes ago, Report_CVs said:

Inb4 cv apologists fail to realize the ultimate issue. Cvs outclass DDs, and there is no counterplay besides delaying your death. 

Dont even give me the "Just dodge, Positioning, etc"

Im a unicum in dds. 

if you want to be taken as anything but overtly biased you should change your name.

As it stands literally nothing you say will be taken as serious debate.

  • Confused 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,273
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
21,246 posts
19,617 battles

Of course DD AA is bad.  It's the smallest ship fitting the least amount of anti-aircraft weapons.  Even if you look at USN DDs like Fletcher, Gearing where the AA is better than many of their peers, they just don't hold the amount of AA weapons as they do on larger ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,140 posts
4,530 battles
4 minutes ago, Dareios said:

if you want to be taken as anything but overtly biased you should change your name.

As it stands literally nothing you say will be taken as serious debate.

Debate does nothing. Its wargaming. 

4 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Of course DD AA is bad.  It's the smallest ship fitting the least amount of anti-aircraft weapons.  Even if you look at USN DDs like Fletcher, Gearing where the AA is better than many of their peers, they just don't hold the amount of AA weapons as they do on larger ships.

If realism is what your hinging this on, youre playing the wrong game. 

Edited by Report_CVs
  • Cool 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,510
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
9,070 posts

In real life, destroyers were more than capable of defending themselves and nearby ships from air attack. For instance, the Gearing class had 6, 127 mm dual-purpose cannon, 12, 40 mm Bofors and 11, 20 mm Oerlikons. When properly spec'd my Gearing can usually down 15-20 planes a match if it's being pestered a lot.

When I'm playing a CV I tend to stay away from DDs like the Gearing and, especially, the Grozovoi in the early game. Even an AA-spec'd Shimakaze can take out a squadron in the early game.

In the late game, when several HE shells have stripped your ship of AA, then it's relatively easy for CVs to attack your DD. That is, if they can find you and hit you. A half-health DD can usually take out a CV before itself is sunk because of the nerfs to CV sighting and aiming. In a recent game I spent way too much time trying to find a DD that was hunting me. I knew it was there because it kept detecting my planes but I never saw it, even though I criss-crossed the area several times, because it was smart enough not to fire on me. Finally, it torped me and that was it.  

 

Edited by Snargfargle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,140 posts
4,530 battles
15 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

In real life, destroyers were more than capable of defending themselves and nearby ships from air attack. For instance, the Gearing class had 6, 127 mm dual-purpose cannon, 12, 40 mm Bofors and 11, 20 mm Oerlikons. When properly spec'd my Gearing can usually down 15-20 planes a match if it's being pestered a lot.

When I'm playing a CV I tend to stay away from DDs like the Gearing and, especially, the Grozovoi in the early game. Even an AA-spec'd Shimakaze can take out a squadron in the early game.

In the late game, when several HE shells have stripped your ship of AA, then it's relatively easy for CVs to attack your DD. That is, if they can find you and hit you. A half-health DD can usually take out a CV before itself is sunk because of the nerfs to CV sighting and aiming. In a recent game I spent way too much time trying to find a DD that was hunting me. I knew it was there because it kept detecting my planes but I never saw it, even though I criss-crossed the area several times, because it was smart enough not to fire on me. Finally, it torped me and that was it.  

 

We playing the same game?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,977
[HYDRO]
Members
3,560 posts
5,062 battles
56 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

In the late game, when several HE shells have stripped your ship of AA, then it's relatively easy for CVs to attack your DD. That is, if they can find you and hit you. A half-health DD can usually take out a CV before itself is sunk because of the nerfs to CV sighting and aiming. In a recent game I spent way too much time trying to find a DD that was hunting me. I knew it was there because it kept detecting my planes but I never saw it, even though I criss-crossed the area several times, because it was smart enough not to fire on me. Finally, it torped me and that was it.  

 

The moment a tier VIII+ CV turns around, is even remotely angled and runs away it's tougher to kill than any kins of ship by DDs. You can't pen the deck, can't overmatch bow/stern, only able to pen the very small island. In the meantime you can be subjected to all sorts of attacks. 

In 200+ battles in DDs post rework I have learned to ignore most high tier CVs that I spot; I'm inviting certain death for very little reward, I would rather get sunk capturing an objective or sinking another DD than spend half my game trying to sink a CV. 

Edited by warheart1992

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,018
[DAKI]
Privateers, Members
8,718 posts
7,708 battles

Would be amazing if DFAA would be capable of spreading out attacks from CVs instead of doing only a minor boost to dps.

What I'd like to see is the scatter effect returning. Have the effect cap the size of the aiming reticle so it can't shrink beyond a certain point. Say 30% for Cruiser DFAA, 50% for DD DFAA. Make DFAA a consumable that actually neuters CVs. It's short-lived already, so make it at least effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,024
[CAFE]
Members
1,726 posts
12,446 battles
2 hours ago, Report_CVs said:

Inb4 cv apologists fail to realize the ultimate issue. Cvs outclass DDs, and there is no counterplay besides delaying your death. 

Dont even give me the "Just dodge, Positioning, etc"

Im a unicum in dds. 

Ummm sorry to break it to you but you are only barely blue in DDs. Let’s go by your logic:

Don’t even give me the “I am not good enough to Just Dodge, Positioning, etc”

I am a (super) unicum in DDs and they are fine.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,140 posts
4,530 battles
On 6/23/2019 at 5:34 AM, JustAdapt said:

Ummm sorry to break it to you but you are only barely blue in DDs. Let’s go by your logic:

Don’t even give me the “I am not good enough to Just Dodge, Positioning, etc”

I am a (super) unicum in DDs and they are fine.

Brb, going to farm dmg in a DM so it looks like im good. 

  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,273
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
21,246 posts
19,617 battles
On 6/23/2019 at 12:08 AM, Report_CVs said:

If realism is what your hinging this on, youre playing the wrong game. 

I'm playing the right game, and as is historical, DDs are the worst in AA capability compared to the larger ships that

*GASP*

Mount more Anti-Aircraft Artillery

 

Not to mention a lot of the navies out there didn't arm their Destroyers for **** in terms of AA capability.  The Japanese have always been sh*t historically in AA capability across almost their entire navy in WWII.  The Germans didn't field a Destroyer with Dual Purpose main batteries for WWII.  The French?  :Smile_teethhappy:

Do I need to go on?

 

And their AA capability as is appropriate... sucks.

Image result for skip bombing world war 2 destroyer

Image result for skip bombing world war 2 destroyer

 

You guys should be happy there are no aircraft that do skip-bombing in WoWS :Smile_veryhappy:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
898
[INTEL]
Members
1,478 posts
12,211 battles
2 hours ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

I'm playing the right game, and as is historical, DDs are the worst in AA capability compared to the larger ships that

*GASP*

Mount more Anti-Aircraft Artillery

 

Not to mention a lot of the navies out there didn't arm their Destroyers for **** in terms of AA capability.  The Japanese have always been sh*t historically in AA capability across almost their entire navy in WWII.  The Germans didn't field a Destroyer with Dual Purpose main batteries for WWII.  The French?  :Smile_teethhappy:

Do I need to go on?

 

And their AA capability as is appropriate... sucks.

Image result for skip bombing world war 2 destroyer

Image result for skip bombing world war 2 destroyer

 

You guys should be happy there are no aircraft that do skip-bombing in WoWS :Smile_veryhappy:

 Yeah, showing a B-25 that's been heavily modified specifically for killing small barely armed targets is pertinent.

 Should we also be happy there are no Harpoons or Tomahawk ASMs in the game? Exocet? Too modern? Teste Mosquito variant? Beaufighters?

 Twin engine medium bombers and attack aircraft purpose modified and using tactics specifically targeted at DD size and smaller targets aren't in the game. The Germans and Japanese never fielded ship killers like the US and UK did. Likewise the US and UK ship killers never faced anything like a pissed off Fletcher on picket duty. 

 The Japanese went so far as to specifically target our picket DDs with concerted suicide attacks. The DDs came off a lot better than CV players in this game would have you believe.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,900
Members
23,232 posts
5,863 battles
On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 1:06 AM, Hotel_a_QT said:

So is there a good reason that DD AA has to be so bad that it can't deal enough damage to shoot down planes circling around me for over a minute straight at around 3km or less until after they've dropped multiple times, despite being two tiers below my ship, a ship specifically designed to be an AA DD?

Blame it on WG's decision to keep AA range bands completely separate with no overlap.

I not familiar with Harugumo, but I'm assuming that 3km or less puts them inside the range band of the 100mm guns.

I could be wrong though, as I said, not sure how close in those 100mm guns will shoot.

One thing to remember though. Though specifically designed to be an AA DD, it's still a DD, which means that it carries no more guns than a non-AA focussed cruiser, and far less than any BB. There's a reason most dedicated AA ships were cruisers and not DDs. My thought is that if Japan could have built and manned more and bigger ships, and built them as quickly as DDs, they would have designed AA cruisers instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,527
[CRMSN]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,953 posts
4,321 battles
On 6/23/2019 at 1:06 AM, Hotel_a_QT said:

 

Because they made it so AA no longer overlaps. Since DD AA is literally focused on long range AA (large caliber DP AA) they only have really effective AA for 1.5 km. As soon as planes get under your big AA guns you might as well start throwing potatoes. 

 

I have said it before and I'll keep saying it. The idea that your 100mm's stop shooting once a target is within 3.5km of you is stupid AF and the devs should be ashamed for implementing such an asinine mechanic ingame. 

 

Harugomo MB Gunner : UH ya the planes are now 3.4km away instead of 3.5km , stop shooting!  /facepalm

3 hours ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

 

I mean its also a Coastal defence ship with barely any AA :P 

But lets not forget that even though USN DD's had more rounds per bird then any other class, they actually came out with the most plane downs in Okinawa compared to cruisers and BB's. 

The idea that your large caliber AA guns just stop shooting after a certain "band" is f'ing stupid and is really one of the worst changes to come out of the CV rework.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
431
[IXM]
Members
498 posts
2,549 battles

WG hates DDs, just look at the PA line. Who would be dumb enough to go for those now? Outside of maybe a very niche role in CW, they've been gutted. WG wants CVs to do everything that DDs can do, except better. They want the average potato to be great again, and CVs allow for that. You don't even have to hit any of your bombs/rockets/torps, just spotting any DD long enough will get them killed. And as someone pointed out earlier, it's the spotting from CVs that really is game-breaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,527
[CRMSN]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,953 posts
4,321 battles
21 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

Blame it on WG's decision to keep AA range bands completely separate with no overlap.

I not familiar with Harugumo, but I'm assuming that 3km or less puts them inside the range band of the 100mm guns.

I could be wrong though, as I said, not sure how close in those 100mm guns will shoot.

One thing to remember though. Though specifically designed to be an AA DD, it's still a DD, which means that it carries no more guns than a non-AA focussed cruiser, and far less than any BB. There's a reason most dedicated AA ships were cruisers and not DDs. My thought is that if Japan could have built and manned more and bigger ships, and built them as quickly as DDs, they would have designed AA cruisers instead.

I think Laffey hit a Val right on the nose with a 5 inch shell from 50 yards away?  I can't remember the exact distance but it was basically point blank. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
71
[UNH]
Members
685 posts
1,150 battles

I have shot down 12planes on a Kiev, but others like Terrible have not AAA at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,273
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
21,246 posts
19,617 battles
22 hours ago, Ares1967 said:

 Yeah, showing a B-25 that's been heavily modified specifically for killing small barely armed targets is pertinent.

 Should we also be happy there are no Harpoons or Tomahawk ASMs in the game? Exocet? Too modern? Teste Mosquito variant? Beaufighters?

 Twin engine medium bombers and attack aircraft purpose modified and using tactics specifically targeted at DD size and smaller targets aren't in the game. The Germans and Japanese never fielded ship killers like the US and UK did. Likewise the US and UK ship killers never faced anything like a pissed off Fletcher on picket duty. 

 The Japanese went so far as to specifically target our picket DDs with concerted suicide attacks. The DDs came off a lot better than CV players in this game would have you believe.

G1TRZSX.png

US Submarines killed more Japanese Destroyers than anything else, and second closest were by Carrier Aviation.

 

Image result for charlton heston laugh gif

Image result for nicholas cage laugh gif

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
898
[INTEL]
Members
1,478 posts
12,211 battles
3 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

G1TRZSX.png

 

Image result for charlton heston laugh gif

Image result for nicholas cage laugh gif

So you posted a chart... and it shows nothing except IJN DD were killed. What does it have to do with the post you were replying to? It doesn't contradict anything I stated. It doesnt reinforce anything you stated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×