Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Capt_Q_Sparrow

When are they going to return all the AA guns they stole from the KGV in 8.0 ?

15 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

196
[MASSD]
Members
476 posts
27,880 battles

I am so tired of the now under defended KGV AA . Why did WG take away over 30 AA guns from this ship in the first place ? Put them back  it's historical accuracy that is constantly being touted is way off on this ship's now extremely weak AA . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,606
[RKLES]
Members
10,984 posts
12,551 battles
3 hours ago, Capt_Q_Sparrow said:

I am so tired of the now under defended KGV AA . Why did WG take away over 30 AA guns from this ship in the first place ? Put them back  it's historical accuracy that is constantly being touted is way off on this ship's now extremely weak AA . 

Lol if you think they took AA guns off of KGV, then you should look up what Duke of York is missing...

Since Duke of York is in it’s later Catapult aircraft removed configuration, there should be a lot stronger AA on it. Particularly since that wS the reason behind the refit that revived the aircraft and catapult. But that is all part of the game, sometimes they can’t allow a Warship to have full historical accuracy in it’s appearance since that could lead to very overpowered performance in game.

Bit with the way WG has been wildly adjusting AA variables, I really see no reasons not to have their full historical compliment of AA guns even if nothing else than to look right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,719
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,605 posts
10,850 battles

1. I'm 99% sure that KGV has the exact same number of guns it had before 8.0. Now if you want to fight on the front of "But it should have more AA guns due to configuration and history" - then I'll back that, even as a CV player, I have been saying for years everything below tier 8 needs closer to what they had late in their careers, or something created where needed, such as some of the German ships. 

2. KGV and DoY actually have solid AA against normal CV's. They got a nice chunk of needed plane kills. That said a decent CV pilot will get through to them if using a tier 8 CV, maybe a tier 6 with total losses, to score hits, more so with Kaga, who's planes are legion, and Saipan, that has a combination to allow blowing past it's AA.

3. Regardless of all of this, AA balance is still massively incomplete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,305
[PN]
[PN]
Beta Testers
8,144 posts
20,220 battles

@Capt_Q_Sparrow you will only get WG to make the game exactly as you want when the whining of a few gets loud enough and frequently enough that they cave just as they did with CVs and removing so called OP ships.

So keep whining and enlist friends to join in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,115
[WOLF3]
Members
22,787 posts
20,710 battles

Below is a September 2017 video on KGV, fully researched, upgraded.  The video starts right away with the port stats showing the AA gun setup.  I can't verify in game ATM to see if that matches with the video.

 

It would have been more ideal to find a KGV review (a rather late review) from late 2018 or January 2019 before the CV Rework in February, but I didn't see any such examples in my quick search.

 

Also, KGV in the RTS CV days was never even a decent AA boat.  I always picked on her when I could on the few times I played CV in those days.  It was DOY and Hood that actually had AA threats in Tier VII RN BB Land.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
196
[MASSD]
Members
476 posts
27,880 battles
On 8/17/2019 at 3:32 AM, WanderingGhost said:

1. I'm 99% sure that KGV has the exact same number of guns it had before 8.0. Now if you want to fight on the front of "But it should have more AA guns due to configuration and history" - then I'll back that, even as a CV player, I have been saying for years everything below tier 8 needs closer to what they had late in their careers, or something created where needed, such as some of the German ships. 

2. KGV and DoY actually have solid AA against normal CV's. They got a nice chunk of needed plane kills. That said a decent CV pilot will get through to them if using a tier 8 CV, maybe a tier 6 with total losses, to score hits, more so with Kaga, who's planes are legion, and Saipan, that has a combination to allow blowing past it's AA.

3. Regardless of all of this, AA balance is still massively incomplete.

You are 99% wrong then .Before 8.0 KGV and DOY were exactly the same AA wise . Same gun amounts and types . When 8.0 hit they stole over 30 AA guns from the KGV and it's overall AA rating dropped by 11 points . I have both ships .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
196
[MASSD]
Members
476 posts
27,880 battles
On 8/17/2019 at 8:40 AM, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Below is a September 2017 video on KGV, fully researched, upgraded.  The video starts right away with the port stats showing the AA gun setup.  I can't verify in game ATM to see if that matches with the video.

 

It would have been more ideal to find a KGV review (a rather late review) from late 2018 or January 2019 before the CV Rework in February, but I didn't see any such examples in my quick search.

 

Also, KGV in the RTS CV days was never even a decent AA boat.  I always picked on her when I could on the few times I played CV in those days.  It was DOY and Hood that actually had AA threats in Tier VII RN BB Land.

I never had any problems with KGV AA until 8.0 hit and screwed with the capt skills and brought in the wretched AA sector defense that somebody dreamed up and nobody wants or likes . As for being picked on the only Cv that could pick on it was a T 9 . It chewed up T5 and 6 and held it's own against 7 and 8 . I always AA built my BBs through T 7 it was a necessity .AA was exactly the same on the 2 ships . Now both the DOY and the KGV have pathetic 5.2 AA range with the KGV missing a whole bunch of it's  former AA guns. before 8.0 AA rating was 

58  after 8.0 it became 47  DOY no change but that's no real surprise as it is a Premium  ship .

Edited by Capt_Q_Sparrow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
196
[MASSD]
Members
476 posts
27,880 battles
On 8/17/2019 at 8:29 AM, CAPTMUDDXX said:

@Capt_Q_Sparrow you will only get WG to make the game exactly as you want when the whining of a few gets loud enough and frequently enough that they cave just as they did with CVs and removing so called OP ships.

So keep whining and enlist friends to join in.

If WG would have just reworked the Cvs it would have been fine but they screwed with the AA at the same time . They made the CVs too OP and messed the game up for 5 months . They never should have messed with everybody else's AA . They broke their own rules by allowing CVs radio location which never should have happened . Then they had all our weakened AA spreading all the damage across the entire squadron allowing them all to be healed and never getting shot down . Did they allow our damaged AA guns to be repaired or to respawn ?  NO !  CVs became way too OP . Hide in the back send out their planes  which couldn't be shot down which took minimal damage and got healed and ruined the game .The best idea I have heard on Cvs is that they take damage as their planes are shot down . CV players wanted a rework . Everybody else wanted a Cv rework . Nobody wanted or asked for an AA rework that weakened our AA . Whoever dreamed that giant mess up needs to reexamine their thought processes . In the end it's still the same problem . The team with the good CV player wins the one with the bad  one loses . Cvs are still too OP , always will be , and need to be dumped .Their affect on the game is negative no matter what happens . If you get the bad one it's a lost cause from the start . If you go against a good one it's  a lost cause from the start . If you get the good one it's a win and boring as can be as the Cv trashes the enemy team by itself .

Edited by Capt_Q_Sparrow
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,305
[PN]
[PN]
Beta Testers
8,144 posts
20,220 battles

@Capt_Q_Sparrow you are wasting your time posting here. Submit support tickets and message WG Staff Members until you get satisfaction. There is absolutely nothing that any of us replying can do about it unless we are as bothered as you. I for one am not.

I am disgusted with the CV Rework Garbage! I have complained and made several reasonable suggestions but have received no satisfaction about that either.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,719
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,605 posts
10,850 battles
8 hours ago, Capt_Q_Sparrow said:

You are 99% wrong then .Before 8.0 KGV and DOY were exactly the same AA wise

Yeah, okay that I for fact know your wrong on. KGV NEVER had the same AA as DoY because I have both as well, and the entire point of DoY was that she had more AA and better AA. They never had the exact same number of mounts, even if they had the same types. DoY had some Bofors over the 40 mm pom-poms and more 20 mm guns - What is in the video that @HazeGrayUnderway  linked is what KGV always had. It's what she still has today.

 

9 hours ago, Capt_Q_Sparrow said:

it's overall AA rating dropped by 11 points .

Everything had their rating changed due to the rework, because they messed with the damn system and changed how it worked, some dropped, some went up, it's why no one ever used the rating as a gauge in RTS because it's a Bull number - There are ships that have had lower ratings that kill more planes because while they had less AA technically the mounts were better due to actual damage, range, etc. 

Nothing lost AA, 90% sure nothing had AA mounts added - they changed to a nonsense system none of us wanted, but rejoice, because the old overlapping AA system is looking to come back with tweaks. But they aren't adding the gins to KGV she never had in game unless it's as part of their thing trying to close the AA power gaps both between the various tiers and within the tiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
159 posts
5,610 battles

Any idea why they did the Carrier rework in the first place?  Was it because some players chose all fighters and would wipe out opposing air groups? 

Maybe just bring it back but limit the choices of air groups or just leave them as close as historical as possible? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,115
[WOLF3]
Members
22,787 posts
20,710 battles
On 11/17/2019 at 9:29 AM, CorvetteKaptain67 said:

Any idea why they did the Carrier rework in the first place?  Was it because some players chose all fighters and would wipe out opposing air groups? 

Maybe just bring it back but limit the choices of air groups or just leave them as close as historical as possible? 

I think it was done for several reasons.

1.  To reign in the power of Carriers.  RTS CVs were a lot more influential, a lot stronger in alpha strike damage.

2.  To reign in the power of the good CV players.  A good CV player simply wiped the floor with the inferior one.  Deplaned him, Sniped him, removed him from play by whatever means.  And then proceeded to smash the enemy team.  WG didn't want that to happen anymore.

3.  To boost the numbers playing Carriers.

 

The CV Rework IMO made Carriers more accessible, yet at the same time it gutted Carriers and AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,179
[A-D-F]
Members
2,105 posts
On ‎11‎/‎17‎/‎2019 at 11:29 AM, CorvetteKaptain67 said:

Any idea why they did the Carrier rework in the first place?  Was it because some players chose all fighters and would wipe out opposing air groups? 

Maybe just bring it back but limit the choices of air groups or just leave them as close as historical as possible? 

Because someone asked if they could be made even more obnoxious and WG took it as a personal challenge.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For security reasons, please do not provide your personal data or the personal data of a third party here because we might be unable to protect such data in accordance with the Wargaming Privacy Policy.

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×