Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
GSXstage1

CV & AA Argument

16 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

743
[TIGRB]
Members
752 posts
15,556 battles

Lets face facts. People who love CV's will always claim AA is overpowered. People who love BB CL CA and DD will always claim AA is weak. Each want the advantage over the other so thier will always be arguing over it. Seems their is no solution and the constant changing of CV strength and AA strength is getting frustrating. I say leave it as it is and adapt. Be done with it.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
74
[BOMBS]
Members
92 posts
9,437 battles

I think AA is over-powered when I'm up-tiered. E.g. a t6 in a t8 fight. When that happens, I spot more and attack less. Otherwise, I think AA is fine, if you save your super-charger for after you drop your ordinance and get clear quickly. Also, don't fly into groups of enemy ships. As a non-CV, I think AA is fine the way it is. If you don't like weak AA, then don't play ships with low AA ratings.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,305
[PN]
[PN]
Beta Testers
8,144 posts
20,250 battles

Bingo! The entire CV rework attempt is garbage just as it was in 8.0!

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
743
[TIGRB]
Members
752 posts
15,556 battles

Truth is Older CV's in WW2 did go up against more modern ships with better AA so i'm fine with that. And what about the poor sod who is in a tier 3 or 4 ship with Little AA or None at all going against 2 CV's in a Game? See..The argument can be made for both sides..It never ends

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,422
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
4,986 posts
16,557 battles

It's a pretty narrow view to think that there are only two groups of people, who want mutually exclusive and directly opposing things all the time.

I happen to play all four classes, and want all of them to be fun. Which fictitious bucket are you going to try and force me into?

  • Cool 1
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
652 posts
2,330 battles

High tier AA was definitely overpowered on the test build. Even against bots with max durability planes using engine boost, a strike on a Tier X BB by a Tier X CV is suicide. Maybe a partial drop gets off but no one in the squadron is living to try again. 

 

Playing the same BBs without AA builds the CV is about as annoying and damaging as the reminder to use priority sector AA. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
74
[BOMBS]
Members
92 posts
9,437 battles
2 minutes ago, GSXstage1 said:

Truth is Older CV's in WW2 did go up against more modern ships with better AA so i'm fine with that. And what about the poor sod who is in a tier 3 or 4 ship with Little AA or None at all going against 2 CV's in a Game? See..The argument can be made for both sides..It never ends

Well, to be fair, t4 CVs weren't really used the way they are in WoWs during that time period. Carriers were few and far between and used mainly for reconnaissance. They didn't really come into their own until Pearl Harbor and even then, they were controversial among naval leadership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,141
[PEED2]
Beta Testers
4,865 posts
13,960 battles

You ask for people stop complain in a online game? good joke my friend!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5
[RAGE]
Members
31 posts
3,537 battles

I think it is now well balanced tier by tier. However, a tier VIII CV can do little against tier X ships, unless they have already been plastered by HE shells. Until then, you better scout when playing a CV. Having said that, there are two things that could be improved.

1) Spotting. At the speed of an aircraft, you often realize too late that you are approaching one or more ships, especially DDs. If a tier VIII squadron meets a group of tier X DDs, the squadron is gone in no time, with very little what could have been done to avoid it. I believe detectability of DDs from the air needs to be increased for tier X DDs in particular. The same is true, but to a lesser extent, for tier XI and X CAs.

2) Game economics. Since the AA rework, CVs tend to lose a lot of squadrons. It is still possible to do reasonable damage and earn a lot of credits, but it is very expensive to resupply a carrier. As a result, you can earn a lot more net credits by playing a BB as compared to a CV. I think resupplying CVs needs to become cheaper now, unless WoW wants to actively suppress people playing CVs.

Peter

 

P.S.: just to make my point: win with Lexington against a mix of mostly tier IX and a few Xs, including the Kremlin. I couldn't even get near a DD without being 75% wiped out, and the Kremlin was a no-no. 156000 credits earned, 142000 for refitting. Yeah. 

Edited by qqwz
Additional information
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
207 posts
1,139 battles
13 minutes ago, qqwz said:

unless WoW wants to actively suppress people playing CVs.

Well, we are almost were this started, unfun ship for the average player, difficult AF, low CV population and if you see a red CV you can almost be sure the player will mop the floor with you if he had a chance to do that, this version is even worse because your CV cant shoot down the red planes like before

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
903
[PVE]
Members
3,963 posts
22,280 battles

I always found it funny that a ship could detect another ship at a farther range than a plane in the air (especially when a spotter plane allows you to fire longer range based on the planes ability to spot farther than the ship alone)...but that's just another IRL comparison to a game balance mechanic & has no place here in the forums so...move along...nothing to see here (unless you launch your spotter plan). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
903
[PVE]
Members
3,963 posts
22,280 battles

I always found it funny that a ship could detect another ship at a farther range than a plane in the air (especially when a spotter plane allows you to fire longer range based on the planes ability to spot farther than the ship alone)...but that's just another IRL comparison to a game balance mechanic & has no place here in the forums so...move along...nothing to see here (unless you launch your spotter plan). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,149
Members
2,487 posts
4,169 battles
2 hours ago, GSXstage1 said:

Lets face facts. People who love CV's will always claim AA is overpowered. People who love BB CL CA and DD will always claim AA is weak. Each want the advantage over the other so thier will always be arguing over it. Seems their is no solution and the constant changing of CV strength and AA strength is getting frustrating. I say leave it as it is and adapt. Be done with it.

That's one of the stupidest things I've read today.  Back at the start of the rework many,  MANY CV players were saying that AA needed to be adjusted upwards,  that it was a bit too low and losses were only really accruing on the best of AA ships or on blobs.  Instead of using a scalpel to increase said damage,  WG hit it with a massive hammer and adjusted targeting to shoot down one plane at a time,  insuring that spending any time in an AA bubble was going to result in plane losses that then result in long ((Overly so,  with AA's current effectiveness)) respawn times on planes.

But of COURSE you think AA is fine as it is,  even low AA ships with no AA skills or modules are shooting down a goodly number of planes.  We're back to the era of "Why spec for AA?" and that's not healthy for the game.  We need a better balance than this.  Currently CV's are balanced around dealing damage over the course of their passes,  three or four CV pending,  but the current AA system discourages that and nearly guarantees you won't get off the full amount of damage the system is balanced around.  One solution is to increase alpha damage,  but I personally am against that.  That makes CV's more effective against DD's or low tier ships,  increasing their damage without sacrificing anything.

If they are going to INSIST on this nonsense of primarily targeting the last plane in a flight then they need to make it a 70/30 damage split,  with 70% of the damage being divided among the rest of the flight and the last plane taking 30% of the total AA damage.  Damage on said last plane ramps up as the flight drops its ordinance,  but the CV still has a healthy chance to drop most of that last group.  Players still get the sense of "I shot something down!" without it now being a goodly chunk of the flight ((on low AA ships,  mind,  high AA ships have a purpose and that is to eat planes for breakfast,  lunch,  and diner)) and CV's don't suffer the same hangar losses as they do currently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
743
[TIGRB]
Members
752 posts
15,556 battles
27 minutes ago, Palladia said:

That's one of the stupidest things I've read today.  Back at the start of the rework many,  MANY CV players were saying that AA needed to be adjusted upwards,  that it was a bit too low and losses were only really accruing on the best of AA ships or on blobs.  Instead of using a scalpel to increase said damage,  WG hit it with a massive hammer and adjusted targeting to shoot down one plane at a time,  insuring that spending any time in an AA bubble was going to result in plane losses that then result in long ((Overly so,  with AA's current effectiveness)) respawn times on planes.

But of COURSE you think AA is fine as it is,  even low AA ships with no AA skills or modules are shooting down a goodly number of planes.  We're back to the era of "Why spec for AA?" and that's not healthy for the game.  We need a better balance than this.  Currently CV's are balanced around dealing damage over the course of their passes,  three or four CV pending,  but the current AA system discourages that and nearly guarantees you won't get off the full amount of damage the system is balanced around.  One solution is to increase alpha damage,  but I personally am against that.  That makes CV's more effective against DD's or low tier ships,  increasing their damage without sacrificing anything.

If they are going to INSIST on this nonsense of primarily targeting the last plane in a flight then they need to make it a 70/30 damage split,  with 70% of the damage being divided among the rest of the flight and the last plane taking 30% of the total AA damage.  Damage on said last plane ramps up as the flight drops its ordinance,  but the CV still has a healthy chance to drop most of that last group.  Players still get the sense of "I shot something down!" without it now being a goodly chunk of the flight ((on low AA ships,  mind,  high AA ships have a purpose and that is to eat planes for breakfast,  lunch,  and diner)) and CV's don't suffer the same hangar losses as they do currently.

You made my point, Thank you. their are going to be people that don't agree no matter what. All the technical mumbo jumbo is not going to change their minds fromwhat they feel in the game. Calling people stupid is also not going to help anything Sir.  The Argument will go on and on and on. Someone will not like the changes no matter what. It's a chasing after the wind so let it be. But I know the CV lover will argue against that so again,,the argument goes on and on. Redundent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
445
[PIG]
[PIG]
Members
782 posts
4,391 battles

Intense AA over a group of ships makes sense, so avoid flying too close... Don't even think about attacking, it's a suicide mission. Issue is when a full squadron is vaporized by a single ship, even if her health is low = BBs like Kremlin, CLs like Minotaur and even DDs like Kidd!!! Players don't even care anymore about planes... Single ship AA should be less intense. Even TX squadrons (I have a Hakuryu) are blown in a few seconds.

Frustration isn't the problem. Game fluidity is : A CL behind a rock can pound a whole fleet 5 minutes, the only ship that can do it is the CV. At higher tiers lots of players know too well the maps and play that kind of tactics. This is naval warfare, not trenches!

Another issue are the islands... They are "transparent" to AA... After a run, fly over an island should protect the squadrons, same when attacking.

In 8.7, AA is supposed to be as intense but more "manual". At least that... If a player fails to start his AA, he will be attacked. At least, it's what I understood. Tier mix will be more reasonable... Some squadrons and CV's that get deplaned too fast will have more planes. Auto pilot will be fixed.

I can imagine that AA balance will be reached soon.

Ship players should stop complaining, no CV can sink a BB, a CL or a DD in 2 or 3 runs...in fact, most of full health ships are unsinkable. No CV OP, just AA of some ships is OP, and others, IJN is underpowered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×