Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Asassian7

What the heck did they do to AA and why is it completely worthless now?

55 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Alpha Tester
309 posts
1,731 battles

I havent played in a few months, came back and apparently the whole AA focus fire thing has been reworked yet again. But why have they made AA in general worthless?
 

A Furious just sat his dive bombers over my kongos short range AA for THREE consecutive bombing runs and didnt lose a single plane. Do they want CVs to be like arty in WoT? because thats what it felt like playing this game tonight.

oh and I just checked while writing this topic, they also removed the range boost to AA from AFT. nice. thanks WG, because CVs weren't already annoying enough as it was. 

  • Cool 9
  • Funny 3
  • Confused 2
  • Boring 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,275
[TMS]
Beta Testers
3,731 posts
14,297 battles

Are you using the tilde key for sector control?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,420
[MERCB]
[MERCB]
Members
4,330 posts
20,013 battles

Because it's taken them a year to figure this out and still not dial in yet,  Is it so unrealistic after year that we might be somewhere close WG?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,081
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,019 posts
11,550 battles
14 minutes ago, Asassian7 said:

I havent played in a few months, came back and apparently the whole AA focus fire thing has been reworked yet again. But why have they made AA in general worthless?
 

A Furious just sat his dive bombers over my kongos short range AA for THREE consecutive bombing runs and didnt lose a single plane. Do they want CVs to be like arty in WoT? because thats what it felt like playing this game tonight.

oh and I just checked while writing this topic, they also removed the range boost to AA from AFT. nice. thanks WG, because CVs weren't already annoying enough as it was. 

Define months because the rework is in month 8, starting month 9.

End of January, they released the rework - that is when AFT was changed, as well as the mod to remove range increase and make them static - supposedly to make it easier on players to know the ranges and all, but I find that hard to believe. From then, it has been a roller coaster, but the last roughly 5 months, other than lowest tiers (aka 3 and 4) AA has been insanely OP. 8.7 they changed AA again - flak is fixed range, AA overlaps, etc. 

This, combined with previous changes and the new 'manual AA' that this is all partially balanced around - led to other changes to avoid AA becoming even more OP.

The end result, unsurprisingly, is that AA is still broken and it hit different ships in different ways. Minotaur is arguably even more powerful than before, Salem, Des, Atlanta have actually lost a bit too much power. Ships reliant on auto-cannons having flak and now lost them are having a ton of issues while ones that didn't are ripping planes from the sky. 

The AA DPS of ships needs massive sweeping changes still in both directions. Ships like Kongo and most lower tiers need a buff, many of the higher tier ships need nerfs, others need individual adjustments, and a whole other ton of work on various aspects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
309 posts
1,731 battles
5 minutes ago, CriMiNaL__ said:

Are you using the tilde key for sector control?

Of course, except now instead of me being able to set it, it just auto does something for 10 seconds and then cools down for 10 seconds? its confusing.

3 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

Define months because the rework is in month 8, starting month 9.

End of January, they released the rework - that is when AFT was changed, as well as the mod to remove range increase and make them static - supposedly to make it easier on players to know the ranges and all, but I find that hard to believe. From then, it has been a roller coaster, but the last roughly 5 months, other than lowest tiers (aka 3 and 4) AA has been insanely OP. 8.7 they changed AA again - flak is fixed range, AA overlaps, etc. 

This, combined with previous changes and the new 'manual AA' that this is all partially balanced around - led to other changes to avoid AA becoming even more OP.

The end result, unsurprisingly, is that AA is still broken and it hit different ships in different ways. Minotaur is arguably even more powerful than before, Salem, Des, Atlanta have actually lost a bit too much power. Ships reliant on auto-cannons having flak and now lost them are having a ton of issues while ones that didn't are ripping planes from the sky. 

The AA DPS of ships needs massive sweeping changes still in both directions. Ships like Kongo and most lower tiers need a buff, many of the higher tier ships need nerfs, others need individual adjustments, and a whole other ton of work on various aspects.

Like, July or so was when I last played. last time I played I could still permanently set the AA over one side of the ship, and they cant have changed AFT in january I didnt even get that skill on my US BB commander until after that and distinctly remember meming with 5km AA Range Texas using it.

 

I only played the kongo (well, ARP haruna) today, but that ship doesn't exactly have bad AA for its tier, at the very least not "let a squadron sit in its AA bubble and drop 3 times without killing a single plane" bad. (and the previous game I played a different CV did the same thing in two drops with torp bombers and only lost one plane that time. Both scenarios the squadrons were sitting inside my re-enforced zone during their runs to drop)

maybe I need to go play tier 10, or higher tier and see if its still worthless though I've very suddenly lost quite a lot of interest as I already find the current CV mechanic pretty dumb and unfun to play against, and potentially having no AA to deal with it sounds extremely unpleasant. 

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,081
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,019 posts
11,550 battles
3 minutes ago, NoLoveForPhatShips said:

Because it's taken them a year to figure this out and still not dial in yet,  Is it so unrealistic after year that we might be somewhere close WG?

That would require them to actually understand what the issues are within context and gameplay - not look at a spreadsheet with no context what so ever and to look past what a change does directly and to what indirect effects it has. Something that still seems to ellude them. Case in point they are currently testing a 40% speed nerf on return to Hosho's TB's I think it is, on top of a 10 knot nerf to torps to 40 knots (making them only 5 knots faster than the other 2 options) because the carrier can take few losses and players spam them the whole game. 

Problem is they are treating it like it's an issue with Hosho, when it's actually an AA issue. Ever since the aircraft rework a few years back, when it was still RTS, pretty much anything below tier 8, other than some newer 7's, has had at best interwar AA vs fighters from anywhere between 1938-1947 or later. Tier 4 CV's are using 1927 or later aircraft, even if still biplanes, against basically WWI or earlier AA. The planes are faster and have more HP than what they were meant to deal with, in game and reality. In the case of HP I mean durability in reality. I can do the same thing in my Langley or UK CV. I can do it at other tiers when against lower tiers or weak AA ships. Wargaming needs to update the lower tier ships to their more modern upgrades they had. Which would also close the power gap between tiers, which would solve a couple other issues and make it easier to balance the planes because you don't have 2 extremes. But for some reason it's like pulling teeth with them. It's always gotta be a tooth and nail fight over CV things. Which gets even more frustrating when even us CV players say a nerf won't work, like when they messed with rockets aiming ability - which we said would only up the skill gap while the better players still stomp DD's with them - only for them to ignore, we get proven right, and then they seem to act like no one could have predicted an outcome half of us predicted without even needing to test the damn changes.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,599
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
15,692 posts

The problems with AA right now / still:

1)  The scaling between tiers for AA damage and aircraft HP is still steep, though not quite as bad as it was. 

2)  The span of AA damage between ships of the same tier -- you can easily find where a blanket change to AA to make a ship barely functional would make other ships of the same tier effectively immune to aircraft.

3)  No way to boost range on AA at all, leaving aircraft with a very clear sense of safe vs not safe airspace.

However, AA is not overall ineffective, and on some ships it's nuts; last night I popped Priority Sector and DFAA at the same time, and the entire enemy full squadron just disappeared in about a second. 

(The new Priority Sector is a functional mechanic, I have to say, which I did not expect.) 

 

 

 

Edited by KilljoyCutter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,257 posts
9,930 battles

AA is fine - what ships are you playing?  Not all ships have great/decent AA.  US ships. generally have the best or very good AA.  I was able to complete the Directive  using a mix of Russian and German BBs in the same amount of time it took to do the other directives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,103
[SOV]
Members
4,621 posts
1 hour ago, Asassian7 said:

I havent played in a few months, came back and apparently the whole AA focus fire thing has been reworked yet again. But why have they made AA in general worthless?
 

A Furious just sat his dive bombers over my kongos short range AA for THREE consecutive bombing runs and didnt lose a single plane. Do they want CVs to be like arty in WoT? because thats what it felt like playing this game tonight.

oh and I just checked while writing this topic, they also removed the range boost to AA from AFT. nice. thanks WG, because CVs weren't already annoying enough as it was. 

Wow have not heard this lie in a while. O the planes hovered over my ship and nothing happened while I got sunk.

Well add this one to the unendong list of plane lies. Like 1 sq of ranger torp planes killed my full health NC and the populate 1 Midway DB sunk my dd. Or my fav tured of having t8 planes hover over my Mino and did not get one.

Yep planes are gods.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
147
[-VT-]
Members
781 posts
9,244 battles
19 minutes ago, KilljoyCutter said:

The problems with AA right now / still:

1)  The scaling between tiers for AA damage and aircraft HP is still steep, though not quite as bad as it was. 

2)  The span of AA damage between ships of the same tier -- you can easily find where a blanket change to AA to make a ship barely functional would make other ships of the same tier effectively immune to aircraft.

3)  No way to boost range on AA at all, leaving aircraft with a very clear sense of safe vs not safe airspace.

However, AA is not overall ineffective, and on some ships it's nuts; last night I popped Priority Sector and DFAA at the same time, and the entire enemy full squadron just disappeared in about a second. 

(The new Priority Sector is a functional mechanic, I have to say, which I did not expect.) 

 

 

 

One thing I have noticed with AA damage is it will chase you a little bit outside of the max range of the ship.  Say I attack a ship with a 6km AA range, when I run away to get out of his AA bubble, I still take damage up to 7km out.  I know it’s his last AA burst from when I was in his range hitting me, but should it be able to?  It’s an odd thing to bring up, but it’s something I have noticed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
425
[KSC]
Members
633 posts
9,476 battles
1 hour ago, Asassian7 said:

Of course, except now instead of me being able to set it, it just auto does something for 10 seconds and then cools down for 10 seconds? its confusing.

Like, July or so was when I last played. last time I played I could still permanently set the AA over one side of the ship.

Priority Sector was changed as a middle-ground for people that wanted a manual-fire option for AA.  While it's not Call of Duty style shooting down planes, is a responsive "shoot at the planes" mechanic that gives direct damage from the shooting, and bonus damage for a while after.

WoWs has enough going on that the devs still have AA be automated for the most part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
425
[KSC]
Members
633 posts
9,476 battles
1 hour ago, Asassian7 said:

I havent played in a few months, came back and apparently the whole AA focus fire thing has been reworked yet again. But why have they made AA in general worthless?
 

A Furious just sat his dive bombers over my kongos short range AA for THREE consecutive bombing runs and didnt lose a single plane. Do they want CVs to be like arty in WoT? because thats what it felt like playing this game tonight.

oh and I just checked while writing this topic, they also removed the range boost to AA from AFT. nice. thanks WG, because CVs weren't already annoying enough as it was. 

I played Wows during the beta, but got bored and quit.  I returned with the CV rework because I found it interesting as a support class.

I can assure that AA is in a healthy place, though it feels awful to be the last person alive on a flank with AA that doesn't kill planes fast enough.

The thing with AA is that it overlaps.  If a single ship can slaughter planes, then two ships near each other just auto-wins vs. a CV.  As it stands, 2 ships nearby restricts CVs to a single attack, and three ships may stop a CV from making attacks at all.  Hilarity ensues from having four or more ships in a clump from deathballing.

I'm not sure what the Kongo's AA is like without looking, but the basic rule is "Don't be alone".  You don't have to be sailing in perfect formation, just be 2-3 km from a friendly ship if you can.

Note:  Lower-tiers intentionally have worse AA to foster a learning environment.  It can lead to abusive situations where the AA doesn't keep up with stronger CV players.  In those cases, assume groups of 3 or 4 on a flank.

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
425
[KSC]
Members
633 posts
9,476 battles
32 minutes ago, DemonGod3 said:

One thing I have noticed with AA damage is it will chase you a little bit outside of the max range of the ship.  Say I attack a ship with a 6km AA range, when I run away to get out of his AA bubble, I still take damage up to 7km out.  I know it’s his last AA burst from when I was in his range hitting me, but should it be able to?  It’s an odd thing to bring up, but it’s something I have noticed.

Once you leave the AA range, you should immediately notice the ticking damage stop on your healthbar.

Flak is more of an auto-generated mechanic.  Clouds of flak spawn around/ahead of your ships, so they can spawn outside of a ship's AA range while you're retreating, yes.

The auto-generation is why you can be hit by flak even if you dodge behind an island from a surface ship.  It generates a puff in relation to your planes, not in relation to sight-lines of the ship.

Edited by Ahskance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GRAVE]
Members
321 posts
19,087 battles

@Asassian7A lot of things have happened to AA. Yes, AA is weaker then what it once were but so too are the planes. The thing is that Furious is a tier 6 aircraft carrier and Kongo is a tier 5 Battleship, and Kongo being Japanese most likely has inferior AA to most BBs of her tier meaning Furious won't and shouldn't struggle striking her.

I think back then that wasn't really the case because mid range AA used to have flack like the long range so there was a higher probability that the CV player may run into flack. However that means only the less skilled CV players will lose aircraft and the more skilled ones can just evade the flack. 

AA is not completely worthless. In fact it is significantly more impactful than what it once was. Impactful and not stronger because CV plane groups are no longer randomly focused and are focused one by one making CVs lose a significant amount of planes if not the whole squad. Additionally all CV got their plane speed significantly nerfed making it hard to dodge flack as they'll be in the AA bubble longer as well as eating continuous damage all the while the squad is being focused by a single plane at a time. It also means CVs can attack less targets compared to the past thanks to nerfed plane speed. Finally a lot of CVs for instance the Americans got their rocket and dive bombers nerfed to a point that they are straight up too weak. For instance rocket aircraft are effective but not really against DDs like they once were and same can be said for dive bombers. So American CVs are kind of irrelevant at this meta. Why American if you got Japanese who didn't really get their accuracy nerfed to a point they are too weak. CVs for the most part are balanced and some are weak like certain (not all) American CVs. 

If you expect one of the weaker t5 BB in terms of AA should be able to fight tier aircraft its like saying Texas should be able to fight West Virginia and that Texas is useless. Of course against higher tier CVs you should struggle the same way lower tier CAs, BBs, and DDs struggle against higher tier CAs, BBs, and DDs especially since it's one of the weakest in terms of AA, especially since AA is more continuous damage instead of it being based on how skilled the enemy CV is. I understand your frustration because I've been in New York and got rekt by Ryujo but New York gets rekt by everything. I've been in stock Furutaka with 22 second reload bottom tier against t7 BBs that can easily overmatch me with a 5 point captain all the while it was retraining. I managed to get 5th and beat most of the tier 7s in such a great disadvantage. As a bottom tier, you have to know that your are significantly disadvantaged and can't let enemy CV attack you alone the same way if you were a bottom tier ship of any class and won't go out alone. Good luck, and I hope this helps or at the least is informative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,453
[TARK]
Members
6,484 posts
2,487 battles
1 hour ago, WanderingGhost said:

That would require them to actually understand what the issues are within context and gameplay - not look at a spreadsheet with no context what so ever and to look past what a change does directly and to what indirect effects it has. Something that still seems to ellude them. Case in point they are currently testing a 40% speed nerf on return to Hosho's TB's I think it is, on top of a 10 knot nerf to torps to 40 knots (making them only 5 knots faster than the other 2 options) because the carrier can take few losses and players spam them the whole game. 

Problem is they are treating it like it's an issue with Hosho, when it's actually an AA issue. Ever since the aircraft rework a few years back, when it was still RTS, pretty much anything below tier 8, other than some newer 7's, has had at best interwar AA vs fighters from anywhere between 1938-1947 or later. Tier 4 CV's are using 1927 or later aircraft, even if still biplanes, against basically WWI or earlier AA. The planes are faster and have more HP than what they were meant to deal with, in game and reality. In the case of HP I mean durability in reality. I can do the same thing in my Langley or UK CV. I can do it at other tiers when against lower tiers or weak AA ships. Wargaming needs to update the lower tier ships to their more modern upgrades they had. Which would also close the power gap between tiers, which would solve a couple other issues and make it easier to balance the planes because you don't have 2 extremes. But for some reason it's like pulling teeth with them. It's always gotta be a tooth and nail fight over CV things. Which gets even more frustrating when even us CV players say a nerf won't work, like when they messed with rockets aiming ability - which we said would only up the skill gap while the better players still stomp DD's with them - only for them to ignore, we get proven right, and then they seem to act like no one could have predicted an outcome half of us predicted without even needing to test the damn changes.

Quoted for truth.

@Femennenly

@Bualar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,388
Members
3,097 posts
12,258 battles

I generally find that AA does work, but only on the ships with the very best AA.  Recently I had to attack Montana and Republique in close formation on Midway, and I could only do one pass with each squadron.  From the other side, I got on enemy cap in Worcester with friendly Des Moines by my side, and the other CV had to try to reset the cap few times, he had pretty bad time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,081
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,019 posts
11,550 battles
15 minutes ago, Asassian7 said:

Like, July or so was when I last played. last time I played I could still permanently set the AA over one side of the ship, and they cant have changed AFT in january I didnt even get that skill on my US BB commander until after that and distinctly remember meming with 5km AA Range Texas using it.

It was the very end of January, 20-something. It hasn't upped range since then. Wargaming made it clear at 8.0 launch AFT and AAM2 would no longer increase range. So you must have had it right before the change to 8.0.

Yes, the permenant AA over one side is gone. They didn't like people setting it the whole match, and players were still whining they want manual control of the AA, so now it's a brief increase used by the tilde (~) or I think O is an option while looking to a side of the ship. Which it actually has a bit more power than the old static version.

21 minutes ago, Asassian7 said:

I only played the kongo (well, ARP haruna) today, but that ship doesn't exactly have bad AA for its tier, at the very least not "let a squadron sit in its AA bubble and drop 3 times without killing a single plane" bad. (and the previous game I played a different CV did the same thing in two drops with torp bombers and only lost one plane that time. Both scenarios the squadrons were sitting inside my re-enforced zone during their runs to drop)

maybe I need to go play tier 10, or higher tier and see if its still worthless though I've very suddenly lost quite a lot of interest as I already find the current CV mechanic pretty dumb and unfun to play against, and potentially having no AA to deal with it sounds extremely unpleasant. 

Back in the day - maybe. But Kongo has 63 DPS at 5.8 km, and another 85 added at 2.5 km. My Furious bombers with a 10 point captain have 2030 HP. If I dodge the 2 flak bursts it gets, that means just under 150 damage per second. before factoring in armour and any other crazy things that apply. I know I have at least -10% that should knock it down to 135 per hit. meaning to take down 1 full health plane would take at least 15 seconds assuming the guns deal that 135 damage every single second and your at max AA, no guns lost. But that's because in July - Kongo class ships had flak rounds on their 25 mm guns that massively upped damage. There is no flak under 3.5 km now, and none of it is tied to auto-cannons. This leaves Kongo with 4x2 127 mm AA guns, 16x 13.2 mm guns and 12x 25 mm cannons. it's really not a lot of AA. Texas was overly balanced around it's 40 mm guns having magical flak rounds, without that just 3.5 km of AA is not all that stellar. That said - it has 329 DPS at 3.5 km and adds another 336 at 2 km, off 10 3 inch guns (that should probably have a longer range and flak rounds) 40x 40 mm and 44x 20 mm guns. Where as the issue here is that yes, you can deal insane damage if your guns are still up, most planes it'll see can hit 150 knots meaning only 8 seconds between hitting AA and hitting the target - likely taking out guns, and only 4 seconds in the worst of it. Texas is in a weird place to say the least.

Opposite side - Akizuki, tier 8 IJN DD, has what at first seems like low DPS at about 250, but 120 of that almost starts at 5.8 km, so nearly 11 seconds plus 130 more inside 2.5 km but it also starts throwing 5 flak bursts in front of a plane, meaning it can more easily chunk it for some good HP. The difference between NM and Colorado is about 300 DPS, and the same between CO and NC, as well as both NM and CO put out 3 flak bursts (despite having more guns than that) to NC's 8 bursts (still has more guns but that's also more than enough). Fletchers can still melt planes, Cleveland is good at ruining a CV players day still.

 

Lower tiers have more issues but overall AA is all over the place. I have DD's I never got plane kills in before knocking planes down, while on the reverse I'm running airstrikes on Atlanta's like it's a Kamikaze or Fujin. It comes down to what ship, and what DPS, range, and flak bursts it has. It's chaos but that's te norm anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,052 posts
15,840 battles

In a nutshell it's because the developers refused to listen to their player base who overwhelming disagreed with the idea of a CV rework. Instead, they went ahead anyhow into a Pandora's box of endless complaints and resolutions.

At first the majority complained about the CVs so they made balance changes and nerfs. Next, the CVs started crying about how quickly their planes were being shot down so they nerfed the AA. 
So what has been accomplished with the rework? absolutely nothing. Nobody is happy, you no longer see CVs in high tier battles and you are guaranteed to see two CVs/ per team on mid and low tier battles (really pissing off DD players who's concealment is now obsolete and who are rocketed to death regularly).

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,072 posts
2 hours ago, CylonRed said:

AA is fine - what ships are you playing?  Not all ships have great/decent AA.  US ships. generally have the best or very good AA.  I was able to complete the Directive  using a mix of Russian and German BBs in the same amount of time it took to do the other directives.

Agreed.  All I had left last night was finishing the secondary hits and the planes.  I took out four secondary build BBs, and finished both directives: Mass, Mass B, Tirpitz, Bismarck.  Tirpitz did most of it, but that was just how the game went, and how much I got attacked by planes.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
309 posts
1,731 battles
8 hours ago, jags_domain said:

Wow have not heard this lie in a while. O the planes hovered over my ship and nothing happened while I got sunk.

Well add this one to the unendong list of plane lies. Like 1 sq of ranger torp planes killed my full health NC and the populate 1 Midway DB sunk my dd. Or my fav tured of having t8 planes hover over my Mino and did not get one.

Yep planes are gods.

Do you want the replay? I will be happy to provide it. I can give you the one from the previous game as well where another CV sat his torp squadron over my AA for two runs and only lost one plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
309 posts
1,731 battles
7 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

It was the very end of January, 20-something. It hasn't upped range since then. Wargaming made it clear at 8.0 launch AFT and AAM2 would no longer increase range. So you must have had it right before the change to 8.0.

Yes, the permenant AA over one side is gone. They didn't like people setting it the whole match, and players were still whining they want manual control of the AA, so now it's a brief increase used by the tilde (~) or I think O is an option while looking to a side of the ship. Which it actually has a bit more power than the old static version.

Back in the day - maybe. But Kongo has 63 DPS at 5.8 km, and another 85 added at 2.5 km. My Furious bombers with a 10 point captain have 2030 HP. If I dodge the 2 flak bursts it gets, that means just under 150 damage per second. before factoring in armour and any other crazy things that apply. I know I have at least -10% that should knock it down to 135 per hit. meaning to take down 1 full health plane would take at least 15 seconds assuming the guns deal that 135 damage every single second and your at max AA, no guns lost. But that's because in July - Kongo class ships had flak rounds on their 25 mm guns that massively upped damage. There is no flak under 3.5 km now, and none of it is tied to auto-cannons. This leaves Kongo with 4x2 127 mm AA guns, 16x 13.2 mm guns and 12x 25 mm cannons. it's really not a lot of AA. Texas was overly balanced around it's 40 mm guns having magical flak rounds, without that just 3.5 km of AA is not all that stellar. That said - it has 329 DPS at 3.5 km and adds another 336 at 2 km, off 10 3 inch guns (that should probably have a longer range and flak rounds) 40x 40 mm and 44x 20 mm guns. Where as the issue here is that yes, you can deal insane damage if your guns are still up, most planes it'll see can hit 150 knots meaning only 8 seconds between hitting AA and hitting the target - likely taking out guns, and only 4 seconds in the worst of it. Texas is in a weird place to say the least.

Opposite side - Akizuki, tier 8 IJN DD, has what at first seems like low DPS at about 250, but 120 of that almost starts at 5.8 km, so nearly 11 seconds plus 130 more inside 2.5 km but it also starts throwing 5 flak bursts in front of a plane, meaning it can more easily chunk it for some good HP. The difference between NM and Colorado is about 300 DPS, and the same between CO and NC, as well as both NM and CO put out 3 flak bursts (despite having more guns than that) to NC's 8 bursts (still has more guns but that's also more than enough). Fletchers can still melt planes, Cleveland is good at ruining a CV players day still.

 

Lower tiers have more issues but overall AA is all over the place. I have DD's I never got plane kills in before knocking planes down, while on the reverse I'm running airstrikes on Atlanta's like it's a Kamikaze or Fujin. It comes down to what ship, and what DPS, range, and flak bursts it has. It's chaos but that's te norm anymore.

That seems like a rediculously large nerf to the kongo, which previously had quite decent AA for its tier. 

 

When did they change the permanent AA focus? Because it was 100% not january. And mind explaining how in the world it works. Its extremely confusing  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
87
Members
263 posts
2,826 battles
2 minutes ago, Asassian7 said:

That seems like a rediculously large nerf to the kongo, which previously had quite decent AA for its tier. 

 

When did they change the permanent AA focus? Because it was 100% not january. And mind explaining how in the world it works. Its extremely confusing  

The change is about a month or two old.

https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/public-test/bulletin-087/

Basically if your AA is bad, take advantage of the burst damage rather than relying on a well-timed damage ramp of the sector.

For BBs burst damage is 3.5% of the enemy squadron current HP. Activate priority sector when they're in range and they take a decent, but not lethal to even one plane, chunk of damage. After that, damage ramps up within the priority sector (up to 135% for BBs if I recall correctly) and decreases in the non-priority sector. The damage returns to normal after the activation period (which is 10 seconds for BBs if I recall correctly).

If your AA is strong, you might want to not use the burst damage, and try to maximize the amount of time that the enemy planes are in the max-damage period of priority sector activation, but I don't know how realistic pulling this off is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×