Latest AA Commander skills change - to AFT, BFT or Massive AA?

[S842]

Commander AA skills were changed in the latest patch.  Has anyone seem any review on this that would help one to decide whether to take AVT, BFT, Massive AA or some combination?  Might also depend to the ship.  In the past Flamu, or others, would put up a YouTube video on this, but so far I have not seen any.

[MidnightPhoenix07]

The only one that’s even worthwhile taking for aa is bft. Aft doesn’t really boost your aa that much, and massive aa is worthless on pretty much any ship that has an aa rating above 15-20 or so (and for those ships, I doubt there’s a single one that doesn’t have a more optimized build to run instead of an aa build). 

AA builds have pretty much been dying out since the rework and dead since the changes to bft and aft, and manual aa. 

[tfcas119]

30 minutes ago, S842 said:

Commander AA skills were changed in the latest patch.  Has anyone seem any review on this that would help one to decide whether to take AVT, BFT, Massive AA or some combination?  Might also depend to the ship.  In the past Flamu, or others, would put up a YouTube video on this, but so far I have not seen any.

AA skills haven't changed since 8.7, when they replaced Manual AA with Massive AA fire. As for speccing into AA, save your points, AFT was ruined with the CV rework, and Manual AA was ruined when they replaced it with Massive Fire, and AAM1 was ruined when they changed the upgrade this patch. AA does absolutely nothing.

[Slimeball91]

There were some upgrade modules changes, but no changes to captain skills.  Some people don't think AA builds are worth it at all, while others might build some ships with AA in mind.  I think the best practice is to build your ships around their strengths, and if that happens to buff the AA then its a bonus.  

[KilljoyCutter]

AFT really needs to get its range boost for AA back, instead of token damage boost.

 

[Perro_ruidoso]

Massive AA is a waste in any circumstance.  WG has so gutted AA that it is positively a joke.  

[Umikami]

It doesn't matter, because no matter what you do to AA, it still SUX!

[KilljoyCutter]

Let's not overstate the problems with AA. 

On a ship with decent AA, popping DFAA and Priority Sector at the same time still turns results in confetti. 

 

[SovereignEagle]

AFT and BFT are not really skills that you would take for the AA buffs alone. MAA is now meant for ships with really bad AA, where you wouldn't bother with AA skills in the first place. 

[Slimeball91]

48 minutes ago, KilljoyCutter said:

Let's not overstate the problems with AA. 

On a ship with decent AA, popping DFAA and Priority Sector at the same time still turns results in confetti.

This Shima player gets hit for 11k in two drops with the 2 DMs, and GK providing AA coverage.  I think its safe to say AA sucks.

 

[Crokodone]

3 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

This Shima player gets hit for 11k in two drops with the 2 DMs, and GK providing AA coverage.  I think its safe to say AA sucks.

 

Probably None of those ships were using dfaa or priority sector. AA is pitiful when not actively used and fo AA ships its no exception.

[Slimeball91]

6 minutes ago, Crokodone said:

Probably None of those ships were using dfaa or priority sector. AA is pitiful when not actively used and fo AA ships its no exception.

I don't know why all four ships would fail to use priority sector for over a minute and half when a CV is attacking, and I know for a fact that at least one of the DM's is using DFAA because you can see red colored flak bursts.

[SuperCustodiam]

Yep. BFT + November Echo Setteseven is all we have left minus modules. Making an AA build these days is taking AAM2 in Tier IX-X ships with BFT and November Echo Setteseven.

BFT is important though, as it counteracts Aircraft Armor skill, which is an essential part of a CVs captain skills to have. Without BFT, your AA does -10% less DPS.

Still, AA builds are a far cry of what they used to be, with MFAA actually being worth 4 points for +100% DPS instead of being completely garbage, and AFT increasing your AA range instead of just increasing the flak damage (which can be good if it hits, but...).

Not sure why they seem so keen on making AA skills/modules less and less worth it...

[macktkau2]

AA is worthless. Don't waste your time.

Maybe stopping a 3rd attack run is not worth the points. Assuming the CV isn't just pre-dropping so the 3rd attack wave goes back to base anyway.

[Crokodone]

10 hours ago, Slimeball91 said:

I don't know why all four ships would fail to use priority sector for over a minute and half when a CV is attacking, and I know for a fact that at least one of the DM's is using DFAA because you can see red colored flak bursts.

Point of the video is adaptation. According to the commentator the Shima was too far away from both DMs for any degree of reasonable support. Not to mention, the Shimakaze leaving on his AA and refusing to pop smoke. The Shima wasn't even running Survivability Expert.

Had both the Shima and Gearing kept their AA off and worked with their allies, the CV driver would have to pick on someone else.

CVs feed on isolation and none coordination. The Shima, the Gearing Sank because rhey made it inviting to sink them. The commentator compared it to a DD running up to a radar cruiser and trying to gunboat them.

Neither of thoss DDs had an an excuse.

[Reymu]

11 hours ago, Slimeball91 said:

This Shima player gets hit for 11k in two drops with the 2 DMs, and GK providing AA coverage.  I think its safe to say AA sucks.

 

Shima kept AA on and did not immediately run to the DMs where their heavier AA would have pummeled that sortie to confetti 10-12 seconds after first drop.

DD stupidity that CV took advantage of.

[Slimeball91]

1 hour ago, Crokodone said:

Point of the video is adaptation.

No, the point of this discussion was that AA sucks. 

1 hour ago, Crokodone said:

According to the commentator the Shima was too far away from both DMs for any degree of reasonable support.

I have a lot of respect for Kuro, but he was playing Monday morning quarterback in this video.  It's easy to point what might have helped after the fact.  I'll say this, I'd be willing to bet money if that was Kuro in that game he would have felt pretty good about being sitting next to two DMs, and GK.  Anyone would have, since most CV players never would have tried to make those attacks.  The bottom line is this, when you play DDs you have to take a chance.  If the CV player is any good you'll lose most of the time.  That's what that video showed, a unicum CV player that understands AA is trash and can exploit the poor AA mechanics.  

[Skpstr]

 

51 minutes ago, Reymu said:

Shima kept AA on and did not immediately run to the DMs where their heavier AA would have pummeled that sortie to confetti 10-12 seconds after first drop.

DD stupidity that CV took advantage of.

Also, the GK was never actually providing AA, with it's 5.2km AA range, it was too far away. Only one DM was close enough on that initial run, and it didn't trip DFAA or prioritise the sector, you can tell by the sparseness of the tracers.

On the second run, he comes into range of both DMs just before he drops, and evaporates immediately after the drop.

But yeah, the commentator (who is a DD uni) is certainly right about the bad play by the DD. No way he would have gotten so beat up had he attempted mitigation.

Also, it's uncommon to run into a CV player of that calibre.

Really, what this clip shows is that, while CVs may need tuning, they're far from "cancer", if DD players don't insist on playing as if CVs don't exist.

I mean really, if you insist on playing as if a certain threat isn't present, of course you're going to get flattened by it.

[Skpstr]

43 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

No, the point of this discussion was that AA sucks. 

I have a lot of respect for Kuro, but he was playing Monday morning quarterback in this video.  It's easy to point what might have helped after the fact. 

That's how replay analysis works. It shows bad decision making. And of course it's easy to point what might have helped, it's so basic, that even I don't have to think about doing it.

Although, maybe that's something too. I didn't get into DDs until right around rework time, so I didn't have to adapt, I learned from the get-go.

Quote

I'll say this, I'd be willing to bet money if that was Kuro in that game he would have felt pretty good about being sitting next to two DMs, and GK.

Sure he would, so would I, and I'm pretty much a DD noob. Both of us would have had our AA off, and moved close enough to get AA support from those 3 ships, not run away from them. It's not like planes can sneak up on you.

Quote

  Anyone would have, since most CV players never would have tried to make those attacks.  The bottom line is this, when you play DDs you have to take a chance.  If the CV player is any good you'll lose most of the time.  That's what that video showed, a unicum CV player that understands AA is trash and can exploit the poor AA mechanics.  

And he also knows the AA ranges of the ships present, which was key to his successful attacks on the DD.

Notice how he only came into range of both DMs on his final run, when plane losses didn't matter.

[Crokodone]

35 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

if that was Kuro in that game he would have felt pretty good about being sitting next to two DMs, and GK.

He said it himself, the shima could've provided smoke for the DMs while they provided firearms and not have to camp behind islands that were blocking their AA.

Even before the rework, when there was a CV in the battle, tactics for all ships changed.

35 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

when you play DDs you have to take a chance.

Thats with any ship. But early in the battle, unless your trying to push a specific advantage (more ships/better ship+consumable combo) you have to be cautious to allow the am ambiguities to resolve; otherwise you'd walk into an ambush every time because there wasn't enough information im the first place. 

When there's no CVs in the battle, initial scouting belongs to the CVs; When there's no CVs, then DDs have to do it. Rolls aren't static, they're fluid: exiting.

Unfortunately, that Shima never got the memo, and that Gearing was probably pulling his hair out in frustration giving his position away so far from any friendly on his team...

[El2aZeR]

12 hours ago, Crokodone said:

Probably None of those ships were using dfaa or priority sector. AA is pitiful when not actively used and fo AA ships its no exception.

DFAA is clearly active as can be seen by the red flak bursts.
The simple truth is that neither sector nor DFAA makes much of a difference.

You just defeated your own point.

[Crokodone]

14 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

You just defeated your own point.

Maybe you should watch the vid. Evem in the past, 1 ship never stopped a t10 CV. Especially an IJN one.

[HazeGrayUnderway]

57 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

 

Also, the GK was never actually providing AA, with it's 5.2km AA range, it was too far away. Only one DM was close enough on that initial run, and it didn't trip DFAA or prioritise the sector, you can tell by the sparseness of the tracers.

On the second run, he comes into range of both DMs just before he drops, and evaporates immediately after the drop.

But yeah, the commentator (who is a DD uni) is certainly right about the bad play by the DD. No way he would have gotten so beat up had he attempted mitigation.

Also, it's uncommon to run into a CV player of that calibre.

Really, what this clip shows is that, while CVs may need tuning, they're far from "cancer", if DD players don't insist on playing as if CVs don't exist.

I mean really, if you insist on playing as if a certain threat isn't present, of course you're going to get flattened by it.

 

1 hour ago, Reymu said:

Shima kept AA on and did not immediately run to the DMs where their heavier AA would have pummeled that sortie to confetti 10-12 seconds after first drop.

DD stupidity that CV took advantage of.

Oof.

 

Historically, IJN AA was also beyond abysmal and their Destroyers suffered mightily from air attacks.  Not just land based aircraft, but carrier-based ones did a significant number on them.  It was just the simple reality for them.

Respect to USN Submarines.

  

[El2aZeR]

5 minutes ago, Crokodone said:

Maybe you should watch the vid. Evem in the past, 1 ship never stopped a t10 CV. Especially an IJN one.

I did.

Again, DFAA is clearly active. And last I checked that's not one, but 2x DMs.

As for RTS:

Yeah, how about you stop with the blatant lies?

[Skpstr]

6 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

 

Oof.

 

Historically, IJN AA was also beyond abysmal and their Destroyers suffered mightily from air attacks.  Not just land based aircraft, but carrier-based ones did a significant number on them.

I find it the same in game, especually with the DDs.

Only exception I've found (so far) is Akatsuki. You can get some surprising results if the planes don't know you're there, and are going after something else. They get through the flak belt of their target, and fly through Akatsuki's flak.

It's the only non-US DD I have where I AA isn't always on or off.