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

Should DFAA 'bloom' aircraft aiming reticles again?

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,091
[ARGSY]
Members
2,015 posts
6,221 battles

For those who don't recall the functionality of DFAA prior to the rework its activation spread the drop accuracy to its least i.e torpedo spreads were as wide as they could be as were bombs.

Even as an avid carrier player I think this would make for a nice re implimentation with the current format.

Anyone else recall or agree?

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
730
[PROJX]
Beta Testers
1,221 posts
5,382 battles

Yes, although it won't solve the ultimate problem that hydro is useful in every game, DFAA is only useful every other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,754
[WOLFG]
Members
33,555 posts
10,430 battles

I have no idea why that wasn't part of the rework....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
4,300 posts
7,474 battles

No. Balancing off of a single consumable is a huge mistake. It means that not having DFAA in a CV match makes your AA useless, and it widens the CV/surface ship gap. Exactly what happened during RTS CV will happen with DFAA- skilled CV players will just bait it out and wait for the duration to expire, average players will get dunked on. Making DFAA less important is one of the big positive changes in the rework.

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,292
[KAG]
Members
1,355 posts
12,892 battles
19 minutes ago, jags_domain said:

NO

You’re right, priority sector should.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,417
[SGSS]
Members
6,212 posts
25 minutes ago, PotatoMD said:

Yes, although it won't solve the ultimate problem that hydro is useful in every game, DFAA is only useful every other.

I switched from DFAA and put sonar because it is far more usfull.

In games with a cv I might get hit once but often not at all.  There have been a few when they would not leave me alone but that not often 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,091
[ARGSY]
Members
2,015 posts
6,221 battles
26 minutes ago, Aetreus said:

No. Balancing off of a single consumable is a huge mistake. It means that not having DFAA in a CV match makes your AA useless, and it widens the CV/surface ship gap. Exactly what happened during RTS CV will happen with DFAA- skilled CV players will just bait it out and wait for the duration to expire, average players will get dunked on. Making DFAA less important is one of the big positive changes in the rework.

Shouldn't we be trying to make DFAA more valuable with so many  claiming it's useless?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
4,300 posts
7,474 battles
8 minutes ago, Sumseaman said:

Shouldn't we be trying to make DFAA more valuable with so many  claiming it's useless?

No, because DFAA being very valuable is bad design when you might not see a CV. DFAA shouldn't be common slotted with hydro if the issue is people favoring Hydro over it. It'd be like UK or PA DD if radar only worked against destroyers and there was only ever one in a match- making their radar better wouldn't fix anything, just make it more of a roll of the dice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,091
[ARGSY]
Members
2,015 posts
6,221 battles
5 minutes ago, Aetreus said:

No, because DFAA being very valuable is bad design when you might not see a CV. DFAA shouldn't be common slotted with hydro if the issue is people favoring Hydro over it. It'd be like UK or PA DD if radar only worked against destroyers and there was only ever one in a match- making their radar better wouldn't fix anything, just make it more of a roll of the dice.

Actually I agree it shouldn't be in a common slot with hydro especially when that's a outdated config where DFAA was more useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5
[JEDI-]
Members
19 posts
9,997 battles
1 hour ago, Aetreus said:

No. Balancing off of a single consumable is a huge mistake. It means that not having DFAA in a CV match makes your AA useless, and it widens the CV/surface ship gap. Exactly what happened during RTS CV will happen with DFAA- skilled CV players will just bait it out and wait for the duration to expire, average players will get dunked on. Making DFAA less important is one of the big positive changes in the rework.

lolwut? 

Suggesting that AA isn't already worthless with the focus on making CV play "more active"  by implementing avoidable flak and reducing continuous to levels that require prolonged exposure to do any real damage. Let's not forget that DFAA was standardized to a flat 50/300%, when DDs sat at 300%, most cruisers sat at 200%, and Hood having relevant AA only because DFAA boosted the effectiveness of the rockets by I believe 1500%?, before flak.

With the focus on flak, AA is about as consistent as anything else in this game. Favored and top tier players can get through with minimal damage, clueless players get trashed every time, otherwise its about 50/50. Enhancing damage caused by a 50/50 mechanic is generally irrelevant, as that bonus still only applies half the time. The +50 to generally insignificant continuous damage makes the difference of mebe 1 second per plane at tier with the best AA. 'Where DFAA actually makes a difference is when it is combined with aux armaments 2 in slot 6, which is the only real and noticeable enhancement to AA, and it is still reliant on the inconsistencies of flak.

The 300% increase to flak damage is still only conditionally relevant, due to the inconsistency of flak.

image.jpeg.069fe58535010b1f65348f0e08df5acf.jpeg

Fly through it, take damage, avoid it you don't.

Again, it was intended for the majority of AA to be focused on flak for a more engaging experience for CV players. There is a reason why hydroacoustics is chosen over DFAA. It happens to be so much less situational and the benefits are far more noticeable. Hydro can be used both offensively and defensively and is relevant against anything with torpedoes, smoke, or hugging islands, while DFAA is purely defensive, only affects CVs (fighters and scouts drop fast enough without it), has limited impact( 'F' bail, wait, aircraft restoration, iframes...) even when there are CVs in the match and provides no benefits when there are none.

Edited by MavHunterZ
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
730
[PROJX]
Beta Testers
1,221 posts
5,382 battles

Too bad AA isn't manual. Not purely manual, mind you. 

Remember Battlestations: Midway? It would work like that, where it would be purely automated until you switch to it with the "4" key or something. Maybe having the manual AA skill will turn off the automatic system but double the damage from the manual. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
722 posts
5,703 battles
48 minutes ago, Sumseaman said:

Shouldn't we be trying to make DFAA more valuable with so many  claiming it's useless?

given how often a cv can attack and how they can bait and run away when DFAA is on for DFAA to be valuable it needs to be either grosly overpowered and simply errase all the planes so it can be used as a limited "out of jail" consumable against CV or give it way more charges and faster cooldown so it can be used more often.

 

olso the game realy needs more modules like auxiliary armament 2, for instance:

auxiliary armament 1 could give 100% increased life of secondary guns and aa mounts and 5*tier flat increace to AA aura damage

scrap slot 3 AA and fuse it with secondary armament so it gives 20% increace accuracy and range of secondary guns and 20% increace AA range.

 

Edited by pepe_trueno

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,059
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,611 posts
13,182 battles
1 hour ago, Sumseaman said:

For those who don't recall the functionality of DFAA prior to the rework its activation spread the drop accuracy to its least i.e torpedo spreads were as wide as they could be as were bombs.

Even as an avid carrier player I think this would make for a nice re implimentation with the current format.

Anyone else recall or agree?

No, because you haven't done your homework.

Aircraft have their aiming time slowed down or stopped based on how much continuous AA damage they are taking.

That's what replaced the panic effect, and now every ship or group of ships can benefit from it.

DFAA just adds to that effect already by providing even more damage.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5
[JEDI-]
Members
19 posts
9,997 battles
28 minutes ago, SgtBeltfed said:

No, because you haven't done your homework.

Aircraft have their aiming time slowed down or stopped based on how much continuous AA damage they are taking.

That's what replaced the panic effect, and now every ship or group of ships can benefit from it.

DFAA just adds to that effect already by providing even more damage.

Have you tested this? I don't think you have.

I just did with the Sho and Zeppelin and the time to aim is the exact same for both conditions for all planes, error within .2 seconds. Are you sure it wasnt due to maneuvering? In case you were wondering, straight line drops over open water and over an armed GK for comparison. Considering players have very limited active control over AA anyways, I consider bots an acceptable comparison tool.

At this point the only things I know that throw an aircraft's aim is its own maneuvering and RNG.

 

Edited by MavHunterZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
289
[CLRN]
Members
609 posts
122 battles
2 hours ago, Aetreus said:

No. Balancing off of a single consumable is a huge mistake. It means that not having DFAA in a CV match makes your AA useless,

Like its not useless right now... :Smile_facepalm:

2 hours ago, Aetreus said:

and it widens the CV/surface ship gap. Exactly what happened during RTS CV will happen with DFAA- skilled CV players will just bait it out and wait for the duration to expire, average players will get dunked on.

Then dont get baited... besides, those less skilled players should maybe learn to bait aswell instead of doing the same mistake over and over again like braindead chickens after tousends of battles.

2 hours ago, Aetreus said:

Making DFAA less important is one of the big positive changes in the rework.

:Smile_facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,059
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,611 posts
13,182 battles
42 minutes ago, MavHunterZ said:

Have you tested this? I don't think you have.

I just did with the Sho and Zeppelin and the time to aim is the exact same for both conditions for all planes, error within .2 seconds. Are you sure it wasnt due to maneuvering? In case you were wondering, straight line drops over open water and over an armed GK for comparison. Considering players have very limited active control over AA anyways, I consider bots an acceptable comparison tool.

At this point the only things I know that throw an aircraft's aim is its own maneuvering and RNG.

 

Seen it many times, usually one ship isn't enough, so a single GK won't do it. It's also not an effect of turning, though turning will make it worse, as any expanding the sights do while turning you won't get back due to the high DPS. Most of my torp and dive bomber runs are very straight, in order to minimize the effect of turning on my aim.

I notice it more in randoms, when attacking over ships to get to the ones behind it with torp bombers, or when attacking with dive bombers into heavy AA. The reticule eventually will not shrink, and your planes will just get shredded.

The new panic effect also will not spread sights that have already shrunk down, it just slows and eventually stops progress while in the AA.

It's also in the release notes when the CV rework went live, and don't bother testing it with IJN CV"s, they're resistant to it. It's one of their "national flavors". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,091
[ARGSY]
Members
2,015 posts
6,221 battles
1 hour ago, SgtBeltfed said:

No, because you haven't done your homework.

Aircraft have their aiming time slowed down or stopped based on how much continuous AA damage they are taking.

That's what replaced the panic effect, and now every ship or group of ships can benefit from it.

DFAA just adds to that effect already by providing even more damage.

Clearly I haven't. So continuous AA not flak?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,059
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,611 posts
13,182 battles
5 minutes ago, Sumseaman said:

Clearly I haven't. So continuous AA not flak?

No, AA damage has two components, 

Continuous AA, you eat it while in range, and it damages and kills aircraft from back to front. It will eventually kill every plane in the squadron given enough time, in a perfectly predictable fashion. 500 dps into airplanes with 2000 hitpoints each, one plane dies every 4 seconds.

Flak Bursts do damage to whatever aircraft actually fly into them. fly straight into a fresh flak burst, you pretty much wreck that aircraft, and will probably suffer heavy damage to all aircraft near it. Scrape by an old one, you take whatever damage it does to the offending plane. When you see a full squadron of aircraft instantly turn into a bunch of burning aircraft, a flak burst or 3 is probably the culprit.

Add to that fighters of any kind, each fighter will do a high amount of damage to one plane until they kill it, then return to the ship. The net effect is each fighter will kill one plane.

DFAA is +50% to Continuous AA DPS and +300% damage from Flak Explosions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,091
[ARGSY]
Members
2,015 posts
6,221 battles
1 minute ago, SgtBeltfed said:

No, AA damage has two components, 

Continuous AA, you eat it while in range, and it damages and kills aircraft from back to front. It will eventually kill every plane in the squadron given enough time, in a perfectly predictable fashion. 500 dps into airplanes with 2000 hitpoints each, one plane dies every 4 seconds.

Flak Bursts do damage to whatever aircraft actually fly into them. fly straight into a fresh flak burst, you pretty much wreck that aircraft, and will probably suffer heavy damage to all aircraft near it. Scrape by an old one, you take whatever damage it does to the offending plane. When you see a full squadron of aircraft instantly turn into a bunch of burning aircraft, a flak burst or 3 is probably the culprit.

Add to that fighters of any kind, each fighter will do a high amount of damage to one plane until they kill it, then return to the ship. The net effect is each fighter will kill one plane.

DFAA is +50% to Continuous AA DPS and +300% damage from Flak Explosions.

Yeah that's what I meant sorry. Accuracy bloom from continuous AA only and not flak bursts taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,059
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
3,611 posts
13,182 battles
Just now, Sumseaman said:

Yeah that's what I meant sorry. Accuracy bloom from continuous AA only and not flak bursts taken.

There's a penalty already built into the continuous damage, where the sights tighten slowly/won't tighten when you're eating a lot of damage. You're usually shedding aircraft at an alarming rate when it's really noticeable. It's built into the damage, not the cooldown (thought the cooldown adds to the damage, so it does affect it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,091
[ARGSY]
Members
2,015 posts
6,221 battles
2 minutes ago, SgtBeltfed said:

There's a penalty already built into the continuous damage, where the sights tighten slowly/won't tighten when you're eating a lot of damage. You're usually shedding aircraft at an alarming rate when it's really noticeable. It's built into the damage, not the cooldown (thought the cooldown adds to the damage, so it does affect it)

So....all the players claiming DFAA was useless were overreacting a tad clearly. I really had no idea this mechanic was in place...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
730
[PROJX]
Beta Testers
1,221 posts
5,382 battles
32 minutes ago, Sumseaman said:

Yeah that's what I meant sorry. Accuracy bloom from continuous AA only and not flak bursts taken.

Honestly, it's hardly noticeable in combat and barely makes a difference, especially if you have the captain skill that reduces time to aim 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5
[JEDI-]
Members
19 posts
9,997 battles

Never intended to say DFAA was useless. Rather, it's more inconsistency that you really don't notice doing anything unless someone pulls a stupid. Flak is still the workhorse of AA. For comparison, Nurnberg with top grade continuous AA for tier 6 cruisers gets less effect out of DFAA than Hawkins despite having higher continuous purely because Hawkins has a(marginally) better chance of landing hits with flak. 2 flak per salvo is still ludicrously easy to dodge though.

It's just that hydro is that much more consistent with more utility. Personal experience both before and after rework is that for whatever reason, loading DFAA instead of hydro reduces my chance of having carriers in the match. Don't know if it is rigging or just my horrid luck with MM/RNG, but same result. DFAA is also one of the only consumables, if not the only consumable directly impacted by an opponent's skill and not your own.

Even if it was a choice between DFAA and fighters, I would go with fighters. When they do work, its the fastest way to take down attacking planes they just do not hold up to AA at all. Added benefit of fighters is you can use them as bait to locate close targets over islands via their AA.

If DFAA is such a competitive choice of a consumable, why are there two distinct modules that directly enhance it? Not just the unique consumable mod, but Aux. Arms. in slot 6. Ignoring consumables mod in slot 5 because it affects all consumables(and competes with concealment).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×