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

More Engaging AA Idea - Resorted and Resubmitted

19 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

925
[ZUOSI]
Beta Testers
1,258 posts
1,764 battles

After taking the advice of the last time I made this suggestion, here it is resorted and resubmitted.

 

Alright so I'm going to throw my hat into the ring in helping fix AA so that it is more engaging.

 

So in order to properly nail down why it needs changed we need to address the primary complaints about AA and what the new system has to incorporate in order for it to accomplish the feeling of engagement.

So the AA Must:

- Be engaging for the player using it

- Allow for lower tiered/underpowered AA to feel competitive against higher tiered CV

- Create a dynamic system that benefits those who use it and punish those who do not

 

So lets begin by saying the current system does not provide a proper way to engage players in fighting off CV's. Also CV's are not properly deterred by ships lower than them making it easy to do multiple drops on a ship with under-tiered/under-powered AA. It's frustrating to non CV players since they feel they have little effect against enemy planes, creates games were CV's either dominate or get completely blown out of the water. There needs to be a balance but the only way to do that is to grant the player more control over their AA.

 

The current system allows minor control but not much overall. This feels like a mild stop gap and doesn't provide enough of an engaging experience. Instead we need to take that concept and make it more akin to the torpedo system that currently exists in game. Now keep in mind this would only work for the AA fire and not the secondary anti-ship fire.

 

New AA sector system

1. The directional system allows for 360 degree control

There is no more port or starboard focus. Instead much like the torpedo and primary armament aiming you have full control over what direction your AA is focusing on. This is essential as the flow of battle is incredibly fluid and can make it hard to guarantee your AA is focusing in the correct direction. On top of this fact, make bombing runs come from the bow or stern making the port or starboard system of direction slight less optimal since you want the forward AA guns or rear AA guns potentially focusing in that direction. So in this instance as long as the AA guns are within proper sight to provide fire they will fire.

 

2. The directional system is mapped based and not ship direction based

Much like your primary artillery when you aim with this new AA concept you would be aiming it in a certain direction on the map. That mean when you click to target it stays fixated on that target no matter what direction your ship steers in. This makes it so you can maneuver while providing AA cover against incoming planes and allows more freedom to address multiple threats in game. This also forces CV players to have to adjust for fear of going into a focused AA wall pointed in their direction.

 

3. AA focus is 4 levels

While torpedoes have 2 levels of focus, wide spread and narrow spread, the new AA system will have 4. Each level focus determines the effectiveness of your AA. The more you focus it the higher your damage becomes but if the planes fly out of that cone then you lose effectiveness in contrast. So if planes move you will have to adjust your focus accordingly. This makes it so CV's have to drop closer and with shorter time making good runs harder to pull off since if they go for a long run they have less maneuverability and thus can't avoid a focused cone of AA as readily. I have pictures of what these 4 cones will be and how their affect will be.

 

Cone 1 - 75% AA Power/100% AA Coverage

8A1LqQ7.png

So with your AA unfocused it would provide full coverage of the ship but only half of the AA effective power. If your AA did 100dps, in this configuration you would only average 75dps. All ships would have this as their default capability until you choose different cones of focus in game while playing a match.

 

Cone 2 - 125% AA Power/ 50% Coverage/ 25% outside Cone Power

dEg4ceu.png

So in this configuration your ships with 100dps AA within the cone will do 125dps and outside the cone it would do 25dps. While this does fall slightly under the power of the current system when being used it is meant to make it good but not overly strong. Like the current system there would be a cool down for its use. 10 second cool down until you can reuse it.

 

Cone 3 - 175% AA power/ 25% Coverage/ 12.5% outside cone power

mTYlvHs.png

This is a bigger cone than most people will realize and will cover a lot of space. With this cone and having a DPS of 100 for the ship your AA will deal 175dps inside the cone and 13dps outside it. I would suspect this cone would be used the most when compared to the rest, even with one more focus to add. Again this features a cool down but  the cool down does become longer. In this instance the cool down would jump to 17 seconds. Longer than the current system but not overly long.

 

Cone 4 - 225% AA power/ 12.5% Coverage/ 7% outside cone power

DZfKwGA.png

This is the most brutal and powerful of the focus cones. This will be most pertinent to under tiered ships when facing up tiered CV's. While in this focus level your ship with 100dps will deal 225dps within the cone and 7dps outside the cone. This would have the longest cool down of 25 Seconds (close to a BB reload). This allows for it be devastating but if used and not effective because of the enemy CV avoiding the cone it would allow the CV player greater opportunity restrike.

 

These cone levels allow players to interact more freely against CV players and focus their defense accordingly. It also potentially makes certain types of CV plane runs more risky in game.

 

4 - AA focus cool down and refresh. This is entirely built upon the level of cone focus you put your AA under. The more focused the greater the cool down. However one difference is that your AA will not reset after a certain amount of time. That means if you use the highest level of cone focus pointed in a certain direction on the map, it will remain as such until you redirect level and direction and then it will have a cooldown based upon the level of focus previously used.

 

This is ultimately the idea and in my opinion the best option for creating more engaging CV/AA gameplay without redoing from the ground up. It tackles many of the issues in game between non-cv and CV players and provides a more enriching experience for the players using it. It also provides opportunity for players to coordinate more both on the CV side and non CV side when dealing with the other . Most importantly this levels out the 1v1 encounter issue making it possible for ships like BB's and DD's better to survive a CV planes while also making it possible for CV players to exploit players who are not actively using their different AA levels to keep CV attacks more at bay. I will answer any questions anyone may have concerning this idea. 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,694 posts
21,969 battles

Don't see the majority of players especially the lower skilled ones being able to implement this in a battle.

While it's interesting I think it complicates it to the point that it would be ignored and make AA less effective especially for the lowest tiered boats.

For the T3-T5 boats that have the most issues due to multiple CVs they can just tweak the damage output for AA. This game isn't really "historical" other than some of the ships actually existed. If the Russian Navy can be some super power in this game they can change how AA works in the lower tiers.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,143
[SALVO]
Members
3,414 posts
3,294 battles

Kudos on developing new ideas.

As I see gameplay, if it is going to requiere my time and attention, it better be "fun and engaging", else it better be simple and/or automated. 

Your system is complex enough to requiere some attention to it, but I don't see a payback in "fun" elements. You still be pressing some keys for a bit more refined priority sector. More complex, equally unfun.

If we are going the "manual" way, we need to feel the trigger for the dakka, that would be actually fun, manually aimed and fired AA... But it is deemed complex because we can't walk and chew bubblegum without tripping.

If we are going the automated way, we only need for the DPS to be meaningful and effective, no need of much more player input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
246
[SPTR]
Members
3,813 posts
777 battles
26 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

If we are going the automated way, we only need for the DPS to be meaningful and effective, no need of much more player input.

And by that, you mean being able to shoot down entire squadrons with minimal input...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,799
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
14,678 posts
3 minutes ago, 6Xero9 said:

And by that, you mean being able to shoot down entire squadrons with minimal input...

I don't see where that was part of their post... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,143
[SALVO]
Members
3,414 posts
3,294 battles
14 minutes ago, 6Xero9 said:

And by that, you mean being able to shoot down entire squadrons with minimal input...

... 

36 minutes ago, KilljoyCutter said:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
925
[ZUOSI]
Beta Testers
1,258 posts
1,764 battles
2 hours ago, ArIskandir said:

Kudos on developing new ideas.

As I see gameplay, if it is going to requiere my time and attention, it better be "fun and engaging", else it better be simple and/or automated. 

Your system is complex enough to requiere some attention to it, but I don't see a payback in "fun" elements. You still be pressing some keys for a bit more refined priority sector. More complex, equally unfun.

If we are going the "manual" way, we need to feel the trigger for the dakka, that would be actually fun, manually aimed and fired AA... But it is deemed complex because we can't walk and chew bubblegum without tripping.

If we are going the automated way, we only need for the DPS to be meaningful and effective, no need of much more player input.

This system is incredibly uncomplicated and is akin to using torpedos, something already in game. If new players can use torpedoes then this would be no different and no less difficult. You are never going to find a fully interactive AA system and AA isn't just problem at low tiers either. It's a problem across all tiers and this system would offer a chance for AA ships to be devastating and non AA ships be more than useless. However it requires interaction otherwise people who don't use it will find their AA less than helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
925
[ZUOSI]
Beta Testers
1,258 posts
1,764 battles
2 hours ago, 1SneakyDevil said:

Don't see the majority of players especially the lower skilled ones being able to implement this in a battle.

While it's interesting I think it complicates it to the point that it would be ignored and make AA less effective especially for the lowest tiered boats.

For the T3-T5 boats that have the most issues due to multiple CVs they can just tweak the damage output for AA. This game isn't really "historical" other than some of the ships actually existed. If the Russian Navy can be some super power in this game they can change how AA works in the lower tiers.

There's no reason it should be difficult to use at low tiers as the system is the same as torpedoes but for AA. The AA problem isn't just at low tiers either. It's across all tiers to varying degrees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,143
[SALVO]
Members
3,414 posts
3,294 battles
2 minutes ago, otakuben said:

This system is incredibly uncomplicated and is akin to using torpedos, something already in game. If new players can use torpedoes then this would be no different and no less difficult. You are never going to find a fully interactive AA system and AA isn't just problem at low tiers either. It's a problem across all tiers and this system would offer a chance for AA ships to be devastating and non AA ships be more than useless. However it requires interaction otherwise people who don't use it will find their AA less than helpful.

It is not akin to torpedo use because torps are fire and forget once aimed and launched. AA is constant damage and you need to consider having it aligned in the proper direction during extended periods of time against a very nimble target, which will be far more complex and time consuming than the "just press a key" mechanic. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,143
[SALVO]
Members
3,414 posts
3,294 battles

duplicated

Edited by ArIskandir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
925
[ZUOSI]
Beta Testers
1,258 posts
1,764 battles
Just now, ArIskandir said:

It is not akin to torpedo use because torps are fire and forget once aimed and launched. AA is constant damage and you need to consider having it aligned in the proper direction during extended periods of time against a very nimble target, which will be far more complex and time consuming than the "just press a key" mechanic. 

That is why you still get effectiveness on the first cone of AA. There will in doubtedly be a learning curve but it's not outside the grasp of new players. Ship positioning and angling is something already in the game and changes in effectiveness based on how you utilize it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,143
[SALVO]
Members
3,414 posts
3,294 battles
1 minute ago, otakuben said:

That is why you still get effectiveness on the first cone of AA. There will in doubtedly be a learning curve but it's not outside the grasp of new players. Ship positioning and angling is something already in the game and changes in effectiveness based on how you utilize it.

I'm not questioning if it is effective or not, I'm saying I find it an extra chore with no real fun aspect about using it. It is only my constructive opinion, not trying to demerit your idea. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
925
[ZUOSI]
Beta Testers
1,258 posts
1,764 battles
2 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

I'm not questioning if it is effective or not, I'm saying I find it an extra chore with no real fun aspect about using it. It is only my constructive opinion, not trying to demerit your idea. 

I think fun is relative. There's a lot that's not fun in the game to some and fun to others. The question of AA and plane interaction is almost never geared towards the interaction being fun but rather being effective. I think the primary problem that needs to be solved is AA interaction effectiveness. Fun can be solved later after we have an effective system that isn't just blanket buff everything. Make it effective and interactive (skill basedish), worry about fun after the fact. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,799
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
14,678 posts

The idea has some merit, but it would require a control scheme that was intuitive, smooth, and non-punitive -- something that wouldn't pull attention away from the other things going on with enemy ships, friendly ships, incoming fire and torps, islands, damage control, etc.  

 

Edited by KilljoyCutter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,143
[SALVO]
Members
3,414 posts
3,294 battles
1 minute ago, otakuben said:

I think fun is relative. There's a lot that's not fun in the game to some and fun to others. The question of AA and plane interaction is almost never geared towards the interaction being fun but rather being effective. I think the primary problem that needs to be solved is AA interaction effectiveness. Fun can be solved later after we have an effective system that isn't just blanket buff everything. Make it effective and interactive (skill basedish), worry about fun after the fact. 

ok, as interactions go, I still find this one simpler and more effective:

2 hours ago, KilljoyCutter said:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
925
[ZUOSI]
Beta Testers
1,258 posts
1,764 battles
16 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

ok, as interactions go, I still find this one simpler and more effective:

 

I'm behind a buff to begin with but it doesn't remove the fact it feels like there's no interaction. Part of what make more interaction important is it makes the player feel like their effort has an effect on the outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,519
Members
1,174 posts
33 battles

Lets be frank, having to constantly look at a plane and watching numbers tick without any further input is marginally more interactive than the current system. You can actually just testbed this idea by going into the training room against a bot CV and use your torp aiming reticle to follow the planes. Does that honestly feel fun to you?

I don't doubt the effectiveness, but it'd still be very lacking in terms of interaction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
925
[ZUOSI]
Beta Testers
1,258 posts
1,764 battles
8 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Lets be frank, having to constantly look at a plane and watching numbers tick without any further input is marginally more interactive than the current system. You can actually just testbed this idea by going into the training room against a bot CV and use your torp aiming reticle to follow the planes. Does that honestly feel fun to you?

I don't doubt the effectiveness, but it'd still be very lacking in terms of interaction.

I don't disagree this isn't the equivalent of shooting down planes on your own but it seems like a fair in between. Also the idea is you find the angle in which you want it pointed and lock it into place until you decide to unlock it that way you can maneuver your ship and fire at other things while still dealing with planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×