Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Panzer_Mac_W126

Dual Purpose Primaries Should Be Player Controlable For AA

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
44 posts

There's a lot of hate floating around for carriers, with the loudest suggested solution being "gEt RiD oF cVs!". Yes, I understand there are ships which don't have massive AA batteries and players who struggle as a result. I even remember how the old CV system could delete an AA spec battleship in one pass. However this game features heavily in the era which signaled the end of the artillery ship as the dominant weapons on the sea so I do not agree with removing one of the most revolutionary ship types in naval warfare.

There are many ships in this game which feature dual purpose guns as their primary weapon, quite of few of them are destroyers. In the case of these ships I say let the players use these guns when the planes show up. Yes the AI already controls your AA shots but I have seen plenty of instances where the AI just sucks at leading the target. Usually I see this with secondary batteries. This is also likely one of the reasons why such hate for CVs exist since our main way of fighting them puts us all at the mercy of an AI using your AA to play craps. It's largely a game of chance, and the odds suck for the smaller ships. In order to relieve this frustration, I say let players have more direct control of their AA. Actually having some control over this would also allow ships that existed (or were to) as AA ships to fulfill a role other than just spamming shells from behind an island or from a cloud of smoke. Perhaps just use the existing priority sector mechanic to swap these guns from anti-ship to anti-air mode on all eligible ships.

Maybe actually being able to directly shoot down airplanes could alleviate some of the hatred for CVs since those players are actually fighting them rather than relying on the AI to roll some invisible dice.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
44 posts
58 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

They are already factored into your AA.

I know that but as I said, that damage is at the mercy of the AI rolling dice, and the AI has shown it is not the best at leading. Many times only doing damage to planes when it's too late to prevent any damage to themselves. Another part of this suggestion is just how human psychology works. People tend to get frustrated when they feel like they don't have control, and when you leave this up to an RNG damage timer, many certainly won't feel like they have control. Thus leading to their frustration. They may do everything right in that moment but since the AI messed up the dice roll, your effort was for naught. Right now there's not much one can learn from this situation and all they can do is hope the dice land more in their favor next time the AI rolls for AA damage. Whereas if they had control over their aim, there is a chance to learn and apply that knowledge to you next encounter.

Another example of how bad the AI can be at aiming for you is secondary battery fire. There are plenty of instances where the AI focuses the secondary battery on parts of a ship it can't hurt but will not adjust its point of aim. This however can be compensated by aiming my main battery where it will be most effective. This simple bit of control offsets the frustration I may feel when my secondaries aren't doing anything but tallying up ribbons without doing damage.

Back to the psychological aspect of this, in the new Modern Warfare, the game doesn't use a bullet scan mechanic to calculate damage as it did in the past. Rather MW animates actual bullets in game much how WoWs does with main battery shells, and torpedoes. When I hit a target, it feels more like I put those shots there. When I miss a target I feel like an idiot and I need aim better next time. In either case, I don't feel like I was blessed or denied by some imaginary cone that exists downrange.

Yes some will still complain as they always have but I like to think that there are others like myself who will have the same reaction to being given this sort of control. When we see those planes go down, we put those shells on target. When we miss, we look at why and learn from it. We don't get to do that with the current system.

Edited by Panzer_Mac_W126
Edited for grammar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,401
[RLGN]
Members
15,143 posts
26,769 battles

More like many will forget they need to aim their AA, and will kvetch about it not doing anything.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
200
[TFFOX]
Members
920 posts
2,104 battles

then what happens if you're getting hit by planes and a enemy DD? ya can't hit both at the same time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
44 posts
2 hours ago, AdmiralFox08 said:

then what happens if you're getting hit by planes and a enemy DD? ya can't hit both at the same time

That... actually didn't come to mind. I was mainly thinking about in the beginning of the fight before the DDs have found one another or the other times when DDs are being harassed by carrier planes. I was also thinking about AA cruisers like Worcester, and Minotaur in the hopes they could have a job other than sitting behind an island or in smoke just spamming shells. That's actually one of the reasons why I don't like playing those two cruisers actually, I never feel like I'm using them for their purpose when I play them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,661
[WORX]
Members
11,915 posts
19,466 battles
5 hours ago, Panzer_Mac_W126 said:

I say let players have more direct control of their AA.

This project (player controlled AA) and human controlled secondaries, were pushed back due to cutbacks in production..

They were meant to be out in testing by this year... Now, I am thinking projects are at least a year behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
44 posts
18 hours ago, Navalpride33 said:

This project (player controlled AA) and human controlled secondaries, were pushed back due to cutbacks in production..

They were meant to be out in testing by this year... Now, I am thinking projects are at least a year behind.

Oh sweet! Thanks for letting me know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,691
[ARS]
Beta Testers
5,267 posts
5,775 battles
10 hours ago, Panzer_Mac_W126 said:

Oh sweet! Thanks for letting me know.

He just made that up.  WG has not hinted as such systems at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×