Jump to content
Forum Shutdown 28/7/2023  Read more... ×
Forum Shutdown 28/7/2023  Read more... ×

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'AA'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - Asia Language Based Communities
    • English Speaking Community
    • 繁體中文討論區
    • 日本語コミュニティ
    • 한국어 커뮤니티
  • Mod Section
    • Player Modifications
  • External testing groups
    • Supertest Academy
    • Supertest
    • Clantest

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL






Drag Interests

Found 30 results

  1. Rina_Pon

    Feed me more planes!

    71 = 2x Air Defense Expert +1 planes. Two enemy T8 CV, one was Kaga. Buffed USN DD DFAA + Kaga planes = GG.
  2. Hmm ... well well So I was these few days with a couple of younger friends who want to try their hand on what I play ( their usual one are smartphone games ) ... we were in one of the gal's house and there are a few of us both gals and guys , and I am the only veteran , so go create the account, get on with it .. OK T1 is T1 , nothing special, get them to play a few games before starting the T2 , still on Cruiser, nothing spectacular, nothing really too hard, I got to do some coaching , Ok, its not hard to get to T3 , still Cruiser and Co-Op .. OK first time there's planes, and Torpedo , OK bots are bots, some coaching and they can handle it ... but come now they can do Random, so they try and guess what .... EACH and EVERY game is a 2CV game , whether its all 12 vs 12 or just 6 vs 6 , when these new players ca be MM with equally novice CV players against veteran CV players and worse they practically had zero AA or at best a nice single digit figure on that continuous damage .. I mean even the most avid cannot excuse the game for this kind of in-balance .... I keep watching them being decimated even me coaching them from behind the chair , what can you do , even if I am playing there would be nothing I can do if I am matched into a game like that ; in short you are MM and specified to fail to be just food for the CV players ... needless to say its not a good education for new player to get to know the game and how to play and certainly not any encouragement to them .. in the end I log in to my own ID and allow them to play some mid and high tier ships me coaching them .. some are impressed and say they MIGHT try to get through the grind ( but hey from T3 to T6 that's going to be a lot of this hellish grind ) , most just say NO , plain and simple , the reason is simple, this is not a very fair game, its not a very fun game, and its certainly not gaming enough for most and many, and really one asked, why can they just attack us and we can do nothing And I would not disagree with them , the grind is not the hard and hellish part, its the gaming and what it return - there are some very grindy game that return a lot of fun, say POE ( and my younger friends all agree , they like it )and equally they voice that the publisher ( WG ) are just luring with this free to play mode to get people to pay to get out of the hellish grind ( premium ships , Premium time ) , pay to progress, and pay to win, trust smartphone gamer to see through that real quick and no less they say the price is all not welcoming at all
  3. So I have gone over many ships to re-do commander skills and Smolensk (BOO HISS ) was the first. Trying the new build with no IFHE in coop and it is pretty good. At the end of the battle I noticed I got an unsporting conduct warning. Ok, but How? To my amusement it says I shot down an allied aircraft. So do I need to go to the gulag until RTS CVs return to repent for my dishonour shown towards friendly planes? Secondaries were changed to not deal team damage due to them being AI controlled. Why is AA not the same? Anyway ever seen this before?
  4. WarGaming is still balancing aircraft carriers (CV) and anti-aircraft (AA) in this game so that players who play CV and those who counter them would be satisfied without ruining each other’s gameplays and enjoyment. Therefore, I would humbly contribute a few of my own suggestions with some comprehensive explanations for CV and AA to be considered by the developers. 1. Reversion to 0.8.4 continuous AA with some tweaks Update 0.8.5 is a massive change to how continuous AA behaves. Starting from this update, continuous AA damage focuses only on a single plane instead of spreading out the damage on several random planes. This causes one plane to take continuous AA damage until it is taken down. Consequently, it is much easier to take down planes as long as the hostile plane squadrons are in AA range. This is good for those who are playing against CV but bad for the CV players especially those who unfortunately get dumped as bottom tier such as Shokaku in a tier 10 match. This also causes CV with little initial plane capacity such as Saipan and RN CVs to get deplaned before the match ends. Hence, it would be wise to revert back to 0.8.4 AA system of which continuous AA damage is spread out on three or more planes. Of course this should come with some improvements. First of all, medium and long AA ranges should be overlapped. This is to ensure higher chance to shoot planes down. Since the AA ranges are overlapped, flaks could be removed from long range AA because overlapped AA should be enough to deal damage on planes thus taking them down. Last but not least, continuous AA damage on a single plane should only be possible by the usage of AA priority sector reinforcement. The AA guns on a ship will focus damage on multiple planes instead if the player does not reinforce AA priority sector. 2. Limitation to plane capacity and removal of plane regeneration ability Yes, you are reading this right. Each CV should have limited plane capacity just like in the RTS era based on this table. For that reason, CV hull should no longer be able to regenerate planes. This change is so that CV players would be more careful in delivering their attack instead of deliberately wasting their planes on grouped ships with combined AA. This change should reward CV players who plan their attacks excellently and punish those who play badly by wasting their planes. Players should consider pre-dropping their payloads on water or land masses to prevent from being deplaned (run out of planes) early. With this change, the old AA Defense Expert achievement should be reintroduced when any type of ship manages to shoot down at least 80% of total hostile aircrafts in a single battle. It is undeniably disastrous if a CV is deplaned. If such case happened, the CV hull should get extra +10% surface and air concealment so that the player can hide until the end of the battle. To prevent from being deplaned early, the Air Supremacy captain skill should give 2 extra planes for each plane type. For example, Hosho with initial 24 planes capacity can have up to 30 planes with this skill. This skill should be the first one to be chosen by players. 3. Repair party consumable for all types of planes regardless of tiers All types of planes should be given Repair party consumable regardless of their tiers. Currently, only torpedo bombers of tier 8 and 10 CVs have this consumable. This consumable is useful to restore planes HP and to prevent excessive plane lost which may cause a CV to be deplaned easily. 4. More buff for Survivability Expert commander skill on planes As of update, Survivability Expert commander skill gives extra +25 HP on planes for each CV tier. This is not enough with the renewed single-plane-focus AA system. Therefore, it is suggested for this skill to give extra +50 HP on plane per CV tier to ensure the longer endurance of aircrafts especially if 0.8.5 AA mechanic is permanent. For example, one torpedo bomber of Graf Zeppelin has 1470 HP. With this proposed SE skill, it would have 1870 HP. This is a major improvement that should be considered to minimize aircraft losses. 5. Panic effect of fighter planes & DFAA while taking down planes Currently, fighter planes (ship-borne catapult fighters and patrol fighters) shoot down hostile planes with the 1:1 trade-off. For example, a ship that launches 3 fighter planes is able to shoot down 3 hostile planes. Meanwhile, Defensive Fire Anti-Aircraft (DFAA) increases the continuous AA damage for limited period of time. Since the CV rework, fighter planes and DFAA do not cause panic effect on plane attack despite being able to shoot down or at least damage the planes. When a ship uses DFAA, the flaks that it produces are dark orange-reddish compared to bright orange-yellowish flaks without DFAA. Therefore, I would suggest the reintroduction of panic effect on attack just like during the pre-rework era. If a squadron is doing attack run within an AA range of a ship currently using DFAA or while being engaged by fighter planes, the drop reticle should be widened. For instance, rocket and bomb reticle should be enlarged to 3 or 4 times of its minimum size. Meanwhile, torpedo drop path could be widened to an extreme 70-80° angle so that the enemy ship could try to dodge the torpedoes thus increasing its survivability chance. 6. Ability of planes to spot torpedoes Before the rework, planes were able to spot hostile torpedoes thus saving the life of ships by giving them enough time to react and torpedobeat. However, this splendid feature was removed once 0.8.0 update hit the live server. Currently, the only way to be aware of incoming torpedoes early is by taking Vigilance commander skill or having a teammate to spot them for you. Therefore, this feature of all types of planes being able to spot torpedoes should be re-implemented. This is to diversify the usefulness of planes. For example, catapult spotter is only able to extend the firing range for a few percentages. With the reintroduction of this ability, it can spot torpedoes once it flies right on top of them. CV-borne aircrafts also should be able to spot torpedoes coming from hostile ship hiding in smoke. 7. Planes take off delay During the RTS era, all CV-based planes had preparation time at the start of the game. The duration of preparation time varied with CV tiers and number of planes in a squadron. In the current reworked CV gameplay, there is literally no preparation time for aircrafts. An aircraft carrier is able to instantly launch aircraft squadron right at the moment when a match starts. Planes are able to spot enemy ships and the direction of their movements in less than 1 minute. This somehow disrupts the ships from moving stealthily to capture points or strategic areas especially for destroyers (DD). WG actually experimented with plane preparation time in the Public Test Server. However, this feature was cancelled when it was supposed to be implemented in 0.8.4 patch. Therefore, the developers should re-implement this feature with some balancing. The aircrafts preparation time for CV is suggested as in Table 2. With this feature, ships of both teams can go to their strategic areas without being spotted too early. A new Upgrade to reduce the plane preparation time by 5 seconds should be provided for CVs of tier 8 and above. Table 2: Suggestion for plane preparation time CV tier Plane preparation time in seconds 4 10 5 15 6 20 7 25 8 30 9 35 10 40 8. Ability to turn off automated consumable usage on CV hull in settings Currently, consumables usage for CV hull is automated. When CV hull is detected by enemy aircraft or ship, escort fighters will be automatically launched and fly around the hull for six minute. Other than that, the Damage Control Party (DCP) will be automatically used when the CV hull is on fire/flooding or when any module on CV hull is incapacitated. This automation is so that CV players can keep controlling their plane squadron without going back to their hull control mode in order to use consumable. Moreover, the developers stated that this is for not spreading the player’s attention too thin in battle and reducing the overload of micromanagement. This automation has its own detriments and can be easily exploited by enemy CV. There is a slight cooldown time of fighters consumable for about 40 seconds once the six-minute patrol has ended. An enemy CV who intends to CV snipe can wait for the patrolling catapult fighters to land and attack the CV during the cooldown period, provided that the enemy CV can avoid the flaks. It is quite bad when the DCP activates only because the rudder/engine is incapacitated or the hull is on fire which will automatically extinguish in just 5 seconds. It is absolutely head tilting when the CV hull is flooding during the DCP cooldown period because it has been wasted just to repair incapacitated module or 5-second fire. Hence, there should be an option to turn off automated consumable usage in Settings just like how the collision avoidance system can be turned on and off. When this option is turned off, a CV player can decide whether to use the consumable or not by cancelling their plane control and going back to the CV hull control mode. Another alternative and much better option is to allow CV hull consumable to be used manually while being in planes control mode. The developers just simply need to adjust the UI of planes control mode by allocating a space for the consumable buttons. An example is shown in the figure below. When a CV player is controlling their planes, they can decide to use the hull consumable by pressing the button assigned to the desired consumable. 9. Zoomable tactical map for precise waypoints setting Currently, CV players rely on waypoints to set their course while piloting their planes. Sometimes, the waypoints fail to navigate the CV hull in the correct direction, causing the hull to be stranded on island or ram friendly ship. This failure often puts CV in dangerous and awkward positions thus making them vulnerable to enemy attacks once detected. This is always caused by complex waypoints being set through islands with small gaps between them even with the collision avoidance system enabled. Therefore, I suggest a tactical map that can be zoomed exactly to 4 horizontal grids so that CV player can set more precise waypoints through islands thus slightly reducing the chance to run aground. A CV player can use the default M button to go to tactical map view and use the mouse wheel to control the zoom level. They can go back to normal view by pressing M again or Esc. This feature should be limited for CV only because it is the only type of ship that uses waypoints for navigation. 10. Reintroduction of odd tier CVs with special planes Odd tier CVs such as Bogue, Hiryu and Essex existed during the glorious RTS CV era. Once update 0.8.0 is released, odd tier CVs are completely removed from the research trees whereas tier 7 Saipan and Kaga are uptiered to 8. There was once a plan to re-implement those old odd tier CVs in alternate CV line but until today, there has been no news about it. Therefore, I would like to suggest the odd tier CVs reintroduction with planes of special functions which emphasis on team support that vary for each nation. The special planes should replace or be optional with the rocket planes. For example, odd tier IJN CVs should have planes that can lay off smokes. The squadron should be set in 2×1 configuration. Once a player starts smoking run, the plane will fly as low as torpedo bombers in attacking phase while generating smokes that can last for about 1 minute. The smoke should be able to cover the whole flank thus blocking enemy’s line of sight. Secondly, odd tier RN CVs should have planes that can extinguish fire on friendly ships. The squadron should be set in 3×1 configuration. The cruising speed of the planes should be 95 knots. The fire extinguishing mechanism should be the same as the RN carpet bombs dropping mechanism. When doing fire extinguishing run, the plane will sprinkle water on friendly ship. This is really helpful for ships especially BB with long fire duration. When a ship is on fire and their DCP is in cooldown period or when all the DCPs have been used up for RU BB, the player should ask the CV with the water sprinklers to help them extinguish the fire. Next, odd tier USN CVs should be provided with seaplane that can land on capture points thus capturing them. Only one seaplane can be launched at a time. During the capturing process, the CV player cannot launch another plane or the capture will stop. Of course the capture seaplane is susceptible to hostile AA and fighters. Therefore, it is only sensible to capture the points together with the presence of allied ships when there is no hostile ship in the vicinity. This is also a novel way for CV to get Capture or Assisted in Capture ribbons without using their own hull to cap. Odd tier IJN and USN CVs should be given different type of bomb from their even tier nation counterparts. HE bombs should be provided to odd tier IJN CVs meanwhile AP bombs are for their USN counterpart. The tables above show the suggested plane capacity of the odd tier CVs and their plane preparation time respectively. Since I am not familiar with Royal Navy ships, I will leave that to WG to decide which odd tier RN CVs to be added. 11. Restriction of one CV per team for tier 8+ CVs Before the CV rework, CVs of tier 8 and above were not accompanied by another CV of same or different tier in a team. Therefore, there was only one CV per team given that the CV tier is 8 and above. This restriction should be implemented once again because tier 8+ CVs are quite impactful in high tier matches despite having lower alpha damage output. This is also to ensure that two queuing CVs get into a match faster without having to wait for the 3rd CV in the queue. 12. ±1 tier matchmaking limitation for CV The matchmaking for CV should be limited to ±1 tier which means that CV should always be midtiered. Currently, CV has ±2 tier matchmaking except for tier 4 CVs of which they are restricted to ±1 unless if they are in failed division. If a CV is the top tier ship in a ±2 tier match, surely the bottom tier ships will be the easy targets for the CV especially if the bottom tier ship is alone or having bad AA. For example, Normandie in a double tier 8 CV match against Lexington and Saipan. In addition, CV being the bottom tier ship in a ±2 tier match is detrimental for the CV player too. As an instance, Shokaku being placed in a tier 10 match against Minotaur and Worcester with overpowered AA. Despite having regenerable planes, bottom-tiered CVs can always be deplaned by ships with AA two tiers higher. Therefore, a matchmaking limitation of ±1 tier for CV must be implemented. 13. Repair Party consumable for destroyers regardless of tier DD is the type of ship with the least amount of HP. Even with the reduction of attack time for rocket aircrafts and the change of HE bomb reticle, DD is always being an easy target for CV especially those with weak AA. Smoke is used by DDs to temporary hide themselves from CV attack but once it has ended, they are vulnerable to CV attack again during the smoke cooldown period. The usage of radar also renders smoke useless for DD, giving chance for CV and other ship types to attack them. Therefore, all DDs should be provided with catapult fighters Repair Party consumable regardless of their tier and nation. Currently, tier 9+ Russian destroyers and Kidd are the only DDs with this consumable. With the provision of Repair Party for DD, their survivability is improved and they can live a bit longer despite being attacked by CV or any other ship types. Even in a match without CV, Repair Party could be useful for them to restore their HP after being hit by shells or torpedoes. If the developers can provide Repair Party for all ships in WoWs Blitz, then they should do the same for at least all DDs in WoWs PC. 14. Improvements to Graf Zeppelin’s bombs and torpedoes Currently, the damage of AP bombs and torpedoes carried by the planes of Graf Zeppelin (GZ) are pretty anemic. The AP bombs often ricochet, do not penetrate or overpenetrate even with the normalization improvement by 5° in the 0.8.5 update. Usually, the bombs do not even hit their targets at all due to the large scatter of bomb drops. The torpedoes still deal little damage even after its alpha damage has been increased to 5333 in the 0.8.5 update. The existence of torpedo bulge on ships makes GZ’s torpedoes less impactful. Therefore, I would suggest a few balancing parameters for bombs and torpedoes of GZ. 14.1 AP bomb improvements The AP bombs could be improved by the following means. The first alternative is to add two more bombers in an attack run. A good loadout would be 3×4 bombers which means that there are 3 attack flights with 4 planes per flight. This should be able to increase the probability of bomb hits on ships especially BB. The second alternative is that a plane should carry 2 AP bombs just like how Midway and Lexington can bring 2 HE bombs per plane. The loadout should be kept as 4×2 bombers with two AP bombs per plane to increase the chance of bomb hitting target ship. With 4 successful hits to citadel, the bomb could deal up to 28k damage. The bomb normalization angle should be improved by 5° more to reduce ricochet and overpen. 14.2 Torpedo improvements There should be two modules of torpedo bombers that can be chosen by players. The first module is the default 3×3 loadout with tier 8 Ta-152C-1/R14 planes. One torpedo deals up to 5333 damage with 6.7 km range. The torpedo damage for this default module is pretty weak thus I suggest for another alternative. The second alternative module has 4×2 loadout with tier 7 planes that should have 200 less HP and 30 knots slower than the default tier 8 torpedo bombers. However, one torpedo should be able to deal up to 9500 damage given that the planes survive in AA auras. The torpedo range should be shortened to 5.3 km too for balancing. In conclusion, the alternative module has torpedoes that can deal more damage which is balanced by weaker and slower planes. Careful and planned attack will reward players with more impactful damage. This concludes my suggestions for CV and AA tweaks for this game. Thank you for taking your time reading this lengthy post. Lastly, I hope that WG takes at least one of the ideas for their consideration.
  5. OK so I've been seeing so many remarks, comments, complaints, etc (Reddit, forums and otherwise). Most of them can be boiled down into 'CV OP', 'AA Broken', 'Delete CVs'. Even when there's constructive feedback on an issue it rarely addresses all the problems folks are raising or that are there. So in simple terms, IMO here's what's needed to fix the CV/AA and ship interaction issue with a few common remarks debunked. The main areas I'll go over: Where do we sit as of 0851 Common Inaccuracies Damage & XP Rewards CV:AA, The Tiering Issue CV:DD, Cause & Effect Where do we sit as of 0851? CVs can do well when top tier, T4 is fairly easy to get some damage numbers that are respectable, overall CV population at this tier is high. Otherwise, being top tier, CVs are ok and it's possible to get some decent numbers, bottom tier they are useless and mid-tier it's hit and miss. For the ships in battle, certain ships are far more likely to be punished and this contributes to the anecdotal evidence 'CV OP'. Outside DDs, this generally comes down to CV:AA balance ship-to-ship. For DDs concealment also plays a part. So: CV interaction with certain ships is poor. CV interaction with DDs is still an issue. CV interaction with uptiering/downtiering is obviously skewed. CV:AA is still all over the place. So as I mentioned above, CV:AA interaction needs to be fixed and CV:ship interaction needs to be fixed. Common Inaccuracies 'Plane speed is an issue' No it isn't. If the speed of planes was the issue, simply adjusting it's metric would fix the whole CV condition, it won't. They've tried to do this with an element of 'national flavour' to IJN CVs, it's barely noticeable. I notice the speed difference between IJN and RN but the biggest difference I notice between the two WRT actual combat performance is HP, not speed. If you nerfed plane speed you would need to increase something else to make up for DPM, which means alpha strike damage. This is the exact opposite of what the player-base would want. Alpha-strike is one of the most rage-inducing things in Warships, think Yamato deleting you at 25km or detonating... 'The ability to strike anywhere without being hit is the problem' This is a popular one, often championed by folks like Flamu. No your royal WeeGeeness this isn't the issue. To keep the gameplay engaging and fair there needs to be a risk-reward element. At the moment trust me, try being a bottom-tier CV and to strike anywhere at whim... Without mitigating plane-losses you will quickly notice you have no DPM because you only have 1-2 planes to launch per wing. And this is where there is a big issue that you notice when you are targeted in a flanker or DD by a CV, CV:AA interaction. 'Zero interaction CV:CV is the problem' Again a fallacy. It is possible to get a balanced game if you nail the CV:AA interaction to a balanced state without a proper plane:plane interaction being involved. One of the main reasons CV:CV interaction was all but removed was due to the CV skill disparity so drastically affecting matches. By removing it WG effectively reduced the potential impact of de-planing or alpha-striking the enemy CVs. 'Spotting power is an issue' Spotting is a factor in the CV issue but it isn't a major one outside DDs. Most ships outside BBs are spotted when you get to AA range which is often around the 5-7km mark. CVs get a bit of an early spot on enemy BBs comparative to DDs but usually this just confirms the classic clock-motion play that happens in most maps, just a bit earlier. This is actually enabling the match to get on with it earlier rather than later. Damage & XP Rewards Before I start with the CV specific stuff there's one global element in Warships that's a major contributing factor that making changes to would improve the immediate situation even if you ignored all the other changes I suggest. That is the ratios of XP Rewards to Damage over Spotting, Tanking and Assisted Damage (what I classify is damage on a target someone else is engaging). Basically XP rewards from Damage should be drastically reduced and rewards for Spotting and Tanking be boosted. It encourages types of gameplay for the team and that often lead to victory but are not really rewarded enough in game. Assisted Damage is an extra modifier I would add. Basically it'd be a small reward for focusing on an enemy your ally is focusing on or perhaps being focused by. It doesn't need to be too drastic but would reward team play. Overall (for CVs and DDs) spotting damage XP buffs would make these classes rewarded for being a team player instead of trying to farm damage. Tanking damage would reward kiting ships and BBs that soak potential damage for their teams as opposed to sniping and farming trash damage at range. (The epitome of trash damage is fire damage on ships with uber-heals, eg. Conqueror, RN CLs). Any damage that is healed, I would add to Tanking damage - this directly rewards players who frequently get Dreadnoughts but aren't rewarded for it. Basically make damage-farming for XP not useless but not the only way to top the boards aside from capping/defending ribbons. These XP changes I think should occur regardless of CV:AA changes. CV:AA, The Tiering Issue The biggest inconsistency with CVs and AA right through the game is when you are top tier or bottom tier. Generally speaking if you are top tier, you can strike most opponents with ease and if you are bottom tier you can barely strike any. This leads into issues like targeting only weak AA targets (ie DDs, see CV:DD, Cause & Effect further on). The easiest way to fix CV and AA balance in this condition is to flatten the curve. Basically this means reducing the AA damage difference tier to tier. When you do this you effectively allow a T6 CV to target all but the best T8 AA ships. To maintain balance you flatten plane HP as well. The at-tier difference between a T6 CV and a T6 ship remains relatively similar, however the difference between a T6 CV and a T8 ship is reduced. Yes it's a big thing to introduce but the CV Rework was a far more drastic change than what is essentially some numbers. So how do you differentiate CVs up/down tiers, simple. Do it with number of possible bombs/torps per drop and by number of aircraft per wing that they already do. A note here, IMO the AA would still be OP compared to CV possible damage output, personally I'd drop the overall damage per strike but make AA kill less planes but that's something you can fiddle with after you fix CV:AA tiering issues. The reason for my suggestion like this is that you reduce the damage suffered difference between 0 AA ships and uber AA ships but it's a fine line to tread. But this point isn't part of my thread, it's just a personal footnote idea. CV:DD, Cause & Effect Out of all interactions in the game, the CV:DD one is the worst. DDs get caps, win games and have huge damage potentials because of how crucial this role is, they are natural targets for CVs and so there's a fine line between the two. The two issues with the CV:DD interaction is that the CV can spot/do damage to the DD without the DD being able to do much. This issue applies to some flanker ships as well and my solution will cover this as well. The first thing I've noticed in the more recent updates is that certain DDs I can't spot-then-attack with rocket planes. What I mean by this is spot them then start my attack run immediately, I actually need to make a second pass. For many of these interactions, this is almost in a good place. For DDs I'd suggest buffing their Air-Detected range a bit more and for flankers with poor AA, do the same. This way, CVs would be able to do damage to DDs most of the time but gives the DDs a bit more wiggle room for skill. As I said earlier it's almost there, I miss my rocket runs sometimes, a swing a bit more towards the DD would be good. Basically make it so DDs and flankers keep their AA off until they are spotted. The trick is balancing the air detectability with the various ship AA ratings, ie you don't want a Mino suddenly being like 'bye bye planes' and have no chance for the CV to even get a plane or two out. The effects of all these changes would be to make DDs far more viable and make them hard enough to strike that it's almost worth pulling out a different wing of aircraft and going after something else. With changes to XP rewards, CVs would be rewarded for spotting and not farming damage, which is currently an issue but more than that there would be a choice involved to keep trying to strike a ship and make successive passes or take the plane losses and let the team deal with DD/flanker. Conclusion Overall the current CV:AA system is still borked, not to mention DD issues and XP issues. Some games CVs enable teams to win by spotting targets or striking a weak outlier to get those urgently needed points but only to rank bottom 3 in XP. Other games CVs farm damage and due to doing so to 'save a star' or for stats, they lose but top XP and think to themselves 'yeah but I topped'. Too many games CVs are useless and have no ability to not be so. No matter how many T10s are in a match, I can have a decent game in my Amagi, Atago, CM or Rich or just about any T8 CA/BB as long as I can get some AA cover from allies where needed. In my Shokaku or Implac, I have no such luck, there are legit games where I can annoy/strike the lone DD and that's about it. After that I spot but I'm essentially resigned to being bottom of the XP board. At the same time you can be top-tier in a CV and laugh at all the ships you can easily strike. The changes I suggest above would address all that. NB: Obviously the actual numbers would need to be refined but as long as you set some sort of success conditions you can always adjust towards success. It really does feel like WGs measures of success are far too generic and need to be more specific down to ship, plane and torpedo. I hope you enjoyed this.
  6. S4pp3R’s CV/AA 0801/2 Rebalance Reddit: Please comment, vote on reddit as well if able, I really want to get this idea out there!
  7. 現在很多航母玩家抱怨說,飛機飛過去一下全被打趴了! 事實上今天打了7局X階BB CA CL下來,我覺得不如先前0.8.0那樣看到航母就感到不舒服,而在飛機攻擊我過程中,我卻沒有感到很大的威脅,因為航母追我打我個兩三次,我竟然就打下9架左右,並且我還不是使用美巡英巡這些防空強大到變態的船。 這也是現在航母玩家的痛,會罵可以理解,但不代表不能用,只是我自己感覺是X階戰艦防空對目前就算是同是X階航母來說,真的太強大了〜 跟改版前一樣的問題,飛機飛過去黑煙一來很容易全趴,我自己打,碰到9~10階船,特別是美巡雙防空+米陶,就算一對一,一輪過去都被打下6架飛機過,更曾被黑煙炮一輪一次性8~9架飛機全沒了 ......碰到這種我這種普通玩家,那輸出真的就是慘慘慘... ....最後就是開始改變打法 自己連打10場打8跟10階航母自己都很意外10連勝,但幾場下來輸出比我開其他艦種都還糟糕,輸出真得慘不忍睹。 我不是大神,只能改變打法,整場主要在做的就是開光,叫隊友支援圍毆,幫忙丟飛機防空,還有干擾打擊想佔點的還有防守再搶我方點的敵方,變成輔助為主的感覺,這大概是我連勝的原因吧! 目前飛機投完彈返回船艦,是原地抬升到脫離防空射程高度才返回,在升高過程中又極容易被擊落, 現在反而是許多航母玩家不能再如同0.8.0修正前一樣浪來浪去,瀟灑走一回 所以飛機不夠用了!整備速度跟不上了! 修正後再開,的確沒之前那麼容易打出漂亮的傷害,應該說傷害差非常多,我是普通玩家加上手殘型,所以現在模式最大的好處是比先前版本容易上手點 現在使用白龍,有時傷害真差到不好意思講,列星頓也有個6〜7萬,想想還是可以用的,但真的就是一不小心或碰到對方歐氣爆發,黑煙一來飛機就被全打趴了 所以使用上在飛機決定攻擊前要更謹慎,別再像過去一樣直衝船團(現在就算不衝船參照團也。很容易被打趴),飛機投完彈原地抬升到脫離過程,絕對全滅 而在防空上部分X階船防空真得過於強大,這部分在已經削弱航母情況下,WOWS不應該再同步把防空調升,建議應該要下修。
  8. After CV rework, CV is weaker than it should be.They may much weaker than they are reworked before. The extreme improve of AA increase the rate of shooting down the aircraft of some strong AA ship like Worcester of USA, Minotaur of UK, they give a good protect to other teammates away from the attack of CV.These ships can do something like this very easily.Even the income of CV- Musashi of JP also can protect herself under CV's attack after CV rework.And this is not the only problem on CV rework. So, players discover styles to play after CV rewoked.Such as long range torpedo attack using Hakuryu of JP, return aircraft immediately after the first attack group’s run inorder to avoid heavy AA from many ships. However, WG see these playing styles as 'bug 'and in update they 'fixed' these 'bug'. Longer time for aircraft reach the height in order to become invulnerable to AA Changing several features of the Japanese torpedo bombers Although WG made a change on AA,they change the efficiency of different type of AA guns,it doesn't help aircraft attack under AA fire.The damage of AA explosions decrease but it won't be a great decrese and the constant damage of AA guns are buffed.It doesn't look like a nerf.It may be only a balance or even it is a buff. These changes and extremely high efficiency AA maybe a choice for WG to 'balancing' the game but this affect the possibility of CV on attacking ship and the usage of CV.For the situation now, it seems that CV are not totally reworked.WG may need to have more improvement or changes on CV and AA
  9. MikuChrome

    Enough is enough

    Well done WoWS team, you just achieved exactly what WoT did to "Artillery rework". The whole game is now unenjoyable with this "CV Rework", haven't you learn anything like at all ? You have like the whole community as a reference to prevent this from happening but no you just not get it don't you, you just have to push this through because you spend your time and resources on it. SEA server potentially be the "worst" server, for what reason, why don't you try to find that out by simply visiting the place and see the meta as a reference to make the game better and more enjoyable ??? So many misturn starts with Belfast, British Battleships, British Destroyers and all other type of unbalanced/premium ships introduced but we all can accept this to certain level since it doesn't really effecting much players. Bugs that exists since beta still around the players can still accept it since again it doesn't effect much players, GUI is an annoyance of waiting and stuttering but we love the game so whatever. But this .......This is too much You have 4 classes of ships 3 of which are surface units having a role of a footsoldier. The last one have a role comparable to a "Commander" role in some FPS games, no doubt about it this is hard to balance it out since it plays completely different. Since you want that role to be somewhat accessible to all kind of players by toning it down to be somewhat closer to surface units gameplay..... Now look at your magic. All 3 surface units are now basically a punching bag for the game, AA ships can't even fend off for itself every single one of them either have to hide in fear or flocked up like a sheeps waiting to be picked off. I don't know what you're trying to achieve other than alienating those 3 classes of ships out because your magic did exactly that, Making the "Commander" role play like a Footsoldier. If the players get to choose between the two role with no limitation everyone will no doubt pick the one that will grant them more power than the other role. The change that changes nothing. You say this change will make the class less dominant, which make sense, considering you're tuning the role of a "commander" to be more of a footsoldier. Fixing the problem of fishermen altogether. Do you failed to realise when a group of players want to rip your game aparts they absolutely will !? You're suppose to reward these players for going through your work to an extreme and accept that not all the players are going to do that but no you just have to attempt to bring them down to the same level as other. For how long do you think these players will stay the same level as the other, think about it, these group of players loved your game so much they will rip the game apart to be up there at the top. Sooner or later they will be back achieving what they always do so what's the point of this so called "change" other than alienating more players and potentially enraging these hardcore fans ? Also if I have to be more direct on this subject this is exactly what the game is like 2 years ago before all the AA buff and CV Changes. You just need to learn to let go of these wasted resources/time otherwise its the players letting go.
  10. I have an idea. maybe. ?? hmmmmmm............ Why not add a some features that every players can control their AA manually so that they won't whine anymore, pointing or blaming the team, the CV, etc. for their bad gameplay? Scenario: Planes on the air, enemy ships on front. its either you focus on firing an enemy ships and make the AI control the AA and damage would be based on RNG or leave your main battery guns, and manually control the AA to shot down some enemy planes. hmmm? what do you think?
  11. 現在大家的電腦硬件都大致上來了,WG是否可以把刪掉的AA特效重新加入遊戲中,現在最高特效下AA攻擊的時候也只是有點聲音而已,畫面都沒。希望WG能重新加入AA特效。
  12. asdfg20905


    目前AA3倍就足夠把中途島飛機打爆 下個版本又要提升到4倍? https://youtu.be/-Da0LK6cB44 棒20171107_013920_PASA015-Midway-1945_50_Gold_harbor.wowsreplay
  13. PYT_Argen

    Balance of AA and CV

    I have played World of Warship for 1 year.And some player and I find that,in high tier games,we seldom saw Aircraft Carriers(CV) in the matching.I know that when the tier of game become higher, CV will be harder to attack enemy. It may make some players give up to play CV in high tier game. However,as I see,this is not the only reason that make players give up. On high tier ships,their anti-aircraft(AA) damage is enough for keep themselves and their teammate safe.This setting is reasonable but some players make the AA damage of their ships become very high by using upgrades and commander skills.I have tried to play CV in the public test server.Although,there is no problem with Cruisers(CA) and Battleships(BB) increase their AA damage,some AA damage is too high that all the planes will be shot down before they can throw bombs or torpedoes.Also,this kind of AA will build up a area that CV players may lose many or even all the planes while that ship can be undetected. Sometime I also see destroyers(DD) use the same method.Some DD have high basic AA damage,such as Akizuki of Japan,Fletcher of USA and Grozovoi of USSR.This method is very suitable for them to shoot down planes and lucky only a few number of DD can have the terrible AA as I said before.However,a few days ago defensive AA fire consumables of USA DD and USSR DD has been increased to 4 time AA damage after consumables activated.Nearly higher than other ships using AA skill and upgrades. Moreover,since ver. 0.6.3,"Alt"-attack has been removed form tier 4-5 CV to protect the ships which don't have enough AA to keep themselves safe.This is helpful for low tier ships but at the same time, Japanese CV will easily lose air supremacy when they are fighting with USA CV.This may reduce the number of Japanese CV player. Finally,I would like to know that is this phenomenon is same as developers expected.If no,will they are going to have some improvement for CV players.
  14. Aniket_Sengupta

    T22 wrong AA rating

    The T22's AA specifications appear to include its 105mm main guns and hence put up a rating of 23 while in reality it should be the same as Ernst Gaede which is 12 or may be even 11 because of lesser number of guns and more vulnerable to getting knocked out. I think the reason for this error is the fact that most of the KMS ships(other than DDs) are equipped with the dual purpose 105mm L65 canons which add to both secondary artillery and AA defence. The game is currently treating all of the german 105mm as the same it seems though in different codenames.
  15. Does the captain skill "Adrenaline Rush" affects reload time of AA or DP guns against air? I saw an old post said "since the AA guns calculate as damage per second, and they don't have reload time, it won't affect" Just want to confirm it, thanks!
  16. Kucingkurus

    Lexington's buggged Anti-Aircraft

    so i recently played 2 random battles with my lexington after weeks of absence. i noticed something frustrating, with AA rating of 81(one of the best), and using Anti-aircraft consumables, in the first game i only take down 3 of 8 shokaku's torpedo bombers that striked me. and the second, i only take down 5 of 12 lexington's dive bombers. what happened? before i upgraded the hull (with aa rating about 60s) i always wiped out almost every planes with consumables used. is there any solid explanation for this phenomenon, or it's just a bug bundled in the new update?.
  17. Storm_Raiser

    About the Iowa "C" hull mod

    So I'm about to get the C hull for my Iowa and I noticed that it actually removes 17 of her AA guns but still manages to Improve her AA by 1 point ... how does that work exactly?
  18. iChaseGaming

    Texas Review - No Fly Zone

    Here's a review of the Texas
  19. EULA_violator

    how OP is Mikhail kutuzov's AA?

    right now now i have 16 captain skills on my MK and i'm thinking of redistributing my point because i'm about to get my 17th skill point so right now i have BFT, situational awareness, incomeing, fire alert, superintenent, AFT, and CE so i want to forgo AFT and BFT and exchange them for EM and DE, but i want to know how much is MK's AA rateing with AFT, BFT and manual AA. can anyone tell me how much is MK's AA with full config?
  20. So I already created this topic in the Suggestion thread, but now I would like to see what the Discussion thread thinks about this idea. So one night I was playing in my Tirpitz sailing the high seas when out of the blue I saw a USS DB and a TB squadron making a bee line for me. I already had my BB's fighter in the air waiting for enemy planes to get closer, and as the two enemy squadrons got closer (around 7km) I went ahead and CTRL click the TB since I view them as more of a threat. Here's where my problem comes in, even though I chose to focus on the TD sq with AA, my fighter plane determined that he would go for the DB sq since they were closer to him (by like 100-200m) as he flew his patrol, and since none of the enemy TB were shot down on their approach I ended up eating 4 torps from that fly by, mean while my fighter shot down 3 DB before they could even reach my ship (wishing that he would have done this to the TBs instead). Now since my short story is over I'll get to the summery. I'm suggesting that WG should give BB's and CA's that have fighter planes the ability select an enemy sq and focus on it in a similar fashion like the ships AA's do. If I CTRL click a enemy plane sq then my fighter (if in the air) should also focus that squadron as well. [This part is not necessary for the main suggestion to work, just an idea] So we can't just allow this as a default function for BB's and CA's right away, there should be a way to earn this ability to use in game. I propose that if you want to be able to tell your fighter to focus then you will need to research a commander skill (maybe a tier 3 or 4 skill). This will force players to pick and choose this skill against other skills. Also I would like to point out that your fighter will still only be bound to patrol within his normal fight radius and you will not have any control on his fight pattern, he will circle over head like normal. Now this is something I would like to see implemented, it makes sense that your ship should be able to communicate with the pilot and tell him which enemy sq. to focus (it's not like he doesn't have a radio up there). Let me know what the rest of you think about this.
  21. Got this idea long ago, but never really considered it until now. TLDR version: make shooting down planes grant exp, and shooting down planes give your team a +2 in score during games. Lately, there have been a lot of complaining about how US ships are ‘underpowered’, well, maybe they are not really underpowered, maybe it’s just the current game rules doesn’t show their full effectiveness. Besides, I think we can all agree that before the nerf, Cheatland is unstoppable. Anyways, get back to the topic, people have always complained about how US battleships and cruisers have bad shell dispersion, bad shell arc etc. Well let’s face it, the reason behind it is that have trouble hitting your enemies = low damage dealt = low experience per match. That is where the problem is, people are complaining because they have lower experience than their Japanese counterparts. Here’s the thing, US ships have superior AA, functions best in groups, and except in a few instances, their ships armor is generally heavier than their Japanese counter parts (again, even in a Nagato I cannot see any ways to get citadel on a Cheatland. However, AA is more of a, you know, ‘passive skill’. What’s more, shooting down planes does not grant experience, and this is where the problem lies. For example, most of you would probably agree that Bogue got a much better advantage over Zuiho. It can overwhelm the Zuiho with ease. However, the average experience Bogue gets is actually lower than that of Zuiho’s. Why? Well cause shooting down planes doesn’t grant experience! While the Zuiho, though its planes will get shoot down very frequently, have two torpedo squadrons and can deal damage a 201 Bogue can never achieve. Another example, People complain about Zao because it can invisible fire, and Des Moines, having a bad shell arc and hard to invisible fire, a lot of US cruiser just end up defending CVs and subsequently low experience. You know, the only thing Zao good at is invisible fire. If this is nerfed (the developers are talking about ‘reworking’ the Zao). It is even more useless than Des Moines because Japanese AA is a joke. Well, here is the thing, I think, if shooting down planes can grant experience, then US ships will have a huge increase in experience, therefore it compensates for their inability to deal decent damage. And Japanese ships will not have to go through all the nerfs (R.I.P Mogami with AFT you will be missed dearly). And the best thing is, everyone benefits from this, cause it’s not like Japanese ships can’t shoot down planes. Another idea I would like to suggest is that shooting down planes should grant +2 in score during domination mode (and any mode which includes points). Right now high tier US CVs have a much lower win rate, not because inability to deal damage, but because less squadron=hard to catch DD=less effective at late part of game in which detection of enemy ships and movement is sometimes key to winning the battle. However, I think this can be fixed to a degree, by having points gained from shooting down planes, US CVs can contribute to the team more as their fighter is superior to the Japanese Ones. And let’s face it man, even in real life Air superiority is a thing, and the survival of planes are just important as ships. Think about Letye Gulf, the IJN lost air superiority in the great turkey shoot, and they don’t have a lot of planes either, the Japanese tried hard to keep up with the plane shortage, they even transported all the planes on Formosa to help the battle. Still, the Northern Decoy squadron have little planes left. Alright, I think this is all I have to say, let me know what you think. P.S: If you like this post please +1 me cuz no one ever bothered to +1 my post
  22. So earlier tonight I was playing in my Tirpitz sailing the high seas when out of the blue I saw a USS DB and a TB squadron making a bee line for me. I already had my BB's fighter in the air waiting for enemy planes to get closer, and as the two enemy squadrons got closer (around 7km) I went ahead and CTRL click the TB since I view them as more of a threat. Here's where my problem comes in, even though I chose to focus on the TD sq with AA, my fighter plane determined that he would go for the DB sq since they were closer to him (by like 100-200m) as he flew his patrol, and since none of the enemy TB were shot down on their approach I ended up eating 4 torps from that fly by, mean while my fighter shot down 3 DB before they could even reach my ship (wishing that he would have done this to the TBs instead). Now since my short story is over I'll get to the summery. I'm suggesting that WG should give BB's and CA's that have fighter planes the ability select an enemy sq and focus on it in a similar fashion like the ships AA's do. If I CTRL click a enemy plane sq then my fighter (if in the air) should also focus that squadron as well. So we can't just allow this as a default function for BB's and CA's right away, there should be a way to earn this ability to use in game. I propose that if you want to be able to tell your fighter to focus then you will need to research a commander skill (maybe a tier 3 or 4 skill). This will force players to pick and choose this skill against other skills. Also I would like to point out that your fighter will still only be bound to patrol within his normal fight radius and you will not have any control on his fight pattern, he will circle over head like normal. Now this is something I would like to see implemented, it makes sense that your ship should be able to communicate with the pilot and tell him which enemy sq to focus (it's not like he doesn't have a radio up there). Let me know what the rest of you think about this.
  23. I've been playing higher tier games (tiers 6+) for a while now since the new patch and haven't noticed the effects much, but since the recent patches where AA was rebalanced with emphasis on higher calibre AA doing more damage, I've noticed that the ships equipped mainly with small calibre AA like the Japanese 25mm and the 40mm Bofors (or equivalent Russian 37mm) have fared poorly against low tier carriers in tiers 4-5. In these tiers, granted AA for most ships is weak, but almost no ships have large calibre AA/DP guns and the few exceptions being ships like the Nicholas (which has 4x5" DP guns, plus its smaller 12.7mm machine guns and 28mm chicago pianos). This allows carrier players to attack us regular surface ship players with impunity, which prior to the recent patch was not the case as the smaller calibre AA was able to at least deal some damage to attacking planes to give competent players a chance to doge and evade attacks. The new patch also seriously hurts ships like the Yubari - with nerfs to advanced firing training, basic firing training and small calibre AA, the ship is now poorly armed (as before), has poor module health (1 hit = engine or rudder gone, as before), has a slow rate of fire for its remaining guns, and its AA struggles to shoot planes down (even with bombard ability), when it once was the king of low tier AA. While I love this game, it really is a pain to have carriers not deal with as much attrition as they should. While any ship can do well in the right hands (even the Yubari) , - Getting sunk by a carrier and not shooting down a single plane for it is rather insulting to say the least, when you've made every effort to avoid this demise in a AA speciality ship.
  24. Not sure if they made changes to the achievement, but as the medals section says for "30 aircraft shot down by AA or fighters" I've had at least 2 games by memory where I fulfilled this criteria (using surface ships and CV's) and didn't get any awards for this.. http://i67.tinypic.com/2guy68g.png[/img] Also sidenote, can anyone recommend image hosting (direct to show images on forums) sites as my go to site tinypic has repeatedly come up with the error message saying this image extension is not allowed