Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'AA'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • 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
  • Public Test Forums
    • English Speaking Community
    • 繁體中文討論區
    • 日本語コミュニティ
  • Locked Threads
    • Locked Threads

Calendars

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Drag Interests

Found 25 results

  1. 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!
  2. 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。
  3. 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 0.8.0.1 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
  4. 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.
  5. 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?
  6. 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。
  7. asdfg20905

    AA平衡的很棒

    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
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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!
  11. 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?.
  12. 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?
  13. iChaseGaming

    Texas Review - No Fly Zone

    Here's a review of the Texas
  14. 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?
  15. 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.
  16. 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
  17. 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.
  18. 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.
  19. 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
  20. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming-class_battleship#Modifications If you're to lazy to read yourself, I'll just tell you the important bits myself: Under the terms of the 1930 London Naval Treaty, Wyoming was to be demilitarized and converted into a training ship. During the demilitarization process, her anti-torpedo bulges, side armor, and half of her main battery guns were removed. Wyoming was modernized at Norfolk Navy Yard from 12 January to 3 April 1944; the reconstruction removed the last of her three 12-inch gun turrets, and replaced them with four twin and two single enclosed mounts for 5"/38 caliber guns. New fire control radars were also installed; these modifications allowed Wyoming to train anti-aircraft gunners with the most modern equipment they would use while in combat with the fleet. Modifications to Arkansas during World War II were kept to a minimum. In 1942, Arkansas received a new tripod foremast and bridgework, along with more anti-aircraft guns throughout the war. By 1945, she carried nine quadruple 40 mm Bofors mounts and twenty-eight 20 mm Oerlikons, and the number of 3 in guns had been increased to ten. This tells us that they essentially turned it into an AA escort, and a CL/CA. Could this possibly be a replacement for the Cleveland once it is changed to the CA (I believe so - Correct me if I'm wrong). Perhaps WG could take a look at this?
  21. Gezeiten_Heimatwelt

    Anti-air DPS Spreadsheet

    (Not sure is this the right section for it though) This is a simple spreadsheet I made as a reference to compare various ships' AA capabilities. Format is simple: - Column 1 is AA Gun DPS: Long range/Medium range/Short range. - Column 2 is AA Gun range: Long range/Medium range/Short range. Note that some ships might not have all 3 categories (such as later IJN vessels which tend to lack short range AA guns). Also, AA DPS stats are cumulative, which means AA DPS at shorter range is combined by longer range AA, to depict the real average DPS enemy planes take as they cross into different AA gun range. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14W3LZpPFOMnxjts1L_R0GQJhoScpRl8LHPKkILfIS4A/edit#gid=867585050 P.S: I might have made small mistakes, feel free to comment so I can fix, thankyou.
  22. Pseudoscope

    Anti-Air

    Hi Dev's, Not sure on how the AA is implemented but as far as I can tell each gun only works on 1 squadron at a time. It think it'd be cool to see an area of effect stance taken on with AA with the preferential AA selection being used to prioritize. This would punish CV's that stack their aircraft one on-top of the other, and would be more realistic. The more planes in a region of sky, the more likely a shell or round will hit them. Cheers Pseudo
  23. Just some shower thoughts about rewards from getting AA kills. **DISCLAIMER** All numbers are for simplicity sake, I don't have any information on the exact amount of XP/Credits for aircraft kills. **DISCLAIMER** First, lets start off by giving each kind of aircraft a base XP value. [This is for an individual aircraft kill] Seaplanes(Non-CV aircraft): 10XP Fighters: 25XP Unloaded Bombers: 35XP Loaded Bombers: 50XP I'm still thinking on how to scale credit rewards so that someone doesn't over earn in lower tiers or under earn at higher, as well as wether or not to add a bonus for getting the "Last hit" on a flight. Next, some modifiers [These modifiers would effect both XP and credit gain and are based on an individual aircraft kill] BBs,DDs,CVs,Bombers and Seaplanes: 1x Fighter Aircraft, CL/CAs: 1.25x CA/CLs while the AA barrage ability is active: 1.5x These modifiers hopefully would give CAs and CVs a bigger incentive to go the AA route and also encourages CAs to stick close to their capital ships. Using the "Clear skies" achievement as a benchmark for players who want to aim for air superiority(30 downed aircraft), if they versed a full strike loaded IJN CV, they would receive around 1312XP - 1875XP depending if the enemy aircraft delivered their ordnance or not and if its a CA/CL, didn't get any AA kills while the Barrage ability was active. The downsides of this could possibly people focusing too much on their AA duties or people becoming greedy for AA kills since they're much simpler to get then ship kills. I'm open to hear what you guys think about this.
  24. Dunno if this is a known issue Well, I was staring at my Omaha ( and wishing it turn into a Cleveland) then noticed something. The AA Guns tab show the wrong number of x4 28mm mounts. The ingame model of the second hull has 10 quad mounts while the AA Guns tab shows it only has 8 quad mounts. Slight buff anyone? Also pardon for the pro-tier paint game
×