Idea to change CVs

[AkiraKurai]

Have CVs become similar to the Dutch Line but they can keep the sqad size and change attach direction with A D in a limited scope, maybe 120 degrees.
They can select their squads similar to traditional RTS CVs and the time it takes for a strike to get there be similar, maybe worse, to the dutch Strikes but will have their standard armarment drop speeds.
Have their strike zone be limited to something like 17 kms at T10, adjust accordingly for "balance".

They'll be able to use their hull armaments with DD gun range and have similar mobility to what they have now, also they won't have infite planes like the dutch but will carry over the current CV plane regen.

The gameplay should be unique as majority of the CVs have DD caliber weapons and have a unuual armor layout if we think about it.
The limit on the degree of attack angles makes it so that repositioning your CV to strike the target is nessecary and doing so will make you extremly vulnerable since you have BB detect and cant take the CE captain skill.

[That WoT Player]

49 minutes ago, AkiraKurai said:

since you have BB detect and cant take the CE captain skill.

The hidden menace captain skill is a thing. 

[AkiraKurai]

Just now, That WoT Player said:

The hidden menace captain skill is a thing. 

Woops, I forgot that skill exists since rarely anyone talks about it. I guess remove that concealment bonus or increase detect of all CVs to accomidate for it.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

1 hour ago, AkiraKurai said:

Have CVs become similar to the Dutch Line but they can keep the sqad size and change attach direction with A D in a limited scope, maybe 120 degrees.
They can select their squads similar to traditional RTS CVs and the time it takes for a strike to get there be similar, maybe worse, to the dutch Strikes but will have their standard armarment drop speeds.
Have their strike zone be limited to something like 17 kms at T10, adjust accordingly for "balance".

They'll be able to use their hull armaments with DD gun range and have similar mobility to what they have now, also they won't have infite planes like the dutch but will carry over the current CV plane regen.

The gameplay should be unique as majority of the CVs have DD caliber weapons and have a unuual armor layout if we think about it.
The limit on the degree of attack angles makes it so that repositioning your CV to strike the target is nessecary and doing so will make you extremly vulnerable since you have BB detect and cant take the CE captain skill.

Idea has been posed many times...WG hasn't taken it up.

Limited range planes would make a mockery of the very idea of an aircraft carrier. This doesn't interest me at all.

[AdmiralThunder]

CV's themselves are actually fine for the most part. They don't need changing (read on before having a stroke and aneurism). 

Strictly speaking the CV's we have now are weaker than the old RTS CV's by a big stretch. So many people forget that or weren't around for RTS CV's. I remember those days and how a good CV player could cross drop you with torps and nuke you from full HP back to port or have multiple DB's drop you for pretty much the same results. The power of RTS CV's was so much greater than what we have now. They were a lot harder to play then what we have now but man they were so much stronger if you could do it well.

What needs work these days is AA. When WG reworked CV's for 0.8.0 they also reworked AA and massively neutered it. THAT is what is really behind the hate for the current CV's; people just don't look at the why just the hate. Current CV's at best nickel and dime you to death. No CV in game can drop a full HP ship and send it back to port like RTS CV's could do outside very rare instances like Colossus AP rockets getting a perfect strike to nuke a Cruiser or somehow a DD eats a whole wave of torps from something like FDR. The alpha is just not there as a rule. Overall a CV will have to make multiple strikes to take a ship out from full HP to dead (even DD's).

So what is needed to even the playing field between CV's and the other surface ships is AA needs to be made more effective. That doesn't mean a no fly zone on every ship. There has to be a balance between CV's being able to strike and ships being able to defend and right now that is massively out of whack. What they should do to improve things...

1. Give us Capt Skills and upgrades for AA that actually do something like they used to. If a player invests into AA upgrades they should actually UPGRADE the AA. The skills and upgrades we have now don't do squat. Give us back the range increase and damage increase like we used to be able to spec for. Make it come at a cost to the player like it used to as well and that is the balance factor that would be needed. If you spec into AA your AA is dramatically boosted BUT you can't take survivability skills or main gun upgrades as examples because the points and upgrade slots are used for AA. But give us the option.
2. Boost base AA to similar levels from RTS days. It is borderline criminal what WG did to base AA in the rework. Ships like US BB's and CA's, BRN CL's, etc... are shadows of what they once were. Ships that are bristling with AA should actually have good base AA and right now so many don't. Those ships when upgraded (see #1) should pose a serious risk to the CV.
3. Base ranges for AA on many ships needs work. It is ridiculous that something like a high tier Italian ship only gets 4.6km AA range.  There should be a minimum base AA range for all ships based on tier. T10 ships shouldn't have sub 5km AA range base as an example. A CV should not be able to make a strike run and drop ordinance outside of the AA zone (hello Comrade Nakhimov). Every time a CV attacks it should have to face AA before it can drop.  
4. Every ship should have some form of AA. Forget IRL here this is a game. While this is a lower tier thing no ship that can face a CV should be without at least some rudimentary AA. WG has given every ship (most anyway - still a few without) ASW even when they didn't have it IRL to deal with the abomination that is Subs so every ship should get AA.

JMHO but I don't think CV's themselves are actually the issue. It is what WG did to AA that is really behind the problems. It has to be fair to both sides here. CV's should be able to get at least 1 strike in against any ship as a rule. If that ship has good AA, and especially if they build to enhance it, however, the CV should pay heavily and that just doesn't really happen unless the Cv player is utterly horrendous. Even vs a weak AA ship the CV should still take some damage/lost planes seeing as they have a plane printing press on board. Right now CV's just don't pay a heavy enough price for attacking ships and THAT is what really gets people cranked up; that feeling of being helpless.

If I were to make an actual change to CV's to go along with ^^^ it would be to add a delay to the CV's squads being launched. Not a long one, maybe 10 seconds or so, but I would stop the ability to spam flights instantly over and over. Give CV's a reload and slow that out pouring of planes slightly. So hit F to send planes back to the CV and there is a 10 sec reload before you can send the next squad out. Also, ONE CV per match period regardless of tier. 2 CV's is too much.

Edited October 20, 2023 by AdmiralThunder

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

27 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

Strictly speaking the CV's we have now are weaker than the old RTS CV's by a big stretch.

I don't think that's true. RTS CVs had way more alpha strike...but that alpha was very brittle.

Current CV strike is not immediately terrifying...but the pure DPS output is astonishing...especially as ships get closer. The number of ships who push in close to my CV expecting an easy kill but then find themselves dead is large.

29 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

What needs work these days is AA. When WG reworked CV's for 0.8.0 they also reworked AA and massively neutered it. THAT is what is really behind the hate for the current CV's; people just don't look at the why just the hate. Current CV's at best nickel and dime you to death. No CV in game can drop a full HP ship and send it back to port like RTS CV's could do outside very rare instances like Colossus AP rockets getting a perfect strike to nuke a Cruiser or somehow a DD eats a whole wave of torps from something like FDR. The alpha is just not there as a rule. Overall a CV will have to make multiple strikes to take a ship out from full HP to dead (even DD's).

While true, making AA stronger...like they did in 0.8.5, did nothing to solve the fundamental problem...which is that fleet air defense is impossible to provide in the current system. All AA does is mitigate damage, it does not offer any sort of defense.

THAT is what drives the angst.

30 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

Give us Capt Skills and upgrades for AA that actually do something like they used to. If a player invests into AA upgrades they should actually UPGRADE the AA. The skills and upgrades we have now don't do squat. Give us back the range increase and damage increase like we used to be able to spec for. Make it come at a cost to the player like it used to as well and that is the balance factor that would be needed. If you spec into AA your AA is dramatically boosted BUT you can't take survivability skills or main gun upgrades as examples because the points and upgrade slots are used for AA. But give us the option.

Won't matter. Spec into AA all you want. I as the CV captain will just sink the rest of your fleet...and then come for you when plane losses don't matter anymore.

I will ALWAYS have the initiative of when and if to risk my planes.

Buff your AA to the moon...I won't care.

31 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

Boost base AA to similar levels from RTS days. It is borderline criminal what WG did to base AA in the rework. Ships like US BB's and CA's, BRN CL's, etc... are shadows of what they once were. Ships that are bristling with AA should actually have good base AA and right now so many don't. Those ships when upgraded (see #1) should pose a serious risk to the CV.

...and I will just avoid losing planes unless I want to (i.e. the benefit of risking the planes favors me).

Like I said, we tried this already in 0.8.5.

31 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

Base ranges for AA on many ships needs work. It is ridiculous that something like a high tier Italian ship only gets 4.6km AA range.  There should be a minimum base AA range for all ships based on tier. T10 ships shouldn't have sub 5km AA range base as an example. A CV should not be able to make a strike run and drop ordinance outside of the AA zone (hello Comrade Nakhimov). Every time a CV attacks it should have to face AA before it can drop.  

This should absolutely be done...however, it won't be enough.

32 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

Every ship should have some form of AA. Forget IRL here this is a game. While this is a lower tier thing no ship that can face a CV should be without at least some rudimentary AA. WG has given every ship (most anyway - still a few without) ASW even when they didn't have it IRL to deal with the abomination that is Subs so every ship should get AA.

Eh.

Most ships at the lower tiers will have far more success using the rudder to mitigate aerial ordinance...as was historical.

33 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

CV's should be able to get at least 1 strike in against any ship as a rule.

If this is true, then you can't actually buff AA enough to make a difference to the CV player. His advantage in speed means he holds the initiative...and he will ALWAYS ensure that going into your AA bubble gives him the advantage.

The only REAL fix here is to give ships controllable fighters, so they can go AFTER the enemy strike planes and prevent them from flying wherever they want. THAT will provide fleet air defense.

Buffing AA will do nothing to change the problems CVs cause to the game.

[AkiraKurai]

32 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

Boost base AA to similar levels from RTS days. It is borderline criminal what WG did to base AA in the rework. Ships like US BB's and CA's, BRN CL's, etc... are shadows of what they once were. Ships that are bristling with AA should actually have good base AA and right now so many don't. Those ships when upgraded (see #1) should pose a serious risk to the CV.

I don't think it's possible to boost base AA to RTS days becuase RTS CVs where a actual threat in the 100 to 0 department and was mitigated by having AA actually perma remove said planes from the game.

Ships that are "bristling with AA" still do exist, stop living in the past where you think DM is still the no 1 in the AA department. All the AA went to the Soviets, don't know why.

Side note, Majority of the CVs in game don't even have sub minute regen and for those who do it barely matters, also note that CVs usually hold a squad and a half, excluding rare but becoming more common cases where CVs would have 2 squads or more at the start, this means that a CV would in theory have at max about 4 squads per plane type for what you would see at T10.

42 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

Base ranges for AA on many ships needs work. It is ridiculous that something like a high tier Italian ship only gets 4.6km AA range.  There should be a minimum base AA range for all ships based on tier. T10 ships shouldn't have sub 5km AA range base as an example. A CV should not be able to make a strike run and drop ordinance outside of the AA zone (hello Comrade Nakhimov). Every time a CV attacks it should have to face AA before it can drop.  

Range is fine.

The only CV that can drop outside of AA range is Nakhimov, it's more of a issue relegated to that ship.

45 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

but I don't think CV's themselves are actually the issue. It is what WG did to AA that is really behind the problems. It has to be fair to both sides here. CV's should be able to get at least 1 strike in against any ship as a rule. If that ship has good AA, and especially if they build to enhance it, however, the CV should pay heavily and that just doesn't really happen unless the Cv player is utterly horrendous.

I think we saw how effective a AA built ship can be in the seasons where CVs where allowed, then again, it was mainly 2 cruisers that displayed it, this effect also applied to Hurricane league so it does affect even the top 5%.

12 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

While true, making AA stronger...like they did in 0.8.5, did nothing to solve the fundamental problem...which is that fleet air defense is impossible to provide in the current system. All AA does is mitigate damage, it does not offer any sort of defense.

THAT is what drives the angst.

0.8.5 wasn't really even a buff to AA, it was just a adjustment to how AA worked, instead of it being spread, it would focus on 1 plane at a time which sure, would take it so that it would guarentee a plane loss, it didn't fix the rate at which how many strikes a CV would get off as it would only focus the last strike plane as you can see by their old patch notes.

Quote

AA defense mounts now inflict damage only to the last aircraft in the squadron. Thus, a player can be confident that their AA defenses are focused on a single target, shooting it down much quicker as a result. At the same time, most of a squadron’s aircraft will remain untouched during the attack, especially those in the attacking flight. The first planes in the squadron will receive damage only if a player is unable to avoid the shell explosions of AA defenses.

I don't really see how fleet air defense doesn't work, group 3 AA speced ships together that aren't DDs and you'll find that the CV paid their whole squad for a single strike that may not even reach the target.

 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

16 minutes ago, AkiraKurai said:

All the AA went to the Soviets

No.

This is a common misconception. Soviet ships have good flak...but flak is irrelevant against good CV players.

18 minutes ago, AkiraKurai said:

I don't really see how fleet air defense doesn't work, group 3 AA speced ships together that aren't DDs and you'll find that the CV paid their whole squad for a single strike that may not even reach the target.

Doing that means the CVs team has already won.

No competent CV is even going to bother approaching that...he doesn't need to. The enemy fleet has already ceded position to the other fleet. No need to strike it.

[AkiraKurai]

2 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

No.

This is a common misconception. Soviet ships have good flak...but flak is irrelevant against good CV players.

Doing that means the CVs team has already won.

No competent CV is even going to bother approaching that...he doesn't need to. The enemy fleet has already ceded position to the other fleet. No need to strike it.

Petro 196 constant dps

DM 105 constant dps

???????

[AdmiralThunder]

22 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I don't think that's true. RTS CVs had way more alpha strike...but that alpha was very brittle.

Current CV strike is not immediately terrifying...but the pure DPS output is astonishing...especially as ships get closer. The number of ships who push in close to my CV expecting an easy kill but then find themselves dead is large.

The alpha wasn't brittle it was that AA worked and AA skills and upgrades actually boosted it further. You could actually shoot planes down to weaken the strike "reliably and consistently" and CV's could actually be deplaned so they had to make their strikes count. If the RTS CV got the drop off and it hit you though you faced insta-nuking. The alpha was a HUGE leap above what we have now. 3 strikes now might equal about 2/3 of 1 strike in RTS days. Plus in RTS days the CV could have 2 torp squads and some DB all hit you at once as well magnifying the damage tremendously over what we have now. IMHO there is no comparison between the offense RTS vs Current. RTS wins in a walk away. It's the influence of AA that I spoke off that made a difference back then and didn't have you feeling so powerless like we do now.

I addressed your other point by A) overall AA improvements but also B) the launch delay. It was the exact scenario you speak of why I want that added. Modern CV's spam planes way too fast. It is one of their broken/unbalanced/unfair/however you want to describe it features. Slowing down how fast they can vomit planes would be a huge help to the other ship classes while not overly impacting the CV players.

30 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

While true, making AA stronger...like they did in 0.8.5, did nothing to solve the fundamental problem...which is that fleet air defense is impossible to provide in the current system. All AA does is mitigate damage, it does not offer any sort of defense.

THAT is what drives the angst.

Exactly and by increasing the range and damage, by improving base AA and the Capt skills and upgrade modules, you make it defensive instead of just mitigating. I am talking real changes to the AA system, skills, and upgrades. Not smoke and mirror token changes like WG has tried since the rework. They all fail because WG refuses to address the fundamental issue that AA is not effective now at all.  They screwed it up so bad it is not funny. They only try to balance it with the idea that the CV always needs to get through and don't actually try to balance that with the surface ship also needing the ability to defend itself vs the CV. Until they address that it will never be fixed. But that was my point - fix it properly don't just keep doing what they have been which doesn't work.

 

36 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Won't matter. Spec into AA all you want. I as the CV captain will just sink the rest of your fleet...and then come for you when plane losses don't matter anymore.

I will ALWAYS have the initiative of when and if to risk my planes.

Buff your AA to the moon...I won't care.

Ok. Whatever. LOL.

It WILL matter for the player being attacked. And if they can defend themselves vs the CV by improving their AA it gives them a chance when the CV comes for them late game (or early game or mid game). What if it is 2 or even 3 players that buffed their AA? That lessens your god like powers as a CV even more.

Your own condemnation of my ideas proves my point. You will avoid my AA enhanced ship most of the game (because you know I can make you pay) and only come for me when your plane losses won't matter. Well, it may not get to that point as I am able to stay alive longer without you damaging/killing me early which means I can influence the game and it may be ME coming for YOU late game and if that is the case me being able to defend against you matters. 

42 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

...and I will just avoid losing planes unless I want to (i.e. the benefit of risking the planes favors me).

Like I said, we tried this already in 0.8.5.

You are wrong here because NOTHING done post rework returns AA, or the skills/upgrades for AA, to RTS day levels/effectiveness which is what I suggested. Everything WG has done since the rework to supposedly "improve AA" has been flawed because they continue to favor the CV and its ability to land strikes into the equation as the main factor. Until they are willing to actually address the need for AA to be effective nothing they do will work because it is a flawed attempt at it. The most recent attempt they made never made it out of testing and my guess is that it actually made the CV pay some for attacking and thus they dropped it. And that is the problem. WG doesn't want other ships to be able to say NO to the CV. 

 

46 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

If this is true, then you can't actually buff AA enough to make a difference to the CV player. His advantage in speed means he holds the initiative...and he will ALWAYS ensure that going into your AA bubble gives him the advantage.

The only REAL fix here is to give ships controllable fighters, so they can go AFTER the enemy strike planes and prevent them from flying wherever they want. THAT will provide fleet air defense.

Buffing AA will do nothing to change the problems CVs cause to the game

Nope. Of course that would make a difference. A CV will be able to get that 1st strike off but not the 2nd and 3rd AND getting that 1st strike off will lead to plane losses which can add up even with the plane printing presses CV's have now. It limits how often the CV can attack you at a given moment and spreads it out more. If a CV player foolishly pushes it against a good AA ship and tries to get multiple strikes they lose all their planes and then late game they are screwed. 

Buffing AA is not a solution that makes CV's perfect by any stretch. Not really possible to do so as they can sit off unseen somewhere and strike you without being hit back unless somehow spotted. But it sure as heck helps the players being attacked and slows the CV down. Players wouldn't feel as helpless vs CV's either.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

10 minutes ago, AkiraKurai said:

Petro 196 constant dps

DM 105 constant dps

???????

Far aura alone is nearly irrelevant.

Tier 10 CV planes have 1500 - 2000 hp.

It's the medium aura that matters.

Petro: 248

DM: 416

Minotaur: 507

 

[AdmiralThunder]

28 minutes ago, AkiraKurai said:

I don't think it's possible to boost base AA to RTS days becuase RTS CVs where a actual threat in the 100 to 0 department and was mitigated by having AA actually perma remove said planes from the game.

Ships that are "bristling with AA" still do exist, stop living in the past where you think DM is still the no 1 in the AA department. All the AA went to the Soviets, don't know why.

Side note, Majority of the CVs in game don't even have sub minute regen and for those who do it barely matters, also note that CVs usually hold a squad and a half, excluding rare but becoming more common cases where CVs would have 2 squads or more at the start, this means that a CV would in theory have at max about 4 squads per plane type for what you would see at T10.

Range is fine.

The only CV that can drop outside of AA range is Nakhimov, it's more of a issue relegated to that ship

Boost AA to similar levels in RTS days means effectiveness not 100% copying it. AA worked in RTS days and it doesn't now. That is the point.

I am not living in the past and I never said DM should be AA king. It just gave examples of the ships that at one time were effective AA ships that now aren't. Yes, I know RU ships have long AA range and such (because Russian) but even they are not even close to the old RTS days AA ships effectiveness wise.

Range is NOT fine.

Funny I drop at the extreme outer edge or even just before AA range in IJN CV's like Kaga and Haku often. The have long approach times and the torps have a 5-6km range so if you drop with the ship coming at you (angled - not bow on which is a poor drop) you absolutely can drop outside AA range for most ships. And all RU CV's have 6km range torps not to mention skip bombs so they can ALL drop outside AA range or just as they barely enter it not just Nakhimov. It's a Russian CV thing not a Nakhimov thing. Sorry dude but NO.

[Verytis]

4 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

No.

This is a common misconception. Soviet ships have good flak...but flak is irrelevant against good CV players.

Doing that means the CVs team has already won.

No competent CV is even going to bother approaching that...he doesn't need to. The enemy fleet has already ceded position to the other fleet. No need to strike it.

The point of AA stacking is that a fleet must make between two opposite choices. Having an AA blob that a CV can't meaningfully hurt or being more vulnerable to CV but stronger map control.

Buffing AA to levels where individual ships can shrug off the CV, would ironically simplify the game. Perhaps AA CLs can have a small buff, but even they shouldn't have too much, because when combined with good manovuerability they just hard counter CVs in a vaccum.

 

4 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

I addressed your other point by A) overall AA improvements but also B) the launch delay. It was the exact scenario you speak of why I want that added. Modern CV's spam planes way too fast. It is one of their broken/unbalanced/unfair/however you want to describe it features. Slowing down how fast they can vomit planes would be a huge help to the other ship classes while not overly impacting the CV players.

High tier CVs still depend heavily on their reserves because a single plane takes over 1min to regen for most types. It can take as long as 10mins to rebuild 1 full squadron's worth of planes.

And even if your AA doesn't dampen their current attack, every plane they lose takes away from follow-up strikes.

 

Eg. A Haku has 6x2 torp plane squadrons.

It can strike up to 6 times in theory, but often loses half the planes against moderate/high AA. So it'll often only strike 2 or 3 times before needing to send new squadrons.

It'll absolutely rip apart a lone Yamato, however.

[AkiraKurai]

1 minute ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Far aura alone is nearly irrelevant.

Tier 10 CV planes have 1500 - 2000 hp.

It's the medium aura that matters.

Petro: 248

DM: 416

Minotaur: 507

 

That medium aura mean jack, there isn't a single medum aura that goes beyond 4, perhapse there is but I honestly can't think if any ship on the top of my head with more than 4km medium. Medium aura is the last thing you should be worried about as a CV as you have immunity immediatly after you drop and have mitigation on drop initiation, since CVs usually drop or initiate the drop around 3km with carpet and DBs, which get constant dps mitigation (TB drop closer but don't get mitigation have a heal instead). You're literally immune for about 75% of the time in medium. 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

14 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

reliably and consistently"

Actually, AA damage was highly variable. It was not consistent.

Plane losses were more important, as once lost they were gone.

16 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

Exactly and by increasing the range and damage, by improving base AA and the Capt skills and upgrade modules, you make it defensive instead of just mitigating. I am talking real changes to the AA system, skills, and upgrades. Not smoke and mirror token changes like WG has tried since the rework. They all fail because WG refuses to address the fundamental issue that AA is not effective now at all.  They screwed it up so bad it is not funny. They only try to balance it with the idea that the CV always needs to get through and don't actually try to balance that with the surface ship also needing the ability to defend itself vs the CV. Until they address that it will never be fixed. But that was my point - fix it properly don't just keep doing what they have been which doesn't work.

Even your proposed changes won't change AA enough to make it a true defense.

AA guns will NEVER be able to provide air defense against planes...because the plane will always retain the speed advantage against AA guns that have limited range.

Plus, even during RTS days...fleet air defense was provided by your friendly carrier's fighters...not by your AA guns.

18 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

Well, it may not get to that point as I am able to stay alive longer without you damaging/killing me early which means I can influence the game and it may be ME coming for YOU late game and if that is the case me being able to defend against you matters. 

I'll have greater influence than you, because I have cruiser damage output out of planes that can hit anywhere on the map.

19 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

Nope. Of course that would make a difference. A CV will be able to get that 1st strike off but not the 2nd and 3rd AND getting that 1st strike off will lead to plane losses which can add up even with the plane printing presses CV's have now. It limits how often the CV can attack you at a given moment and spreads it out more. If a CV player foolishly pushes it against a good AA ship and tries to get multiple strikes they lose all their planes and then late game they are screwed. 

FYI, Unless you are shooting down more than one strike of aircraft EACH TIME he attacks you...then you are losing the Regen rate race.

21 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

Buffing AA is not a solution that makes CV's perfect by any stretch. Not really possible to do so as they can sit off unseen somewhere and strike you without being hit back unless somehow spotted. But it sure as heck helps the players being attacked and slows the CV down. Players wouldn't feel as helpless vs CV's either.

Buffing AA would help the game, yes.

It is not a full solution to the problems.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

2 minutes ago, AkiraKurai said:

That medium aura mean jack, there isn't a single medum aura that goes beyond 4, perhapse there is but I honestly can't think if any ship on the top of my head with more than 4km medium. Medium aura is the last thing you should be worried about as a CV as you have immunity immediatly after you drop and have mitigation on drop initiation, since CVs usually drop or initiate the drop around 3km with carpet and DBs, which get constant dps mitigation (TB drop closer but don't get mitigation have a heal instead). You're literally immune for about 75% of the time in medium. 

If medium doesn't matter...far doesn't either. Far just doesn't do enough damage to ANYTHING to matter.

[AkiraKurai]

8 minutes ago, AdmiralThunder said:

Boost AA to similar levels in RTS days means effectiveness not 100% copying it. AA worked in RTS days and it doesn't now. That is the point.

I am not living in the past and I never said DM should be AA king. It just gave examples of the ships that at one time were effective AA ships that now aren't. Yes, I know RU ships have long AA range and such (because Russian) but even they are not even close to the old RTS days AA ships effectiveness wise.

Range is NOT fine.

Funny I drop at the extreme outer edge or even just before AA range in IJN CV's like Kaga and Haku often. The have long approach times and the torps have a 5-6km range so if you drop with the ship coming at you (angled - not bow on which is a poor drop) you absolutely can drop outside AA range for most ships. And all RU CV's have 6km range torps not to mention skip bombs so they can ALL drop outside AA range or just as they barely enter it not just Nakhimov. It's a Russian CV thing not a Nakhimov thing. Sorry dude but NO.

AA 100% did not work in the old RTS days, the implementation of AA was horrendous, planes didn't have health, instead what happened during those days was that planes had a set rate at which they would not explode and AA auras had a set rate of exploding a plane out of the sky. You would get inconsistent games where 1 game a DM would evaporate a squad and then the next none of the planes went poof and then you died.

Your torp example is the equivalent of having a 8km shima fire it's guns 8km out in open water, you can't hit it, but the shima's torps are also gimped down to 50 kts, also, this shima gets teleported beyond its torp range and requires about 40 seconds to attempt another 8km run with those 50 kt torps every time it fires a rack.

Suddenly that 8km shima sounds more like a fly than a threat.

Just now, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

If medium doesn't matter...far doesn't either. Far just doesn't do enough damage to ANYTHING to matter.

let's take a extreme example and use a AA speced petro with todays commanders, note that AA skills will be buffed in the future, and compare it to Hak DBs that is also fully kitted.

Hak will have 25,188 hp in this squad

Petro with constant will have 284 dps 497 when max re-enforced, secord re-enforcement will last 10 seconds, let's simplify the calculations and underweight how much AA the petro will do by having AA ramp up stay at 270 and jump to 472.5, this ramp up takes 5 seconds as well.

Petro will initiate priority when the planes enter for the instant damage, this will cuase the planes to lose 3.5% of their total hp, it's down to 24,306 at that instant
5*284=1420, 22,886 hp
(15 seconds in) 10*497=4970, 17,916 hp
(28 seconds in) 13*284=3692, 14,224 hp
14,224-(14,224*0.035) = 13,726 hp
(38 seconds in) 13,726 - 4970 = 8756 hp
(51 seconds in) 8756 - 3692 = 5064 hp
5064-(5064*0.035) = 4887 hp

It took about a minute for the AA petro to kill the whole squad without mid range and without using DFAA, if DFAA was thrown into the mix, it would have killed it in about 40 seconds. Also note that when a CV drop, the drop planes technically count as a squadron itself, meaning the CV is technically taking double damage. On top of that, Hak didn't even net a single plane gen in that engagement.

Add another ship into the AA ring and the time a CV can loiter is even less. How exactly does far not do anything?

[Mono_De_Mantequilla]

1 hour ago, AkiraKurai said:

Petro 196 constant dps

DM 105 constant dps

???????

Every other navy lost ships to carrier aircraft, except the Soviets.  Soviet AA in-game must be made stronk to replicate this reality.

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

12 minutes ago, AkiraKurai said:

AA 100% did not work in the old RTS days, the implementation of AA was horrendous, planes didn't have health, instead what happened during those days was that planes had a set rate at which they would not explode and AA auras had a set rate of exploding a plane out of the sky. You would get inconsistent games where 1 game a DM would evaporate a squad and then the next none of the planes went poof and then you died.

Your torp example is the equivalent of having a 8km shima fire it's guns 8km out in open water, you can't hit it, but the shima's torps are also gimped down to 50 kts, also, this shima gets teleported beyond its torp range and requires about 40 seconds to attempt another 8km run with those 50 kt torps every time it fires a rack.

Suddenly that 8km shima sounds more like a fly than a threat.

let's take a extreme example and use a AA speced petro with todays commanders, note that AA skills will be buffed in the future, and compare it to Hak DBs that is also fully kitted.

Hak will have 25,188 hp in this squad

Petro with constant will have 284 dps 497 when max re-enforced, secord re-enforcement will last 10 seconds, let's simplify the calculations and underweight how much AA the petro will do by having AA ramp up stay at 270 and jump to 472.5, this ramp up takes 5 seconds as well.

Petro will initiate priority when the planes enter for the instant damage, this will cuase the planes to lose 3.5% of their total hp, it's down to 24,306 at that instant
5*284=1420, 22,886 hp
(15 seconds in) 10*497=4970, 17,916 hp
(28 seconds in) 13*284=3692, 14,224 hp
14,224-(14,224*0.035) = 13,726 hp
(38 seconds in) 13,726 - 4970 = 8756 hp
(51 seconds in) 8756 - 3692 = 5064 hp
5064-(5064*0.035) = 4887 hp

It took about a minute for the AA petro to kill the whole squad without mid range and without using DFAA, if DFAA was thrown into the mix, it would have killed it in about 40 seconds. Also note that when a CV drop, the drop planes technically count as a squadron itself, meaning the CV is technically taking double damage. On top of that, Hak didn't even net a single plane gen in that engagement.

Add another ship into the AA ring and the time a CV can loiter is even less. How exactly does far not do anything?

Time spent in the far bubble is less than 5 seconds.

[AkiraKurai]

2 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Time spent in the far bubble is less than 5 seconds.

and time spent in mid is about 1, point?

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

12 minutes ago, AkiraKurai said:

and time spent in mid is about 1, point?

Actually, it's longer...as entering mid is required to strike...unless you are a skip bomber or a torpedo bomber with a longer arming distance.

None of this changes the fact that AA isn't strong enough...and that Soviet AA isn't the most dangerous AA...

[Wolfswetpaws]

DevStrike has no official conduit of communication to WG and World of Warships.
I suggest either filling-out a customer service ticket or going to Discord with suggestions for how WG/WOWs should change the game.  🙂 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

4 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

DevStrike has no official conduit of communication to WG and World of Warships.
I suggest either filling-out a customer service ticket or going to Discord with suggestions for how WG/WOWs should change the game.  🙂 

Absolutely right.

Of course, be prepared to be trolled on Discord...so probably best to reach out directly to WG through customer service tickets.

[AkiraKurai]

2 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Actually, it's longer...as entering mid is required to strike...unless you are a skip bomber or a torpedo bomber with a longer arming distance.

None of this changes the fact that AA isn't strong enough...and that Soviet AA isn't the most dangerous AA...

How is it longer? you engage a drop around 3km and as I've stated, there isn't a ship with mid range longer than 4km, at that point the planes have enter mitigation or healing to deal with the rest of the range, after that, they exit mid range without taking damage due to immunity.

2 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

filling-out a customer service ticket or going to Discord with suggestions for how WG/WOWs should change the game. 

Doesn't mean that we can't discuss about what poteentially could be changed here does it? It's a forum after all.

[Wolfswetpaws]

2 minutes ago, AkiraKurai said:

Doesn't mean that we can't discuss about what poteentially could be changed here does it? It's a forum after all.

Indeed.  🙂 
Spin yer proverbial wheels to your heart's content.  
Discuss, vent and rant at your convenience.  🙂