Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
SkollUlfr

t3 aa and secondary balance needs reviewed.

29 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
548 posts
5,158 battles

these ships do face CV, but have hopeless aa spec to do anything in their own defence.

a problem compounded be the fact that t4 cv do not have summon fighters to defend low tier friendlies. something i, to be honest, suspect has been overloocked.

 

the other thing being more a fun/QoL issue, ships under t4 have such short range on their secondary guns that simply getting to use them is an unexpected and rare moment. there has to be some metric tracker somewhere that could assist in adjusting these guns so that they occasional rather than exceptionally rare use.

which would add veriety to low tiers and actually let new players know "your ship has more guns, and there are ways to use them". which seems currently lacking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TF57]
Players
101 posts
10,619 battles

Unfortunately WG want T4 CV players to enjoy their experience and develop their skills at this level and not be put off by strong AA ships, all this at your expense, so that they progress quite happily to T6 and maybe even purchase a premium CV.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,162 posts
9,017 battles

Stay with some T4 ship that actually gets AA.

 

While T3 hardly gets AA, T4 CVs do have the issue that they are quite limited in their damage output. Being able to launch like 3 torps on a squad of biplanes, each doing maybe 5k when you have good torps is quite limited compared to what others like BBs can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,032 posts
245 battles

Maybe secondary batteries at that tier could be increased to 6km? And maybe a little more accurate? With maybe a stagger fire or hold fire option as well.

 

not sure if most tier 3 can keep up with other tier 4’s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
26,701 posts
14,317 battles
2 minutes ago, martin035 said:

Unfortunately WG want T4 CV players to enjoy their experience and develop their skills at this level and not be put off by strong AA ships, all this at your expense, so that they progress quite happily to T6 and maybe even purchase a premium CV.

The average Tier IV CV brings down a Tier III BB to 40% HP in 20 minutes...

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
548 posts
5,158 battles
15 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Tier IV CV are weak. Really weak.

 

Just do not sail alone and you are fine.

took a hermes out for a spin and the only thing a had to worry about was a kirov, koenig and in rion duke. the rest was just use A and D a bit. they might lack damage output but that isnt the issue im pointing out.

but like i said, this is specifically about t3 which can do nothing in their own defence, and often arent even quick enough to dodge.

 

in either direction, the  interaction of t3 ships and the 1st line cv is not working well and needs dealt with as an end of range interaction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
3,910 posts
16,107 battles

Q: Why is T3 AA rubbish?

 

A: Most of these ships were designed around 1906 and launched in 1908-1909.

 

This is what aeroplanes looked like in 1909:

 

 

 

Bleriot_XI_Thulin_A_1910_a.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
548 posts
5,158 battles
Just now, invicta2012 said:

Q: Why is T3 AA rubbish?

 

A: Most of these ships were designed around 1906 and launched in 1908-1909.

 

This is what aeroplanes looked like in 1909:

 

 

 

Bleriot_XI_Thulin_A_1910_a.jpg

and wows is not a simulator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TF57]
Players
101 posts
10,619 battles
2 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

The average Tier IV CV brings down a Tier III BB to 40% HP in 20 minutes...

Agreed, but they don't lose any/many planes in those attacks so enjoy the experience and get a taste for CV play. 

 

If however, their planes were to get shredded in the first attack with no rewards then said CV player would give up the grind to T6 as to frustrating. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
3,910 posts
16,107 battles
1 minute ago, SkollUlfr said:

and wows is not a simulator.

Oh, go on. Make the Tier III French CV Calais and give it a load of Bleriot Mk XI planes, with 25kg bombs. (I am not making this up, they actually did do this). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,245 posts
9,381 battles

I like the rework in general, but T3 is a pretty specific problem. Most of the ships at that tier are pure WW1 and we can't really give all of them speculative AA upgrades. And then they have to play against late-1930s planes.

 

The only real outlier is Katori which has actual WW2 AA. I think a few (Caledon, Friant at least) have something like interwar AA.

 

(I'm salty because I was just detonated by an aircraft torpedo in my Charleston, with a glorious AA complement of 7.6 mm Hotchkiss machine guns.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTTX]
[TTTX]
Players
4,608 posts
8,081 battles
1 hour ago, SkollUlfr said:

and wows is not a simulator.

doesnt change the fact that these ships did not have AA because there were no planes around for them to worry about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
548 posts
5,158 battles
36 minutes ago, jss78 said:

 

(I'm salty because I was just detonated by an aircraft torpedo in my Charleston, with a glorious AA complement of 7.6 mm Hotchkiss machine guns.)

yea, you are a favourite target. you slow down that much when you turn and your point blank aa does nothing.

 

37 minutes ago, jss78 said:

I like the rework in general, but T3 is a pretty specific problem. Most of the ships at that tier are pure WW1 and we can't really give all of them speculative AA upgrades. And then they have to play against late-1930s planes.

there are plenty of entirely speculative entire ships in wows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
13,895 posts
19,717 battles

If you were to give low tiers serious AA then low tier CVs would inevitably have to gain serious alpha strike.

You sure you want that?

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
548 posts
5,158 battles
13 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

If you were to give low tiers serious AA then low tier CVs would inevitably have to gain serious alpha strike.

You sure you want that?

hyperbolic. all they need is t4 equivalent aa to match the t4 planes they face. 

enough to actually defend themselves from air. where now, even grouped up, these ships have essentially nothing.

 

t3 ships are end of range for aa balancing, at they will ALWAYS be bottom tier vs cv, much in the same way as t10 cv are end of range, in that they will always be top tier vs ships.

before the rework, these ships could be defended by fighters, this is a luxury they do not have now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
13,895 posts
19,717 battles
7 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

hyperbolic. all they need is t4 equivalent aa to match the t4 planes they face. 

enough to actually defend themselves from air. where now, even grouped up, these ships have essentially nothing.

 

This is a contradiction in itself.

Because the AA you get at low tiers is more or less equivalent to the power you face. If you want AA to the point of being capable of denying strikes like in higher tiers then low tier CVs have to be capable of causing more damage just like in high tiers.

 

Fairness is a two way street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-SOG-]
Players
404 posts
8,856 battles
2 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

Tier IV CV are weak. Really weak.

 

Just do not sail alone and you are fine.

Tell that to my Dreadnought, serious secondaries, but zero anti air.

 

When the new meta is like 2 T4 CVs very often you get farmed alot in ships with none existent anti air. At least some machine guns would be nice, for sure some kind of mobile machine gun must have existed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
3,910 posts
16,107 battles
2 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

If you were to give low tiers serious AA then low tier CVs would inevitably have to gain serious alpha strike.

Er... no. It's unbalanced.

 

The current MM gives HMS Hermes and the USS Langley (both sunk in 1942 and capable of using WW2 planes) the chance to attack ships like Bellerophon which were scrapped in the 1920s. Tier III ships shouldn't see CVs: shouldn't see planes at all, other than the occasional spotter. All that they had to worry about were observation balloons and Zeppelins (and I don't mean the Graf). With the ludicrous amount of DD sealclubbing at low tiers, as well as having to deal with CVs in a Tier III BB, I'm surprised there are any new players of this game, if they have to put up with this kind of nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
13,895 posts
19,717 battles
1 minute ago, invicta2012 said:

The current MM gives HMS Hermes and the USS Langley (both sunk in 1942 and capable of using WW2 planes) the chance to attack ships like Bellerophon which were scrapped in the 1920s. Tier III ships shouldn't see CVs: shouldn't see planes at all, other than the occasional spotter. All that they had to worry about were observation balloons and Zeppelins (and I don't mean the Graf). With the ludicrous amount of DD sealclubbing at low tiers, as well as having to deal with CVs in a Tier III BB, I'm surprised there are any new players of this game, if they have to put up with this kind of nonsense.

 

Not that I particularly disagree about handling low tier CVs differently but bringing up history is kind of a meh argument.

In terms of mechanics the threat low tier CVs pose to their contemporaries is almost nonexistent, as such their counterplay options must be pretty much nonexistent. It's a natural development of how low tier CVs are designed.

Ofc whether the inherent design of low tier CVs is bad is a different matter entirely. Spoiler alert: It is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DEFR]
[DEFR]
Players
1,266 posts

But a fair point was posted though. Ships like the UK Dreadnought doesn't have any AA guns at all, I mean none what-so-ever on the BB ship. So how is that supposed to defend itself if lets say two CV are in the match and they are aware that the Dreadnought has no AA guns,. They'll most likely target that ship because it's a slow BB with absolutely zero defence against any planes.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
13,895 posts
19,717 battles
4 minutes ago, MRGTB said:

So how is that supposed to defend itself if lets say two CV are in the match and they are aware the Dreadnought has no AA guns, so they'll most likely target that ship because it has absolutely zero defence against any CV planes.

 

Just let your armor and HP pool soak the damage.

It's not gonna be better in a T3 BB that has AA guns because those do pretty much nothing, too. So having AA guns or not is actually irrelevant.

 

It sounds stupid because it is stupid, but low tier CVs deal so little damage that you can just let your passive defenses deal with them. There is no interaction whatsoever.

Hence why low tier CV design is garbage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
26,701 posts
14,317 battles
5 hours ago, affie said:

Tell that to my Dreadnought, serious secondaries, but zero anti air.

 

When the new meta is like 2 T4 CVs very often you get farmed alot in ships with none existent anti air. At least some machine guns would be nice, for sure some kind of mobile machine gun must have existed. 

You have mobile AA, on your teammates ships. Use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×