Change to aft

[thiextar]

I think that most of us agree that aft is rather lackluster atm, as that 20% extra flak damage doesnt really make a difference, its all up to if the flak burst hits or not.

 

So my idea would be to make it either buff flak rof, or give the flak bursts themselves a larger radius, thus making the skill increase hitrate/making it harder to dodge flak, rather than applying a damage buff that doesnt really do anything.

 

Anyways, let me know what you think about this idea, or if you have any other ideas? Maybe you even think that aft is worth 4 points atm, in which case, please convince me :)

[Mr_Snoww]

Erm Yeh... Just no mate. Flak is already annoying enough to dodge whilst tightening the reticle. And we really don't need any more cv nerfs. They have been nerfed more than khaba, and that's saying something. 

[Beastofwar]

It is worth the points because it synergyzes with 20 % more range for guns up to 139 mm - almost all DD main guns and some Cruiser main guns get 20 % more range that is a lot - and it increases the range of secondary guns - of all sizes, even 203 mm ones - 20 % as well. I know the latter does not seem to interest anyone for some reason.

 

The AA part of that skill....well may you are right....on it's own it is unimpressive but it is 15 % more damage when it hits aircraft. But it negates the aircraft armour skill and overpowers it by 5 %. WG may assume you use it together with the AA ship module which gives you 2 more FLAK cloud explosions increasing that effect.

 

When you take only 1 AA skill the effect may not really give impressive results. But when you take all AA skills - for example for a dedicated AA cruiser - and modules these skills/modules strenghten each other.

 

For DD with dual purpose main guns you would hurt your performance not taking it....

[belalugosisdead]

As a AA skill AFT is nearly useless now. I only use AFT now on russian Gunboat DDs and on Bismarck and Scharn. And for Bis/Scharn its more to have another build as a tankbuild, which should be the rationaly seen better Build.  Before the rework AFT was my major Skill for AA builds. Now: not worth the points. 

[Miragetank90]

Call me dumb but for a second I thought you were talking about:

 

 

 

 

 

[thiextar]

39 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

It is worth the points because it synergyzes with 20 % more range for guns up to 139 mm - almost all DD main guns and some Cruiser main guns get 20 % more range that is a lot - and it increases the range of secondary guns - of all sizes, even 203 mm ones - 20 % as well. I know the latter does not seem to interest anyone for some reason.

 

The AA part of that skill....well may you are right....on it's own it is unimpressive but it is 15 % more damage when it hits aircraft. But it negates the aircraft armour skill and overpowers it by 5 %. WG may assume you use it together with the AA ship module which gives you 2 more FLAK cloud explosions increasing that effect.

 

When you take only 1 AA skill the effect may not really give impressive results. But when you take all AA skills - for example for a dedicated AA cruiser - and modules these skills/modules strenghten each other.

 

For DD with dual purpose main guns you would hurt your performance not taking it....

But my point is this: that damage boost in the flak burst doesnt do anything, either you kill a plane with one flak hit or two flak hits, theres no inbetween. If the carrier player dodges the flak, he will be fine, if he doesnt, he will die, the extra damage in flak doesnt change that.

 

Especially considering that you can get bft for 3 points which increases continuous damage which is much more valuable, because increasing that actually makes a difference, in comparison to the "nothing or everything" nature of flak.

Or you can get manual aa for 4 points which increases continous aa even further. In comparison to these two skills, i just cannot justify taking aft for aa.

 

And aft increasing secondary range and low caliber range doesnt really work as an argument either, as i can count the number of high tier ships that gains anything from that on one hand. German full secondary build bbs(which arent as competative as their tanky meta-builds), massa and harugumo meme build, possibly some other ships, but not many.

 

aft was among the strongest aa skill in the past, now in my experiences, it doesnt do anything for aa anymore. Now im not saying it should be "the strongest" anymore, its obviously good to have choices, but atleast we should bring it in line with the other aa skills, cause the only thing to do for aa right now is to get bft or manual aa, wether 3 or 4 points fits into your build.

[Miragetank90]

2 minutes ago, thiextar said:

But my point is this: that damage boost in the flak burst doesnt do anything, either you kill a plane with one flak hit or two flak hits, theres no inbetween. If the carrier player dodges the flak, he will be fine, if he doesnt, he will die, the extra damage in flak doesnt change that.

 

Especially considering that you can get bft for 3 points which increases continuous damage which is much more valuable, because increasing that actually makes a difference, in comparison to the "nothing or everything" nature of flak.

Or you can get manual aa for 4 points which increases continous aa even further. In comparison to these two skills, i just cannot justify taking aft for aa.

 

And aft increasing secondary range and low caliber range doesnt really work as an argument either, as i can count the number of high tier ships that gains anything from that on one hand. German full secondary build bbs, massa and harugumo, possibly some other ship, but not many.

 

Your argument is valid, and if I'm remembering rightly people have raised concerns over the viability of AFT for AA since the rework before, especially compared to BFT, a 3 pointer. But I suppose for WG it's working as intended. 

 

 

[Beastofwar]

14 minutes ago, thiextar said:

But my point is this: that damage boost in the flak burst doesnt do anything, either you kill a plane with one flak hit or two flak hits, theres no inbetween. If the carrier player dodges the flak, he will be fine, if he doesnt, he will die, the extra damage in flak doesnt change that.

 

 

This is true..

 

And if you did observe : FLAK clouds almost never kill aircraft flying into your AA zone.....they kill aircraft flying out of your AA zone. Probably because you can't dodge what you can't see coming from behind, or aircraft are just more vunerable to explosion to the rear.

 

So it does not stop them from dropping weapons on you, if they come around for another pass they will not enter that outer heavy AA zone so that will not be stopping more weapons dropped, but when they are exiting THEN they are shot by FLAK clouds.....not preventing damage on you......yeah that is what WG programmed.

[Uglesett]

The problem with skills like AFT (and BFT for that matter) is that the AA buff alone isn't really worth the cost. Basically, they're skills that do too many different things, and the cost is essentially set with the assumption that you get all of those benefits.

 

If you run them on something like the Atlanta or Kidd, where you get buffs to pretty much every aspect of the ship except torpedoes... then sure, they're excellent. On a BB where you can really benefit from their effects on both AA and secondaries they can also definitely be worth the points cost. But for just the AA buffs on a ship that otherwise gets no benefit... eeeeh. 

 

I've proposed this before, but in a future rework of the captain skills I think the best thing they can do is split these "jack of all trades" skills into multiple, lower cost skills. Make buffing AA if that's all you do a bit cheaper. 

 

Because right now, if you have the choice between an AA build that helps against one out of four classes, and a more general build that works against three (or even all four) classes.... well, it's not hard to see what's rational.

 

16 minutes ago, Miragetank90 said:

Call me dumb but for a second I thought you were talking about:

Glad I'm not the only one...

[thiextar]

3 minutes ago, Uglesett said:

The problem with skills like AFT (and BFT for that matter) is that the AA buff alone isn't really worth the cost. Basically, they're skills that do too many different things, and the cost is basically set with the assumption that  you get all of those benefits.

 

If you run them on something like the Atlanta or Kidd, where you get buffs to pretty much every aspect of the ship except torpedoes... then sure, they're excellent. On a BB where you can really benefit from their effects on both AA and secondaries they can also definitely be worth the points cost. But for just the AA buffs on a ship that otherwise gets no benefit... eeeeh. 

 

I've proposed this before, but in a future rework of the captain skills I think the best thing they can do is split these "jack of all trades" skills into multiple, lower cost skills. Make buffing AA if that's all you do a bit cheaper. 

 

Because right now, if you have the choice between an AA build that helps against one out of four classes, and a more general build that works against three (or even all four) classes.... well, it's not hard to see what's rational.

 

Glad I'm not the only one...

Yeah I think you are on to something here, we need aa skills that are actually dedicated to aa and thus worth taking in for example an aa cruiser or non-secondary battleship. 

 

But I still think that aft is the biggest issue at the moment, as it's supposed to buff aa, but in practicality just doesn't,while being the joint most expensive aa skill. 

[thiextar]

10 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

 

This is true..

 

And if you did observe : FLAK clouds almost never kill aircraft flying into your AA zone.....they kill aircraft flying out of your AA zone. Probably because you can't dodge what you can't see coming from behind, or aircraft are just more vunerable to explosion to the rear.

 

So it does not stop them from dropping weapons on you, if they come around for another pass they will not enter that outer heavy AA zone so that will not be stopping more weapons dropped, but when they are exiting THEN they are shot by FLAK clouds.....not preventing damage on you......yeah that is what WG programmed.

This too is very well observed^^

 

So most people here seem to agree that aft needs a change, what do you guys think of the specific ideas of making aft give 20% flak rof or 20% flak radius or something like that? Or does anyone have any other/better ideas? I would like to collect and rate all the possible options.

[DFens_666]

1 hour ago, Mr_Snoww said:

And we really don't need any more cv nerfs. They have been nerfed more than khaba, and that's saying something. 

 

How is the amount of nerfs relevant to anything? If WG would release a ship, which is invulnerable to anything, while having 1 sec reload with 460mm guns, and 20km secondaries and AA that kills everything instantly, and then they would start to nerf 1 thing at a time, you would argue, that after x nerfs, they are not allowed to nerf it anymore, leaving it with 1 sec reload?

 

Now that we got that out of the way:

Yes, AFT needs to be changed. I hope WG doesnt just swap BFT <-> AFT at some point

 

33 minutes ago, Uglesett said:

I've proposed this before, but in a future rework of the captain skills I think the best thing they can do is split these "jack of all trades" skills into multiple, lower cost skills. Make buffing AA if that's all you do a bit cheaper. 

That would be the most ideal option imo. Secondary specced BBs gain a lot more by those 4pts compared to, lets say Cruisers (except Atlanta/Flint). Whether DDs gain something, or are actually hurt by the longer main gun range depends ofc on the DD in question. Can be good - can be bad Just for that, they should be seperated. I think, WG put them together to have a reason making it a 4pt cptn skill, they seem to lack any ideas to make proper cptn skills anyway. Would be great to have more builds/options.

 

31 minutes ago, thiextar said:

20% flak radius

That might be overkill ?

Maybe they should go for something like faster AA sector switching, combined with some smaller damage buff to both Flak/DPS?

Like -15% / +5% / +5%. I think that would make it an equal choice compared to Manual AA.

[lup3s]

40 minutes ago, thiextar said:

This too is very well observed^^

 

So most people here seem to agree that aft needs a change, what do you guys think of the specific ideas of making aft give 20% flak rof or 20% flak radius or something like that? Or does anyone have any other/better ideas? I would like to collect and rate all the possible options.

 

Or why not revert to the old AFT, which increased the range of your AA?

It would then synergize well with BFT and Manual AA, enhancing the usefulness of a full AA build - i.e. at least able to shoot down planes before the first attack.

[thiextar]

2 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

That might be overkill ?

Maybe they should go for something like faster AA sector switching, combined with some smaller damage buff to both Flak/DPS?

Like -15% / +5% / +5%. I think that would make it an equal choice compared to Manual AA.

I think thats too little tbh, as manual aa gives -20% sector switch time and +20% sector switch damage, which would be better than aft at everything ^^

 

My ideal solution would probably be a combo of uglesetts idea to seperate it into a pure aa skill, and then balance it after where its put, so if it still costs 4 points after split, 15-20% flak radius should be fine, or if the skill is made cheaper, it could give something less useful or just a lower %.

 

Anyways, i like the idea of keeping continous aa and flak seperated in the aa skills, as it allows for variety and choice in what you focus on strengthening. Rather than aa skills just making aa overall stronger, you get to choose between flak and dps. Maybe it would also be possible to bake in the sector reinforcement in this choice, rather than it only affecting continous.

[DFens_666]

19 minutes ago, thiextar said:

I think thats too little tbh, as manual aa gives -20% sector switch time and +20% sector switch damage, which would be better than aft at everything ^^

 

My ideal solution would probably be a combo of uglesetts idea to seperate it into a pure aa skill, and then balance it after where its put, so if it still costs 4 points after split, 15-20% flak radius should be fine, or if the skill is made cheaper, it could give something less useful or just a lower %.

 

Anyways, i like the idea of keeping continous aa and flak seperated in the aa skills, as it allows for variety and choice in what you focus on strengthening. Rather than aa skills just making aa overall stronger, you get to choose between flak and dps. Maybe it would also be possible to bake in the sector reinforcement in this choice, rather than it only affecting continous.

 

Yeah, the problem is ofc still that AFT has the range extension for Secondaries and small caliber main battery. So its not a pure AA skill like MAA.

If you balance AFT to give equal benefits like MAA, then it would give too much benefits for ships which also profit from the range extension imo. Thats the best reason to seperate them into 2 skills imo.

 

27 minutes ago, lup3s said:

Or why not revert to the old AFT, which increased the range of your AA?

I dont think they will do that anymore, since AA spotting range is tied to AA range on some ships now (mostly/only Cruisers?). Guess they dont like "stealth" AA anymore, so using "P" is only viable for DDs now.

With AA range upgrade, Minotaur and co could lure planes into AA by disabling it - and they didnt like that.

Even if it wouldnt be a bad idea imo, WG would never go for it.

[Beastofwar]

I would agree on making AA killing much more aircraft on approach, giving ships a chance to escape all incoming damage if :

 

- Aerial torpedo's get the damage their size warhead should cause compared to DD torpedo warhead size.....so no pityful 1.5k hits but 6-11 k per torpedo depending on it's size and power. That will mean if a strike comes through DD and Cruisers get instantly deleted and BB will be deleted if they were not full health. This is what RTS CV were, more or less.

 

It is all or nothing then, and WG chose not to do this. So first attacks (almost) always get through, but the damage it does is modest save some exceptions as a magazine detonation. Citadels on a BB look like overpens except fot teh balck ribbon, that is not modest but tear drawing low dmg.

 

- CV players do not have to pay for lost aircraft  The amount is mentioned mouse over  "Ammunition resupply".  It would be quite unfair if CV were to go bankrupt on one sided increased ( AA ) power to completely stop them always without getting some damage/score in return. Such unbalance will never happen.

 

 

 

 

[El2aZeR]

I believe all WG will do is swap the AA effects of BFT and AFT. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[WeGreedy]

3 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

I believe all WG will do is swap the AA effects of BFT and AFT. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

If they only swap the AA effects I'd assume it's somewhat okay? Like maybe? I don't know...

[thiextar]

4 minutes ago, B0Tato said:

If they only swap the AA effects I'd assume it's somewhat okay? Like maybe? I don't know...

That would just mean that no one uses bft instead... 15% more flak damage does nothing, and therefore wouldnt even be worth it as a 1 pointer. Flak is all or nothing, a small increase in damage wont change anything.

[WeGreedy]

4 minutes ago, thiextar said:

That would just mean that no one uses bft instead... 15% more flak damage does nothing, and therefore wouldnt even be worth it as a 1 pointer. Flak is all or nothing, a small increase in damage wont change anything.

Yet I prefer this solution to WG just swapping AFT and BFT completely.

[HaachamaShipping]

4 hours ago, Beastofwar said:

It is worth the points because it synergyzes with 20 % more range for guns up to 139 mm - almost all DD main guns and some Cruiser main guns get 20 % more range that is a lot - and it increases the range of secondary guns - of all sizes, even 203 mm ones - 20 % as well. I know the latter does not seem to interest anyone for some reason.

Most ships are unaffected by this because it either does not apply to them or it isn't useful given their gun ballistics. AFT basically is there for Russian DDs and Atlanta/Flint, I guess.

 

Secondary builds... yeah it works. With the AA part being nerfed though, I find it hard to justify it as a 4 pt skill now though.

4 hours ago, Beastofwar said:

The AA part of that skill....well may you are right....on it's own it is unimpressive but it is 15 % more damage when it hits aircraft. But it negates the aircraft armour skill and overpowers it by 5 %. WG may assume you use it together with the AA ship module which gives you 2 more FLAK cloud explosions increasing that effect.

Aircraft armour reduces damage taken by continuous dps, flak burst is not continuous dps. AFT counteracts if anything SE on planes. BFT counteracts aircraft Armour. If you don't fly into flak though, you also don't care about AFT.

3 hours ago, Miragetank90 said:

Call me dumb but for a second I thought you were talking about:

Same here.

 

I'd say, it'd already add some viability to AFT if you'd replace additional damage with additional explosions, just like with the first AA module.

[Panocek]

1 hour ago, Beastofwar said:

- CV players do not have to pay for lost aircraft  The amount is mentioned mouse over  "Ammunition resupply".  It would be quite unfair if CV were to go bankrupt on one sided increased ( AA ) power to completely stop them always without getting some damage/score in return. Such unbalance will never happen.

 

 

 

 

Same applies to all munitions spent and not on target. Shells even on tier 10 are on cheap end, but torps, especially Shima can be surprisingly expensive if you have knack for not landing anything. And if wiki is of any value, tier 10 CV + Saipan pays 1600cr per attack plane lost. So you've lost 29 planes

 

Not mentioning ancient times, when T10 CV sunk had 360k credits repair bill + whatever planes lost

[Yedwy]

5 hours ago, Beastofwar said:

It is worth the points because it synergyzes with 20 % more range for guns up to 139 mm - almost all DD main guns and some Cruiser main guns get 20 % more range that is a lot - and it increases the range of secondary guns - of all sizes, even 203 mm ones - 20 % as well. I know the latter does not seem to interest anyone for some reason.

Ok there are like 3 cruisers with such guns in tiers in whitch that AA boost matters - krispy, flint and atlanta and thats it everything else has 140+ mm and hence its a nono for AFT bonus

[DFens_666]

14 minutes ago, Panocek said:

Same applies to all munitions spent and not on target. Shells even on tier 10 are on cheap end, but torps, especially Shima can be surprisingly expensive if you have knack for not landing anything. And if wiki is of any value, tier 10 CV + Saipan pays 1600cr per attack plane lost. So you've lost 29 planes

 

Also id like to add, that CVs cant (dont need to either?!) mount premium consumables US CLs and French CAs have to pay >100k per battles just to run all of them.

[Yedwy]

1 minute ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Also id like to add, that CVs cant (dont need to either?!) mount premium consumables US CLs and French CAs have to pay >100k per battles just to run all of them.

I wouldnt count on that beeing the permanet condition though