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

ST, changes to AA and detectability ranges by air (DB 63)

136 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[WG]
WG Staff, Administrator, Community, WG Team
5,290 posts
4,468 battles

We would like to present you some changes that we are going to try to the AA and the detectability changes by air.

 

Read more.

 

Please note that all information in the development blog is preliminary and subject to change during testing. Any showcased features may or may not end up on the main server. The final information will be published on our game's website.

  • Funny 7
  • Bad 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAD]
Players
5,180 posts
21,458 battles

The death of AA destroyers, why would you ever turn it on if it takes 7 seconds to turn it on and off.

Maybe if you're a Halland with T8 CVs you might just leave it on.

 

Very surprised that even battleships and cruisers are getting air detectibility reduced by 40-60%.

Doesn't that bring stealth fire AA back to all cruisers?

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
5,886 posts
24,024 battles

So ships will be encouraged to turn their AA off to avoid detection, but if they are detected then their AA defences will turn back on so slowly that they will be defenceless for at least one, and probably two strikes - not even continuous damage?

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DK]
Players
264 posts
2,494 battles
3 minutes ago, gopher31 said:

The death of AA destroyers, why would you ever turn it on if it takes 7 seconds to turn it on and off.

Maybe if you're a Halland with T8 CVs you might just leave it on.

 

Very surprised that even battleships and cruisers are getting air detectibility reduced by 40-60%.

Doesn't that bring stealth fire AA back to all cruisers?

 yes, but not extremely op, as aa will be even weaker if you try, as it will start out by only dealing 30% damage

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[--]
Players
1,676 posts
23,807 battles

Not gonna lie, this looks like straight CV improvements to me.

 

7 seconds to get your AA to full efficiency

7 seconds to go to stealth once you turn your AA off

CVs get early warning they are about to enter AA bubble

 

These are stupid changes.

 

Basically admitting your only way to fight CVs is to go stealth and hope he won't spot you. Just get rid of AA already, it has no use whatsoever.

  • Cool 21
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DK]
Players
264 posts
2,494 battles
1 minute ago, quickr said:

Not gonna lie, this looks like straight CV improvements to me.

 

7 seconds to get your AA to full efficiency

7 seconds to go to stealth once you turn your AA off

CVs get early warning they are about to enter AA bubble

 

These are stupid changes.

 

Basically admitting your only way to fight CVs is to go stealth and hope he won't spot you. Just get rid of AA already, it has no use whatsoever.

look at the 40-60% air detectability reduction, this makes it even harder for cvs to attack dds

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WoWs Wiki Team, In AlfaTesters, Beta Tester, Quality Poster
2,243 posts
15,682 battles

So all ships becomes more difficult to detect when their AA is off.

And all ships become detectable at 130% of their AA range when it's turned on.

 

Mino for example, assuming it gets a 50% reduction;

Before: 6.9km aerial conceal with AA off, 6.9km aerial conceal with AA on

After: 3.45km aerial conceal with AA off, 8.97km aerial conceal with AA on

 

And then some penalties to stop people just turning AA on and off instantly.

 

Players who are not smart enough to determine if their ship has AA worth turning on are going to become a lot worse.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[--]
Players
1,676 posts
23,807 battles
1 minute ago, Astolfo_Is_My_Waifu said:

ship has AA worth turning on

There are such ships in the game? :cap_yes:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EUTF]
Players
459 posts
9,551 battles

Good job thats what we need

less detection less AA power and AA guns will have 30% range in outer area if fire so whats the point of guns having a range in the fiirst place

 

hmc.gif

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
12,414 posts
13,357 battles
16 minutes ago, quickr said:

There are such ships in the game? :cap_yes:

Yes, ones that aren't under direct CV attack

 

Besides, such tests should happen, I don't know, in 2018 when REEEwork was taking shape instead 1.5y after release?

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
105 posts
14,494 battles

"It will protect planes from sudden, enexpected volume of fire". Because DD´s like Halland had actually a way to counter this class and that didn´t fit into your policy, did it WG?

 

Well done, thats a big nerf for DD´s there once again. After 7 Seconds the cv dumped its load and is already on its way home....

Btw: What will protect the rest of the playerbase from "sudden, execpected volume " of air strikes constantly coming down from the sky, other than hiding and hoping the cv wont find you? 

 

Keep it on with your "CV first doctrine" WG .:Smile_sceptic::Smile_facepalm:

 

 

  • Cool 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAD]
Players
5,180 posts
21,458 battles

It's a buff to destroyers who do not have good AA but makes the newest DD line obsolete.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ENUF]
[ENUF]
Players
2,522 posts
23,343 battles
1 hour ago, siraiaw said:

look at the 40-60% air detectability reduction, this makes it even harder for cvs to attack dds

No, it doesn't. At all.

 

The CV knows when his planes are detected so he knows there is a DD around, DD concealment is irrelevant for that. Due to the speed difference the CV will find the DD and there is nothing the DD can do. Smoke can delay the inevitable for 1 - 2 minutes but it fixes the DD's position on top of telling the CV exactly where he is, woop-dee-doo.

Once he finds the DD he puts a fighter onto his head. Now the DD has two options:

  1. keep AA off: the CV strikes him for free 3 - 4 times. DD is dead and CV lost 0 planes.
  2. turn AA on: the CV strikes him 3 - 3.5 times. DD is dead and CV lost 1 - 2 planes + a couple of fighters.

When this hits live it's time to pick AFT, mount range mod on all DDs and join the cruisers and BBs on B/C line.

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4,093 posts
18,572 battles

Just one thing:

 

For at least 1.5 years people have been telling you that you have to reduce the overall air spotting of the CVs.

 

Why did it take you so long to adress this in any form?!

Did you finally lose enough players over this?!

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DREAD]
Players
12,403 posts
7,867 battles
1 hour ago, quickr said:

Not gonna lie, this looks like straight CV improvements to me.

 

7 seconds to get your AA to full efficiency

7 seconds to go to stealth once you turn your AA off

CVs get early warning they are about to enter AA bubble

 

These are stupid changes.

 

Basically admitting your only way to fight CVs is to go stealth and hope he won't spot you. Just get rid of AA already, it has no use whatsoever.


Dude - cutting air detectability in half - including the OP BB class - and try to fix a stupid exploit to mitigate the impact of this stupid detection change = CV buff?!

 

Are you for real dude?

 

EDIT: it means that your destroyer can now easily avoid any planes unless you criminally misplay it. The CV will be literally on top of you to spot you 

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 2
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[INTRO]
[INTRO]
Players
1,500 posts
24,837 battles

For me it's: "OK, lets try it."

 

My hopes are not hight but I understand that nothing changes by itself. If we don't test anything then change is even less likely to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
595 posts

The splendidness of this idea leaves me breathless. Give surface ships new ways to misplay in an even more convoluted and illogical design, while controlling CVs continues to require less forethought and planning than preparing a slice of toast.

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POP]
Beta Tester
462 posts
11,011 battles

This is what you get when you balance the game to playerbase average and also insist that CV population must be comparable to other classes no matter how much players don't like playing them (not to mention against them).

 

Yesterday I saw a Lexington with average damage of 4000. And he is more valuable as a metric to WG than any unicum is, as he's closer to average player. :cap_book:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GURKA]
Players
810 posts
18,568 battles

The aircraft carriers are finally getting support against these evil Destroyers, thank you. I thought you couldn't surprise me anymore, but then this idea..

 

Please do not be surprised in the future if the question arises whether you are playing your own game.

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WG]
WG Staff, Administrator, Community, WG Team
5,290 posts
4,468 battles
1 hour ago, Astolfo_Is_My_Waifu said:

So all ships becomes more difficult to detect when their AA is off.

And all ships become detectable at 130% of their AA range when it's turned on.

 

Mino for example, assuming it gets a 50% reduction;

Before: 6.9km aerial conceal with AA off, 6.9km aerial conceal with AA on

After: 3.45km aerial conceal with AA off, 8.97km aerial conceal with AA on

 

And then some penalties to stop people just turning AA on and off instantly.

 

Players who are not smart enough to determine if their ship has AA worth turning on are going to become a lot worse.

Hi,

 

If we take your example in account, you are correct. The goal is really to put an emphasis on the choice of having your AA turned on or off. The use of the button "P" would become much more important if this changes is implemented with the values actually tested. But again guys, it's a test. 

 

 

  • Funny 1
  • Bad 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
595 posts
Vor 6 Minuten, Tanatoy sagte:

Hi,

 

If we take your example in account, you are correct. The goal is really to put an emphasis on the choice of having your AA turned on or off. The use of the button "P" would become much more important if this changes is implemented with the values actually tested. But again guys, it's a test. 

 

 

Apart from the handful of ships like Shinonome where you never turn on AA (unless to clear up fighters after the CV attack planes have left), this is a sidegrade at best and a nerf at worst for DDs in the DD-CV interaction. That's NOT what is needed; mindboggling somebody has to spell that out for you.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WG]
WG Staff, Administrator, Community, WG Team
5,290 posts
4,468 battles
1 minute ago, thisismalacoda said:

Apart from the handful of ships like Shinonome where you never turn on AA (unless to clear up fighters after the CV attack planes have left), this is a sidegrade at best and a nerf at worst for DDs in the DD-CV interaction. That's NOT what is needed; mindboggling somebody has to spell that out for you.

I would personally disagree with this as apart on my European DD + Kidd, i'm turning off my AA. I prefer to keep my detectability at 2.6km, and here in this case it would be 1.3km.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×