HE-AA interaction needs to be adressed

[Vivi_Ornitier]

This topic has probably been discussed more than once, but it's still something really frustrating. HE spam destroying AA mounts and leaving you vulnerable (even more) to CV has always been toxic, but with the rise of heavy caliber HE spammers like thunderer and other HE vessels (colbert, smolensk, etc), it's very bad now.

I unlocked Kremlin yesterday and have been getting fun matches... until there is a CV. You'll face thunderers in every game, often together with smolensk, hindenburg, yoshi.. and having just 30% AA left after 2/3 thunderer salvos isnt a pleasing experience. Let's not pretend AA will stop cv from striking, but perhaps we can prevent them from being inside your AA long enough to get 3 or 4 strikes. 

[Uglesett]

Just get rid of permanent module destruction. It'll solve a lot of frustrations with playing cruisers and DDs.

[Aragathor]

Will not happen, WG will protect the holy cow no matter the cost. They are dumb like that.

[Bindolaf_Werebane]

Do you not read the board,  OP? Do you not hear the cries of CV captains? Are your ears deaf to their suffering? Have a heart.

[Humorpalanta]

1 hour ago, Bindolaf_Werebane said:

Do you not read the board,  OP? Do you not hear the cries of CV captains? Are your ears deaf to their suffering? Have a heart.

Vlack clouds, ahha, black clouds, yee, black clouds oh-oj, black clouds. BLACK CLOUDS.

[ForlornSailor]

2 hours ago, Aragathor said:

Will not happen, WG will protect the holy cow no matter the cost. They are dumb like that.

 

Exactly. How many times did the community bring this up? And everything else whats so blatently wrong with this game and especially 2 of the 4 classes. Nothing in that regard has ever changed. CVs still burn for 5 sec because reason. CVs cant detonate because reason. List goes on.

[Miscommunication_dept]

2 hours ago, Uglesett said:

Just get rid of permanent module destruction. It'll solve a lot of frustrations with playing cruisers and DDs.

Bofors hit, permanent destruction.

460mm turret incapacitated, give it 30 seconds........

[mdjmcnally]

Well even I recall that when people complained about the Kremlin being too strong WG used to need the AA a bit in response.

 

would make more sense to actually address where people said was too strong rather then the AA.

 

of course it does make it easier for precious lambs in CV to get through

[Vivi_Ornitier]

50 minutes ago, mdjmcnally said:

Well even I recall that when people complained about the Kremlin being too strong WG used to need the AA a bit in response.

 

would make more sense to actually address where people said was too strong rather then the AA.

 

of course it does make it easier for precious lambs in CV to get through

I know AA nerf to krem was intended to balance it. At first I laughed, didnt think it would make any difference and krem would still be op, but this + artillery nerf have actually taken krem out. 

[eliastion]

4 hours ago, Vivi_Ornitier said:

This topic has probably been discussed more than once, but it's still something really frustrating. HE spam destroying AA mounts and leaving you vulnerable (even more) to CV has always been toxic, but with the rise of heavy caliber HE spammers like thunderer and other HE vessels (colbert, smolensk, etc), it's very bad now.

I unlocked Kremlin yesterday and have been getting fun matches... until there is a CV. You'll face thunderers in every game, often together with smolensk, hindenburg, yoshi.. and having just 30% AA left after 2/3 thunderer salvos isnt a pleasing experience. Let's not pretend AA will stop cv from striking, but perhaps we can prevent them from being inside your AA long enough to get 3 or 4 strikes. 

Setting aside the issue about how many strikes post-rework CVs should be expected to deliver per sortie - the idea that permanently destructible AA is impossible to balance (and thus requires some changes) is older than the Glorious Rework. It was one of the things both surface ship and CV players complained about in the days of RTS CVs. Neither group appreciated CV power scaling into the late game when the effects of "less, more spread out ships" was combining with "less AA on ships" to make sure that at the start of the match DDs were the only viable target (full-AA ships could be a complete no-fly zones) while at the end CVs had free reign (some AA fortresses had potential to be stripped almost bare after some HE spam)...

 

Anyway, as you can see, the feature has stayed with us for a loong time and remained untouched even when almost everything else about planes and AA was changed. WG seems to be REALLY attached to the concept of AA mounts dying from HE - and then staying dead for the rest of the battle. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to do anything about this...

[Vivi_Ornitier]

10 minutes ago, eliastion said:

Setting aside the issue about how many strikes post-rework CVs should be expected to deliver per sortie - the idea that permanently destructible AA is impossible to balance (and thus requires some changes) is older than the Glorious Rework. It was one of the things both surface ship and CV players complained about in the days of RTS CVs. Neither group appreciated CV power scaling into the late game when the effects of "less, more spread out ships" was combining with "less AA on ships" to make sure that at the start of the match DDs were the only viable target (full-AA ships could be a complete no-fly zones) while at the end CVs had free reign (some AA fortresses had potential to be stripped almost bare after some HE spam)...

 

Anyway, as you can see, the feature has stayed with us for a loong time and remained untouched even when almost everything else about planes and AA was changed. WG seems to be REALLY attached to the concept of AA mounts dying from HE - and then staying dead for the rest of the battle. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to do anything about this...

Cv can replenish their planes and not give a f about em dying, and we can repair our AA mounts :(. Flawed. 

[SkollUlfr]

the entire module damage system needs rebuilt from the ground up. aa mounts being part of that obviously.

[ForlornSailor]

37 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

the entire module damage system needs rebuilt from the ground up. aa mounts being part of that obviously.

 

I agree. Lets also take into account, how the current system can ruin your day as a DD. 120 sec torp reload? 4 sec left to reload and send the bismarck next to you back to port? Hell no, one secondary hit took out your torp tube - hf waiting 2 mins again, KAPPA.

[Vivi_Ornitier]

3 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

I agree. Lets also take into account, how the current system can ruin your day as a DD. 120 sec torp reload? 4 sec left to reload and send the bismarck next to you back to port? Hell no, one secondary hit took out your torp tube - hf waiting 2 mins again, KAPPA.

I was rushing a thunderer yesterday in ranked as venezia and he perma destroyed both tubes D:

[ForlornSailor]

1 minute ago, Vivi_Ornitier said:

I was rushing a thunderer yesterday in ranked as venezia and he perma destroyed both tubes D:

 

Yup, Ive litterally lost games because of that %&%&% aswell.

[lovelacebeer]

I assume it’s a left over from the days of RTS where as CVs would loose planes from their finite air group so ships AA mounts would also be lost over the course of a battle. However like so much WG got bored of sorting out all the various aspects around the almighty rework. 

 

Still really they should at least make it so AA mounts get  repaired over time. 

[eliastion]

1 hour ago, Vivi_Ornitier said:

Cv can replenish their planes and not give a f about em dying, and we can repair our AA mounts :(. Flawed. 

Well, the first part isn't true (there are specific few CVs that barely give a f... but this isn't true for most, at least in higher tiers).

That being said, the permanent AA damage has been an issue for a long time - because CVs have a strange power curve (getting more powerful as the match progresses, unless they manage to waste all the planes early on) by their very nature. This is basically impossible to change - so it would only make sense to adjust the mechanics that CAN be adjusted to reduce this effect, not reinforce it. AA mounts sholdn't be permanently destructible - it should be possible to knock them out (maybe even for a relatively long time), so that dropping a ship engaged in combat or one that has just left it would be safer and more forgiving. But after a couple minutes AA should be back to full capability. Now, it might perhaps be lower - to reduce the blobbed AA potential at the start of the battle - but the point is that they should be able to count on that through the battle. As it is now, the only ships that retain most/all AA power 'till the end game are the backline campers, since they tend to be beyond the range of HE spammers.

[SkollUlfr]

1 hour ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

I agree. Lets also take into account, how the current system can ruin your day as a DD. 120 sec torp reload? 4 sec left to reload and send the bismarck next to you back to port? Hell no, one secondary hit took out your torp tube - hf waiting 2 mins again, KAPPA.

you say that like you got your tubes destroyed rather than just crit damage status. of which, you dont even have to hit a dd to destroy their tubes.

having DCP work like reload booster for fixing broken things would be a big improvement. even if it was like WoT and the fixed module had jacked up accuracy/traverse/reload etc. you could at least work around that by playing carefully.

[Pururut]

Destruction of modules is a fine game mechanic and should remain in the game. It will be more practical to apply the rules to CVs rather than remove them all together. 
 

Reintroduce limited reserves to carriers. Shells scoring penetrations against the hangar should be able to destroy and damage reserves. Carrier deck can be made into a separate module just like torpedo tubes and main battery and be susceptible to incapacitation and destruction. If the ship is set on fire; halt aircraft operations and gradually damage and destroy reserves if not put out quickly. 
 

CV as a class should be kept as is but there is no reason for it to be exempt from the rules that apply to other classes.

[HassenderZerhacker]

17 hours ago, Vivi_Ornitier said:

This topic has probably been discussed more than once, but it's still something really frustrating. HE spam destroying AA mounts and leaving you vulnerable (even more) to CV has always been toxic, but with the rise of heavy caliber HE spammers like thunderer and other HE vessels (colbert, smolensk, etc), it's very bad now.

I unlocked Kremlin yesterday and have been getting fun matches... until there is a CV. You'll face thunderers in every game, often together with smolensk, hindenburg, yoshi.. and having just 30% AA left after 2/3 thunderer salvos isnt a pleasing experience. Let's not pretend AA will stop cv from striking, but perhaps we can prevent them from being inside your AA long enough to get 3 or 4 strikes. 

 

wait... are you saying AA matters ???

[Vivi_Ornitier]

1 hour ago, HassenderZerhacker said:

 

wait... are you saying AA matters ???

Read the last two sentences D:

[Starchy_Tuber]

16 hours ago, ForlornSailor said:

CVs still burn for 5 sec because reason. CVs cant detonate because reason

CVs have far too much else to keep an eye to expect to be able to keep an eye on their actual ship.

I think this is perfectly fair enough.  ¬_¬

[ForlornSailor]

32 minutes ago, Starchy_Tuber said:

CVs have far too much else to keep an eye to expect to be able to keep an eye on their actual ship.

I think this is perfectly fair enough.  ¬_¬

 

No... no its not. First, its a matter of UI. Second, CVs have survivability rate WAY above all other classes/ships. While the other ships range in between 20 to 50% (with 50% beeing exeptions of borderline OP ships & BBs), CVs rake in between 70 to 80% mostly. Its a joke to call this a balanced PvP environment and justify mechanics, that even protect this class, that already is unkillable like a cockroach.

[Starchy_Tuber]

1 hour ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

No... no its not. First, its a matter of UI. Second, CVs have survivability rate WAY above all other classes/ships. While the other ships range in between 20 to 50% (with 50% beeing exeptions of borderline OP ships & BBs), CVs rake in between 70 to 80% mostly. Its a joke to call this a balanced PvP environment and justify mechanics, that even protect this class, that already is unkillable like a cockroach.

you missed the "¬_¬" methinks....

[ForlornSailor]

4 minutes ago, Starchy_Tuber said:

you missed the "¬_¬" methinks....

 

Indeed. I got triggered waaaay before reaching the last line (not that it was that much of text, but see what CVs do to you^^) You got me there