Patch 0.5.3 AA changes - Buff or Nerf?

[StuntMan0369]

Well, it's a shame, but the main feature of 0.5.3 - team battles - has been overshadowed by the changes to BFT, AFT, Expert Marksman and AA in general. However, is it all bad on the AA front? To help decide that, here's some number crunching (I couldn't do EVERY ship of course, so I did certain groups, as well as certain AA based cruisers);

 

Ship Name	0.5.2 DPS	0.5.3 DPS	0.5.2 DPS w/ Ctrl + Defensive AA*	0.5.3 DPS w/ Ctrl + Defensive AA*	Nerf or Buff?
Cleveland	155	206	502.5	426.8	Nerf(1)
Aoba	118	97	267	128.7	Nerf
Nurnberg	72	75	198	152.9	Nerf(1)
New Mexico	156	182	234	200.2	Nerf(2)
Fuso	107	109	160.5	119.9	Nerf
Warspite	185	157	277.5	172.7	Nerf
Yubari	75	55	135	67.1	Nerf
Murmansk	109	111	163.5	122.1	Nerf
Atlanta	120	177	540	460.9	Nerf(3)
Mikhail Kutuzov	234	264	1026	547.8	Nerf(1)
Baltimore	367	363	820.5	601.7	Nerf

 

* Ships that can't use the Defensive Fire AA ability (BB's and certain cruisers like Murmansk) have not got it factored into their DPS values

 

(1) - Whilst it's raw DPS has increased over 0.5.2, the nerf to Ctrl targetting still leaves it below the value that 0.5.2 would obtain even before the Defensive AA nerf. In short, the guns perform better than they used to when not using Ctrl, but whilst using Ctrl, they are actually weaker than 0.5.2 (Disclaimer; using Ctrl is still worth it, it does still boost damage output over not using it)

 

(2) - Whilst it has boosted it's raw DPS, the layout of the DPS has changed in favour of long range guns. Now, more of the AA DPS is based on your long range guns so you have more time to shoot down planes (a theoretical buff). The range of the guns was reduced though by 0.8km.

 

(3) - When using Ctrl targeting, the damage is actually better than 0.5.2, not by much, but it's slightly better (180 vs 194.7). However, with Defensive AA active, it has lost almost 80 DPS.

 

Long story short, it would appear the winners of the AA changes are the carriers. Hopefully this may encourage some more to start playing, so AA focused cruisers can still do their job effectively. In my personal opinion;

 

• Warspite AA nerf was needed, it already was best at dodging torps, so it having the best AA was a bit too much.
• Yubari should have received buffs to it's raw AA damage, not nerfs to compensate for the reduction of Ctrl targeting and Defensive AA
• Mikhail Kutuzov was always insane with it's AA, so I'm glad it got reduced, but wasn't expecting it to be such a heavy reduction (47% reduction in AA damage)
• The new AA skill for 85mm+ guns is going to be a very worthy investment to compensate for the AA changes, but whether it is worth the 4th crew point is up to the captain and the ship it's being used on.

 

Overall, I'm not exactly outraged by the changes. In the end, AA is still very functional, and the new 100% damage increase to 85mm+ AA guns is a very interesting skill that I will have to debate whether to use or not on certain ships. If you have anymore specific examples of AA changes (Mainly higher tier stuff that I didn't manage to check) or any thoughts on these changes, please start up the discussion below!

[ParEx]

Nevermind. Blind me.

 

[StuntMan0369]

Do you get any data for the Atlanta? Would be really nice.

 

Atlanta is included in the table, but long story short: It's AA did get buffed. When not using Defensive AA (and just Ctrl targeting), it's actually stronger than 0.5.2, but with Defensive AA active, it's worse than 0.5.2.

[Pastaiolo]

Well, consider that now there is also a new AA skill for AA guns with a caliber above 85mm. 

[Sigimundus]

Did you count in the new manual AA skill?

[OttoKretschmer]

very interesting ! could you extend it to all the ships ? or at least Yamato, Hipper, Mogami, Nagato... ?

[Vulgarny]

Its quite funny that you count small caliber AA that range was below 3km that was almost useless against TB as quite important in 5.2. You should compare not total AA DPS that is misleading but total AA dps at set ranges like 7km/5km/4km

[RamirezKurita]

Something else that is worth remembering is that long range AA in general got buffed and short range AA got nerfed, so even if the maximum DPS values of a ship haven't changed the effective DPS would be greater due to how long aircraft stay within the long range AA. The Cleveland's AA DPS may have only increased by 51, however it's long range AAA went from 36 to 91, which is particularly important compared to the damage loss on the 20mm guns as aircraft spend so little time within the 2.1km bubble of the 20mms compared to the 5km bubble of the 127mms.

[Vaderan]

While the overall raw DPS seems to be reduced, which includes all areas of AAA effect (short, medium & long range) how does the buff of the long range AA guns influence the overall damage on a ctrl target? The short range AAA is significantly weaker by now, but doesn´t the buffed long range AA compensate for it? That´s a question, not a remark or criticism.

The time spent for attacking planes within the short range AAA was usually pretty short, with more impact on DBs compared to fighters and TBs. Now, all of them have to work through a by far tougher long range AAA.

 

However, i still don´t see the need of a nerf that significant to the Yubari. AAA capability was the reason and main task of that ship...

[Spithas]

Its quite funny that you count small caliber AA that range was below 3km that was almost useless against TB as quite important in 5.2. You should compare not total AA DPS that is misleading but total AA dps at set ranges like 7km/5km/4km

 

Most competent CV players drop well within 3km with their TB. If you gain time by maneuvering 3km AA is very useful vs TB.

[StuntMan0369]

Did you count in the new manual AA skill?

 

These values do not, no. Overall, this skill will heavily benefit cruisers, as most of their AA damage comes from their long-range AA (which happens to be their high-caliber AA). Battleships will gain benefit too, but not as effectively (they don't have a big multiplier on long range guns like cruisers do).

 

Its quite funny that you count small caliber AA that range was below 3km that was almost useless against TB as quite important in 5.2. You should compare not total AA DPS that is misleading but total AA dps at set ranges like 7km/5km/4km

 

Comparing ranges, yes, you are right that moving the AA DPS to long range guns does benefit ships as there's more chances to shoot down planes. Not so much for the US BB's (who have lost range on their long range AA) but cruisers have a better chance of shooting down planes at range (they are still reliant on Defensive AA to be super effective at that range, and since that's been nerfed, overall it would appear to be a nerf - until you account for the new AA skill).

 

While the overall raw DPS seems to be reduced, which includes all areas of AAA effect (short, medium & long range) how does the buff of the long range AA guns influence the overall damage on a ctrl target? The short range AAA is significantly weaker by now, but doesn´t the buffed long range AA compensate for it? That´s a question, not a remark or criticism.

The time spent for attacking planes within the short range AAA was usually pretty short, with more impact on DBs compared to fighters and TBs. Now, all of them have to work through a by far tougher long range AAA.

 

However, i still don´t see the need of a nerf that significant to the Yubari. AAA capability was the reason and main task of that ship...

 

Ctrl targeting was nerfed from 1.5x to 1.1x, so that's where most of the AA DPS loss has come from. The long-range AA has been buffed which should help BB's more, but not by a large margin. If a BB is smart at avoiding the attack long before they get within strike range, they will feel the buff to long range AA for sure.

[Vulgarny]

Im like half sec in 3km range of AA so nope it isnt useful as much as you think

[Kartoffelmos]

Well, the OP Aoba got her AA nerfed on all ranges, because it was such a good AA platform, while weak-AA-Cleveland got her long-range AA buffed to a ludicrous level (91). So yeah, this will undoubtedly increase the survival of low level air groups.

 

The developers show how good they are at balancing yet again.

[Spithas]

Im like half sec in 3km range of AA so nope it isnt useful as much as you think

 

VS braindeads maybe.

[StuntMan0369]

Well, the OP Aoba got her AA nerfed on all ranges, because it was such a good AA platform, while weak-AA-Cleveland got her long-range AA buffed to a ludicrous level (91). So yeah, this will undoubtedly increase the survival of low level air groups.

 

The developers show how good they are at balancing yet again.

 

Yes, Cleveland now has a great 91 DPS at long range. However, activate Ctrl targeting and Defensive AA, and it's weaker than 0.5.2 (unless using the new AA skill, in which case it's pretty damn OP (660 DPS at tier 6?!?!?))

[Vulgarny]

 

VS braindeads maybe.

 

Lolz. Im going from side and from front. Either way you eat half of them.

[Panocek]

Well, the OP Aoba got her AA nerfed on all ranges, because it was such a good AA platform, while weak-AA-Cleveland got her long-range AA buffed to a ludicrous level (91). So yeah, this will undoubtedly increase the survival of low level air groups.

 

The developers show how good they are at balancing yet again.

 

Don't forget mid range Bofors got buffed too form 54 to 68

 

 

Yes, Cleveland now has a great 91 DPS at long range. However, activate Ctrl targeting and Defensive AA, and it's weaker than 0.5.2 (unless using the new AA skill, in which case it's pretty damn OP (660 DPS at tier 6?!?!?))

 

BIG question is how variables interact - pre 5.3 AA barrage used to multiply with manual target designation, so Cleveland 36dps went into 324 (36*6*1.5).

If post patch values still multiply, then Cleveland gets even juicier 91*3*1.33=363dps (I think new manual designation bonus is 33%, correct me if I'm wrong).

[Kartoffelmos]

Yes, Cleveland now has a great 91 DPS at long range. However, activate Ctrl targeting and Defensive AA, and it's weaker than 0.5.2 (unless using the new AA skill, in which case it's pretty damn OP (660 DPS at tier 6?!?!?))

 

Are you sure about that? Bear in mind that, according to this post, the AA bonuses are additive rather than multiplicative (the same behaviour is applied to XP calculations, so it makes sense if they are consistent). I would use real numbers to prove my point, but I'm not currently using my regular computer and WG's attachment system is down for some reason, so I cannot check the AA values I had stored prior to the patch. Will come back to this topic later.

 

EDIT: The guy above me used a 36 DPS value which means that the additive long range DPS was 198 compared to the new one of 303,03/300,3 (depending on the manual focus is 0,3 or 0,33). Still not 100% sure if the bonuses are additive, as there might be a translation/miscommunication issue involved.

 

In any case, it is a massive buff to a ship that didn't really need it, as it was already quite strong against air groups, even without defensive fire.

[gr0pah]

  

A question. Can NM really have defensive fire consumable (that's what you mean with "Defensive AA" I take it)?

 

Mikhail Kutuzov	234	264	1026	547.8	Nerf

LOL

 

[Panocek]

 

Are you sure about that? Bear in mind that, according to this post, the AA bonuses are additive rather than multiplicative (the same behaviour is applied to XP calculations, so it makes sense if they are consistent). I would use real numbers to prove my point, but I'm not currently using my regular computer and WG's attachment system is down for some reason, so I cannot check the AA values I had stored prior to the patch. Will come back to this topic later.

 

If they are additive, then 91*3+91*0.3 (AA barrage x3 multiplier and manual designation with 30% bonus) gives 300dps. 391 if you add tier 4 Manual AA skill

[StuntMan0369]

 

Are you sure about that? Bear in mind that, according to this post, the AA bonuses are additive rather than multiplicative (the same behaviour is applied to XP calculations, so it makes sense if they are consistent). I would use real numbers to prove my point, but I'm not currently using my regular computer and WG's attachment system is down for some reason, so I cannot check the AA values I had stored prior to the patch. Will come back to this topic later.

 

EDIT: The guy above me used a 36 DPS value which means that the additive long range DPS was 198 compared to the new one of 303,03/300,3 (depending on the manual focus is 0,3 or 0,33). Still not 100% sure if the bonuses are additive, as there might be a translation/miscommunication issue involved.

 

I have no idea how the new skill works, I'm hoping that I am wrong in saying that. All I know is that when calculating for Ctrl targeting and Defensive fire AA, it is DPS*1.1*3 = DPS*3.3. (It used to be DPS*1.5*6 making it DPS*9)

 

Now, bear in mind that 85mm+ guns now get double damage with that skill, so new DPS on Cleveland's long range is 182. Times that by 3.3, and you get the magical 600 DPS (I was wrong with 660, I miscalculated cause I'm a derp).

 

A question. Can NM really have defensive fire consumable (that's what you mean with "Defensive AA" I take it)?

 

For the Battleships and cruisers that can't mount Defensive AA, I have not factored in Defensive AA multipliers into their DPS values. I should have made that clearer, but I was in a bit of a rush to get the information down (I hate real life sometimes).

 

Edit: Updated original post to reflect that fact.

[gr0pah]

For the Battleships and cruisers that can't mount Defensive AA, I have not factored in Defensive AA multipliers into their DPS values. I should have made that clearer, but I was in a bit of a rush to get the information down (I hate real life sometimes).

 

Edit: Updated original post to reflect that fact.

Cheers!

 

EDIT: One more question. I can't recall if it's ever been explained how AA DPS aura is applied? Is it the full value to every single squad inside? So if we assume that 3 squads (2 DB, 1 TB) are circling the NM for example:

New Mexico

156

182

234

200.2

 

0.5.2: 2 squads takes 156 DPS and 1 squad 234 DPS

0.5.3: 2 squads takes 182 DPS and one squad 200.2 DPS

 

Would that be correct?

[StuntMan0369]

Looking around, there is some confusion on the new Intensification factor for Ctrl targetting. That post that I was linked says 1.3x, whereas our main portal say 1.1x. Could someone please clear this up, because it's kinda critical to the calculations I am showing here.

 

Edit: Taking into account the date of that post I was linked, it also states Defensive fire is a x4 multiplier, not x3 on our main portal, which suggests to me it's outdated information, but until someone clarifies this, all my data is kinda up in the air right now.

[gr0pah]

[added a question in edit above]

[StuntMan0369]

EDIT: One more question. I can't recall if it's ever been explained how AA DPS aura is applied? Is it the full value to every single squad inside? So if we assume that 3 squads (2 DB, 1 TB) are circling the NM for example:

New Mexico

156

182

234

200.2

 

0.5.2: 2 squads takes 156 DPS and 1 squad 234 DPS

0.5.3: 2 squads takes 182 DPS and one squad 200.2 DPS

 

Would that be correct?

 

My values in the table are only for comparison between past and present AA values. This table doesn't account for the range for AA guns, just their overall DPS if all AA guns are engaging a target. As for your question, each AA aura can only attack one squadron at a time. Say there are 2 squadrons inside your mid range AA. Both your Long range AA and Mid-range will shoot at ONE squadron, based on priority. Of course, Ctrl targeting is highest priority, and then there is a priority system in place for which squadron gets shot down (TB's and DB's take priority over fighters for sure, but I don't know the true specifics for these).