Return of the Carrier

[El2aZeR]

A CV would spot a DD to highlight him to his team. If you are able to erase a DD then you take away an unknown element (a ship that could pop up and cause problems elsewhere).

 

That does not answer his question at all. It's "why", not "how".

 

At present I can have aircraft flying above me with no fear of getting killed. What is the point of giving a ship an AA rating of 2.

 

Well, if a CV can constantly hover planes above your head you're out of position and rightly deserve to be punished for it. I don't see the problem here.

As for AA, you may as well ask what the point is for any ship to have AA at T3-5. None of these ships really have adequate AA, requiring players to stick together to even have a chance of being immune to air strikes.

 

A simlle question was asked and completely warped by CV players suggesting DD players are asking for BB levels of AA or special consumables. When CVs come onto a DD zone and exagerate the topic shouldn't they feel  as they brought it on themselves? 

 

Since when was adding Def AA a suggestion from a CV player?

 

Let me tell you why CV players are freaking out about this (and rightfully so).

1. People expect to always have a chance to take no damage from air strikes no matter how out of position they are or what class they play and regard it as unfair when they do take massive damage or get sunk. This is absurd, if a CV can safely strike or constantly spot you you deserve it, end of story. As Crysantos said, it is similar to getting detected at close range by a cruiser.

2. DDs are currently the ONLY targets a CV can safely strike (and that doesn't even apply to US DDs). Every other ship simply has too much AA, even if they're on their own. Striking a BB at any time before the 10 minute mark is basically asking to have no planes left over later on. If you give DDs adequate AA (regardless of which form that'll take, be it Def AA or straight up buffs), what the [edited] are CVs supposed to do then? Go afk until the team has finally softened up BBs enough?

3. People whine about CVs despite there already being very viable and effective counters to them in the game, constantly demanding CVs to be nerfed in some way. And the amount of unnecessary nerfs CVs had to endure so far is ludicrous, we had a single major patch last year which didn't include some sort of nerf to CVs.

 

Already US DDs can do this when fully AA specced (and this was before the captain skill rework):

 

Just played a game in my Taiho. Couldn't even see this guy half the time.

 

 

Yep, totally balanced.

 

EDIT: Div'd up with him for the next few games (playing Shokaku). Once engaged 2 fighter squads over him.

I got a single plane kill out of that engagement.

 

If that's what you wish to give every DD then you may as well remove CVs from the game.

[Redcap375]

DDs are currently the ONLY targets a CV can safely strike (and that doesn't even apply to US DDs). Every other ship simply has too much AA, even if they're on their own. Striking a BB at any time before the 10 minute mark is basically asking to have no planes left over later on. If you give DDs adequate AA (regardless of which form that'll take, be it Def AA or straight up buffs), what the [edited] are CVs supposed to do then? Go afk until the team has finally softened up BBs enough?

 

BINGO!

 

This gentleman has got it. And he didn't need anymore hints too. I can tell that this player plays not only CVs, but other ships like myself (to different degree's)

 

You see Grimm about thinking not just about your own line, but all lines in general.

 

You slap defensive aa ON ALL dds and you make them, over night, practably untouchable by aircraft. You put more aa on already buffed (10%) then you limit still the targets CV players have, period.

 

Spotted with planes trying to snipe the enemy CV? Tough

 

Spotted by planes trying to sneek up on BBs? Tough

 

Don't see many RN cruiser captains complaining when it happens. You noticed that?

 

You have a CV in your team right? How about asking him for help? You know m8, teamwork..or get your [edited]back to your lines for aa support. You go solo, you take the risk.

 

I know you would want that, being an untouchable dd player and all but open your eyes to the bigger picture. The game

[Redcap375]

Cheer's chaps  no hard feelings.

[Zathras_Grimm]

 

That does not answer his question at all. It's "why", not "how".

 

 

Well, if a CV can constantly hover planes above your head you're out of position and rightly deserve to be punished for it. I don't see the problem here.

As for AA, you may as well ask what the point is for any ship to have AA at T3-5. None of these ships really have adequate AA, requiring players to stick together to even have a chance of being immune to air strikes.

 

 

Since when was adding Def AA a suggestion from a CV player?

 

Let me tell you why CV players are freaking out about this (and rightfully so).

1. People expect to always have a chance to take no damage from air strikes no matter how out of position they are or what class they play and regard it as unfair when they do take massive damage or get sunk. This is absurd, if a CV can safely strike or constantly spot you you deserve it, end of story. As Crysantos said, it is similar to getting detected at close range by a cruiser.

2. DDs are currently the ONLY targets a CV can safely strike (and that doesn't even apply to US DDs). Every other ship simply has too much AA, even if they're on their own. Striking a BB at any time before the 10 minute mark is basically asking to have no planes left over later on. If you give DDs adequate AA (regardless of which form that'll take, be it Def AA or straight up buffs), what the [edited] are CVs supposed to do then? Go afk until the team has finally softened up BBs enough?

3. People whine about CVs despite there already being very viable and effective counters to them in the game, constantly demanding CVs to be nerfed in some way. And the amount of unnecessary nerfs CVs had to endure so far is ludicrous, we had a single major patch last year which didn't include some sort of nerf to CVs.

 

Already US DDs can do this when fully AA specced (and this was before the captain skill rework):

 

 

If that's what you wish to give every DD then you may as well remove CVs from the game.

 

His question was why?  : Why do CV players target and attempt to sink dds in this messed up/non RL WG world? Bearing in mind you are the hardest target to hit (skill wise) BY FAR

 

Again you make an assumption. At the end of the game a DD may often be looking to cap. You have to take that chance in order to win the game. I'm not out of position or playing wrong. You seem to be looking for a fault in the way I play to negate the simple question about having more AA.

So someone takes a topic about increasing AA and exaggerates what is being suggested and doesn't expect to be called out for it? That's like someone saying 'I want longer range' and someone jumping in and saying 'D'uh, so you want to be able to hit one side of the map from the other'. Not even close. Really, the increase wasn't even given in numbers, just suggested.

 

 

1. And again you insult everyone by saying 'people expect to take no damage', no they don't. Some might but you are again taking the extreme. No one has said 'D'uh if I sail away across the map with no support and get caught by a CV Sqn I expect no damage!' What has been said is Yes I would like more AA so that at least I stand a chance of shooting a firkin plane down once in a while (and that is exactly what I'm asking).

2. SO you are pissed that the ships that have little AA are wishing they had more, when your real gripe is that other ships have too much.

3. I have not whined about CVs. I've stated I would like AA that can shoot a firkin plane down lol. Isn't that the point of AA? I haven't said anything about wanting BB levels off AA, or radar or nukes before anyone decides to go that way! Just better AA; what that means could be up for discussion but apparently not with CV captains.

 

 

Again you show a Fletcher. I have no idea if it is supposed to be an AA ship, or what. I would be happy to discuss if you want. Just give me a few minutes to remove it from my throat you just shoved it down lol.

 

 

 

I'm glad you pointed that out, perfect can touch on that later 

 

Good, but hold your horses m8. You can do that with a lot of ships but you are right, CVs can do this very well. Its one of those skills/things that other ships do, like..Spam HE, Invis torp, fire from smoke, you know the kind 

 

Like I said, open your mind to not just "DD or nothing" mentality. Think of the bigger picture.

 

Now...Why do CV players target DDs knowing that they are the hardest target to hit but do it anyway?

 

Why not that big fat juicy BB at the back? Or that nil torp armour cruisers with him?

 

No, I have (or at least had) no problem with CVs - I have NEVER said anything bad about CVs. I have asked questions in the past about load outs , or talked about CVs that don't move when warned about the enemy. But at no time have I badmouthed CV players for being CV players.

 

 

I have sometimes stated that Cvs are the pain in my [edited], but have always indicated this as banter by giving the smiley next to the comment and stating I think its the hardest ship to play. Look back over my posts if you like. But honestly, the crap I've got for wanting more than an AA level of 2. Wow.

 

 

 

[Zathras_Grimm]

 

BINGO!

 

This gentleman has got it. And he didn't need anymore hints too. I can tell that this player plays not only CVs, but other ships like myself (to different degree's)

 

You see Grimm about thinking not just about your own line, but all lines in general.

 

You slap defensive aa ON ALL dds and you make them, over night, practably untouchable by aircraft. You put more aa on already buffed (10%) then you limit still the targets CV players have, period.

 

Spotted with planes trying to snipe the enemy CV? Tough

 

Spotted by planes trying to sneek up on BBs? Tough

 

Don't see many RN cruiser captains complaining when it happens. You noticed that?

 

You have a CV in your team right? How about asking him for help? You know m8, teamwork..or get your [edited]back to your lines for aa support. You go solo, you take the risk.

 

I know you would want that, being an untouchable dd player and all but open your eyes to the bigger picture. The game

 

You talk about thinking about all lines in general. I suggest you do so then!

 

You have basically taken the frustration you have with other ships out on someone who has asked for a better than 2 AA rating. Seriously, that's like slapping a starving guy who is asking for food because you have to look at a fat bastard all day! lol

[Redcap375]

 

 

 

Agree they should have defensive fire to at least do some damage to Sqns that constantly hover above there heads.

 

I think your suggestion is a bit stupid Redcap. Then again I guess you don't want anything to have a defence against your planes (or is that just me suggesting another ridiculous sledgehammer approach to the topic?).

 

Are you feeling OK Grimm? Was this your post? 

 

My I draw your attention to the first paragraph, you know that one about giving all dds defensive aa? So you believe they should all have defensive aa..

 

You did write that..Or did the kids get hold of the keyboard?

 

Not to mention how you jumped right in with a presumption, like you said someone else did on your post? Interesting isn't it m8.

 

See you on the big blue 

[Redcap375]

 

You talk about thinking about all lines in general. I suggest you do so then!

 

You have basically taken the frustration you have with other ships out on someone who has asked for a better than 2 AA rating. Seriously, that's like slapping a starving guy who is asking for food because you have to look at a fat bastard all day! lol

 

Some people just don't understand. Shame.

[Zathras_Grimm]

 

Are you feeling OK Grimm? Was this your post?

 

My I draw your attention to the first paragraph, you know that one about giving all dds defensive aa? So you believe they should all have defensive aa..

 

You did write that..Or did the kids get hold of the keyboard?

 

Not to mention how you jumped right in with a presumption, like you said someone else did on your post? Interesting isn't it m8.

 

See you on the big blue 

 

Yes and you took it to mean the consumable. Having defensive AA is AA that works and actually kills something in my book.

 

In post #32 I even stated:

I am talking about increased AA level, not the consumable. When you have an AA skill of 2, I'd rather have whatever WG thinks that is worth as extra HP as it does nothing in game.

 

 

If this is where the confusion is or why I got the crap load of grief from CV players then at least I understand now. Whether, it could have been more productive to ask me what I meant or how powerful I thought the AA should be then maybe a better understanding could have been had. Instead you started stating rubbish about BB levels of AA (did you not say that, where did I jump in).

 

 

I guess some people don't understand, and yes it is a shame.

[El2aZeR]

-snip-

 

*sigh* Do you take everything personally? The reasons why CV players freak out about this are directed at the majority, not you in particular. Besides, I could also say when playing a BB that DDs should be constantly spotted lategame since all my teammates are dead and I need to go cap because I want to win. Same thing.

If you do find yourself in a situation like this, your own CV misplays by not giving you cover and you suffer for it. Nothing wrong here. Might be frustrating but this is a team game after all.

 

You have basically taken the frustration you have with other ships out on someone who has asked for a better than 2 AA rating. Seriously, that's like slapping a starving guy who is asking for food because you have to look at a fat bastard all day! lol

 

No it isn't. DDs have worse AA than others by design. They neither deserve nor need more AA, because it's one of their inherent weaknesses. It's more like punching a rich guy in the face for posing as a starving man and begging in the streets.

DDs have plenty of advantages by game design, bad AA is one of the trade-offs they have to deal with. You may as well ask giving BBs better maneuverability, or cruisers more armor.

[Redcap375]

 

Yes and you took it to mean the consumable. Having defensive AA is AA that works and actually kills something in my book.

 

In post #32 I even stated:

I am talking about increased AA level, not the consumable. When you have an AA skill of 2, I'd rather have whatever WG thinks that is worth as extra HP as it does nothing in game.

 

 

If this is where the confusion is or why I got the crap load of grief from CV players then at least I understand now. Whether, it could have been more productive to ask me what I meant or how powerful I thought the AA should be then maybe a better understanding could have been had. Instead you started stating rubbish about BB levels of AA (did you not say that, where did I jump in).

 

 

I guess some people don't understand, and yes it is a shame.

 

Lol....Oh mate .  Nor did I, but i I included it just in case (52#) 

 

Cheers  

[Zathras_Grimm]

 

*sigh* Do you take everything personally? The reasons why CV players freak out about this are directed at the majority, not you in particular. Besides, I could also say when playing a BB that DDs should be constantly spotted lategame since all my teammates are dead and I need to go cap because I want to win. Same thing.

If you do find yourself in a situation like this, your own CV misplays by not giving you cover and you suffer for it. Nothing wrong here. Might be frustrating but this is a team game after all.

 

 

No it isn't. DDs have worse AA than others by design. They neither deserve nor need more AA, because it's one of their inherent weaknesses. It's more like punching a rich guy in the face for posing as a starving man and begging in the streets.

DDs have plenty of advantages by game design, bad AA is one of the trade-offs they have to deal with. You may as well ask giving BBs better maneuverability, or cruisers more armor.

 

Really! You respond directly to me and my post and then 'sigh' and ask me if I take everything personal?  Is this a tree falls in a wood but does it make a sound if no one is there to hear it question.

 

 

If you mean is my heart close to breaking then no, fear not; I haven't even felt the need to curse or go cry into a pillow. My problem was with you jumping all over what I thought was a reasonable ask. More than a 2 AA rating. We can all bring up bad scenarios about DDs being out on their own and I am happy to admit that I have taken some risks in the past and paid for it (rightly so). And of course my CV player might 'misplay', in fact I'd prefer to just put it down to the enemy CV player being better than mine misplaying (as I do not play CVs). These are things I haven't even discussed or argued against. I understand you talk about them to bring a level headed view to the conversation, but as I haven't disagreed or would disagree with these 'sane' comments then I fail to see why you have brought them up?

 

 

So my DD rating of 2 AA is a rich guy posing as a beggar. Ok fair enough. I will not ask for better than the 2 AA I have.

 

 

[Zathras_Grimm]

 

Lol....Oh mate .  Nor did I, but i I included it just in case (52#)

 

Cheers

 

So you are just against a DD having better AA and to put your point across you indicated that I or other DD players were asking for BB levels of AA in comparison.

 

Your post at #52 is actually very good, as all you do is give scenarios that no one has argued about. Seriously you point out things that most players would agree with but do mention why that has any bearing on someone wanting a higher AA level.

 

 

Try to sneak get caught!  What has that to do with asking for more AA? You seem to link more AA with giving someone something for making a mistake. No one has asked for this; asking for better AA defence is not asking for mistakes to be nullified, it is simply asking for better AA.

 

EDIT: We're obviously not going to see eye to eye, I have asked for better AA and that has translated into asking for BB levels of firepower and your post at #53.

 

 

 

 

[El2aZeR]

Really! You respond directly to me and my post and then 'sigh' and ask me if I take everything personal?  Is this a tree falls in a wood but does it make a sound if no one is there to hear it question.

 

I've tried to explain the general viewpoint of CV players to you regarding this topic. Feel free to take something personal from it if you believe it applies to you.

 

So my DD rating of 2 AA is a rich guy posing as a beggar. Ok fair enough. I will not ask for better than the 2 AA I have.

 

Yes. Let's examine what you get for having bad AA:

- best maneuverability in the game

- best concealment in the game

- ability to fire from stealth (torps or guns)

- great utility and game impact

 

You can't have everything condensed into one class, otherwise it becomes too strong (you know, like BBs currently). Yes, 2 AA is worthless, but here's where realism is a fairly valid point. Not having any AA when the real life counterpart did would raise some questions among the "muh realism!"-crowd and since that bit of AA is nothing game-breaking you may as well include it.

[Zathras_Grimm]

 

I've tried to explain the general viewpoint of CV players to you regarding this topic. Feel free to take something personal from it if you believe it applies to you.

 

 

Yes. Let's examine what you get for having bad AA:

- best maneuverability in the game

- best concealment in the game

- ability to fire from stealth (torps or guns)

- great utility and game impact

 

You can't have everything condensed into one class, otherwise it becomes too strong (you know, like BBs currently). Yes, 2 AA is worthless, but here's where realism is a fairly valid point. Not having any AA when the real life counterpart did would raise some questions among the "muh realism!"-crowd and since that bit of AA is nothing game-breaking you may as well include it.

 

Yes I am sorry that when you respond to my posts I do not understand you are not responding to me but to the general topic matter (even when you directly quote what I have said).

 

And again you seem to indicate I am asking for something massive(?) That list you mention, well point for point that can be angled at CVs too. Yet you don't feel that it is wrong to show your frustration at the levels of AA some ships have out there and want something to be changed.

 

 

You might be right, some ships may need less AA, I don't know. At least I'd be willing to discuss the why instead of quoting all the things you should do to avoid the AA (as if you don't do that already), or say 'you want all ships to have useless AA'. Because I don't believe you are saying that. Yet that seems to be the angle that you and Redcap seem to be coming from with my suggestion of having better AA.

 

 

As many scenarios that you mention, or emotes that Redcap spams, its cool, its a forum and people can disagree. The level of hostility to a suggestion of better AA on my level 2 rating AA mystifies me, but you say that it is angled as a general comment. It didn't seem that way, but fair enough. On my part I am sorry you thought I had a problem with CVs because I was suggesting better AA.

[S4h3L]

[Redcap375]

 

Lol..

 

 

So you are just against a DD having better AA and to put your point across you indicated that I or other DD players were asking for BB levels of AA in comparison.

 

 

This is just too much  It will click m8, don't worry.  

 

 

Your post at #52 is actually very good, as all you do is give scenarios that no one has argued about. Seriously you point out things that most players would agree with but do mention why that has any bearing on someone wanting a higher AA level.

 

 

Still nothing?? 

 

No hard feelings lad.

[Zathras_Grimm]

 

Lol..

 

 

This is just too much  It will click m8, don't worry.

 

 

Still nothing?? 

 

No hard feelings lad.

 

If it makes you feel better I have no hard feelings lol.

 

 

 

You've mentioned many things but failed to answer the question about my wish to have a better than 2 AA rating. You seem to say I'll get the fact that 'you feel you only have the DDs to attack because everything else is so powerful', but what you don't seem to get is that doesn't answer my question. If the click is realising you aren't answering that question I figured that one out a while back.

 

 

I only hope you have no hard feelings for my asking such a hard question, son.

[El2aZeR]

And again you seem to indicate I am asking for something massive(?) That list you mention, well point for point that can be angled at CVs too. Yet you don't feel that it is wrong to show your frustration at the levels of AA some ships have out there and want something to be changed.

 

*sigh* Alright, one last try.

Yes, it can be said for every class, since every class has specific strengths and weaknesses. As such

CVs get limited "ammo", inability to cap and a dedicated mechanic (AA) to counter them

BBs have bad handling, long reload times and bad concealment

Cruisers get bad armor and alpha strike

DDs have a low HP pool, no armor and bad AA

 

Giving DDs adequate AA and therefore eliminating one of their weaknesses would simply make them too strong.

You get a DD with a 2 AA rating because they were designed in real life to have a specific armament, which coincidentally complies with overall class balancing. Sure, you could up it to 10 or so with a fantasy upgrade but why bother wasting time on designing such a thing when it gets you basically the same results as 2? And going overboard with it and therefore giving the DD a rating of 30-40 to actually make a difference would go against class balance.

Making AA on DDs "a bit better" would not be worth the effort, while giving them adequate AA would make them OP.

[Zathras_Grimm]

 

*sigh* Alright, one last try.

Yes, it can be said for every class, since every class has specific strengths and weaknesses. As such

CVs get limited "ammo", inability to cap and a dedicated mechanic (AA) to counter them

BBs have bad handling, long reload times and bad concealment

Cruisers get bad armor and alpha strike

DDs have a low HP pool, no armor and bad AA

 

Giving DDs adequate AA and therefore eliminating one of their weaknesses would simply make them too strong.

You get a DD with a 2 AA rating because they were designed in real life to have a specific armament, which coincidentally complies with overall class balancing. Sure, you could up it to 10 or so with a fantasy upgrade but why bother wasting time on designing such a thing when it gets you basically the same results as 2? And going overboard with it and therefore giving the DD a rating of 30-40 to actually make a difference would go against class balance.

Making AA on DDs "a bit better" would not be worth the effort, while giving them adequate AA would make them OP.

 

Again with the *sigh* and the one last try lol.

 

Really who do you think that fools? It telegraphs your intention just like Radcaps m8 and lad comment. If he is a real Redcap then his interview technique must suck lol.

 

 

Lets dispense with your sighs and his 'you'll get it', or next you'll be giving me an imaginary pat on the head and that much 'care' would be just too much lol. The fact is I think some DDs with low AA could do with better AA. You do not, as you think it will make them too powerful. How you know that when we haven't mentioned what type of increase is beyond me.

 

 

I'll agree to disagree. Its all cool. (and don't worry, I'll be ok ).

[El2aZeR]

How you know that when we haven't mentioned what type of increase is beyond me.

 

As i stated, a low increase would make no difference at all while making them capable of reliably shooting down planes would make them too powerful. You don't have to be a genius in game design and balance to understand that.

[Zathras_Grimm]

 

As i stated, a low increase would make no difference at all while making them capable of reliably shooting down planes would make them too powerful. You don't have to be a genius in game design and balance to understand that.

 

Agree to disagree.

[pra3y]

When people tell your DDs have weak AA and a Gearing shoots down 64 planes

 

 Granted it was highly situational and the opposing CV player was abit meh flying over/near strangers123 repeatedly after getting his planes shot down earlier in the game.

 

[Zathras_Grimm]

When people tell your DDs have weak AA and a Gearing shoots down 64 planes

 

 Granted it was highly situational and the opposing CV player was abit meh flying over/near strangers123 repeatedly after getting his planes shot down earlier in the game.

 

 

Thank you Pra3y; although you obviously come from a bias standpoint you have at least allowed me to compare. Also you generalise by saying DDs have weak AA. Some do, some don't.

 

1. The Gearing has a rating of 31.8 damage per second.

2. The Fujin has a damage rate of 3.2 per second.

 

 

You let yourself down with your first sentence (not exactly a lets look at this evenly approach lol), but I thank you for adding it was a highly situational scenario (even though that part is hidden lol). In my book the Gearing seems F* amazing! With 3.2 damage a second I am lucky to get an aircraft at all. Over 100s of games, with some that I am caught by fighters (mistake on my part or not), no fighters, not one.

 

 

So yes, I would like a better AA rating than 2. Does the Gearing need more AA? I'll leave the people who play the Gearing to discuss that point. How much more AA well that is the question! My AA is 10 times less than the Gearing yet I really don't shoot anything down. I remember the Minekaze had 10 AA rating I think  and if it was in a situational scenario like yours then it would maybe shoot down 2 aircraft. Not a lot but at least it did something.

 

 

So I will punt for an AA rating of 10 (to out numbers to it); what my old Minekaze had.

 

 

Again, thank you.

[pra3y]

 

Thank you Pra3y; although you obviously come from a bias standpoint you have at least allowed me to compare. Also you generalise by saying DDs have weak AA. Some do, some don't.

 

1. The Gearing has a rating of 31.8 damage per second.

2. The Fujin has a damage rate of 3.2 per second.

 

 

You let yourself down with your first sentence (not exactly a lets look at this evenly approach lol), but I thank you for adding it was a highly situational scenario (even though that part is hidden lol). In my book the Gearing seems F* amazing! With 3.2 damage a second I am lucky to get an aircraft at all. Over 100s of games, with some that I am caught by fighters (mistake on my part or not), no fighters, not one.

 

 

So yes, I would like a better AA rating than 2. Does the Gearing need more AA? I'll leave the people who play the Gearing to discuss that point. How much more AA well that is the question! My AA is 10 times less than the Gearing yet I really don't shoot anything down. I remember the Minekaze had 10 AA rating I think  and if it was in a situational scenario like yours then it would maybe shoot down 2 aircraft. Not a lot but at least it did something.

 

 

So I will punt for an AA rating of 10 (to out numbers to it); what my old Minekaze had.

 

 

Again, thank you.

 

To be fair,you should compare their AA against their same tier CV which they will usually meet. After all I'm certain that AA ratings are geared towards same tier CVs, like a Gearing AA is balanced against a Midway/Haku and a Mahan against Hiryu and Ranger.

 

A Kirov has an AA rating of 16. Nic has 4, Mini 2, Mut 16, T-22 18, Gne 8 and Grem abt 10/10+ (21 with bft and aft) (all stock). I had a match yesterday in my Bogue where I disconnected for about a min or 2 with my torpedo bomber squad next to  a Kirov. By the time I reconnected I lost 2 planes from the squadron. This is a CA with pretty bad AA. That means that a Mutsuki, T-22 and Grem at tier 5 can kill off Bogue planes (and presumably Zuiho planes since they have lesser planes per  squad and also health) at a decent rate while a Nic will take some time and in a Minikaze probably longer or should just run. Sure your Fujin and Mini has crap AA but I think it's balanced out against their own strength as well like stealth and torps. Ships can't have everything. They have to win some and lose some

[Zathras_Grimm]

 

To be fair,you should compare their AA against their same tier CV which they will usually meet. After all I'm certain that AA ratings are geared towards same tier CVs, like a Gearing AA is balanced against a Midway/Haku and a Mahan against Hiryu and Ranger.

 

A Kirov has an AA rating of 16. Nic has 4, Mini 2, Mut 16, T-22 18, Gne 8 and Grem abt 10/10+ (21 with bft and aft) (all stock). I had a match yesterday in my Bogue where I disconnected for about a min or 2 with my torpedo bomber squad next to  a Kirov. By the time I reconnected I lost 2 planes from the squadron. This is a CA with pretty bad AA. That means that a Mutsuki, T-22 and Grem at tier 5 can kill off Bogue planes (and presumably Zuiho planes since they have lesser planes per  squad and also health) at a decent rate while a Nic will take some time and in a Minikaze probably longer or should just run. Sure your Fujin and Mini has crap AA but I think it's balanced out against their own strength as well like stealth and torps. Ships can't have everything. They have to win some and lose some

 

Actually I didn't think the Minekaze was too bad. It had a rating of 10 I think and if fighters were flying over you for a period of time you could get a couple of kills. It is actually from the same tier and is exactly the kind of improvement I was looking at.

 

Thing is I didn't want BB levels of AA, I just wanted AA to actually shoot down a plane every once in a while lol. The 2 rating does not (seriously lol). Unfortunately the want for better AA seemed to open up frustration with ohers and the current situation with AA on other ships. For some reason the fact that they felt they couldn't attack other ships because of AA, made it ok to attack DDs with little AA. It's a shame if that is the case but I do not see why that should make asking for better AA that actually shoots something down every once in a while a crime. 

 

Thank you.