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

British battleship heavy AA guns too weak?

24 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[MIMI]
Beta Tester
768 posts
3,632 battles

I am curious... I know the 133mm guns were not top of the line AA weapons, but only 65 dps for 16 guns (8x2) seems very very weak. That is even less than the Amagis 16 127mm AA guns get (81 dps), and only half of what 16 german 105mm AA guns yield (133 dps which actually appears excessively high to me). I know that the US 127mms are vastly superior, but japanese guns AND german peashooters also being much stronger seems wrong to me.

 

Especially when reading stuff like this in the wiki (yes, I know it's wiki, but...).

 

" A wartime account describes HMS Euryalus firing her 5.25 in guns:

We left Suez and headed for the Gulf, where at 1PM the ship's company closed to action-stations and gave a demonstration of the cruiser's fire power to the army officers. Fire was opened with the 10 5.25" guns in the form of a low angle barrage accompanied by fire from smaller guns. Set to burst at 2000 yds range, a terrific barrage was put up for two minutes and we fired some two hundred rounds of 5.25-inch HE...A wall of bursting shell was thrown up just above sea level and I could see that the army officers were impressed... "

 

 

" According to postwar publications the gunhouses were cramped, and the heavy projectile and cartridge cases resulted in a reduced sustained rate of fire to seven or eight rounds per minute from the designed twelve rounds per minute. However, these factors do not appear to have reduced HMS Euryalus's rate of fire, over a one-minute period, which was typical for a World War II AA engagement. The dual-mount turrets 10 deg/s traversal speed was considered too slow to engage higher-speed aircraft at close range. However these elevation and traverse rates were still higher than some contemporary weapons, such as the 10.5 cm SK C/33 twin mounts carried on the Bismarck and Tirpitz. "

 

And why would the british have used such an excessively weak gun on so many of their ships? Something seems wrong to me there...

 

Thoughts from experts?

 

And please, I am not asking for stronger AA on BBs, this is just about historical accuracy that seems quite a bit off to me here.

Also I am basing this off numbers shown in the extended tech tree, if the actual numbers in test are different, please tell me...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MIMI]
Beta Tester
768 posts
3,632 battles

Very constructive....

Obviously there has to be game balance, but some things shouldn't be totally off imho. Or would you be fine with Yamatos 460mm guns being weaker than Myogis 356ers too?

 

I play this game because it is a reasonable adaption of history into a playable game. If it goes all fantasy, I wouldn't bother...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Alpha Tester
2,097 posts
7,213 battles

I cannot be bothered to do more research since the line isn't out yet, but the wikipedia article also includes this segment:

Quote

 The gun fired an 80 lb (36 kg) shell, which was considered the largest that a gun crew could easily handle while still having the rate of fire needed for anti-aircraft use. In 1944, VT-fuzed shells became available, making the gun significantly more effective against aircraft.

 

In any case, balance > historical accuracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SICK]
Weekend Tester
5,078 posts
11,114 battles
8 minutes ago, Kruzenstern said:

 

And why would the british have used such an excessively weak gun on so many of their ships? Something seems wrong to me there...

 

 

The weak AA ingame is just a balance decision so I wouldn't link it too much with real life.
I mean, a USN dual 127mm mount with VT fuze shells having less DPS per mount than the German 105 ? lulz

However, when talking about purely IRL aspect, I have no reason to believe that the 133mm wasn't at the very least adequate compared to its contemporaries.

That being said, it wouldn't have been the first time an overall ineffective weapon was used in mass.
The prime example of that being the Japanese with their very Ork-like devotion to increasing AA by slapping on more 25mm dakka, and to a lesser extent the French with their rather poor 130mm DPAA (as seen on the Dunkerque) and hilariously jam-prone 15" quad turrets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MIMI]
Beta Tester
768 posts
3,632 battles
11 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

The weak AA ingame is just a balance decision so I wouldn't link it too much with real life.

 

I don't really think giving the 16 133mm barrels something like 85 or even 100 dps instead of 65 would break game balance, would it? The main AA comes from the bofors anyway...

 

You are quite right about the japs with their 25mm obsession though. I don't really see the 5.25" playing in that league of fail, but maybe I am wrong...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SICK]
Weekend Tester
5,078 posts
11,114 battles
Just now, Kruzenstern said:

 

I don't really think giving the 16 133mm barrels something like 85 or even 100 dps would break game balance, would it? The main AA comes from the bofors anyway...

 

 

 

I have no idea, I was mostly commenting on the IRL aspect as the ingame aspect is purely a balance decision.

But I think they're very careful with DPAA nowadays because of manual AA.
Boosting the 65 dps to even 85 dps would mean a 40 dps increase using manual AA. Even more if you tack on flags and more skills.
 

I think they're in a jam with the British BB AA because the DPAA doesn't really change, but the mid range AA changes from pom-poms to bofors after a while, so they have to deal with the branch not having a firstly good long range AA at mid tier when the 133mm first appear, then as soon as the bofors make their entrance a ridiculous amount of AA by having good long range and mid range bubble, plus the inevitable oerlikon spam in every nook and cranny of the ship.

At least that's my take on it, and I could be completely wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
26,731 posts
14,356 battles

People were impressed by fireworks and now you want to buff AA?

Logic?

You can do a lot of fireworks that are completly harmless to planes....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,130 posts
10,780 battles

Using a phone so bare with chaps (cant beat a keybord)

 

You don't play CVs do you?  Let's look at this from the other side of the fence.

 

This game does not need yet another BB line that can single handly blow planes out the sky. Please remember that the CV should be the counter of BBs. This has got completely lost and will never be sorted with DDs being the main target now (excluding high tier ones that is)? Really? I'm sure that was the CV main targets in WW1 and WW1,  please. 

 

The Hood? Godly AA when tweaked (play with this ship in Kaga div).  The Warspite? Very good for its tier. I knew the RN BB will be another plane killer. Just look at the crusier line and thats without defensive AA?? 8.4 km on the minor,  LOL. 

 

1)US are great at it and im cool with that. it's their thing on all their lines.

2) German cruisers and BBs are good at it. Gne?Sharn?Bis? You stick that one captain skill and it's painful. 30 plane kills in my Sharn easy.

3) higher tier DDs with defensive fire

 

That brings us to the RN line. Hood and Warspite are the Benchmark and it's going to be transfered to the rest of the line.

 

Can you see many people kitting them out for secondary brawlers? That leaves more points to spending on AA protection and tanking. Forget about doing bomb runs on these things, long range torping will be the best option.

 

So many CVs out there now with lower tier planes for its tier is making planes survivability worse. Being up tiered is just expected now as a CV captain.

 

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the RN line and if it has strong AA then fine. I Love playing BBs with all of my BB lines equipped with manual aa aim. I know what it does and I hate seing what It does to another CV captain, but this is world of battleships. Seeing 5 German BBs in each team is getting boring so another BB line is welcome. God help us all when the made up russian BB line comes. I bet my mortgage that it too will have very good AA, just like it's crusier line. So 3/4 BB lines can deal with planes on their own. Great.

 

God I used to love the Cleveland, but it's now collecting dust in my port. The game had changed for crusier captains (my first line) as being  being blow up in one go by all these battle cruisers (AKA crusier hunters) isn't my cup of tea. Without smoke, a crusier captains life can be very short. Even russain DDs can own them now. It's there thing I know but doesn't help crusiers captains one bit.

 

I hate both playing them (can't get the hang of them) and going against DDs but I genuinely sorry for them at the moment. I am very efficient at killing them at the moment. In both a CV and BB, thats not right.

 

At least IJN BBs are still a target? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,774 posts
17,292 battles

High tier British BBs have been balanced for weak long range AA.

 

Although I'm surprised the 134mm/50 QF Mk I only has a 4.5km range. It looks like an error that's been carried through, like 57mm Bofors. All 130mm+ DP guns should have base range of 5.2km. Even crappy old ones.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
18,781 posts
6,105 battles

Am I going t get lynched if I say I'm happy to see BB's which are vulnerable to CV's but have higher short range 'retaliatory strike' capabilities? CV's will lose planes but not before they drop you. Meh as a non CV player I can live with that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,199 posts
14,266 battles
4 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

Am I going t get lynched if I say I'm happy to see BB's which are vulnerable to CV's but have higher short range 'retaliatory strike' capabilities? CV's will lose planes but not before they drop you. Meh as a non CV player I can live with that...

Not a single CV player is crying because short/medium range. You can awoid that with longer drop (skill)....problems are strong 7.5, 8.2 aaa auras that you can buff 20% + 100% by captain skill + defensive fire......that is no fly zone......plus 8 km spotrange of ship against 8.2 or it is 8.5? Range of aaa on Minotaur = stealthfire :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
18,781 posts
6,105 battles

It's a weird concept, the visibility of planes and how AAA works. I expected it to be made less complex for us players.

 

ps: my Akizuki kills your planes before you spot me, and with manual AAA that long range DPS isn't that bad either, so I can imagine how it is for a carrier when you suddenly lose multiple planes from your squad and you can't even see who's killing them ( I been with enough CV's cursing about this very thing ). It seems such a complex mechanic, not sure how new players understand it, or how they are supposed to learn to stay away from things they can't see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles
3 hours ago, 15JG52Adler said:

No

 

P.s

When you are so for historical accuracy pls tell me did they have stealth on 10-13 km?

 

That's how RL Iowa sunk the Katori don't you know? Crept up on it and opened fire at 13km :Smile_teethhappy:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
607 posts
6,250 battles
13 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

ps: my Akizuki kills your planes before you spot me, and with manual AAA that long range DPS isn't that bad either, so I can imagine how it is for a carrier when you suddenly lose multiple planes from your squad and you can't even see who's killing them 

Maybe the mechanics changed recently but right now if you are DD shooting at planes from stealth, you become spotted as you would have fired your main guns.  Please others players confirm or infirm.

I had bad surprises when I wanted to shoot down planes from stealth range with my Hatsuharu (long range dp aa guns) lately in Ranked. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Modder
1,691 posts
3,667 battles

keep aa for bbs low. this is power creep at its best and germans are the bad precedent. american bbs should be imho the only bbs with decent aa. i really dont get why german bbs received such strong aa. full aa spec gneisenau is pretty much invulnerable to air attacks

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
18,781 posts
6,105 battles
Just now, PseudoMi said:

Maybe the mechanics changed recently but right now if you are DD shooting at planes from stealth, you become spotted as you would have fired your main guns.  Please others players confirm or infirm. I had bad surprises when I wanted to shoot down planes from stealth range with my Hatsuharu (long range dp aa guns). 

 

I haven't played in weeks I might be wrong / have a to old patch in mind. 

 

If you can't shoot down planes anymore without them spotting you that would be a good thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SPUDS]
Beta Tester
4,052 posts
8,760 battles
2 minutes ago, PseudoMi said:

Maybe the mechanics changed recently but right now if you are DD shooting at planes from stealth, you become spotted as you would have fired your main guns.  Please others players confirm or infirm.

I had bad surprises when I wanted to shoot down planes from stealth range with my Hatsuharu (long range dp aa guns) lately in Ranked. 

Depends on the DD in question. AA firing = 2km detection increase (for both types of detection, but only the air detection really matters here). Which in turn means some ships can in fact stealth AA, Akizuki being one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,130 posts
10,780 battles
3 minutes ago, puxflacet said:

keep aa for bbs low. this is power creep at its best and germans are the bad precedent. american bbs should be imho the only bbs with somewhat ok aa. i really dont get why germans received such strong aa. full aa spec gneisenau is pretty much invulnerable to air attack

 

That has always been my thoughts but alas, it's too late for that now. I can even except 2 BB lines with really good AA but not 3/4. It's becoming a joke.

 

Mark my words regarding the upcoming russian BBs and even the Italian one when it comes out. More aa to deal with. My 2 fav lines are going in different directions from each other and I personally know which one has the worse deal at the moment.

 

Alot of peoples aa stats regarding range dont include AFT and/or man aim and flags. It substantially increases aa death remember and who doesn't use AFT in BBs? Very few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
607 posts
6,250 battles

The true problem is general inbalance of the game due to lack of constant CV in teams. Some ships get big power in exchange of low AA. And that low AA is not a handicap in 90% of games where there is no CV. Thus the ship will be OP in 90% of games. General chronic inbalance. Mainly due to MM +/-2 impossibility to balance ships over five tiers, and its collateral effects. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,130 posts
10,780 battles

WG just arnt bothered to be honest. Both the money and player base isn't with CVs but the other lines. Its Just good business sense so I don't hold it against them. Just sucks that's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,199 posts
14,266 battles
13 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

WG just arnt bothered to be honest. Both the money and player base isn't with CVs but the other lines. Its Just good business sense so I don't hold it against them. Just sucks that's all.

And for some reason ther released Kaga, Big E and soon Stuka CV:).....3 premiums in very short time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
13,904 posts
19,732 battles

Tbh I do not mind if BBs have some fairly good AA values initially. (Fairly good meaning strike-able when caught alone but with some significant losses).

Because the AA of most BBs usually gets significantly reduced during the course of a battle. Seeing the AA values plummet in my NC when under consistent fire of even just a single cruiser is painful to watch. This also makes CVs dependent on teamplay, which is a good thing since no class in the game should be completely self-sufficient in a team game.

 

Maybe lowering AA values but making the AA mounts more survivable would be a good thing. Generally speaking AA would benefit a lot from making it more consistent instead of encompassing the entire spectrum of "completely useless" to "giant middle finger to planes".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×