AA Changes Proposal/Discussion

This is just a proposal created by Myself, on possible mechanics WG could implement to counter the ever going power creeping of AA. WG has not announced any of these changes to AA.
I bring unto you all today, a series of Ideas that I have discussed with friends, whom are among the top CV players, as well as myself whom does not play CV at all, to have good perspective on both sides of the AA gameplay, and we have come up with some ideas that should be fair to both the CV players and non-CV players.

The year of 2017 was proposed to us by wargaming that this would be the year of the CV.
This is what it looks like so far:

And with the recently announced USN CL tech tree, with the USS Worcester Anti-Aircraft Cruiser, things are not looking bright for CV players.

Thus myself and some cv and non-cv friends have come up with some changes to AA in how it functions, without actually nerfing the stats of high AA ships, by introducing some temporary conditions that can effect the AA performance of a ship, conditions that can be dependent on team play or that of a skilled CV player. This includes 2 new conditions that have a reasonable and sensible temporary effect to the AA of a ship.

Condition 1:
If a dual purpose weapon is reloading (whether it be a main or secondary weapon) it does not count towards the AA of a ship’s AA aura. This would reasonably simulate the fact that a DP gun cannot both fire at aircraft and ships at the same time. This would also be semi-dependent on team-play, and can be done either by random players just happening to work together, or division mates acting on intentional team play. In the case of a battleship, cases where all secondary dual purpose guns are all busy are unlikely, so its not like a battleship will out right lose all their long range aa effect because they are being engaged in close quarters combat, only the part that is occupied will be effected. As for AA cruisers, such as Atlanta, Minotaur, and Worcester, it gives some skill to using their ultra powerful AA, meaning they will have to choose between firing at ships or firing at aircraft. Or they can do both by choosing an angle where some of their guns cannot be used for ship warfare, example, an Atlanta player could choose to be bow on to a target, their stern side guns would not be able to fire at a ship, therefore they are never in the state of reloading and are now currently in the AA role.

Overall, “Condition 1” gives team-play, and in some ships, skill, to using their AA effectively.

Condition 2:
AA Crew and Fire does not mix. Very realistic, so here is a game mechanic that can be based off of this fact. AA can be divided into 2 categories for this mechanic, Open AA and Enclosed AA. Most AA found on ships is Open AA, where the theoretical AA crew is exposed to the elements. Enclosed AA, which is usually (but not exclusive to) dual purpose AA, is AA where the crew is protected on all sides by some sort of armored encasement. For every fire a ship has, a penalty is applied to the DPS of AA aura. A ship’s Open AA will receive 20% reduction to the dps of the ship’s Open AA, and only a 10% reduction to the DPS of all Enclosed AA.
Generally, the most powerful AA auras of a ship in-game is found in their dual purpose AA, and that is why I have figured it is fair if the enclosed AA is less effected by a fire on the deck. There are examples of ship’s who have non-dual purpose AA that is fully enclosed, found on many Russian destroyers and cruisers, as well as Minotaur’s medium AA is enclosed, and thus would only get the 10% Debuff to their DPS per fire.
This effect is additive between multiple fires. so if your ship has 2 fires set, the open AA will have a 40% DPS Debuff for the duration of the fire, while the Enclosed AA will only suffer a 20% losses in DPS. This mechanic would also increase the value of the Fire Prevention skill, which from what I hear from players is usually not a popular choice. Given the skill reduces the maximum number of fires to 3.
“Condition 2” I believe is a very reasonable temporary debuff to AA, that can rely on team play and/or the skill of the CV player.

If any of these numbers appear to be too extreme, then they can easily be modified if after play testing the effect is too strong or too weak. Overall, I feel these changes gives some more skill to AA, more teamplay to AA, without applying a dreaded nerf hammer to specific AA heavy ships. AA power creeping is all ways going to be a problem, so introducing new mechanics rather then nerfing specific ships is far easier to implement, and adds skill to what is, currently, a game mechanic that requires far less skill on the non-CV player then it does on the CV player.

Please, I do highly encourage you all to discuss these 2 new AA conditions.

I have also posted this article on the NA Forums:
~IGN: Shipmaster_Crook


14 thoughts on “AA Changes Proposal/Discussion

  1. Worcester is an AA cruiser, but I suspect her AA will be no better than Des Moines. Granted that means she’ll be tied for the best plane-swatted in the game, but no actual power creep here. Just the same AA that already existed at Tier X.


    1. The same case is with WoT. WG hates things that the average potato can’t understand. For example they are never going to introduce in the UI the terrain (ground) resistances or the secondary dispersions of the gun (after firing, when turning the turret, when rotating the hull, etc.)


    2. Pretty much this. While ’17 hasnt been the year of CV’s at all, WG likes to keep things arcade/simple just like in their other games.

      The second proposal might sound like an answer against the typical strong AA boat, but what about ships with mediocre AA? These would even be further impaired in their AA ability. CV comes in with bombs, puts ship on fire, and only then brings in the torp bombers. Good chance the poor guy cant even shoot down one torp bomber anymore, as these proposed AA changes will decrease his AA output by a substantial amount.

      I wonder if these proposals arent just made by a group of players who are bummed they cant break 200k damage anymore whenever something with AA pops up in their game.

      Liked by 1 person

    3. Well then by that logic soft stats like terrain resistances and other hidden stats for tanks and ships would not exist and would never be implemented.
      All the potato player would need to know, dummed down, is that being on fire reduces your aa, and your secondaries can’t act as aa when they are firing at ships. Pretty easy to understand for the potato.

      Liked by 1 person

    1. How about you pay attention and adjust your position before the carrier drops his torps? Oh heaven forbid leaving sniper view for more than a second…


  2. Part 1 seems to complicated for an arcade style game (i give it sounds very nice and skill cap bound but it will be to hard for 4/5 of the players and therefore not beneficial) Also you would need a second button to switch off your secondaries if you wanted to fully use their AA power even if engaged in cqb with an other ship (most BB secondaries are not worth the ship to ship DPS but definetly the AA DPS) For example i would rather turn my fully skilled Montana secondaries on a incomming bomber strike wave instead of getting 3/10 hits in every salvo on that side on the one DD trying to torp me.
    Part 2 sounds good a s a base idea, but as said before certain ships will suffer brutally from it while others will hardly notice. Also you points about fire prev being less used … depends on the ship, most BBs these days have to have it for the 3 fire starter pests called Khaba, Conq and Zao so that point is more ship class then player choice bound. And DP guns being the strongest AA guns only comes into play when you actually go for the manual AA skill, otherwise most of the time the mid range aura with 40mm Bofors, long 55mm german guns, Minos 70something mm guns put out a lot more then the long range ones (without the skill chosen of course)


  3. How does this create more “skill.” It’s a completely automated adjustment of numbers that’s a straight debuff to AA. In some cases, a quite significant debuff. CVs need a complete re-work, and AA needs to be adjusted as part of that. This idea is just a way of nerfing cruisers, and aggressive battleships. Neither of which needs a nerf.>


  4. Maybe this would work if carrier players were primarily team players instead of the same scum who infest most FPS games. I generalise of course and have played with fine people in carriers but the experience of the bad ones is worse.

    Maybe we should also remove manual drops as they make carrier drops far too easy and powerful. Without specific Aa support a battleship just one tier lower can be pretty much shut down completely, a destroyer killed off without any risk and a cruiser severely hampered (though it is nice that the cruiser can express their only remaining strength at that point, small size and decent Aa). Maybe we should try that for balance?

    Why? Because I’ve seen too many carrier players just play for the damage and kills and it’s never fun getting the focus of the carrier without heinous Aa which you’re looking to reduce.

    Let me be frank, I do find carriers a pain to play and to play against. I find them to be the same as the artillery class in WOT. If you give the power to kill off high value targets with impunity (like arty) then they need a significant weakness just like arty.


      1. Exactly, it helped them to not be OP. Another stupid thing they need to get rid of is fighter strafing, what the hell flies in straight lines and just shoots their guns. Dumbest shit they ever put in the game.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.