Jump to content

KiyoSenkan

Beta Testers
  • Content count

    17,396
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    3741
  • Clan

    [NMKJT]

Community Reputation

5,378 Superb

About KiyoSenkan

  • Rank
    Admiral of the Navy
  • Birthday 08/08/1983
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

2,787 profile views
  1. No, you just caught me being short with one of the forum's more frustratingly biased members.
  2. I actually didn't specify destroyers at all in that post.
  3. Wow it's almost like using torpedoes to attack ships isn't the brainless easy mode damage farm that battleship mains like to claim it is.
  4. When an entire line of tech tree battleships is released with access to DF from tier 5 and up, then you'll have an argument. Via Nicholas, USN destroyers can get Defensive Fire as early as tier 5. Earlier than any non-premium cruiser. There's 100% no reason why a SINGLE IJN destroyer that was specifically designed as an anti-air escort, with some of Japan's best anti-air weaponry, shouldn't also have it. Also you can stop acting like I said the whole IJN line should have it just by saying Akizuki should. Alternatively you could stop unreasonably hating anything Japanese that's not a battleship but I won't hold my breath on that one.
  5. And simply adding DFAA to a ship that by all rights should have it is somehow not possible?
  6. There just isn't any actually decent, impactful tier 1 skill for destroyers that aren't Russian. PM and PT are the only things that are even remotely useful.
  7. To Musashi or Not to Musashi

    To Musashi, or not to Musashi, that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to burn The shells and torpedoes of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sky of bombers And by opposing end them. To sink—to sleep, No more; and by a sinking to say we end The heart-ache and the thousand impact shocks That steel is heir to: 'tis a consummation Devoutly to be wish'd. To sink, to sleep; To sink, perchance to kraken—ay, there's the rub: For in that sleep of sinking what dreams may come, When we have shuffled off this matchmaking coil, Must give us pause—there's the respect That makes calamity of so long life. For who would bear the shells and fires of time, Th'oppressor's wrong, the proud ship's contumely, The pangs of dispriz'd love, the law's delay, The insolence of teamwork, and the spurns That patient merit of th'unworthy overpens, When he himself might his quietus make With a bare bodkin? Who would fardels bear, To swear and sweat under a weary life, But that the dread of something after sinking, The undiscovere'd map, from whose bourn No YOLOer returns, puzzles the will, And makes us rather bear those ills we have Than sail to others that we know not of? Thus camping does make cowards of us all, And thus the native hue of resolution Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought, And Enterprises of great pitch and moment With this regard their currents turn awry And lose the name of action.
  8. How is this remotely fair?

    No the issue with CVs is people play badly against them and then claim the ship is overpowered when the victim outplayed himself. Example: Sitting still in smoke and then whining that a manually dropped torpedo strike sank him.
  9. No the poster's point is that Akizuki, as a ship, was designed with AA escorting in mind and was rather good at it. It almost wasn't even built with a torpedo launcher. An Akizuki was active after the war until 1968 for Christ's sake, they were slow but they were by no means badly designed or ineffective ships. The fact that WG has released it without defensive fire, and considers its AA power "unintended" and is considering nerfing it, is a further insult to why the ship was even built in the first place. It's like saying Iowa shouldn't do 30+ knots when she was very obviously designed with this as a goal. As for the actual thread subject of one change to a tech tree ship: I'd drop Shimakaze's gun reload to 3 seconds. Claim it's an autoloader, Japan was prototyping one for 12.7cm guns late in the war anyway. You want me to use my guns? Give me guns worth using. Oh wait that's just the Shimokaze, theoretical tier 10 in the IJN gunboat line that WG will literally never release because they want people to stop playing IJN.
  10. The tactic of burning through the NW fleet spawn to surprise torpedo the carriers when they spawn on Aegis is actually how I do this scenario in my Leander. Works pretty well.
  11. This is why I take Priority Target. PM is basically worthless.
  12. How is this remotely fair?

    Neither of those are Saipan, which is what is being discussed.
  13. Did anyone suggest putting these in the game? We're just discussing an interesting vehicle that was used in some shore landing operations.
  14. Ding ding ding ding The other problem is the regular nerfing of their ability to torpedo battleships. When it is the only thing they can do offensively. Every other role they can perform is passive.
×