Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'dd'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Contests and Competitions
    • Events
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Programs Corner
    • Support
  • Off Topic
    • Off-Topic
  • Historical Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
  • Player's Section
    • Team Play
    • Player Modifications
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests

Calendars

  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 62 results

  1. I've had several people in my clan ask me for tips and builds for the French DD's. And since I now feel comfortable saying I know what I'm doing to people outside my clan (1st on the server for winrate in Mogador woot woot) I figured I may as well post this and see what people think/who can get some help for it. How to Build: Here are the 2 corners for French DD playstyles. General preference is the name of the game for which one you prefer. (This will help you decide which build to try for.) Playstyle 1: (open water) Damage farmer. Khaba, Henri, Zao, Etc. Etc. we all know the ships, you know if you like them, and you know what the strategy is for them. Run and gun, and gun, and gun. Playstyle 2: CQB Assassin/Ambush. Brawler DM. Daring. Appear suddenly and kill a specific enemy, counting on surprise/superior maneuverability to use your brutal damage output to kill them without counterplay. This playstyle is more of a “sub”-playstyle (see the opportunity, do the thing), at this point, there aren’t very many ships that this works well as the primary playstyle you use. It serves more like the “What would you prefer to do in this situation.” French DD’s, the DM, and the Daring are kind of are the only ships that are even capable of pulling off this strategy. These outlines don’t mean that you only play with that playstyle, even in a given match you should be switching between each one to best handle the situation you find yourself in. But whichever playstyle you prefer is going to VERY heavily effect what build you run/what you do at the beginning of a match. Open water damage farmer. The purpose of this build is to allow maximum damage output for someone who never stops firing their guns. Some notes: AFT, IFHE, and BFT are all mandatory. You need the range, 29 mm pen, and extra Dakka. Reload mod instead of range mod is also mandatory, because sorry, if you’re going 54 knots and you need to be at 17 km from what you’re shooting at to do well, I have bad news for you (you might need to talk to your doctor about a prescription of “git-gud”.) SE isn’t really necessary, DE is more useful overall since you aren’t getting hit anyway, and the fire chance is spicy, why not make it spicier. Concealment options are a waste for this build, nothing can catch you, and if you are constantly shooting your guns the concealment isn’t being used anyway. Use the points/slots for other things. Rudder mod 3 is hilarious on these things, and if you’re running it, use propulsion mod Juking: Using high maneuverability to adjust your ship away from where an enemy’s shells will land. For long-range: Assuming you’re running the build shown here, start at 10km from what you want to farm. While firing, back towards them, once they shoot you pull forward out of the way, rinse wash repeat. You shouldn’t get closer than 9km from something actively shooting at you. If you are forced to be moving forward constantly: go full speed, this will usually be enough for people to miss you, (players have had trouble leading a Khaba for years, and these go even faster than that) If you see shells incoming that will hit you, full stop and put your rudder to one side, this will stop you the fastest. In Defense of IFA: IFA is a utility skill, it removes the possibility of “surprise” hits, and helps you manage multiple angles of fire shooting at you. (Get an alert but don’t see the ship you’re farming shoot its guns? You know something else is shooting at you and to look along the horizon to find out where it is.) CQB Assassin. The purpose of this build is to maximize quick damage output, stealth, and short-term survivability. Notes: Very little up for debate for the purest build: IFHE, CE, BFT, SE, AR, PM, LS, conceal mod and prop mod are all mandatory, you need the concealment to actually… do the thing. You need the firepower buff. And you NEED the survivability. And steering mod is useless for close-range juking/pouncing on prey. You have to be on your toes CONSTANTLY to utilize this build well. Enemy cruiser just went behind an island while their DD smoked up? Perfect, gank the DD and rush the CA. CA’s radar just go down after it pushed in front of its team? Kill it faster than it can even turn its guns. It’s a hardcore thinking strategy. Remember that for its caliber, French DD AP is pretty much the best in the game. This lets you assassinate any CA in the game (provided you have the drop on them) Torps are amazing also. This is an extremely passive playstyle in its pure form (note that I’m saying pure form, DO NOT rely on this as your only contribution in battles) You rely on surprise and crippling, sudden firepower to get crapdone. You aren’t the one rushing into areas you don’t know about, that’s for the plebs on your team. You let them find out where that unicum DM is holed up, so you can flank and blap him. You let them find the flank with the Shima, force his support back, then you go in and deal with him. Gearing in a cap? Wait for the right moment and rush his smokescreen, then escape straight after killing him. For juking at close range: Unless you’re faithful in your ability to anticipate other players actions, let whatever you’re fighting get one hit on you. Then, pull a hard stop by slamming your ship in reverse and turning to one side. Let them aim correctly at least one salvo while you’re going backward, then pull hard forwards. This whole process can take as little as 5 seconds, so be sure to rinse wash repeat as often as you can to maximize effectiveness. Personal Build/What I’d recommend Thanks, F1Toaster for the capt build… forgot you can run 3 tier 4 skills This is what I’d refer to as the “Generalist” build. It does the job of switching between all the different playstyles very well, you can adapt to the shifting game situations around you to maximize performance. Wanna farm? Have fun. See a chance to assassinate an enemy? Do it. Need to disengage? You can go dark and run, or shoot… and run. Push flanks, surprise CV’s by being right next to them 3 minutes into the game, surprise CA’s by coming in from a unexpected angle, Etc. Etc. The sea is your oyster. Prop vs Steering mod is totally up to personal preference, for Mog I loosely recommend steering since 7.1 det makes it more of a dedicated kiter. I’m expecting Kleber to be a FAR better brawler, 6.9 det and better firepower/health/speed, so Prop mod will be better. I swap between the 2 on my Terrible and Mog daily just kind of based on how ballsy I’m feeling that day/how much of a prick I want to be. Random assorted points: Le Terrible is a more gunboaty Fantasque, .2 worse concealment, 1 sec better reload, 13 second faster torp reload. 10 knot slower torps. AP vs. HE. I touched on this in the assassin point, but your AP is the best for its caliber. You’re AP can citadel most cruisers out to a range of 10km. And at 2.5k a cit, you will eat broadside cruisers alive. There are 2 main opportunities to utilize it: The most basic is simply an ambush, whether you have a DM camping an island, and you can flank to its broadside. Or an Henri that’s backing towards your team. You find an enemy cruiser that’s focused on something else, and that can’t easily turn away, and strike with you’re reload boost. Use torps to cover the most likely means of escape they’ll use, take the Henri example for instance. If he’s backing towards the enemy. He can’t go backwards any faster, and if he accelerates it’s a linear progression. (Noone is going to think to switch up to half speed, drop down to quarter speed, then up to full when they’re losing a 5th of their health every 2 seconds.) Use the kneejerk reaction of them realizing what you are and where you are to force them into torps. For HE, you’ll do 3-5k salvo’s, and with the 9% fire chance after IFHE, you aren’t hurt for taking it. You eat everything at every range. It obviously doesn’t have the same blap potential as AP, but against BB’s, DD’s, and CA’s at weird angles, it does the job and it does the job well. French AP penetration VS Khaba, VS Mino: On a smaller point, When gunfighting Khaba’s, and Gearing’s specifically, AP is your best option. You won’t overpen Gearing unless you’re sub 3km. And Khaba is fair game at all ranges. 6k salvos can be expected with good AP hits on them. Try to hit directly under the smokestack for both of them, that’s where their 50mm and 21mm armor plates are. Here is a comparison Graph for Kleber vs Daring vs Khaba. FYI. SI is unnecessary, you shouldn’t be relying on your reload boosts for “general” damage, and with speed boost mod you are incapable of using the extra speed boost because of the time limits in a match. Thanks to some testing by ThatsAPaladin and I, here is some insight into Prop vs Steering Mod. Prop mod makes half a ship-length difference while accelerating (as compared to something without it) and steering gears… do the thing, rudder shift is a posted number so there are no real secrets to it. Just remember: if you’re using slowing down and speeding up as your means of dodging, your negating your biggest asset: your incredible speed. You going from -20 to 30 knots is awesome, but you might have been better off staying at 50 knots and moving towards something important. (especially since 75% of the player base is incapable of leading you correctly when you’re going max speed.) SE is optional if you are playing open water mostly. I’ve never died in my Mog while kiting. And only very rarely in my Terrible (which I had 200 battles in before I got my Mog so… there’s going to be some outliers.) People legitimately just have a hard time hitting you. (WAY more so than a Khab) How to handle planes: If they aren’t rocket planes, Just-Dodge™. If they are: go dark and always have your nose towards the planes. You turn fast enough that this is achievable. The Mog (and Kleber) have good enough AA to wither down planes that are hovering over you. Even unicum CV’s seem to have trouble anticipating the amount of lead they need, and if you are going full speed towards them, they won’t have enough time after spotting you to get their aiming cone fully centered, which means you’ll only take about 1k damage per run. (If even) Some points on what to, and how to avoid: Remember these things: Worcester radar: 9 KM. USSR Radar: 12km. Everything else: 10 KM. If you get caught out or surprised when you get radared, you’ve screwed up somewhere. Work to avoid areas where you know there are destroyers unless you are rushing them or trying to scare them from advancing. It's not worth it to lose a quarter of your health because you tried to be cheeky and force your way into a DD with friends nearby. (especially friends that can spot for a gunboat DD.) Also work to not make an enemy CV think you're going to try to go for him (even if you are.) Keep an enemy between you and him/where you think he is, if you decide to go for him go dark in a position that is away from wherever the hole you're slipping through. This will help you have the drop on him, and stop him from investigating you. How to Play: Decide whether to play kiter, try to be cheeky at the beginning of a game or play passively until there’s a good opportunity (I decide at the beginning of a game what playstyle I’ll start with based off of matchmaking, build, and whether I’m in a div/who I’m divved with) then decide on a flank (Always, no matter what playstyle you choose, go to a flank. Screwing around in mid just isn’t worth it 99% of the time (unless you want to meme.)) For kiting, if you’re running prop mod, start backing up towards the enemy once you’re at the flank. Extra brownie points if you get super close to the enemy before shooting, they’ll focus you and so long as you dodge (it's not that hard, come on) its just wasted DPM from them. If you’re running steering gears, run donuts around a flank away from you’re teammates, open up once there’s stuff spotted/ Then it's just… you know, farming. Every so often, it pays off to go dark (or don’t), reposition to an area away from your team, and start farming from there. This splits the enemy’s attention, increasing the odds that your teammates won't just die in front of you. Also remember that you can citadel most CA’s out to about 10km with your AP, so if one is showing broadside, punish with extreme prejudice. For the cheeky, choose a cap/area you know there will be DD’s shortly after the match starts. If it’s a cap, hang outside until it starts getting flipped, rush the most likely location of the DD and kill it, disengage from the enemy team. Then just farm them into submission. If there’s an enemy/a pair of enemies that are separated from their team, go dark and get to their broadside at close range, torp, and right when they’re about to be hit/ right before torps get spotted, open fire with proper ammo type and reload boost. If their guns are toward you/they have a good turret traverse, you go parallel to them or kite (as appropriate). But if they’re faced away and have a bad turret traverse, close the distance to improve accuracy/ use your other sides torps. You can ambush stealth DD’s very easily even in spite of your bad detection if you can anticipate them turning towards you (turning around to go back to a location/avoiding the map border. Trying to flank. Avoiding torps, etc.) It’s always a gamble, but if you have a good game sense you’ll end up on top most of the time.
  2. So I'm sure most, if not everyone, saw that Wargaming was looking to make some changes to IFHE, HE and plating. This has been an issue for a long time - BB's, HE, and IFHE. So this one is going to be part history lesson, part explainer, and part "how can we fix it". There's a lot of text, basically a wall, you have been warned. I: HE vs BB's back in the day - When the game first launched and sometime after - there was no IFHE, just HE. The point of HE was really for thin skinned targets like DD's, maybe some cruisers, and setting a BB on fire. Though at low tiers some HE could pen more than the BB superstructure. And while there was frustration at low tiers with fires being set, high tier had a very different problem - inconsistency of fires and how outmatched anything but a 203 mm cruiser was against a BB other than another BB, and even then 203's had some issues. Pen on a 5 inch gun HE round is 21.1 mm, 152 is 25.3. This meant bow on, high tier BB's and some cruisers were heavily immune to damage - AP would richochet or shatter, HE unless you caught the superstructure would shatter, and you had to hope on fires. Part of why fire damage was so high. This created an issue in that BB's and some heavy cruisers were likely a bit tougher than they should be to take down because fires were so horribly inconsistent for damage. So something had to be done to redress this right? II: IFHE and the rise of 152 mm cruisers - Damage was inconsistent, so the solution to Wargaming seemed simple - make it more consistent. Thus was IFHE born. And while it has seen tweaks to fire chance, early on it overly punished DD's that took it, and barely punished cruisers by comparison. DD's or any ship with 127 mm guns gained the ability to punch through 27 mm of armour - basically anything but the layer that covered tier 8+ BB's. 152-155mm guns however - they reached the magic number to pen 32 mm armour - what covers the bulk of BB's. Combined with the fire chances they maintained, especially with DE and flags - it was a perfect storm. DD's while potentially strong in low tiers now still lacked punch and had limits on what they penned, what had kept 203 mm cruisers in check, save the likes of Des, was Rof - but the light cruisers had the perfect combination of Alpha, Rate of Fire, and penetration to become monsters eating ships alive. Ships putting out 108 rounds a minute that were straight pass/fail, usually pass, vs most of a ships protection with 726 damage per hit. even if 3 of 12 is all that penetrated, that's 19,602 damage in 1 minute without setting a fire. Any better accuracy, or more Rate of Fire, and numbers really start to add up. Add in the arcs some have that allow them to fire from behind an island 100% safe, it now swung the other way. BB's, meant to be tanks and soak damage, were now ripped to shreds especially if more than one focused on them. Knowing the worst offenders had short range caused BB's to start playing further back, and helped start the "camp meta" of BB's terrified to go forward because even if a DD couldn't get them, they may have 2-3k or more stripped salvo after salvo that they couldn't return fire against and couldn't get away from fast enough. DD's, Cruisers, and now even CV's have had fire duration and damage lowered - BB's have not. Which leads us to - III: The Problem - The problem is really simple, math and timing. Now, most defenders would by now be saying "But Ghost, fires are 100% repairable". Yes well - what does that mean. What this actually means is that - if you have the means to repair all the fire damage you took - you can in fact repair it all. And that's part of the rub - there's a good chance you don't, and heres where the math comes in, as well as timing and other mechanics. With no modifiers at all - 1 fire on a BB does 18% hp damage, as well as large cruisers - a normal repair party (not UK style zombie heal) repairs 14% HP. Now - lets take another WG idea which is to just make premium consumables the default, and assume that it will keep the same CD and number of charges. On an NC as an example that's 4 charges, that last 28 seconds on an 80 second cooldown. 4 fires will do 72% hp damage if allowed to burn, or forced to, whereas the repair parties will only make up 56% of the hp - even with a 5th, you don't quite make it up. Now remember that the repair party takes time, and doesn't start to reset till after it's finished. So that's 28 seconds up, 80 down, 28, 80, 28, 80, 28. To use all 4 on that NC would take almost 6 minutes of taking 0 damage to get back all you can with no issues, a lot when your average match is likely 10-15 minutes. "Buuuut Ghost - there are things to change fire damage and all" - true. There are of course signal flags that reduce burn time and increase amount repaired, these two alone make it closer to 1 fire = 1 repair. But that still takes time and there is a key issue - you have to have those flags. 1 requires that you take 120% HP damage from 4 ships and survive, the other lose 40% HP to fires and survive the battle. Especially for a new player easier said then done. Only other way to get them is as rewards from directives, missions, etc or crates. Well, then you have modernization's - everyone can get them, right? DCSM 2 - the one that reduces fire time, is the 4th slot. Only tier 6 and higher ships have that option if they have a million credits to spend. So a tier 3-5 BB doesn't have that option, with tier 5 being a tier that can be shredded by 127 mm IFHE rounds, let alone 152 mm. Which then leaves skills which sure over time a player can build up to take a 3 point skill to reduce the fire time. If the player knows to get that and sacrifice in other areas that could be just as useful, well, by the time they hit tier 5 they will have only achieved in all likelihood 27-30k of the 37k xp they need to hit 6 points. So newbie in New York is likely going to have a bad day I start raining fire on him with my 14 point Cleveland captain put in my Atlanta. "Your forgetting DCP" - this, once again, comes down to timing. That firerate I pulled numbers for earlier is the current Cleveland. It has a base fire chance of 12%, knocked down to 9% by IFHE. And while I get it's part of the weird equation WG has for fire chance, lets assume that when that's factored in, the average for starting a fire is 6% or 6/100 hits starts a fire. Cleveland fires 108 shots in 60 seconds - Premium DCP coolsdown in 80 seconds. Even holding out till 2-3 fires are started odds are 3-4 get left to burn - up to 72% of the ships HP. And it'll take 6 minutes to repair that damage. And that's the potential of 1 ship let alone 2-3. a nightmare scenario of 100% accuracy yes, but cruisers can be quite accurate. But then comes the part everyone forgets about - the penetration damage. It's not just the fire damage, but the fact that if we round up that figure from above to 20000 - most repair parties only repair half of that. Lets say these numbers are against a New Mexico. The damage is 20k plus 2 fires that had to burn at max for whatever reason. That's 39,080/53,200 gone in 60 seconds. Repair party can repair all but 10k of that technically speaking. However at the unmodified 14% - it would take all 4 repairs to fix both the damage from both fires AND the damage from the penetrations. And that still means 6 minutes untouched to get back to 80% health. Good luck in a BB that slow. And 25% of rounds penning a target causing 2 fires that burn out all the way - not exactly outlandish numbers to achieve. The nearly automatic penetrations are as deadly, if not more so, then the fires. IV: Wargaming's last suggested solution - So, before IFHE the issue is the inconsistency of fires being started in higher tiers where HE can't pen, and post IFHE the issue is that the penetrations alone are as deadly as the fires due to volume, let alone if they do start fires with no actual way to lessen the damage by angling or any other means. So - what does Wargaing's solution posted up on July 3rd look like? Tier 5 and below BB's a 152 mm gun still punches trough unaided, Tier 6 and 7 ships with 152 mm guns can pen tier 6 and 7 BB's/8-10 cruisers with IFHE, but cannot pen tier 8+ BB's at all, while tier 8+ 152 mm ships still punch through same tier BB's. Basically - little to no change on penetration other than Tier 8-10 BB's being immune to lower tier CL. Which brings us back to both the past and current issue with IFHE and HE vs BB's. The new IFHE would cut fire chance 50%. That means while tier 8-10 CL are fine just because they can autopen BB's still are fine - but tier 6 and 7 cruisers that take it to deal with the same tier BB's and higher tier cruisers are screwed against BB's they can see pretty often. So, obviously they can not take it, and keep the fire chance, but basically then anything not a same tier CA on the list is immune and are 100% relying on fires and superstructure hits. No real change in one tier range, the other stays broken or goes back to the way it used to be broken. Not to mention potential ramifications on DD's that use it or a ship like Atlanta. Best case scenario here you maybe fix things at high tier while causing issues in lower tiers, worst case, something on par with the wreck that was the launch, and mostly still is, the CV rework. V: How else to address the problem? - So - IFHE as it is is kind of a problem. Removing it to the old way, also a problem. The proposed changes a month ago - the potential to at the same time change too much and not enough at the same time. So - what can be done to fix it? The funny thing here is for a good while, and to some degree still do, go after Wargaming on CV changes because instead of nerfing an issue directly, like the fact Hak's torp alpha is too high, they nerf around it like changing the way the planes aim, or removing the 4x plane option. This time they go to nerf it directly - when the best option is actually changing things around it. I can't say for certain any one of these alone would be the solution, likely, it would be a combination of things, but all would go a ways to help it. Reduce fire damage of BB's - DD's, CA/L and BB's once all had 18% fire damage, and CV 24%. CV's are down to 2%, almost immediately after IFHE was added cruisers and DD's were dropped to 9%, yet BB's remained 18% - even as cruisers and DD's started getting heals, the one loose justification for the difference. And I'm not even saying nerf them that much - maybe just bring it that BB's and large cruisers are in the same range as Graf Spee. This would allow IFHE to stay unchanged, while reducing the damage just a bit from the fires started - they keep the consistency to pen targets and BB's regain some durability due to less fire damage. Changes to DCP - Having played Gascogne, I do believe lowering the base premium (or possibly if they do the 1 consumable thing just base) cooldown to 40 seconds could go a good way toward helping, maybe lower Gas and Mass's to say 30 seconds to keep the uniqueness? Tweaks to Repair Party - There are multiple teaks that can be done here. Faster cooldown like Gas and Mass, change the pen damage repair percent, repair percent in general, how fast it repairs the damage or some combination of those. Reducing/removing the modifiers - putting aside that I've long felt the "different tiers have more slots" bit should have faded away long ago, it would in general be easier to balance if we don't have to worry about if someone has a no bonuses yo repair party or reduction in fire damage, or all of them. If we use the example from the first suggestion here BB's and 'super cruisers' burn for 13.5% health, DD's and normal cruisers 9%, CV's for 2% - no more, no less per fire. We could always leave one thing, but aside from easier to know and balance around the damage dealt/taken by fires this would open up in combination with possibly the other changes here the option of new Mods and a new skill and more ability to have some choice and variety not pretty much defaulting to DCMS 2 in slot 4 or likely taking BoS just to fight fires. Changing how fire works - maybe fires need to be a little more like detonations. By that I mean once the HP of the magazine hits 0, it starts rolling for a detonation. Perhaps to make fires more consistent, and reduce the need for it, would be if as sections take damage, the fire resistance is reduced making it easier to set that part of the ship on fire at least. Possibly others I forgot or haven't thought of yet. Other than maybe number 5 (it would likely see either the IFHE change Wargming proposed or it'd removal) these would allow the 30% buff to stay, allowing the consistency to stay, if we don't just change the formula overall so that it's not needed, while leaving the ability to set fires intact but cut down somewhat on the ability of mainly 152 mm guns to simply overwhelm all forms of damage control and bring some durability back to BB's if the RNG damage is a bit lower. I think a bit more reasonable and equitable for all parties.
  3. Its probably best if you just glance over the Underlined and bold parts. Its quite long. Plz reply and share your experiences. Hi everybody! I have been looking around at other forums and have thought that It would be a good idea to have one, big, main forum where everybody can voice their opinions (i.e. rage and complain) about the recent carrier rework. I have been getting several different opinions about what the carrier rework and hotfix has done to our warships. I have been looking around to see what kind of different opinions we have been getting about the carrier rework. From what I have currently seen, the most trouble has come from destroyers. The complaint is that aircraft spotting is too good, and that they are permaspotted and shelled by everything in the vicinity. The same can be said about scout cruisers, which lack the AA defense to repel concentrated air attack, and who cannot output enough damage to repel the hail of fire that the rest of the battle fleet will throw at it. This also does not allow it to spot other targets, voiding its purpose. Light and Heavy cruisers can output a substantial amount of AA firepower, but only the most powerful light cruisers and the most AA oriented heavy cruisers to repel a concentrated air attack. Under constant attack from my fully maxed Lexington, only the enemy Atlanta, AA spec Cleveland, a new Orleans with defensive AA fire, and a trio of battleships pooling their AA could prevent themselves from being decimated by my aircraft (even the AA ships still took minor damage from the remains of my squadrons). Light cruisers that shoot from behind islands are immobile, and vulnerable to attack from bombers and torpedo planes. Heavy cruisers, especially those with an AA focus, are the only ships capable of repelling constant attack by same tier carriers without major damage. Most battleships, with the exception of high tier American ones, generally have crap or mediocre AA, and need an escort or a division to pool their AA. However, concealment isn't really that important, and all BBs can take a hit, so other than being unable to dodge torpedoes, they did OK. The main consensus is that CV's are not that fun to play against. On top of that, It is hard to repel air attack, and being permanently spotted is deadly for most light cruisers and destroyers. I have also heard complaints from the aircraft carrier community. The US Cv community, complains that dive bombers require too much RNG and that the torpedoes don't do enough alpha. The IJN community is having trouble with AP bombs and the bomb sights, which are accurate but hard to use. The british CV line is still going through buffs and nerf at an alarming rate. Right now (2 patches from now this could have changed entirely) the british CV community complains that the short arming distance torpedoes are carried by aircraft that lack the health and speed to reach their target, and the bombing runs are rather flat and sort of have a forward rather than a mostly down trajectory. On top of that, all Cv's are having trouble doing reliable damage to ships. For example, American CV's struggle to inflict damage with bombs to well armored battleships, whose deck they fail to penetrate, and maneuvering cruisers, which they lack the accuracy to hit. Many Cv's complain that other ships do damage and earn credits farming damage off of cruisers and destroyers that they spot, while the CV hemorrhages aircraft trying to get damage done and the cruisers and destroyers rage over being spotted and focused down by the rest of the enemy ships. In conclusion, I believe that carrier spotting mechanics are a death sentence for any ships that rely on concealment. I also believe that Carriers fail to do much damage due to the fact that their planes, while fast, have too little health or maneuverability. Also, Carriers don't like being up-tiered. I look forward to your opinions and ideas about how to fix the carrier. Please PLZ! comment below. Photo gallery:
  4. Disciplyne

    Stealth torps

  5. Cossack is a stealthy British gunship destroyer armed with eight 120mm/45 naval rifles and a single bank of four, high-tier torpedoes. She is defined by her good concealment values and awkward firing arcs. Cossack also has access to the Engine Boost consumable while maintaining improved British acceleration and energy preservation. Game play wise, Cossack is very similar to Lightning with an overlap in consumables and commander skill choices. Wargaming has set her price tag at 9,600 doubloons. This is the second Tribal-class destroyer introduced into World of Warships following the release of HMCS Haida earlier this year. She is less remarkable than her sister-ship but that's largely owing to the unforgiving environment in which she plays. Cossack contends with being up-tiered more often than her Canadian counterpart and higher tiered matches are far more radar intensive. Moreover, at tier VII Haida has a defined role -- she's a lolibote-molester. This role is generally lacking among the other tin-cans at tier VII which makes Haida stand out. Cossack doesn't share this same kind of defined specialty. She's more of a generalist scout or gunship -- roles that are replicated by other destroyers at her tier. Thus, Cossack is a workhorse, one gunship among many. She gets the job done in a tough environment which is worth noting, though she is not deserving of any acclaim in this regard. PROS Good DPM performance on her guns and excellent chance at starting fires. Powerful torpedoes for a gunship which may launched individually. Improved engine performance with increased acceleration and energy preservation in a turn while also having access to the Engine Boost consumable. Ridiculous rate of turn, throwing herself about at almost 9.0º/s! Good concealment with a surface detection as low as 5.48km. Access to a long-lasting British Hydroacoustic Search consumable. CONS Poor fire angles on all weapons. Terrible gun ballistics -- worse than American 127mm/38s. Limited to a single torpedo launcher. Her anti-aircraft firepower is effectively non-existent. Poor quality Smoke Generator consumable with short emission time and duration. Overview Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / Extreme Cossack is not a forgiving ship to play. For a novice player, she has many strikes against her. She struggles to do damage, hamstrung with restrictive fire sectors on all of her weapons and poor performing guns. A deep skill build is necessary to allow her to do direct damage with her artillery against larger opponents and the range of targets she can engage is limited. Having a single torpedo launcher does her no favours either. She is at her best at what amounts to point-blank ranges. At high tiers this is a range where you will get killed in short order for making a mistake. Cossack has the speed, stealth and agility enough to make her attractive to a veteran but her engagement range, optimized for short-distances and limited attack power are a severe mark against her carry potential. Still, she has a diverse toolkit that will earn her some devoted supporters. – One of, if not the worst at its tier. This is a pronounced weakness. – Middle of the pack at its tier. Not terrible, but not terribly good either. – Has a significant advantage over her tier mates. A solid, competitive performer. – No other ship at its tier does this as well as this ship. Cossack's damage output and durability are best described as average. While she does have her strong points, a combination of drawbacks with her guns keeps Cossac from outperforming her peers. Her low hit point total similarly holds her back. She gets a rating in both categories. Her anti aircraft firepower is virtually non-existent and she earns a evaluation as a result. It's arguably worse than the IJN torpedo boats which is saying something. Where Cossack stands apart truly is her agility and stealth. She takes primacy from Lightning in terms of flexibility and speed. It's a closer contest for Vision Control, but she wins out against Loyang. She's the in both categories among tier VIII destroyers. Options Cossack's options are almost all standard for a British destroyer. Cossack like (new) British destroyers cannot make use of the Propulsion Modification 2 upgrade as she already has an improved version built in. Consumables Cossack's Damage Control Party is standard for a destroyer. It has unlimited charges, a 60s/40s reset timer and a 5s active period. Cossack uses a British destroyer Smoke Generator. This has 5 charges base and a 90s/70s reset timer (it's not just you, that number is stupid-weird). It emits smoke for 10s and each cloud lasts for 40s. Unlike other (new) British destroyers, Cossack has access to Engine Boost. This is a standard destroyer-version of the consumable providing an 8% speed increase with 2 charges base, an 180s/120s reset timer and a 120s active period. Cossack uses a British destroyer Hydroacoustic Search. This has 2 charges base, a 180s/120s reset timer and a 180s active period. It detects torpedoes and ships at a range of 3.00km. Upgrades Cossack should equip Magazine Modification 1 into its first upgrade slot. If you like to live dangerously, then Main Armaments Modification 1 is fine. In your second slot, the special upgrade, Hydroacoustic Search Modification 1 is optimal. If you do not have access to it, then the next upgrade you should reach for is the special upgrade Engine Boost Modification 1. If you're lacking that, then default to Propulsion Modification 1. Aiming System Modification 1 is optimal for slot 3. The only reasonable choice in your fourth slot is Steering Gears Modification 2. Similarly, the only reasonable choice in your fifth slot is Concealment Modification 1. Camouflage Cossack comes with Type 10 Camouflage. For 2,000 doubloons you may purchase Royal Navy - Cossack as a cosmetic swap. Both camouflages provide: 50% bonus experience gains 10% reduction to maintenance costs 3% reduction in surface detection 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. Cossack comes with Type 10 Camouflage in mottled grey. I personally think she looks prettier in Royal Navy - Cossack in green, black and grey, but that's only for players with deep pockets. Firepower Main Battery: Eight 120mm/45 guns in 4x2 turrets in an A-B-X-Y superfiring configuration. Torpedoes: Four torpedo tubes in a 1×4 launcher mounted amidships. The 120mm/45s that Cossack uses for her main batteries have a lot of problems at tier VIII. While perfectly serviceable at tier VII with ships like Jervis and Gadjah Mada, against the upgraded opposition faced at higher tiers they're nowhere near as competitive on a per-gun basis. This is largely owing to penetration issues due to gun caliber but there are other things to remark. They have a modest rate of fire, damage per shell and poor ballistics. The mountings on HMS Cossack are poorly situated with limited fire arcs and a lackluster traverse rate. Their only real strength is a high fire chance per shell. Her saving grace is that she has a lot of guns -- quantity has quality all of its own. However, the competition is fierce at tier VIII and even armed with eight rifles Cossack struggles finding the edge she needs. Destroyer AP shells are highly circumstantial in their utility. Most simply do not have the penetration or damage output to make them worth chancing the risk of a bounce using except in specific circumstances. Still, when a broadside is offered, switching to AP provides a much improved damage increase -- especially if your target is already burning from fires set. HMS Cossack's poor penetration values limit the range at which she can make these exchanges successfully, with her ability to citadel enemy cruisers falling off at 4km and her ability to reliably penetrate the extremities of battleships dropping off between 9km and 11km.1 Cossack's HE damage potential looks impressive, though it's important to cross reference it with her penetration values. The chart on the right shows the armour value the respective guns can best while the extremity armour on the bottom lists the prevalence of different armour types for the bow and stern. The number in brackets is the (current as of 0.7.9) number of ships with these armour values. There is a long list of targets she is incapable of damaging directly which will necessitate her making the attempt with AP shells instead. The arcs of fire on A and Y turret are terrible, contrasting the excellent arcs on B and X. On top of this, B-turret may rotate 360º which facilitates keeping it engaged even while Cossack manoeuvres. It's thus very easy to keep six guns on target most of the time but especially difficult to keep all eight firing. Bringing all eight guns to bear makes her an easy and predictable target due to the limited fields of fire on her foremost and rearmost turrets. Sacrificing a turret makes Cossack's gunnery no better than a tier VII destroyer. Cossack doesn't have the DPM advantage to be able to best contemporary gunship destroyers. The race is very close. Once you factor in the hit point totals and detection consumables, the margins get even smaller. Against anything higher tier, Cossack comes out the worse for it. This said, Cossack does have the muscle to bully anything smaller than herself short of HMCS Haida. She can play the role of a destroyer hunter provided she can ensure the detection, hit point and DPM advantage, but she has nowhere near the primacy in these categories at her tier. Against larger vessels, Cossack's guns are a mixed bag. Her ability to deal direct damage is compromised with her poor penetration values but she's an excellent fire starter. Note that this is largely owing to volume and accuracy of fire -- Cossack must be cycling all eight of her guns onto a target and landing with most of her hits to be a credible threat this way. Where Cossack truly excels is her potential to set fires. This is especially true of she eschews the use of IFHE in her commander skill build and elects to just focus on Demolition Expert instead. While this is unlikely to ever give a hale and healthy cruiser pause, it is very effective against battleships. Note, in practice these values are approximately halved when striking ships and represent only the raw fire starting potential. Thus, against a Montana, Cossack with a DE build could expect to set about 4 to 5 fires per minute. Be warned, though, the efficiency of focusing on fires leaves a lot to RNG. Cossack's performance will not be consistent. The final issue facing Cossack's gunnery is one of range and detection. She has adequate reach but she suffers from horrible ballistics. British 120mm/45 guns have worse shell arcs than American 127mm/38s. Cossack has similar gunnery challenges to Loyang, Hsienyang, Kidd and Benson without their fast rate of fire to facilitate aim correction. Cossack is greatly endangered by the prevalence of Surveillance Radar within her matchmaking tier where her short engagement range is more likely to bring her within reach of this consumable. Furthermore, her Smoke Generator does not allow for long bouts of gunnery within the safety of concealment. Cossack must contend with much of her gunnery being done while she is vulnerable to return fire if she cannot make use of island cover. Thus, Cossack must be opportunistic. Whatever ability she has to bully other destroyers falls away as she faces same or higher tiered opponents. Her guns can terrorize lower tiered vessels, including battleships but they lack the caliber needed when facing higher tiers. Throw in the usual challenges of radar in this matchmaking spread and a pattern emerges: The power and flexibility of Cossack's guns varies considerably upon the hand which she's dealt by Matchmaking. Cossack's torpedo launchers have much better rearward arcs than forward. Like her guns, Cossack is going to have to give up her full broadside to be able to fire her torpedoes at a target. Cossack's torpedoes are decent individually, but she has too few of them and bad firing arcs to boot. Cossack has HMS Daring's torpedoes but at tier VIII instead of tier X, which looks nice on paper but that single launcher holds her back. The saving grace of Cossack's torpedo armament is her ability to fire them one at a time. While getting good accuracy with single-launch torpedoes is locked behind a skill wall, once mastered it helps greatly with making up for the lack tubes. For a gunship, Cossack has better individual torpedoes than those found on the Soviet, American or German destroyers. However, like with her guns, she places a distant second to Akizuki, lacking both striking power and being unable to keep up with her damage output Furthermore, Cossack's individually more powerful torpedoes in no way makes up for having only one launcher. Like Cossack's guns, her torpedoes perform much better when she's top tier than bottom. Their 10km range is fairly standard (and an improvement on the 8km on Lightning's), however as Surveillance Radar becomes more and more prominent in higher tiers, this reach just doesn't provide the same level of safety. Ideally, a player should be able to combine Cossack's torpedoes with her excellent fire setting to stack damage over time effects on a given target. In practice, this is much easier said than done. Their limited arcs makes finding opportunities to use them difficult, especially in a pinch. When the stars align (or skill prevails), Cossack can doom an enemy vessel in short order by overtaxing their Damage Control Party between fires and floods and score herself an easy kill. However, these will be rare events rather than commonplace. As discussed, use of Cossack's gunnery and torpedoes are both steeped in challenges. One of the drawbacks of British torpedoes is their large detection range. While not quite on the same level as Japanese destroyer torpedoes, this does limit their effectiveness. Summary: The potency of her guns varies considerably based on the tier of the target she faces. Her gunnery performance is inconsistent. Her torpedoes are individually excellent but they're difficult to use, locked behind a higher skill wall. Cossack must present a lot of broadside to cycle her weapons which can make her unfortunately predictable. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Cossack never quite gets her act together to seriously contest the Japanese gunships for their primacy at this tier. Yeah, I'm as shocked as you are that Japan now dominates the destroyer firepower meta at tier VIII. I always thought it would have been the Soviets, but here we are. Defense Hit Points: 15,200hp Min Bow & Deck Armour: 19mm The Lolibote with a redundant name sure looks OP when you lay out the maximum effective hit point total of the tier VIII destroyers like this. However, making perfect use of all four charges of her Repair Party happens so seldom. Still, she's way tougher than Cossack. Cossack has nothing going for her in this category. She has a downright middling hit point total and no fun quirks to her armour profile. This is a destroyer where you will have to manage any gunfire trades carefully to preserve your health. Her DPM advantage is not so high that she can afford to simply slug away at an enemy lolibote and hope to come out the better. The Survivability Expert skill, which ups her to an even 18,000hp should be considered mandatory lest she fall behind the staying power of other gunships. Veterans who are familiar with the play style of Loyang and Benson will no doubt be able to relate to the need to properly spend their hit points when making gunship attacks. The difference between Cossack and these American-based gunships is her worse Smoke Generator performance which limits her ability to make escapes when things go pear shaped. Cause they will. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Cossack is in the bottom half of the vast tier VIII destroyer population. It's going to take a lot to move her up in rank -- namely another 5,000 hit points or a Repair Party consumable. Agility Top Speed: 36.0 knots Port Turning Radius: 610m Rudder Shift: 3.6s Maximum Turn Rate: 8.9º/s There's a lot to cover here. Let's hope I can put it in some semblance of good order without melting the brains of my readers. Your take away should be this: Cossack is far more agile than her in-port stats might otherwise indicate. She comes about quickly. She accelerates fast. She doesn't lose speed in a turn. Stay with me here, this graph isn't as scary as it looks. In purple, we have the sustained 4/4 speed of the tier VIII destroyers with their rudder hard over. This is how fast these destroyers can move while wiggling, dodging and coming about. In green is their nominal maximum speed -- for Cossack and Lightning, that's 36 knots. In blue, we have their engine boost speed. What makes Cossack so remarkable is that her maximum speed and turning speed pretty much overlap AND she access to an Engine Boost. This makes her a much harder target to hit, akin to a fast Soviet destroyer in terms of her forward momentum but with the added bonus that she can change her heading much more quickly. Cossack doesn't have the straight-line speed of some of her contemporaries. However, she's functionally faster than many of them. Like destroyers from the Royal Navy tech tree, Cossack preserves almost all of her speed while under manoeuvres. Most destroyers bleed off between 15% and 18% of their top speed while wiggling and dodging. Cossack loses less than 2%. In addition, Cossack comes about almost as nimbly as USS Sims -- one of the most agile mid-tier destroyers in the game, and at a higher sustained speed. For enemies trying to pick her off at range, Cossack presents the dual challenge of a ridiculously high top speed with an nimble target, giving the best traits of both American and Soviet lolibotes in a single package. It doesn't stop there. From a dead stop, Cossack accelerates as much as 25% faster than a similar destroyer equipped with Propulsion Modification 2. From a dead stop, Cossack is quick to get moving again, helping her avoid sudden threats like incoming torpedoes or being lit by Surveillance Radar. Cossack gets the best of both worlds when it comes to upgrades; she enjoys better acceleration than she would have receive with Propulsion Modification 2 and she gets the improved rudder shift time of Steering Gears Modification 2. Unlike other Royal Navy destroyers, Cossack gets all of this without sacrificing access to Engine Boost. Combined with a Sierra Mike signal, she can get her speed up to 40.8kts for these brief spells while keeping all of the aforementioned bonuses to her handling. While ships like Kiev and the upcoming Le Terrible can outpace her in a straight line, Cossack wins out in overall handling and flexibility in combat situations. She trivializes dodging incoming fire and dancing torpedo beats. Paper stats won't tell the whole story. If you looked at a combination of Cossack's top speed, turning radius and rudder shift time, she'd look deceptively mediocre. The engine power of the Royal Navy destroyers and their energy preservation means that they perform on an entirely different level from the other lolibotes, making Cossack far more nimble than her stats otherwise indicate. Her Engine Boost consumable adds even more flexibility than even Lightning can boast, making Cossack the most agile destroyer at her tier.[/caption] Summary Boosted acceleration. Little to no loss of speed in a turn. Cossack can rocket-butt with Engine Boost unlike other British DDs. Evaluation: What would have to happen to DOWNGRADE to : Loss of her Engine Boost consumable would be enough. This is a closely contested category at tier VIII with Lightning being hot on Cossack's heels with better rate of turn and a smaller turning radius. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Battery Calibers: 40mm / 12.7mm AA Umbrella Ranges: 2.5km / 1.2km AA DPS per Aura: 12.9 / 4.2 Hahaha, no. Cossack has no large caliber AA guns to speak of. Even cursory HE damage is likely to strip her of all of her remaining defensive weapons. Enemy aircraft carriers should feel completely safe in having their planes loiter over Cossack and friendly carriers should abstain from dragging enemy aircraft near Cossack. She'll be of no help. ... except I did. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Cossack only barely ekes out the worst AA rating at tier VIII. Asashio is only marginally better with less DPS but more range. In theory, it wouldn't take much to nudge Cossack up the ladder, but don't ever assume this would make her evaluation passable here. Refrigerator Base Surface Detection Range: 6.97km Air Detection Range: 3.90km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 5.48km Detection Range when Firing from Smoke: 2.48km Main Battery Firing Range: 11.89km Detection Consumables: Smoke Generator / Hydroacoustic Search There's a whole lot of weirdness crammed into Cossack's refrigerator. She is currently the rated tier VIII destroyer in terms of stealth and detection, however this is a title she doesn't claim easily. There are three elements which define her concealment: her surface detection range, her Hydroacoustic Search and her Smoke Generator. Surface Detection Spotting distance delta (in meters) between HMS Cossack and the destroyers within her matchmaking spread when fully upgraded for concealment. This chart is restricted only to those destroyers within +/- 500m spread of Cossack's optimized stealth rating. Note that a distance of at least 200m is necessary to have a plausible chance of a reactionary advantage over an opponent and more is preferable. There are few destroyers that can challenge her concealment rating. Cossack is one of the stealthiest destroyers not only at her tier but also within her matchmaking spread. Only the Kagero-class sisters (Kagero, Asashio, Harekaze) have an improved stealth rating as low as 5.374km to Cossack's 5.476km. In open water with every other match-up, Cossack will detect enemies before she herself is seen. Generally speaking, when Cossack is top tier, she will dominate scouting. It's only when she faces tier IX opponents that things get harried, with detection ranges being close enough that Cossack is likely to trip over an enemy destroyer without enough time to react. Surveillance Radar, always the bane of destroyers (and gunship destroyers especially), is a very real and especially prevalent threat to Cossack's well being. When she's bottom tier, Cossack faces several ships with radar that meet or outstrip their surface detection range. There is very little counterplay she can exercise against ships armed with this consumable short of having advanced knowledge of their approximate location. Keep a wary eye on team rosters and behave accordingly. Hydroacoustic Search HMS Cossack comes with a Royal Navy Destroyer safety blanket -- her Hydroacoustic Search. In the radar-heavy environment in which she plays, this lacks the offensive utility found on HMCS Haida and it's largely reserved for simply sniffing out torpedoes. Still, it is possible for Cossack to unmask ships hiding within smoke screens while using her consumable, however she needs to get even closer than her Canadian counterpart to do it. This tactic is largely inadvisable given Cossack's difficulties in getting away once detected but it can be pulled off in a pinch, especially in late game scenarios where an enemy destroyer lacks support. Exploit that three minute duration -- she can outlast the longer ranged (and easier to use) consumables found on Loyang and German destroyers. Outside of these very specific instances, Cossack's Hydroacoustic Search is better used defensively -- giving her the time necessary to avoid incoming torpedo strikes. In most games, this will largely be its purpose. Vigilance is a helpful skill in this regard for team play purposes if you can afford it. Still, this consumable provides a degree of flexibility to the ship that expert players can exploit and to underestimate or dismiss it would be a mistake. Cossack belongs up on the front lines, projecting vision forward for her team and sniffing out early torpedo threats. Smoke Generator There's a big ol' "but" looming over Cossack's superior vision control. She may have great surface detection. She may have a very handy detection consumable that keeps her safe from torpedoes and can be used offensively in a pinch. Butt, her Smoke Generator stinks. Shackled to the same terrible smoke consumable as the British destroyers in the tech tree, Cossack is held back by its low emission and duration times. She doesn't make many smoke clouds for one. What smoke she does make doesn't last nearly long enough to be comfortable, undermining both Cossack's survivability and her ability to deal damage. When used offensively, Cossack can only park in smoke for 40 seconds at a time. With American battleships boasting up to 20s worth of immunity with their Damage Control Party, Cossack isn't going to seriously contest her opponent's ability to put out fires. This necessitates other tactics to get the most out of the potential damage output of her guns. Borrowing the smoke from another ship is one way such as in a division. She can also take a page from American cruiser and destroyer game play and use island cover to lob her shells at enemies that cannot see her but her lack of reach makes this difficult. Finally she can simply elect to fire from open water and risk trading her hit points. I would hardly call this ideal given her low hit point total. Defensively, her smoke is also found wanting. At top speed in a straight line, Cossack drops all of three (count 'em) smoke clouds. If you install the special upgrade, Smoke Generator Modification 1 you get one more puff. That's it -- hardly worth the coal investment. Cossack's consumable is not so much a smoke screen as a squid's ink-squirt. If Cossack has been firing her guns, she may not being able to create enough smoke to block line of sight to multiple opponents (which will make you wonder why you even bothered). Fortunately, if you cut your speed the moment you activate her consumable, Cossack will come to a stop inside the last cloud. Don't wait on the throttle though -- you need to be decelerating the moment you begin laying down your rings. At least Cossack's smoke reset timer isn't punitive. The delay between dissipating and the availability of her next charge can be as little as 20 seconds with the correct commander and signal combination. With up to seven charges available, Cossack simply needs to hold her fire for brief intervals before setting up for another round of shooting. Patience and careful planning can almost make up for all of her consumable's shortcomings. Closely Contested Cossack is an excellent scout. Few destroyers at tier VIII can sit as comfortably on the front lines, broadcasting back enemy positions for their team as Cossack can. In addition, her forward position helps protect her allies from long range torpedo salvos which become quite commonplace within her matchmaking. This isn't a safe place to be, however, and Cossack lacks reliable smoke from her toolkit to give her a sense of security. Cossack may be one of the stealthiest ships at her tier and one of the best destroyers for controlling vision for her team. However, this is very little room for error. Summary Great open water concealment. Hydroacoustic Search combined with her great acceleration and handling makes enemy torpedoes launched at range a non-threat. Her smoke smells like butts. At least she gets a lot of quick-reloading charges. Evaluation: What would have to happen to DOWNGRADE to : Top spot among the tier VIII destroyers is heavily contested. The Japanese torpedo ships have the best raw concealment values. Loyang has arguably the best combination of detection consumables though her surface detection is too big to take the crown. Cossack wins out on primacy despite the flaw of her Smoke Generator, but not without contention. Keeping Oskar from becoming a Sam Skills rated by their utility in descending order from purple, to blue, to green, to red. For the colourblind, they're also rated by hearts. Cossack's initial skill choices are fairly standard for a gunship. Start with Priority Target. Next take Last Stand at tier 2. Survivability Expert is optimal at tier 3. And finish off your 10th point with Concealment Expert. Basic Fire Training should be a must on anyone's list after that and Adrenaline Rush is also optimal. From there, spend your last four points as you will. Final Evaluation I'm not one to blame matchmaking. However, Cossack's fortunes are more firmly tied to matchmaking than many other ships I've played in recent memory. I think it's largely owing to how Cossack performs when she up-tiers. To be absolutely clear, Cossack is a beast when she's the top of the pile. There are very few opponents she cannot engage comfortably and it's only those vessels at her own tier which give her pause. However, Cossack doesn't feel anywhere near as comfortable when she has to go up against tier IX and X opponents. This isn't a problem unique to Cossack, but it is more pronounced in her case. Her guns have a very limited menu of appetizing targets when she faces same or higher tiered opponents. It's not that she can't deal damage when bottom tier, it's simply more of a challenge than for other destroyers. She reminds me very much of most tier V battleships, where they can feel like real powerhouses in those rare times that matchmaking favours them and victims otherwise. Your mileage in Cossack will vary based upon not only where your placed on the Matchmaking roster but what's on the enemy team. So long as she's facing enemy destroyers and cruisers with soft squishy bits she can pelt with her pew pews, you're going to have a great time regardless of her tier. If you suddenly find yourself facing down tier VIII+ American and German heavy cruisers, a heavy battleship lineup or Japanese ducky-destroyers, life's going to be a lot more difficult. Fortunately, Cossack still has a role when she can't be the big dog. When she's no longer able to deal direct damage easily, she excels at simply putting eyes on targets and pressuring cap circles. It's difficult to dislodge an RNDD that has setup shop around a given cap short of using concerted air power or a constant barrage of radiation from Surveillance Radar to drive them back. Cossack won't come out of said matches with much to show for it other than a win if everything goes right, unfortunately. I do like Cossack, but she doesn't inspire the same kind of awe her sister ship, Haida did for me. There's a lot to enjoy with this ship. Few feels as comfortable as she does when top tier and even in those uptiered matches, she can serve you well provided you meet the right opponents. However, in those games where there's nothing but hard targets, the pickings get mighty slim. I dunno why, but I'm a fan of Cossack's alternative camouflage. I wish it didn't cost 2,000 doubloons to make my ship look pretty, but oh well. Would I Recommend? Cossack was originally made available through the Royal Navy event which ran in the last quarter of 2018. Wargaming assigned her a cost of 50 Guineas with players able to earn up to 48 Guineas over three patches. It's not you -- the math doesn't add up. The assumption is that players will have to pay for the difference with a Guinea setting you back around $1 USD. Otherwise, players may acquire her for the equivalent cost of 9,600 doubloons + the price of a port slot. PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? No. Cossack does alright in Operation Dynamo, but her contribution is very one-sided with being largely limited to engaging the torpedo boats. Her AA power is virtually non-existent. Co-Op isn't kind to gunship destroyers, particularly those with only modest hit point pools and limited torpedo options. Random Battle Grinding: This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. Yes with a butt. Cossack doesn't play much differently than the other Royal Navy destroyers and her skill choices overlap nicely (especially with captains for Icarus, Jervis, Jutland and Daring). The only issue is that earnings get a might bit slim of matchmaking doesn't love you. For Competitive Gaming: Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. No. There are better choices, namely Loyang and Akizuki. For Collectors: If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. Yes. Now you too can own a memento of the ship that predicated the early invasion of Norway! Slap on a Hotel Yankee signal, board some enemies and cause an international incident! For Fun Factor: Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? Yes. While I'd rather play Haida, that's my own Canadian bias speaking. Cossack is a fun ship though be warned, she is a tier VIII destroyer. That comes with all of the hangups that tier VIII destroyers face. What's the Final Verdict? How would the ship rate on an Angry YouTuber scale of Garbage - Meh - Gud - Overpowered? GARBAGE- The boat is unbalanced, not fun to play and weak. The ship desperately needs some buffs or some quality of life changes. Mehbote - An average ship. Has strengths and weaknesses. Doesn't need buffs to be viable however she's not going to be considered optimal. Gudbote - A powerful ship, often one of the best ships at a given role within its tier. Usually considered optimal for a given task. OVERPOWERED - The boat is unbalanced and powerful. Typically she's either horrible to play against or she redefines the meta entirely In Closing Is it over? I think it's over! Cossack (and Haida) have been on books since January of 2018 -- that's over nine months of work that has gone into reviewing her and her sister ship with too many different versions between them. As you can imagine, there was a lot of information to keep track of with her performance changing so regularly. While I'm happy the two ships aren't terrible, I'm very (very) glad to be able to stop worrying about Cossack for a while. I want to thank my readers and fans who helped keep me sane over these months and an especially well deserved thanks to my Patrons on Patreon who helped keep me fed. I won't have to dig her out again until there's another tier VIII destroyer to review for a comparative study. But that won't happen for another ... Aww, sh-- ...! Appendix (1) Penetration data courtesy of Proships.ru (https://www.proships.ru) and World of Warships AP Calculator (https://mustanghx.github.io/ship_ap_calculator/).
  6. Destroyers versus Carrier Aircraft need help. This proposal in aimed to do exactly that: save the Destroyer from Carriers, but within REASON. Goal of the proposed change: Give all Destroyers a dedicated defensive "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" Consumable that remains active for X minutes and respawns destroyed "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" during that time frame. This will enable Destroyers to capture a zone at game start and fully protect themselves from enemy Aircraft Carriers for a limited amount of time. Reason for the proposed change: Destroyers are the ships that normally capture zones and they need special protection to at least enable them to capture ONE zone, especially when their fleet does not protect them from enemy Aircraft. If the Destroyers of a fleet fail to capture a zone at the start of the match due to enemy Aircraft, then that usually also decides the outcome of the match. That is very bad for game play. The proposed Consumable should allow every Destroyer to capture at least one zone even when facing an enemy Aircraft Carrier. This is to be a new and a unique "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" Consumable, for Destroyers ONLY, that works very different from the "Fighter Squadron" Consumable that currently exists in the game. The Characteristics of the proposed "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" Consumable change: It is a consumable that is only available to all Destroyers at all Tiers that face a Carrier and the Consumable is only available to a Destroyer when they are in a match with enemy Carriers (if not then it is hidden). It can only be used once per match for X amount of minutes. The "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" Consumable consists of two parts: one on-map, one off-map. The on-map part of the "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" Consumable consists of a single Fighter Patrol Squadron, consisting of X Fighter Aircraft, that flies at low altitude above the Destroyer in a circle pattern (like the existing "Fighter Squadron" Consumable does). The on-map part "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" can be spotted, damaged and destroyed by enemy Aircraft and enemy AA/Flak because they fly at low altitude. The off-map (very high altitude) part of the "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" consists of an unlimited number of Fighter Patrol Squadrons that will replace the on-map (low altitude) Fighter Patrol Squadron if it is destroyed. This replacing takes place X seconds after the on-map Fighter Patrol Squadron is destroyed. The off-map (high altitude) part of the "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" Consumable consists of an unlimited number of Fighter Patrol Squadrons that fly at very high altitude above a Destroyer and thus above the range of enemy Anti-Aircraft Artillery/Flak/Fighters. They are not visually represented on the map and mini map, they cannot spot and they cannot be attacked nor can they attack. The "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" Consumable has a radius that is 25% LARGER that than of the current best Fighter Squadron in the game. When enemy Aircraft enter the "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" circle, the on-map part of the "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" will move in to attack them, like the current "Fighter Squadron" Consumable does. If the on-map Fighter Patrol Squadron of the "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" Consumable is destroyed it will be replaced by a full Hit Point Fighter Patrol Squadron that travels down from very high altitude to low altitude within X seconds after the last on-map Fighter Patrol aircraft was destroyed. The on-map and off-map part of the "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" Consumable cannot spot. That simulates that there is no direct communication between the Destroyer and the Fighter Patrol Squadrons, like usually was the case in real life in WW2. The on-map part of the "Fighter Patrol Squadrons" Consumable can spot only for itself, but cannot share data on what it spots with the Destroyer and the fleet. It is advisable to combine this "Fighter Patrol Squadron Consumable proposal" with the "AA/Flak and Carrier Aircraft proposal for Tier 8-10" that is described in another topic.
  7. Link to photo "We are aware. As 0.8.5 changes have brought much needed and requested AA DPS consistency, it seems like in many cases the plane losses became slightly excessive, and overall CV efficiency was nerfed too much. While we do like the change, we still need to keep CV efficiency reasonable. Over the weekend and early next week we intend to observe the situation very closely, determine the amount of needed changes to plane HP, and implement a hotfix. Unfortunately, only live server data will help us to polish the change, preserving its core concept – more rewarding and meaningful anti-air defense. Stay tuned for more news, and we sincerely apologize for any inconvenience." That is the official response from the EU forum regarding the current SITREP of the CV change. I'm not being fastidious, but if WG insists on only using "live server data" to make their decisions on anything to do with Warships game (which is probable). Then how about the CV players fudge their CV stats during "the weekend and early next week", to feed data to their "Game Balance designer" dude. Maybe the pendulum will swing to the other extreme if this temporary exercise is actually done by all CV players (or most). At best, we will at least put to bed that "live server data" is only what is actually used to determine the changes of any ships (past & present & future) by WG theory. So what say you CV players?
  8. The following is a review of Monaghan, a ship kindly provided to me by Wargaming. This is the release version of the vessel and these stats are current as of June 8th, 2018. Cue crowd singing: "Monaghan! Monaghaaaan! Monaghaaaaaan! MONAGHAN!" (Mono...! Doh!) Quick Summary: An AA-specialized Farragut that has the option for being outfitted as a gunship or torpedo-specialist. Cost: Undisclosed at the time of publishing. Can be won through the American Cruiser Collection crates. Patch & Date Written: 0.7.5. May 30th to June 8th, 2018. PROS Option of two different armament load-outs -- a gunship or a torpedo-destroyer. Gunship destroyer has solid DPM on her main battery. Long fuse timers on her AP shells make them excellent at citadelling cruisers at point-blank ranges. Torpedo destroyer has access to quintuple torpedo launchers with tier VIII fish and has a Torpedo Reload Booster too. Good AA power for a tier VI destroyer with access to Defensive Fire. Fast and agile. CONS Horrible ballistic arcs on her 127mm/38 main battery. Very long range on her main battery which increases her surface detection while firing her guns. Gunship destroyer has short ranged torpedo armament. Torpedo destroyer only has two guns mounted on the bow, making her largely unable to defend herself. Her tier VIII torpedoes are slow at 55 knots. Large surface detection range. Does not have access to the American Smoke Generator. (!) Defensive Fire and Torpedo Reload Booster are mutually exclusive. Overview Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / Extreme Monaghan appears deceptively simple on the surface. She's a Farragut-class destroyer -- a destroyer even relatively new players can get access to even with only a week's worth of casual play. This will suffice to familiarize most inexperienced players with the first hull option. The second, however, is more reminiscent of the tier V Japanese Mutsuki. I would not recommend Monaghan for novice players that haven't already got a handle on these two types of game play lest they frustrate themselves. Monaghan's play style is immediately familiar to Veterans. However, her torpedo-specialist build will feel awkward given the size of her surface detection range. Here's the break down of her components: - One of, if not the worst at its tier. This is a pronounced weakness. - Middle of the pack at its tier. Not terrible, but not terribly good either. - Has a significant advantage over her tier mates. A solid, competitive performer. - No other ship at its tier does this as well as this ship. Whichever hull option you choose, Monaghan will have either guns or torpedoes. This hurts her overall Firepower performance with her overspecialization leaving her with a rating. Her Vision Control (Refrigerator) and Defense are unremarkable while her Agility is . Her Anti-Air is weird, having the potential to be the at her tier, but only if you specialize deeply into it. Monaghan only really excels in one place, and that's the potential (not the initial value) of her anti-aircraft guns. Most of the time, you're not going to want to bother with touching them anyway. On the whole, the ship rates only a rating in the categories where it matters. Ye be fairly warned, says I. Options Monaghan is two premium ships in one. She has two armament choices between her A-Hull (four guns, eight torpedoes, or "four-eight") and her B-Hull (two guns, ten torpedoes, or "two-ten"). The former is a gunship, with short-ranged torpedoes that best performs as an anti-destroyer role with spotting and harassing of larger ships as secondary role. The latter is a torpedo destroyer, woefully under-armed to perform any kind of interdiction against enemy lolibotes. She can scout as a secondary role, but she must give way to any enemy opposition in between her torpedo reloads. Consumables: Monaghan's consumables are odd. Her Damage Control Party and Engine Boost are standard for an American destroyer, but her Smoke Generator is not. You also have a choice in your 4th slot on which consumable to take between Defensive AA Fire and a Torpedo Reload Booster. Be warned, running this ship can get hella expensive. Normal American Destroyer Smoke Generators have a longer emission time. In addition, their smoke clouds last longer than either Russian, British, French or Japanese destroyers. For whatever reason, Monaghan doesn't get access to the American consumable and has to make use of the ghetto one instead. This has a 20 second emission time and each cloud lasts 81 seconds. By contrast, Farragut's smoke has a 26 second emission time and each cloud lasts for 118 seconds. Boo-urns. Monaghan defaults to a Defensive AA Fire consumable in her fourth slot. This has a 30 second action time and it increases the damage done by her 127mm/38 and 40mm Bofors by a 4x multiplier. You can swap this for a Torpedo Reload Booster. This will reload all of her torpedo tubes in 30 seconds. Camouflage Monaghan comes with Type 10 Camouflage. This provides: 50% bonus experience gains 10% reduction to repair costs 3% reduced surface detection range 4% increased dispersion of incoming fire Upgrades For Monaghan's upgrades, they're mostly standard for a destroyer. Start with Magazine Modification 1 to reduce your detonation chance. If you like to live dangerously or you intend to be using a Juliet Charlie signal most of the time, then Main Armaments Modification 1 is superior. Take Propulsion Modification 1 in your second slot. Speed is life for a destroyer. In your third slot, you have a choice. Take AA Guns Modification 2 if you intend to specialize her as an anti-aircraft ship. Otherwise, stick with Aiming Systems Modification 1. Finally, take Propulsion Modification 2 to increase Monaghan's acceleration. Firepower A-Hull Main Battery: Four 127mm/38 in four turrets in an A-B-X-Y superfiring configuration. A-Hull Torpedoes: Eight tubes in 2x4 launchers mounted amidships B-Hull Main Battery: Two 127mm/38 in two bow-mounted turrets in an A-B superfiring configuration. B-Hull Torpedo Options: As A-Hull above or ten tubes in 2x5 launchers mounted amidships Both versions of Monaghan use the infamous American 127mm/38. It's renown comes from it's excellent rate of fire, gun handling and good shell damage with both AP and HE. Its infamy comes from horrible ballistics and terrible fire setting properties on a per-shell basis. Mongahan's range with these guns borders on ridiculous, rivaling even USS Sims for maximum reach which is a mixed blessing (though primarily a liability). With sufficient numbers of these weapons, Monaghan becomes a fierce prospect in a knife fight. Without, she's a victim. USN 127mm/38 guns are some of the most interesting destroyer weapons in the game. They are plagued by horrible shell flight times which makes them lob shells in "rainbow arcs" at even modest ranges. Yet somehow they are among the best AP shell throwers -- rivaling even Soviet 130mm -- with their ability to devastate cruisers at point blank ranges with citadel hits. These are weapons you need to be in close to make operate efficiently, particularly in an anti-destroyer role. There, with her fast reload, a four-gun Monaghan can shred opponents in short order. Four-Eight Monaghan Monaghan's four-eight configuration is a near-identical load-out to that found upon a C-Hull Farragut. This is the knife fighting variant of Monaghan, designed to excel in close quarters combat. Her short range torpedo launchers necessitate using ambush tactics to put them to use outside of suicidal brawls with larger ships. On paper, four-eight Monaghan is only outgunned by contemporary destroyers Aigle and B-Hull Farragut. In practice, she's an excellent contender for one of the better cap-point bullies at her tier, but this performance falls away quickly when facing higher tiered opponents. Outside of knife fights, this version of Monaghan begins to struggle. The horrible ballistic arc on her 127mm/38s, while facilitating catapulting shells over obstacles like islands, makes gunnery against anything but slow and predictable targets almost impossible at range. Monaghan can seldom take advantage of her phenomenal reach. However, she still must suffer the additional spotting range every time she opens fire. Without Inertial Fuse for HE Shells, her ability to directly damage tier VI and VII battleships is limited to superstructure hits. Even with the skill, she cannot hurt the extremities of tier VIII battleships wiht her HE shells. Her short-range torpedoes are limited to ambush uses which are most easily deployed around islands. Four-Eight Monaghan's torpedoes are limited to the short-ranged, Mark 12 torpedo. With a full concealment build, it is possible (if only just) for Monaghan to launch these weapons from concealment. You have only a 210m window of opportunity to do this and it's best done by sailing just in front of an enemy ship and dropping her fish into their path with the hopes that they sail into them. This tactic is easily foiled by any form of detection consumable, however. This version of Monaghan's armament does not up-tier well. Not only must she contend with other gunships with better DPM and larger hit point pools, some are stealthier besides. In higher-tiered matches, engagement ranges increase and the amount of island cover decreases -- two banes for a close quarters specialist like four-eight Monaghan. Opportunities to use her torpedoes outside of knife fights melt away when she's bottom tier. The prevalence of Surveillance Radar and longer-ranged Hydroacoustic Search further compounds the difficulty of making her short-ranged weapons work. Four-Eight Monaghan peaks early, often having its most dramatic moments when top-tier and early on in matches. Two-Ten Monaghan The Two-Ten Monaghan gives up any pretense of being a gunship destroyer (or even being able to adequately defend itself) to turn into a torpedo specialist. I must stress this is an option -- you may still equip the two quadruple launchers with the short-ranged torpedoes if you wish, but that would be a mistake. Her access to the quintuple launchers firing tier VIII fish is probably the reason most players have any interest in this destroyer in the first place. First, the bad news: if your Two-Ten Monaghan gets tracked down by another destroyer, you're dead. In theory, you may be capable of outfighting a Mutsuki, but that would be a closer battle than anyone would want to reasonably admit. Monaghan sacrifices of any pretense of competency with artillery to get access to the following: Those are Benson's upgraded torpedoes and ten of them between two launchers. While they're pretty meh at tier VIII, they're hella powerful at tier VI. Even one of those slammed down the throat of an enemy lolibote at tier VI and VII will kill them good. Only a scarce few German destroyers (and Aigle) are able to suppress their gag reflex and manage to hold on after getting one of those shoved in their faces. These fish are not without their flaws, however. They are slow -- their 55 knot speed means that it takes almost 62 seconds for the torpedoes to reach the end of their run at 9.2km. If they're spotted anywhere along their course, even at close to their 1.1km detection range, they're quite easy to dodge. In addition, their flood chance is only on the better-side of average for a tier VI destroyer. It's comparable to that found on the IJN torpedo boats. Finally, being quintuple launchers, they have an appalling two-minute reload timer. I strongly recommend looking at Torpedo Armament Expertise for any commander dedicated to sailing Monaghan. All of these flaws can largely be forgiven when you account for Monaghan's Torpedo Reload Booster consumable. Before you get too excited (because you skipped the Options section and didn't read it there first), this isn't the lightning-quick, 8 second torpedo reload consumable found on Japanese destroyers. Monaghan isn't capable of deploying a twenty-torpedo wall of skill. Her consumable accelerates the reload to 30 seconds. Those of you with a touch of evil in them will have realized that this is just long enough for an enemy that got hit by your first wave of torpedoes to go "Oh, shoot, I'm flooding!", activate their Damage Control Party and have it go back on cooldown before your second wave hits. Hilarity and Liquidator medals ensue. That's Monaghan in a nutshell really and why people will want her. You can turn a Farragut-class destroyer into what amounts to a Mutsuki with a consumable that allows her to double-dip fish into unsuspecting enemies sailing in straight lines. As good as this sounds, it barely keeps pace with ships like Fubuki or Shinonome. If you map out the maximum number of torpedoes that can be fired over ten minutes, Monaghan puts out 70 torpedoes compared to 72 of Fubuki and 81 of Shinonome (Fubuki needs another 8 seconds to get out her next 9). Monaghan just doesn't quite keep up with these torpedo specialists, especially given the versatility of three triple launchers and the massive Japanese warheads on their torpedoes. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Of her two builds, the Two-Ten Monaghan is closer to boasting a rating but even that's a long ways off. She's not as good of a torpedo destroyer as Shinonome or T-61 for example. In Monaghan's gunship build, she doesn't stand up to Farragut (B-Hull) and Aigle. Defense Hit Points: 13,900hp Minimum Extremities & Deck Armour: 16mm Remember when destroyer durability was relegated to just hit point totals? It's nice being back at a tier where it's just about hit points again and not wonky armour schemes or Repair Party consumables. Compared to Farragut, Monaghan has a fine ol' slug of hit points. Skills like Suvivability Expert will help, adding another 2,100hp putting her just shy of Gaede. This is especially handy in her Four-Eight build where she's expected to trade hit points in gun duels with enemy destroyers. In the grand scheme of things, though, she's decidedly average for a tier VI destroyer -- neither fragile nor tough. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Monaghan would need another 2,000 hit points to be any kind of contender here. Agility Top Speed: 36.5kts Turning Radius: 560m Rudder Shift Time: 3.4s Maximum Rate of Turn: 8.4º/s Monaghan is almost identical to Farragut in terms of her agility, with only a minor disparity in her rudder shift time to differentiate the two. What defines Monaghan (and Farragut's) agility the most is their small turning radius of 560m. American destroyers have always been incredibly agile with tight turning circles and Monaghan are no different. She's only outdone by HMS Gallant in this regard at her tier. Monaghan also boasts a decent top speed which helps her progress through her turns faster while also giving her the option of dictating engagement distances against slower ships, like Japanese destroyers. Overall, Monaghan handles beautifully. This is arguably one of her best traits and it makes her super-comfortable in knife fights. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Rejoin the British Empire, you rebel. Gallant has a tighter turning circle and nearly as much speed which makes her more nimble by far. Anti-Aircraft Defense A-Hull AA Battery Calibers: 127mm / 20mm A-Hull AA Umbrella Ranges: 5.0km / 2.0km A-Hull AA DPS per Aura: 22 / 28.8 B-Hull AA Battery Calibers: 127mm/ 40mm / 20mm B-Hull AA Umbrella Ranges: 5.0km / 3.5km / 2.0km B-Hull AA DPS per Aura: 6 / 49.8 / 21.6 It's time to celebrate mediocrity! Monaghan, regardless of her configuration, has the potential to have the best anti-aircraft firepower at her tier. Lemme preface this by saying that stock, she doesn't have the best anti-aircraft firepower among the tier VI destroyers. That honour belongs to Hatsuharu (of all things) which really puts everything into perspective. Monaghan does take upgrades well -- specifically, she takes Defensive Fire well and, on paper, she looks like she may be a competent anti-aircraft picket ship. With her consumable blazing and every upgrade stuffed down her throat, Monaghan puts out some decent killing power. But at what cost? Let's be real: If you're using the Two-Ten Monaghan, you're going to want Torpedo Reload Booster instead of Defensive Fire in your final consumable slot. Upgrading her for anti-aircraft firepower is a waste of points and upgrades that could be better spent on emphasizing her torpedo performance. It's only the Four-Eight Monaghan where taking Defensive Fire makes any kind of sense and even then, I'm not entirely convinced you wouldn't be better served sticking with the Torpedo Reload Booster anyway. If you do go this route -- if you go full hog and bathe Monaghan in all of her anti-aircraft potential, then you get comparative killing power to a mid-tier British cruiser while Monaghan's Defensive Fire is active. Unlike a British cruiser, you will have the added bonus of a disruption effect. This can be hella-annoying for enemy CVs; especially for inexperienced aircraft carrier commanders not expecting this from a mid-tier destroyer. They may even make the mistake of trying it twice, not recognizing that you're the one scattering her drops. Throughout this, you shouldn't expect to swat down entire waves of aircraft. You're likely only to bruise them unless the squadrons linger. Still, this can be a nice supplementary source of credits and experience if you want to go this way. Just keep in mind what you're giving up. So Monaghan has great AA power -- AA power you're unlikely to ever exercise to its full potential because there are better choices out there. Evaluation: What would have to happen to DOWNGRADE to : Don't take Defensive Fire. If you don't, then Hatsuharu is better. Refrigerator Base Surface Detection Range: 7.2km Air Detection Range: 3.48km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 6.29km A-Hull Detection Range when Firing from Smoke: 2.68km B-Hull Detection Range when Firing from Smoke: 2.43km Main Battery Firing Range: 12.51km Much ado has been made that Monaghan has better surface detection range than the lead of her class, Farragut. This is accurate. It's entirely irrelevant, mind you, but it is accurate. Monaghan is a total cow when it comes to being stealthy which is really not what you want to be when you're a gunship that specializes in close-range knife fights. It's even less desirable in a torpedo-destroyer that can scarcely defend itself from a Japanese destroyer, never mind a competently played hunter. While Monaghan is able to stealth fire her fish in both configurations, her large detection range is a nuisance. Her guns make it worse. Her main battery range is an alarming 12.51km but most of this range is already useless given the horrible shell flight times. So not only do you have useless range, it also allows Monaghan to be spotted from a long ways away when she has to pull the trigger. Where this gets just downright idiotic is that this range weakness compounds if you have the audacity to try and specialize Monaghan towards her AA power -- y'know, one of the selling features of the ship? Yeah, tacking-on Advanced Fire Training to boost the range of your AA power also boosts her 127mm/38 guns to have a reach of 15km. So she's a stupid, fat cow with a bullhorn screaming at the Reds to shoot at her. And for whatever reason, Monaghan doesn't even get access to the improved American Smoke Generator consumable. Instead she has to make do with the same one found on Soviet, British, French and Japanese destroyers. This means less smoke made and your smoke clouds don't last nearly as long as other American destroyers -- because reasons. Ugh. Monaghan's only saving grace is that she's not German. Or tier VII. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : She needs to get her surface detection below 6km with upgrades. Genuine Bona Fide Electrified Six-Tier Monoghan There are two builds to consider with Monaghan. First off, though, a caution: A full anti-aircraft build just generally isn't worth it for this destroyer. Her Two-Ten hull doesn't have enough AA DPS situated in her 127mm/38s to be worth upgrading with Manual Fire Control for AA Guns and Advanced Fire Training is a loser-skill option that will only make it easier for enemy ships to spot you when you're engaged in gunnery battles which is bad news for both hull types. For both builds, start with Priority Target and then pick up Last Stand at tier 2. Tier 3 is where all of the choice begins and where the two ships diverge. For the Two-Ten Monaghan, take Torpedo Armament Expertise to accelerate your reload. The Four-Eight Monaghan should look at Survivability Expert or Basic Fire Training for their first tier 3 skill. Grab Concealment Expert at tier 4 next for both builds. For your next nine skill points, you're spoiled for choice. The Four-Eight Monaghan should look towards skills that help with gunnery. Inertial Fuse for HE Shells will help damage battleships. So too will Demolition Expert. However, Superintendent is very useful for the extra smoke charge which, in long games, will allow you to sit still and bombard enemies with less worry about being damaged. With any points leftover, take Adrenaline Rush or wherever you wish. The Two-Ten Monaghan should look to skills like Survivability Expert, and Superintendent as a matter of course. Any leftover points can go where the player wishes, though I would highly recommend trying to squeeze in Radio Location so you can be where other destroyers aren't. Final Evaluation Harekaze 2.0 this is not. You're getting the choice of playing a Mutsuki or 4/5ths of a Farragut How many people use the C-Hull on their American DDs anyway? Am I the only one that avoids it? Two different armament options!? Sign me up! That was my initial thought when I heard that Monaghan could swap between two very different builds. This got me all kinds of excited. I loved the change in game play styles offered when you can equip different weapon types. This is part of what makes Harekaze and Mogami so much fun, in my opinion. Yet for whatever reason, Monaghan just hit a sour note with me. I never found my earlier excitement stoked further with compelling game play. I find this incredibly strange given the enjoyment that can be found in torpedo destroyers and gunships respectively. It took me a while, but I think the issue that makes me feel 'meh' (foreshadowing!) about Monaghan is her surface detection range. I guess the Japanese destroyers have spoiled me. If I'm running with so few guns, I want to get close to ensure torpedo hits. But Monaghan's too fat to get that close and unlike the higher tiered American destroyers, she doesn't have the self defense armament to protect herself if she gets spotted by a picket ship. Once you factor in the slow running speed of her torpedoes, this extra launch distance really makes landing those hits difficult. Benson, with Concealment Modification 1 can get a whole 500m closer to fire off her fish and she's generally not worried if she's lit by another destroyer beforehand. As for her Four-Eight hull, well -- I have never found the C-Hull variants of the American destroyers particularly compelling. Give me the choice between more dakka versus surface ships or more dakka versus planes, I am going to choose the former every time. So Four-Eight Monaghan feels just under-gunned for me. Her extra concealment over Farragut helps a bit here -- I mean, you can choose to turn away, rather than engage some of the bigger, scarier boats but I'm still left wanting more. Oh well. Monaghan isn't terrible, she's just not for me. The variety offered by this ship is a good thing. Would I Recommend? This isn't a ship I would get for myself. If I won it in a crate, hooray! It would still most likely sit in my port unused barring use in some occasional Daily Mission. PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? Yes. Monaghan can spit out a lot of damage very quickly with her massive torpedo walls. So long as you can survive closing with bots, you should be able to derp fish at point blank range up their nose and score some big damage in Co-Op. Random Battle Grinding:This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. Yes. Monaghan makes a great trainer for either your gunship destroyer captains or if you've specialized some of your high tier American destroyers commanders to emphasize throwing torpedoes instead. For Competitive Gaming:Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. No. Monaghan doesn't have a competitive edge over ships like Shinonome, T-61 or Aigle. For Collectors:If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. Yes. Monaghan earned 12 battle stars in her service during WW2, including fighting at Pearl Harbour. For Fun Factor: Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? No. This one surprised me, but I just couldn't get into this ship. You would think with two hull options, the variety would appeal, but we just never clicked, Monaghan and I. Your mileage may vary, though. What's the Final Verdict?How would the ship rate on an Angry YouTuber scale of Garbage - Meh - Gud - Overpowered? GARBAGE - The boat is unbalanced, not fun to play and weak. The ship desperately needs some buffs or some quality of life changes.Mehbote - An average ship. Has strengths and weaknesses. Doesn't need buffs to be viable however she's not going to be considered optimal.Gudbote - A powerful ship, often one of the best ships at a given role within its tier. Usually considered optimal for a given task.OVERPOWERED - The boat is unbalanced and powerful. Typically she's either horrible to play against or she redefines the meta entirely. In Closing This took longer than I had planned. I caught the summer flu that's been going around locally and that cost me a few days. My next review will be USS Salem, the tier X American cruiser. Expect it around the week of June 18th. Thank you all for reading. If you enjoy my work and find it useful, please consider sponsoring me on Patreon. Appendix A list of sites, programs and people I rely upon to create my reviews.
  9. Just got a 10pt captain on her and I am wondering what skills I should go for next. I am thinking EM, DE then IFHE but PM and SE would be some good skills to have too.
  10. This is likely not a popular opinion but I find that I don't have to much issue playing a DD in matches with CVs. A lot of the time they don't primarily target me and I don't have to much issue avoiding rockets and dive bombs. when they do primarily go for me I think it's more of a advantage because that means the enemy CV is distracted with me instead of trying to deal with my whole team.
  11. Yes, another one of these threads about CVs Its no secret that DD life has been very difficult with the prevalence of CVs flooding the queue. On average at least 3 of every 5 games will have a CV in it. Shouldn't be too big an issue right? For a CA or a BB, mostly not. For a DD however, CV presence makes life absolutely miserable against any CV that's even slightly competent. The trouble with playing a DD in a CV game at Tier X is not so much the damage output that a CV can do to a destroyer, but more lies with the fact that the presence of a carrier forces you, as a destroyer, to play a certain way, because playing any other way will be punished very very heavily if you catch the attention of a carrier. The damage that they can do, its not fun, sure, but with the possible exception of Midway, and to a lesser extent Lexington HE Dive Bombers, the damage is not the issue here. Think of the current DD vs CV situation as playing a BB back in the days when OWSF was still a thing. The problem with stealth firing is that it is a very frustrating mechanic to play against, because the only real counter-play option as that BB is just to hope that the DD's aim sucks. The same holds true for CVs in the current state of the game when it comes to destroyers. Outside of shooting the planes down, which lets face it, most DDs don't have the greatest AA in the world, and even the ones that do like Gearing or Grozovoi need a full AA spec to defend themselves reliably. Because of this, DDs are easy prey for a CV, and with that fact, a DD is forced to stay very close to their team for the first half of the game, which severely hinders the role of a destroyer at all, and that is the biggest problem with the current state of DD vs CV. CVs effectively act as an "on/off" switch for the entire point of a destroyer. A DD's primary job is capture point and maintaining vision control for their team. Because of this, DD operations are generally very independent and is often why the impact of bad DD players vs good ones on the outcome of a game is so prevalent, but that's a topic for another day. Back to the matter at hand; DD operations are generally very independent themselves but have a vital impact on the outcome of a game. But this is the biggest problem, any good CV player can completely shut any of that down and cost a DD at least half their HP for even trying. Yes, I can hear you already clacking away at your keyboards "Turn your AA off until you're about to get spotted and you'll be harder for the CV to find". Yes, that is true, but also consider the number of other things that can spot a destroyer. Radar and other DDs are the two most significant and common spotting threats to a DD. Once a DD has been spotted in an area, whether they fall undetected or not, a determined CV will hunt you down without too much issue. The ultimate result is forcing DD players to hang back towards the rest of their team, because they really just don't have the AA power to reliably defend themselves unless they're an AA spec Gearing or Groz, but even then if the enemy CV is good they will still get at least 1 strike off on you, with damage ranging from only 1 or 2k HP to potentially half your HP pool depending on the nation and type of planes involved. This remains true even with friendly AA support. Its a no-win situation, your only hope as a DD when being focused by a CV is praying that the enemy CV's aim sucks. Other than that you're pretty much SOL unless you can chew through the squadron via AA which is never the most reliable tactic. As a DD, your role and ability to perform your duties as a DD is effectively turned off by the presence of a CV. All you can do is really just hope to be ignored, which by any good CV the chances of that are slim to none the second you get spotted. Now, I am aware that the CV round start delay is in the works, but while it will definitely give a bit of breathing room at the start of the game, it will ultimately fail to solve the problem. While there is a significant difference between being spotted at 18:00 against being spotted at 19:15, the ultimate result is still the same. As a DD, you're still being forced to play that same certain way, hanging back huddling near friendly AA if you wish to survive. And as the match progresses, however, even this becomes increasingly unreliable as the attrition of battle sets in; AA mounts are destroyed on friendly battleships and cruisers, and usually the DD as well. This leaves an even bigger gap in AA defenses for CV players to exploit and increases both your own and your team's overall vulnerability to air attack. The fact herein is really that even huddling with your team won't always save you, which defeats the purpose of huddling with your team to begin with. Just like a DD in the RTS CV version, a CV's impact on the match grows as the match progresses, just like a destroyer's would. Really, the ultimate problem is the fact that CVs, as a DD player, will effectively force you to play a certain way, because playing any other way will cost you a significant chunk of HP with nonexistent counter-play options outside of smoke, which will not always be available. With how easily a CV can adjust their attack runs on the fly, it would take more skill to miss the target than it would to hit. CVs will severely punish, to great effect, what would otherwise be good play and positioning from a DD. A CV literally turns the role of a DD on a team into the start of a bad joke, and punishes DDs for playing DDs, basically. DDs have 0 freedom unless you're a full AA Groz or Gearing, but even both of those are a coin toss whether or not it will really help to any significant effect, especially later in the game (again, attrition of battle; AA mounts being knocked out from enemy fire and past air attacks). While DDs are by no stretch of the imagination unplayable, life can be a whole lot more challenging than it needs to be. Life as a DD was already hard enough, but now some games can be that much more incredibly frustrating to play in if the CV decides to focus on you, which a lot of CV players will target DDs first. A fair amount dont, but a fair amount do. Which is just terribly unfun to play against. Of course, there is an old saying that does "Complaining about a problem without proposing a solution is called whining." That's not what I'm here to do. I have 3 suggestions for possible solutions to help give DD players a little more breathing room in CV matches. These are all, as far as I am aware or have seen, never been suggested before, but if they have been suggested elsewhere and refuted then well, refute them again I guess. (Also if you wouldn't mind, also link the thread where the idea was proposed first, thanks) 1.) Rework the way plane attacks operate. This is a very extreme option, and will be, if even possible at all, very very difficult to pull off. This effects mostly rocket planes and dive bombers (especially USN). The current iteration of CVs, it is very easy for CVs at adjust their attack runs on the fly, which makes dodging and any form of counterplay extremely difficult. With the old RTS system of carries, bombers had a line called the Line of No Return, which means that the second that line is crossed, the bombers are committed to the drop and cannot be readjusted. I propose some sort of similar system, keeping the elements of manually controlling a large, single squadron but still retaining some element of "commitment" from the old RTS system. Torpedo bombers are fine as is attack-wise, but I propose a system of dive and rocket attacks to have an element of commitment to a direction, being unable, or very slot to, turn in either direction once the attack run initiates, increasing the value of good plane placement to maximize hits across the bow and stern of a ship. Again, this is a very, very extreme option and probably will never happen. 2.) Rework DD air detection. A simple fix, simply decrease the air detection of DDs further, thus increasing their potential to both hide from, and defend While the first buff did significantly help, unless the DD is spotted by other means, I believe that this change, by decreasing the air detection range, will help throw off accurate attacks against a DD without making attacking them impossible unless the DD is spotted by other means. If this makes any sense, think of it this way: A DD is spotted by a CV at a distance that the attack run will pretty much have to be launched almost the second the squadron spots the destroyer for the most accurate attack, rewarding good plane placement to catch the DD nose or stern to attack for maximum hits as well as good reflexes. If the attack is not launched almost immediately, the resulting attack will be far less accurate due to there being a much narrower gap between the attack location and DD position. Again, this is probably an extreme option. 3.) My last, very simple solution is to simply beef up destroyer AA capabilities to improve their defense against carriers, especially those that will drop fighters over a destroyer to keep them spotted, and getting them focus fired heavily. While proposal 2 would help to alleviate this, the simplest solution I can think of that would help improve the amount of freedom and defense a DD has in a CV game would simply just beef up their AA defense not quite to cruiser or even Groz/Gearing levels, but enough to actually being able to reliably shoot down planes more consistently, although the weakness with this, again, is the attrition of battle. This is a very simple suggestion that ultimately will probably fail to fully fix the problem, but will at least help. Another possible variation of this would also just be decrease damage on CVs overall, which would help lower their effectiveness against DDs so the DD isnt a quarter at least of their HP in the first 2-4 minutes with almost nothing that can be done about it, sure, but will also cripple their damage on other classes, which I don't think is a good idea. This is my take on the current situation of CV vs DD interactions. Again, all of this is just my opinion, and my suggested solutions are definitely far from perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but I would like to know everyone else's opinions on the matter, and other possible solutions that you all may think would work better. Discuss~
  12. CV's haven't ruined the ability of DD's to be successful. It helps when your teammates do their part as always but if you play smarter, not harder you can do well. Instead of rushing out solo. Stay with your team and be the torpedo screen and use that F3 key to highlight the enemy DD's when you see them. It makes all the difference. You spot and the teammates cover you with AA.
  13. One of the often-overlooked changes in the recent-ish patches was the addition of a 6s a relay delay to radar, where anything spotted on radar takes 6s to be lit up to allies to shoot it. Meanwhile, one of the big common complaints with CVs is their ability to spot things easily and effectively, particularly DDs, which rely on stealth instead of health (CV complaint threads are easily more common than the next several most common threads, combined). The extension of this spotting delay to anything planes spot seems to be a logical step. As far as gameplay is concerned, this would give ships more time to react to being spotted, perhaps hiding a citadel a bit better, getting a chance to smoke up, or finding cover before fire starts pouring in. It would also mean the window for firing on targets during the opening spotting run will be less usable, since the CV would actually have to stay for a bit to get spotting damage. Any thoughts?
  14. ricochets_and_more

    Mid Tier DD gameplay "against" CVs

    I'm currently grind the US DD line and after watching some threads I have this come to mind: (I'm a Farragut thus I'm speaking from tier VI to VIII perspective, and this thread will be my understanding of DD under current meta and me asking for advice before step into Mahan, Benson to face tier Xs and Midway, Haku) Part I: 1.This is the part I'm taking about the whole strategy not tactics Since in terms of spotting ability CVs overwhelm DDs, DDs are most likely to take direct damage from planes and additional focus fire from surface vessels: (1)As a DD if your side has already been occupied by enemy CV(s), you quickly take cover(which is less likely if you are in the open sea where the Cap is) to take less damage from focus fire and play the defensive, and get into position(I find it not likely to happen at most time because of the sequential air strikes) while (hoping) friendly carrier(s) do the counter-spotting to hinder the enemy push and the enemy DD(s) doing the same. (2)If your flank is not occupied by CV(s) currently, you do the same stealth meta strategy: (US DD) Limit the movement of enemy DDs, Hunt for enemy DDs, Gain Cap control, Support allied DDs/flank and finally Deal some damage. (If you've checked and are wondering why my stats(in Farragut) look so peculiar, well... you can call it sheer luck, and here's my explanation: in terms of 1(1), I pretty much fail to retreat and am focused to death; as for 1(2), I often fail at the last stage of my listed role because allies get the kill or make them retreat, or I'm just blown out of water under focus fire) 2. If you are suddenly radared while commencing the 1(1) stage of action, at least for me, "Ugh, FK this why I'm so screwed up..." and take constant damage(*to death) from CV(s) while (hoping) our CV(s) descend the same fate on my enemy counterpart(s). Or, I just retreat instantly which means surrender Cap control and hope being able to carry out both stage 1(2) then 1(1) (which is even more unlikely to be done because teammates won't be evenly distributed around caps and carriers have bigger fishes to feast on) 3. Never rush tier VIII CVs, spotting them is not even recommended, that's CV's job (Doing so will result in high chance of double carriers immediately focusing you to death or at least make you cost dearly for spotting them) Part II: New and first time putting up a thread here, glad you have the patience to reach here. After reading the whole, you pretty much find that I'm still quite a noob as a DD captain apparently and that's why I'm asking for help & advice for improvements. (I'm a American CA reroll and I grind this line according to my experience in CA before the rework. After reaching Gearing hopefully, I'll re-grind the American CA line to come up with strategies against CVs) It's very kind of you to point out my misplay as much as you can. Or if you agree with me, I'll just keep to this strategy until I feel just fine with my skills to move upwards.
  15. poeticmotion

    Aigle fan club thread

    Anyone who has ever divved with me, talked WoWS with me, or even has heard of me knows about my over-the-top love for the Farragut. Well, Farragut is now my side chick, and I only have eyes for the new tier 6 love of my life. Behold the DD that made me shelve my Farragut (at least for a while)...my sweet Aigle. Aigle is amazing (for my playstyle.) I absolutely understand why she gets a bad rap from some people...this isn't a ship that will work for everyone. For me, she's gudbote and maybe even overpowered, but I cant argue with LWM that she's a mehbote overall. And I doubt I'll continue to do *quite* as well in her as I did in my first 8 games, but I can tell she's going to be a go-to boat for me from now on...especially considering I did as well as I did today with only a 10-point captain and she really needs a 16-point captain to excel (I have PT, LS, SE, and CE per Littlewhitemouse's recommendations, will be adding EM and IFHE as I get the points for them.) She just works for me. She's like the bastard stepchild of a Farragut and a Khabarovsk, feel-wise if not quite stat-wise. Her handling is a bit clumsy, as was pointed out by others, and her shell arcs are...weird. I struggled to get hits in the first few games with guns; I can make the high shell arcs of Farragut work for me, but trying to adjust to Aigle's arcs was tough. I was having to walk my fire onto even broadside BBs. But she's incredibly fast, can take a beating, and her torps hit HARD. And she can straight up bully other DDs out of cap circles. She gives you the speed to fly across the map, the guns to demolish DDs or HE spam anything else, and her torps are few in number but they make up for it in power. I was having a blast laying torp ambushes around islands or using my speed to flank and torp BBs as they meandered across the "safe" back area. And she's a pretty good cap control boat, if you're experienced enough at knife fighting to anticipate torps and evade them. Your handling sucks; you need to plan ahead and anticipate as you can't just dart through a torp spread with the twitch of a hand on a keyboard like the maneuverable Farragut; but with speed boost is on she's a bit more nimble than I thought she'd be. She's not going to work for everyone. But for skilled gunboat DD captains, she's a beauty. I <3 you, Aigle. My first 8 games in her: 6 wins, 2 losses, 42k average dmg (was consistently doing 50k except for one game where my team just collapsed so quick I couldnt do much and another where the enemy Saipan dedicated his game to keeping me spotted and then finally sunk me...another weakness, Aigle's AA is terribad. Just turn it off. Seriously. ) Here are the games I played today in my new beloved Aigle (in the spoiler tab)
  16. Koogus

    Mainline IJN DDs

    My question is should i try out the mainline instead of the secondary (gun boat) line? Ive gotten to tier 6 on the secondary line and i have lost interest in continueing it to get a spammy gun boat. (Im asking how thr ships are overall not in a CV situation)
  17. Ares1967

    Random thoughts...

    Upfront. I don't like CVs. They could be removed tomorrow and it wouldn't bother me one bit. They are here, and I enjoy the game, so I don't throw a tantrum over them. I'm going to share some opinions though. AA. So your bottom tier CV cant attack most higher tier ships therefore AA must be nerfed. AA gets nerfed and the gripe immediately becomes I cant attack a cluster of ships, AA must be nerfed. I have zero sympathy. The only thing a CV ever has to worry about is AA. If a match gets to the point a CV is under direct fire from anything, his team suffered a epic collapse, or he failed to keep an eye on the developing battle. Top tier AA should be devastating to a bottom tier CV. A Top tier CV should be able to pretty much ignore bottom tier AA. Yes its gonna suck to play a T8 CV 70ish percent of the time. That's the price extracted to get to a T10. Someone brought up "scaling" AA damage in a private conversation. Just the fact it could be seriously suggested indicates a problem with expectations. Scaling a mechanic is a horrible idea on so many levels. So we scale AA so a Lex can get through the AA of a Mino. Do we also scale it so a Dallas can be a decen th threat to that same Lex? What about Asashio? Do we scale the Asashios AA so it can be a threat to at least a cat fighter? Or is this only for the benefit of the CV and screw anyone else. Where else do we apply this? IJN 127mm guns shoot faster and do more damage when shooting a BB? Sims torps do 20k base damage when hitting a Musashi? CO only takes half Cit damage from an FDG? I consider each of these on the same level as scaling AA. DD vs the rework CV. My opinion the rework upset DD balance to a very large extent. Before the rework it took a better than average CV player to be a threat to any DD. Now due to rocket planes, multiple attack abilities, squad launch speed, and multiple CVs, many DDs have been beat with a nerf bat. I'm going to give an extreme example. A week or so back I jumped in a cap knowing both CVs were hunting me. Being in a Groz, I didnt really care. 43 planes later my trusty Divmate arrived in his Wooster. Yeah I lost half my HP, but I stopped their points, eventually got the cap, and we won a very close match. What if I had been in a Shima? Pre rework I'd have taken my chances against any CV player in that si3tuation in any DD. Post rework, especially with 2 CVs? We're gonna lose if it comes down to me heading into that cap. As a possibly better than average DD player I have a couple of operating principles. One is, never throw away my ship unless its gonna cost the red team far more than my loss cost the green. I dont sit back spamming torps unless the situation forces me. I'll cap contest and start a gunfight with almost any ship while in any DD if I get the slightest advantage out of it. Since the rework I added another operating principle. I don't push double CVs in most of my DDs. That means when a BB or cruiser player is crying about no spotting... tough. My ship is as important to me as yours is to you. You want me to push into that cap while you sit behind an island or park beside a Mino... fat chance buddy. Push a flank? You first. See, DDs got told to adapt. It works both ways. You're just not gonna like how I adapt. I'm sure there are some unicums that can pull off anything, I wish you luck drawing them more than you draw me. I'm going to keep playing the game but I reserve the right to play it for my enjoyment and screw everyone else. I learned that last part from CV players.
  18. While I love the Asashio now, I would like to see it get a different range of torps to use, ones like the Pan Asia line would be nice, as well as standard torps that the IJN line uses. I have found with the recent CV rework the Asashio is a great DD in this environment. Staying hidden using not just your stealth but also the available distance you have at hand with your torps, as I find that if a BB knows there is a DD near them they will wasd hack which they should, but I find when your at that 13-16 km mark they still sail in straight lines and they think they are safe happily firing away until that torp warning comes in to them to late, I have gotten many a BB this way just by keeping my distance at that particular time in the match. The biggest issue of using a DD with CV's in the game is to actually stay away from your team so you are not spotted by planes, therefore your position on the map is not given away and alerting those more switched on BB players that their could be torps in coming from distance. I would also like to see the 20 km shimma torps get back their original detection range, seeing as now we are getting some buffs to radar distances, and also seeing 2 cv in a t10 game, as 2.5 km detection is far to high now with the amount of ships that have hydro and so on
  19. WG, why do you have to use a sledgehammer when you do a Hotfix? BB's and cruiser's didn't need a smaller detection range from planes, they have AA. BB"s and cruiser's didn't need all of the weapons a plane has nerfed to protect them. DD's needed better consealment or rockets nerfed, not both. Suggestion for your emergency Hotfix, that needs to be done now to save your CV rework, rollback this Hotfix, but leave the 2.5 km detection for dd's, no more no less. Let the CV have weapons, let them deal with the AA, but let them do damage. And if a CV finds me inside that 2.5 km, I'll take my licks, if I can't keep outside of 2.5 km, I should get beat up.
  20. @ Min 55 of today's WOWS live stream. Its still live, the min will change until the stream is over I am at a disagreement with Mr Conway's opinion/bias narration on how the tier 10 match "should be" because "500k DMG that's excessive". I was disappointed with his POV. I think he was trying to say was, If it was a CV/Cruiser/DD who do 500k DMG then is "excessive". If a BB does it "perfectly normal", "working as intended". The reason a CV got 500k DMG was because BB have 95k to 105k HP AND heal. WIth 5 BBs to each side (Ref. the now infamous bias commentary CC youtube video "flying Shimakazies) Its still can happen again. Now for my point about the hot fix. Cruisers, can reach to 500k DMG. It has fire/HE pens AND some have good AP. However, thanks to BBs having the "alpha strike" capabilities (the only ship in the tier). One ship will not reach it DD, Torp DDs will never reach to 500k DMG, 3 years of torp/torp ships nerfs along with other DD counter measures. Gun DDs, They have a shoot but IMO they have to low HP pool to withstand, cruiser HE spam, radar, or other factors. It takes time with low caliber pew pew guns, to sink even one BB. BBs, Thank to all the help of upper MGT of WOWS over the years (Lowered Citadel, ETC.). Now that torps are no longer an issue (as in you dont have to change your BB cpt skills to adapt to the arial torps). BBs have a better chance of breaking 500k (and as of right now, the only capable class to do so). BBs have limited threats/workload then say a DD/cruiser. My argument, tier 10 is stale (I dont represent the majority, I represent people who want diversity game play in the tier). Nerfing the Haku is the reason why tier 10 BBs drivers dont play as a fleet. There is no reason to adapt OR play with your cruiser teammate when you just nerfed the CV/DD/cruiser torps DMG potential to the ground AGAIN. BBs, should not be autonomous/stand alone ship in a team game. The hot fix- I am just floored that a hot fix had "unattended consequences" (Quoted by Mr. Conway) To lower tier CVs. To appease the tier 10 BB population, its wiling to alienate/sabotage the otherwise great work the new CV and new CV cpts. To keep BBs happy ? Seriously ? Based on my experience with WOWS. If its torp related, the nerf bat goes way to far. Any other exploit, it take longer. This hot fix is one of many examples of it. Its unfortunate, the above circumstances are prevailing. I am not surprised, its disheartening to watch WOWS repeating their mistakes on a very hard worked CV rework...
  21. Okay, hopefully my sorta-clickbait title grabbed your attention, so hopefully you'll bear with me. So a major problem centered around the CV right now is primarily from the DD crowd and how a CV's aircraft spot enemy ships, right? Let's see if we can't figure out a bipartisan solution to this, shall we? I propose a rework to the spotting mechanics of CV aircraft. It would go as follows: Enemy ships spotted by carrier aircraft, by default, will ONLY be visible to the Carrier. The rest of the team will not see these ships, nor will they appear on the map in any way. In order to still provide a means of effective scouting without "perma-spotting", a new consumable will be added to all Carrier Aircraft, called "Recon". "Recon", when activated, will make all ships within aircraft detection range visible to the entire team. If a ship falls out of detection range after they are "Recon"ed, they will go unspotted. The consumable will last between 10 and 20 seconds, depending on tier. Cooldown would be between 30 and 45 seconds, also depending on tier. (Longer durations and cooldowns will be at higher tiers) If a squadron initiates an attack run during the active time of the "Recon" consumable, the consumable would then cancel and enter it's cooldown. The "Recon" consumable would have, at base, 4 charges, but can increase to 6 with the "Superintendent" Captain Skill and the premium version of the consumable. It will be accessible to all types of aircraft. Each aircraft squadron will have it's own set of the consumables, like the current "Fighter Squadron" and "Engine Boost" consumables. Non-Carrier Aircraft, like catapult fighters and spotter planes, will not be affected by the spotting changes. I think this would alleviate a lot of the spotting issues when it comes to Carriers that both parties could agree on. Of course I'm sure it's not perfect and could use improvement, so any thoughts on how it could be improved are always welcomed. If we can get it good enough, who knows? Maybe someone up high could see it and maybe pass it along? Crazier things have happened. Also I'm not sure if this is an entirely unique idea, though since I haven't really seen it around I figured I might as well put it out there. Anyways, cheers!
  22. l1nv5

    My turn to whine.

    Or just temporary remove it from the game until you fix it completely, please? You could just put it back in the PTS and reward us Stalingrads for getting into the PTS and help you figure out how to make it right. It literally costs you figurative money yet making the player base so much happier. In my humble opinion and I believe WG you have seen it by now that balancing CV is hard and will be taking a lot of time and CV integration is ALL or NOTHING. You either get it right all the way or not getting it at all. You need full manual AA, WOWP level of aircraft control, even individual manned aircraft control for the balance to work. And as much as I know WG, you are perfectionists, you would stop at nothing until getting it perfectly right, just look at how you totally scrap the RTS version and overhauling CV gameplays, how much committed you guys are at doing the perfect things once and for all; why not hear us out, delete CVs, buy over WOWP, integrate it into the game, and then bring CV back. Believe me, your game is already a work of art without CV. Despite some friction I have with radars, the game overall is elegant and CV existence ruins it. I believe you can do it, press that delete button. You can't roll back CV rework now, just blame it on the proposer, fire him and all is good, you are still the perfect WG I know. Come on, do it! Do it... do it... do it.... yes that button, do it... do it..........
  23. Thank you for the hard work so far and a big thank you for all the lovely rewards you are giving us right now much appreciated .
  24. KSN

    Mean Z39

    Das Gud Bote! ... and the replay:
  25. Recently I watched Flamu’s and sea raptor’s quick review of Leone. After seeing the concealment, reload of guns, the double torp mounts with only 4 torps, and the low speed, I’m thinking that some of the stats will change once this ship goes into testing. May tier 6 better it seems like it cannot compete. Not to mention that if one decides to treat this ship as a gun boat, they will only be able to use HE as an option because the AP appears to be horrid. Plus the low speed and short smoke duratiOn, I’m thinking that I will be hard to put gun and evade other dd’s. Especially if up tiered. Even though there seem to be a lot of bad areas, I’m hoping that once it undergoes testing it will receive some buffs in some of the areas. What are your thoughts at first glance? ( , flamu’s review starts at 10:26)
×