Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'dds'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 33 results

  1. In the Tech Tree, for 3 of the new German DDs (0.10.3) it indicates - "You can gain early access to this ship by completing a special mission." One would assume that the "German Destroyer Mission 1" is that special mission, though it simply shows a gift container as the final reward. If that is the special mission for getting the early access, they should clarify this rather than make players wonder if that gift is early access for all ships, one ship, or actually something different. I have read through WOWS main pages and googled to find clarification as to what the special mission is/are, or how to access them, but found nothing. One issue with not knowing what you receive by completing "German Destroyer Mission 1" is that one of the sub-missions requires either the new Schultz or new ZF-6. This requires spending at least 1500 doubloons if lucky and even possible, or possibly quite a lot more. - To acquire F. Schultz - Only option is via Random bundles (1500 DBLN each) - Odds should be 1:7 of getting Schultz for each random bundle purchase, but given WG's history with the word "random", it might require buying a couple "random" bundles before having a chance to get it. - To acquire ZF-6 - Must complete the ship in the dockyard. Which cost between 2200 and 8950 DBLN depending on how much you want to accelerate the build. Is there something I am missing? Have they done it this way in the past? Or is the "German Destroyer Mission 1" the special mission they refer to? Early access for the Italian ships seemed a lot simpler. Sorry it took this much to explain, and especially if there is just something I somehow overlooked.
  2. Lose_dudes

    shipgirl discussion thread

    My guess is it has something to do with the fact they don't have citadels? Yes that was a pun, but still a question
  3. I am interested in one of these 3 DDs. Just these 3. Which one do you recommend? Z-46, Östergötland or Jutland?
  4. Before anyone accuses me of being a BB fanboy, please take a look at my stats and notice that I'm actually pretty close to a DD main. While I enjoy and appreciate the class and the challenges and capabilities it brings , I'm not some kind of class fanatic that will defend it to the end regardless if broken or not. With that in mind, someone has to talk about DDs and the ammo the new BBs fire, SAP. So, SAP is offered with the new RM BBs as That's all fair and dandy, Italian cruisers are generally well liked and even with the lack of HE got some nice potential, especially tier VIII+ upwards. They can be absolutely devastating when they catch an unaware DD and punish misplays. Now, BB SAP is instead treated as an overpenetration when it hits a DD, dealing 10% of the max damage listed. In a recent community stream I asked Mr. Crysantos about this, to get the response that SAP alpha is higher than AP, so it's better to shoot at DDs. In theory this has some basis. Let's see Vittorio Veneto's SAP and AP max damage comparison So, SAP does 500 more damage than AP. On a 10% of a penetration of a DD, this translates into 50 extra damage. What's more, in contrast to HE you can't incapacitate modules easily, so that's another disadvantage. On top of this, you also get the shotgun accuracy of the new ships that has you move ever closer, thus in greater danger from DDs. And the cherry on top, the secondary suite of most of these ships is comprised primarily of 90mm guns, unable to penetrate DD plating. So a line with bad range, bad accuracy, bad secondaries and average concealment is made to be played the closest to DDs. In my opinion this is a form of hand holding that's simply not needed. I'm not saying that BB SAP should oneshot DDs, but at least be on par and a bit ahead of HE in terms of effectiveness. The lack of accuracy, lack of incapacitations and fires can compensate for any alpha potential anyway. Bottom line, not only does this make DDs very strong against a type of ammo that's supposed to be perfect to moderately and lightly skinned targets, but also one that takes character away from the upcoming BBs.
  5. xavier_556

    DDs e suas 10 linhas

    Este é um texto descritivo sobre cada uma das 10 linhas de Contratorpedeiros (DDs) que temos atualmente "in-game", com a intenção de auxiliar aqueles que estão ou pretendem seguir uma delas, por meio do melhor entendimento de suas capacidades, limitações e funções. Usando como base minha experiência/opinião das mesmas e principalmente a Wiki Oficial, Gameplays e/ou Reviews de CCs (iChaseGaming, Destroyer_KuroshioKai, LittleWhiteMouse, Notser, Flamu e outros), espero ter ajudado e aproveite a leitura. Eu divido os DDs em 3 tipos de classificação, Torpedeiros, Híbridos e Canhoneiros, as duas últimas com 2 Subclassificações cada. Torpedeiros: O nome já diz tudo, seu principal meio ofensivo são seus torpedos e seus canhões não são bons ao ponto de ser uma ferramenta realmente afetiva para fins ofensivos; Híbridos: DDs equilibrados em que podem se destacar tanto por seus canhões como por seus torpedos, dependendo das características do navio e a forma que o jogador as utiliza em campo; Afinidade para Torpedos: São aqueles DDs que suas características favorecem o uso majoritário dos torpedos como fonte de Dano, diferente dos Torpedeiros, seus canhões podem ser utilizados tanto para fins defensivos como ofensivos; Afinidade para Canhões: São aqueles DDs que suas características favorecem o uso majoritário dos canhões como fonte de Dano, seus torpedos por uma combinação de fatores limitantes (Alcance, Recarregamento, Detecção tanto dos torpedos com do próprio navio e etc...) não se sobressaem como seus canhões; Canhoneiros: O nome já diz tudo², diferente dos Híbridos com Afinidade para Canhões, os fatores limitantes impedem/desencorajam fortemente o uso dos torpedos com fonte de Dano; De Mar Aberto: São aqueles DDs que podem se manter detectados em mar aberto a partida inteira sem temer receber grandes danos em resposta facilmente, graças a combinação de duas as seguintes características, boa: manobrabilidade, velocidade, trajetória balística; De Fumaça: São aqueles DDs que por não possuir duas das características citadas acima, são forçados a manterem ocultos usando cobertura de fumaça/ilhas enquanto atiram; Agora vamos detalhar cada linha de DD, dos Torpedeiros até os Canhoneiros De Fumaça... Linha Principal Japonesa (Shimakaze): Linha Americana (Gearing): Linha Pan-Asiática (Yueyang): Linha Pan-Européia (Halland): Linha Alemã (Z-52): Linha Britânica (Daring): Linha Secundária Russa (Grozovoi): Linha Principal Russa (Khabarovsk): Linha Francesa (Kléber): Linha Secundária Japonesa (Harugumo):
  6. I'm just getting to the point of trying to think through the new commander skills, and how this might compare to my current DD builds. This is just off the top of my head thinking without really giving the new skills some deep consideration. For those of you that haven't seen the new skills here's the google doc with all the info we currently have. Remember this is all a work in progress, and it hasn't even entered testing yet, so we can expect some tweaks along the way before this goes live. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Bgx8ilNzUAp3qMI7Ke_Qtw0359mv1hecZRTjlV5pAKE/htmlview?pru=AAABdG6Ch5M*hyX6M5q-2bLoqDydb2gdrg#gid=0 To get the ball rolling let's look at the standard build 10 point build for pretty much every DD. That would be: -PT or PM -LS -SE -CE With the proposed changes there is more or less nothing different for the first 10 points, with the exception of PT will be changed to "Argus Eyed" and will become a 2 point skill. That means you'll take the new PM (now called "Maintenance Specialist"). Personally, I don't like this as I take PT as my first skill on all ships. Looking at a specific ship line and comparing it to what I currently use. Here's my current USN DD build, a 19 point commander on my Fletcher. This is a fairly common build. -PT -AR, LS -SE, BFT -RL, CE With the new skills I can't make this same build. Here are the problems. First, PT (Argus Eyed) is no longer a one point skill, its a two point skill. Not a big problem if you like PM over PT. However, I like PT, and that makes some real problems recreating this build. I could make the same build, plus PM (Maintenance Specialist), but that would be 22 points, so its not possible (the new limit will be 21 points). What is stupid is that build would only cost 20 points in the current system. Also, the new BFT (Main Battery and AA Specialist) is only -5% to main battery reload instead of the current -10% on BFT. I would have to drop PT (Argus Eyed) and pick up "Consumables Specialist", the same as the current "High Alert" but its only 1 point in the new system instead of the 2 points it is currently. Frankly, I don't like it, as it applies to this build. I think a solution is to make PT (Argus Eyed) a one point skill, and switch the new Consumables Specialist back to 2 points. This post is just to get things started, and to help us think all of this through. I'd like to see what you guys have to say about how this will impact your favorite DD builds. Also, it would be nice to see others do this same discussion for the other ship types in separate topics.
  7. Hello fellow captains! Since long ago I have been thinking, real warships had a limited amount of ammunition on board, but in the game you can throw an infinite amount of fire power to your adversaries. Some ships like to hide behind islands and fire their guns over the terrain with impunity, which is not very engaging in my opinion. I firmly believe putting a limit on the amount of ammo you carry will make things a lot more interesting. We will have to be very careful with our target selection and the ammo type we use. I Propuse limited ammunition carried into the battle, based on historical data; and to select the proportion of ammo type at port. For example, as a cruiser you can carry a certain amount of shells, then at port you use a slider to select what percentage will be He (or SAP), and what percentage will be AP. You'll have to select very well depending on your play-style and the characteristics of your ship. Of course, this has some deep implications. To mention one battleships are capable of holding a lot of ammo, simply because of their size, while destroyers can carry less. Ah and goodbye to torpedo spamming. I know, I know destroyers will love this proposal, but please hold your horses. Please let me know what you think about it. Even if all ships hold the same amount of ammo, it will definitely call for a more strategic gameplay. I'll be reading the comments and Wargaming too. Take care and stay safe.
  8. It's the last day of the long 4th of July weekend. All weekend, I have noticed that capital ships and oftens destroyers as well are sitting about 2 squares on the mini map behind the caps. I think this occured in about 8 out of 10 games this weekend. In one game a Vecenzia sailed to towrads the middle of that game with 3 caps in one giant circle. He was told to "get back"! . I noticed later he was complaining that no one was spotting. Ten out of 12 ships were in the outer ring or behind it. My theory is dds have been hammered so much by rocket planes and radar that they are adapting and staying away from caps. However, I also think 80% of all players are now playing for the last 5 minutes. Who can fault them. Their stats are better and 50% of the time that might be able to take one crucial action that they couldn't do if they were did. I've watched Unicum streamers say, I'm looking to kill that guy that gets out of range from his support. Is the new Meta - Only Fools Rush In? I'm I only now noticing this or was this a holiday weekend effect?

    GERMAN CV's?

    I'm confidant this is about the last topic you'd care to hear about or more likely hear more about. I have to believe WOW has lost its way introducing German CV's to a game who hasn't seen an Italian Battleship or Destroyer line. Lines of ships that actually existed in history being pre-empted by a line of exclusively, save one, paper ships simply boggles the mind. Is there an Earth shaking demand for German CV's? Not only are you bringing to life paper ships but you are also endowing them with paper super weapons. Mind you the Germans had a guided missile, of sorts, but it was never launched from a CV. Perhaps that's another little surprise we have to look forward to in the future? To add insult to injury two of the three dominant Navies of WWII are withering on the vine. The USN and IJN are being power creeped into obscurity with only premium ships providing any grace what so ever. The Brits are having issues themselves. I have to assume these are purely business decisions. The NA player numbers is far from huge and I'm sure the number of Italian players is dwarfed by those from Russia. The only reason I'm doing this now is because I failed to include it in the after clan season survey. I felt it didn't really belong there any way.
  10. Privet komrad I bring you my honest ways on how to make this game more balanced and enjoyable for all classes(even bringing harmony between dds and cvs) 1: radar Radar can be changed in 2 ways: Real radar: radar/hydro can’t detect through islands. This will guarantee that cruisers can still detect smoked up dds but they can’t do it behind the safety of islands with absolutely no penalties and dds can spot and detect as long as they stay out of eye of sight of radar. Submarine like radar: What I mean by this is like the submarine pings. You get pings that cost battery. it can also recharge. I think this is more intuitive and much better. This can also be implemented with the first radar change I suggest as well as radar range change. Ships can change radar range. So if you choose to use a 12km radar, you can freely use it but it will cost a lot of battery. this will also make sure you don’t get so much Russian cruiser spam. Cvs: 1: universal AA range The 40mm bofors on the montana have a 6km range, on the gearing they have 5.8km. and the 40mm bofors on the montana have the same range as the 128mm l/61 on the gk. Just they like diversity radar change for cruisers, they should diversify AA range on each gun. But each gun doesn’t change the range on a different ship. Each AA mount has a range, be it on the ground, a battleship or a submarine. 2: manual fire control Im going to sum this with the third point to make this shorter if a cv deploys a fighter next to its torpedo bombers around a ship. The ship will do the exact same damage for both the fighter and the torpedo bobmers. It’s not hard to see you should and must prioritize the torpedo bomber. Use all available AA for that squadrum. With that, flak bursts should make a LOT more AA damage. A cv can just send a squadrum, ignore flaks and still release their torpedos/bombs. Just like battleships get punished for going in straight lines, airplane squadrums should get absolutely nuked if they keep going in astraight line ignoring flak.it shouldn’t happen just to heavily AA mounted ships like the haaland. DDs: There really is only one thing I want to see change regarding dds. Overpens. A yamato can’t do 6 overpens and the dd just 6khp but be happily sailing like nothing happened. There’s some astonishing dd survival stories like the hms Cossack but if you get 6 overpens from a 460mm shell you should get severely punished. Overpens of high caliber should still do monstrous damage. It shouldn’t take a battleship 3 salvos to kill a DD BBs: Bbs should have a fire control more like the Russian battleships. They should get more damage control parties but can use quicker. This will severely help them against he spam and torpedos as well as keepingthe he spammers happy as if they used all their damage cons they are still at the mercy of the he spammers. Cruisers: Armour: Just like bbs. There’s isn’t much to change (besides radar) and that’s the 50mm armour belt. no cruiser should be able to bow in a shikashima or even a montana. Make the 27mm more prevelant with other cruisers or even 30 or 32mm bows but 50mm armor belts shouldn’t be a thing with some special cases like the super heavy Kroonstad class Sap: You should not do 12k salvos to a bow in hindi unless you are sailing a battleship. Sap should kill dds but it shouldn’t kill cruisers and battleships that quickly either. In order to make sap viable I would suggest nerfing the damage and and severely nerfing the penetration angles. If you’re bow in in ashima you should get nuked, if you’re bow in in a dm, you shouldn’t get nuked every 20s seconds. These are changes I would love to see implemented and I think would make the game far more enjoyable for every class and keeping harmony with all players. What do you think? Please share your feedback because unlike waraming, I care to see other’s opinion.
  11. TinCanMan_

    How to Kill DDs with rockets

    Gents, What is the best way to get rocket hits on DDs. Conversely, what makes DDs hard to hit with rockets? Hmmm. Maybe I should ask with a different name? Cheers
  12. anonym_bleJN7gXeLqd

    Småland is a fun boat!

    Here are the results of two battles that I had in the Småland. I am really enjoying her. I am beginning to think that the 2 million Free XP that I spent was actually worth it.....
  13. with the recent update and the future sub update something needs to change for BBs were expected to push and tank but with the current meta were focused way to much we cant react fast enough from the new torps if we dont know the DD is there. so either a limit to DDs or even radar for high tier BBs would be a big help for us if you have nothing constructive to say dont say anything
  14. Hatsuharu and Shyratsuyu, both forgotten by the developers... They are basically downgrades of their torpedo tech tree counterparts. Their stealth torpedo gimmick was removed a long time ago so they have only disadvantages compared to Fubuki and Akatzuki. They both have the same 7.5 second gun reload. Hatsuharu is basically Fubuki but with one less torpedo launcher, fair sine its a gun line right? But they have the same reload and amount of guns. Shyratsuyu has 2x4 torpedo launchers and 5 guns, all have 7.5 sec reload. Akatsuki has 6 guns and 3x3 torpedo launchers. I think it would be fair to give both Hatsuharu and Shyratsuyu a slight reload buff, lowering it to 6.5 or even 6.8 seconds, be it something to keep up with the powercreep of other DDs. Thoughts?
  15. Since I've owned Shimakaze, my go to torpedo option has always been the Type93 mod.3 12km torpedoes. However, the new update has allowed for builds that make every torpedo, including deep water torpedoes, to be seen from 1.8km to 2.25 km. This has made me consider instead running the 20km Type93 torpedoes with Torpedo Acceleration and Torpedo Tubes Modification 1 to create 16km 70 knot torpedoes. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
  16. Like them or not, the community is really torn about CVs. I'm on the hate side, but I think i have a legitimate solution on how to keep them in the game, but make them 1) more rewarding 2) Increased danger 3) strategic in way that benefits all classes. This is my gamification of what I learned from watching a youtube video on the Battle of Midway and the struggles the CVs actually faced at the time. 1) Range Currently there is no range restriction. You can get in a squadron and just fly forever until you fire a few times or get shot down. There is no urgency to using the squad and no detriment to going to the wrong location or just flying forever to find that last DD when the rest of your team is dead. Where you fly should matter, and unplanned random discovery flights are unfair to classes that rely on stealth. The ideal distance would be between 14km - 18km depending on the type of plane used / country. This would become a stat that differentiates the carriers. They have stats now, but they all feel about the same. Range +1 km would also be a good captains skill as long as it's a choice between another valuable stat like faster flying or additional plane in a squad in the 4th tier. 2) Invincibility for average intelligence As long as you aren't a complete idiot, staying alive in a CV is really easy for the first 5 minutes minimum, and many matches it's easy to never even feel threatened in an even match. Decisions should have consequences. The range forces the CVs to move forward to deploy a squad (stay with me CV players). The idea that a CV isn't under threat during a battle is not based on anything but a lack of a realistic mechanic that works. 3) Plans instead of Spam CVs don't have 3 fully geared squads ready to go at any given time. Choices are made in advance. It should be at least as time consuming to attach a torpedo to a plane as it is swap between HE and AP. This also increases the value of pre-selecting the right type of plane to suit your current objective. Now, the CVs benefit from DD spotting more than they prevent DDs from being able to spot. Class balance is returning, and DDs are being given a chance to be DDs. Launching ships requires nothing right now and it shouldn't be so boring. When CVs are maneuvering, you aren't launching planes. Ideally, a squad should be taking off into the wind, but I would accept that it has to be moving at a minimum between 12kps and 18kps to give make launching a squad more meaningful. You can't just sit behind the island and spam from your magical deck of 3 ready to launch squads. There should also be time added when an unused ship needs to be stripped down from one use and converted. 4) In real life, explosions aren't an issue you solve with a signal When prepping for a strike, the CV is most vulnerable due to high-explosives being more exposed to shells, fire and shrapnel. This real life danger isn't represented. Shooting a CV feels like shooting a cinder block that operates separate from it's bombardment. CVs should be more susceptible to damage when struck on the deck with a squad being prepped. Maybe you thought having 40 torpedos on the deck that you might use later is save until one gets hit and a chain reaction kills you for littering your deck with explosives. This only works if there is flight setup time, but just adding arbitrary boring time onto the game feels like it would be arbitrary and boring... Call it redundant. Now, you start with a set amount of planes, and you can queue up their equipment set. Best of all, you can make choices. 5) Strategy and consequences Send all 50 at once for a massive attack, but now you have no planes equipped to be a fighter, so you are extra weak if the other CV comes after you. Might want to have 5 dressed out fighters on standby to defend your ship. Might not want to risk everything as you can the attack would be bigger, but not necessarily more ships sunk. That will be the most challenging gameplay balance. What is the incentive to risking more planes? Maybe you need 10 dive bombers and a 10 fighter escort. This is going to really ramp up CV strategy and create a higher skill gap then someone crosstorping using 1 move over and over again to set damage records, without ever being in danger of running out of ships or someone shooting their boat. If you lose a plane, it's gone and there will not be a magic plane building factory in the CV anymore. This might also help with that nightmare scenario when after a tough battle there is a team that has a DD and say a Cruiser both low on health, and the other has a CV that had 100 planes shot down and can now make a few more to kill the Cruiser with a DB and the DD with rockets... make from magic. If the CV stashed a couple away for an emergency, that's great, but he would have to sacrifice more defense or offense throughout if he doesn't utilize all of his planes earlier when they could have tilted the scales. 6) Fighters as spotters Sure, but they run out of gas and have to fly back, which means if you want them up for more than a few seconds, they have to start close to the CV. no more dropping a fighter on A 10 because a ship has terrible detectability by air and can't shoot the fighter down 12km away. This also would ideally remove the dpm types from crapping out a fighter on their way to flying on magic fuel. if you want a fighter, go for it, It will leave from your deck if you have one queued up, and it will probably die, then it's gone forever. Now they matter and aren't just another way to dump on the DDs trying to play. 7) DPM These changes obviously reduce the frequency of attacks, but they allow for bigger and more complex attacks. Fighters on a BB can get their butts kicked by the 10 that came along, but those 10 will probably get shot down. Bigger attack, bigger risk. 8) The dumbest thing The dumbest thing that is effective on this game is loading a plane, taking off, then immediately firing a third of the arms you loaded into the ocean so those planes will be ready faster... I get it. It's a game. But please remove this. This had to be on the list of nonsense you wanted to get out of the game, but ran out of runway to fix. You just sold a bunch of 'ships' for 25k dubloons... for Christmas. Make some runway, we deserve it and the guys that bought the PR paid for it. Best part is it's not a total overhaul. Rather than boost, you have range, you might consider burning range faster in exchange for boost, but the logic is minimal, the CVs gain more character, the DDs get to play the game again and if you suck... (the best part)... we can kill you without having to take ourselves out of the game to do it. 9) The spotter plane Rarely did a fighter plane circle over AA and take it until they died. CVs would send out spotters. They had a big area to cover, usually flew out like bicycle spokes then cut a few degrees and came back. Less likely to be shot down, but less likely to radio back while in fight. Last knows update when the spotters return to the ship.
  17. Charlie2Pen

    CV vs DD balance

    so I've been playing for four years and took an eight month break to come back and find that CV's have made destroyers completely obsolete. I did my homework and have seen that this has been an issue since the rework just after i stopped playing and has been hot fixed over and over and yet I'm still getting 1 shot by rockets within two minutes of the game starting. if i even look at a flag the wrong way i get 2 fires, broken engine and rudder along with the 3/4ths of my health it hit me for. how is this considered balanced? I know people must get tired of hearing dd players complain but I'm not even a dedicated destroyer player i only have 2 T10 dd's working on my 3rd. i just think there needs to be some compromise, obviously you cant have dds be immune or they go carrier hunting and then that's unbalanced but the game isn't in a healthy spot as it is. this is my first time ever posting a topic, never even commented on one i usually believe in sucking it up and just dealing with it but i really want to know if its just me not being good with dd's and it really isn't that bad, or is this still an issue?
  18. Final8ty

    Funny as Hell

    DD wolfpack. 20200106_015124_PJSD012-Shimakaze-1943_15_NE_north.wowsreplay
  19. Hey guys, I'm wondering how you guys think the premium tier 8 dd's stack up in 2019. Mainly interested in the Loyang, Kidd, Cossack or Le Terrible as I already have the Asashio (I love it but I want something a bit more flexible). Could you tell me which one you guys recommend and why? Thx. Ps. I like torps, while it doesn't have to be the main thing of the ship I still want to torp things because it's fun and satisfying.
  20. She is absolutely fab Sure, I added xp boosting camo, flags and so on, but I always do. I have never played through a t8 tech tree ship, as quickly as this, and certainly never, with as much fun. Fantasque is a pure 100% thoroughbred hooligan, on steroids.
  21. So with flak more or less being relagated to long range so carriers can focus on aiming at mid and short range, that seems to leave DDs in a tight spot since you leave AA off until the planes would detect you. And with most DDs, this is less than the range of your flak (assuming you're in a DD that even has long range AA). Am I missing something here?
  22. T61 (WIP) vs Aigle (Release) - compared Greetings fellow forumites, in line with recent posts that have drawn heavily on available WOWS official wiki statistics, I present here a critical (but purely intended to be fun) comparison of basic vital statistics of these 2 new tier 6 premium dds. The conclusions I draw, are of course, entirely subjective, and conditional, as T61 is still in development, and we still have no release date. Obviously, these 2 beauties will be competing for our attention, one French, one German (really a Dutch design), one a nightmare for many of you to pronounce (I go with egg-le), the other very easy to pronounce if you can count up to 6. This survey is restricted to publically available statistics, many 'soft' stats are invisible to us, for example, the chance of engine failure, and the precise armour layout. For the same reason, I will not compare consumeables such as smoke (which of course, can and do carry and compensate many ships through their hard statistical weaknesses). Announcing T61 vs Aigle vs Survivability First off, let's take a look at the survivability of these ships, how much damage can they take, and how easily they can avoid taking damage. Damage potential Now let's take a look at the more exciting part of our comparison, damage potential. As we have seen in our survivability survey, concealment values are very important for stealth fire of torpedoes. Why the delay over the T61? Well of course, the sale of Aigle is one very good reason, to avoid having them both in the shop at the same time. Which is a better overall ship? These statistics cannot answer that question, but in random battles, well rounded vessels are easier to learn to play, while more specialized ships are much more reliant on positioning and favourable circumstances. Which would win a beauty contest, Aigle! Which would win a drag race? Aigle T61. Which do you prefer? How do they compare to tech tree ships?
  23. And people wonder why i just can't always be bothered to put the effort in. They want you to do it there way and right now. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/362151742550310914/589914666361159691/20190616_210744_PJSD012-Shimakaze-1943_25_sea_hope.wowsreplay
  24. Another member was messaging me about the rework debate recently. In the course of the discussion he mentioned all the buffs DDs had received recently and how nothing will make DD players happy. He listed the BB AP nerf, radar nerf, air detection buff, and so on. I'm not surprised, we hear about these "buffs" all the time. When I told him these weren't actually buffs as DDs didn't get any perceivable increase to their performance, as per the data. He was less than impressed. Let's take a look at the what the numbers are. We'll start with the BB AP nerf that was supposed to be a massive buff to DDs (claims that DDs could now yolo BBs with no consequence). The data I'll be using is form the Maple Syrup stat site, and all data is for the NA server. I'll include a link at the end of this post. For those that don't already know Maple Syrup gathers data from the WoWs API, that is data WG makes publicly available. This data is straight from WG, and its 100% accurate. With that out of the way, let's get back to the BB AP nerf. When this change went live I checked the data and saw no increase in DD survival, or average damage. In fact, the first week the change went live DD stats dropped. That didn't make sense to me. I don't know if DDs just had a particularly bad week or if DDs had a really good week the week before. I decided to go back four weeks before and four weeks after the change to find the averages to remove the normal fluctuation in the data week to week. Now the data made more sense, DDs had received a buff after all, and the data showed it. Four Week Averages For High Tier DDs Before and After BB AP Nerf, High Tier (T7-T10) Survival Rate Damage Before Change 29.38% 36,732 After Change 29.53% 37,339 Difference +0.15 +607 Percentage Increase +0.5% +1.6% As you can see DDs did get a buff, technically speaking. So that's one half of one percent increase in survival, and a little over one and half percent increase in damage. I think it's fair to say DDs didn't actually get any buff at all. Okay, let's look at the data during the rework, not just for DDs, but all ships types. The data is in averages before and after the rework (The before data is an average for two weeks before the rework 1/19-1/26, the after numbers are an average from the start of the rework on to the latest data from Maple Syrup 2/9-4/27, the week the rework dropped had a split of before and after data so it was excluded from the averages). During this period there was the reworked CVs, radar changes, air detection buff and other nerfs to CVs to help DDs. Here are the numbers: Average Damage by Ship Type, High Tier (T7-T10) BB CA/CL CV DD Before Rework 63,554 52,589 67,725 37,731 After Rework 62,819 51,248 65,331 35,709 Change In % -1.16% -2.55% -3.53% -5.36% You can see all ships are averaging less damage. DDs have biggest drop. I wouldn't call it massive, but DDs already had the lowest average damage. Next, survival rates. Average Survival By Ship Type, High Tier (T7-T10) BB CA/CL CV DD Before Rework 34.53% 31.38% 66.78% 29.01% After Rework 33.84% 30.69% 72.90% 27.81% Change in % -2.01% -2.17% +9.17% -4.13% All ships except CVs have a lower survival rate. DDs have the biggest drop again. Place your bets now if you think this is going to be a trend. Average XP BY Ship Type, High Tier (T7-T10) BB CA/CL CV DD Before Rework 1437 1458 1430 1425 After Rework 1491 1502 1760 1424 Change in % +3.76% +3.07% +23.08% -0.01% All ships get an increase in XP, except DDs. Look at that increase for CVs. Average Games Played Per Week By Ship Type, High Tier (T7-T10) BB CA/CL CV DD Before Rework 401,368 363,032 16,942 264,596 After Rework 298,131 310,744 46,842 180,671 Change in % -25.72% -14.40% +176.48% -31.72% As we can see there is a disproportionate change in games played between the increase in CV play and decrease in all other ships, meaning, the decrease isn't only players playing CVs more now, its players playing less games. Now, I'm not making any claims about a drop in population outside the normal fluctuation throughout the year. The point is to show it is DDs that are disproportionately played less than the other surface ships. Its no surprise given the big changes in DD play in the CV heavy meta. The point of all of this isn't make it sound like its the end of the world for DDs, because it not. The point is to show all of the so-called "buffs" were only to prevent DD stats from dropping even farther. I hope this helps everyone to have a better understand of the numbers as move forward in our discussions. Good luck out there. Link to Maple Syrup site: http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/index.html For those that like pictures, line charts tracking the data.
  25. Howdy salts, My interest in the game has now waned to the point of perhaps no return. I never have liked cv's in this game from the very beginning, but it was ok because only 10-25% of matches had a cv. Cv's spelled the end of traditional surface warfare in reality and it has done the same to this game for me and more than a few others. At least limit cv's to one a side. One match after the tenth battle in a row with 2 cv's I quit the match out of frustration. Please WG 1 cv per team across all tiers. Not to mention the fact that cv's have changed the game meta entirely to a passive blobfest in most cases. Argh!