Jump to content
Forum Shutdown - July 28, 2023 Read more... ×
Forum Shutdown - July 28, 2023 Read more... ×

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'destroyer'.

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
    • Contests and Competitions
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • External testing groups
    • Supertest Academy
    • Supertest
    • Clantest
  • ANKER's ANKER Candidate Info
  • ANKER's ANK-A Candidate Info
  • ANKER's ANK-S Candidate info


  • World of Warships Events
  • [C-RED] - Code RED's Events

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 102 results

  1. Hey guys. I recently watched a few videos posted by the Youtuber The Mighty Jingles drawing attention to how the Graf Zeppelin can dominate matches by utilizing a full secondary build while being escorted by two DDs that take turns smoking up the carrier. I purchased the Graf Zeppelin with the hope that I can put together my own player division to enjoy my own carrier brawling shenanigans. However, I am currently torn over which Tier VIII DDs would be able to best suit the role of carrier smoke escort. In the video below, 2 Tier VIII Siliwangi DDs escort the GZ. I'm assuming this was done by the participants to ensure that the division had access to both hydroacoustic consumables and smoke generator. Conversely debating whether i should consider having my division mates use Tier VIII Kidd DD or perhaps Tier VIII Benson DD? The Kidd has the advantage of having the repair consumable. Whats more important to have in this situation? The Hydroacoustic charges offered by the Siliwangi or repair party offered by the Kidd? Considerations should also be given that the Siliwangi is unable to protect itself against smaller DD and cruiser targets due to her only possessing deep water torps. Any thoughts or recommendations guys?
  2. Frostbow

    How do you Elbing?

    As large as a cruiser, and can be as clumsy as a battleship. Link: https://youtu.be/KRKWH1D8MUQ Harass enemy ships with guns that have amazing accuracy? Launch torpedoes that are so slow?
  3. Main article (spanish) History This is the story of a destroyer that could also be a cruiser. Towards 1939 Chile was reducing its requirements to the British shipyards to incorporate warships immediately. Its Navy required from a heavy cruiser with 203 mm guns to a light cruiser with 152 mm guns and finally a super-destroyer with 6.0 or 5.5 inch with characteristics similar to those of the "Mogador". "Mogador" https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Mogador General characteristics We have no specified details, but we can we can assume: - Dimensions: 137.5 x 12.7 ms. - Displacement: 4,020 l.t. - Machinery: 2 e., 4 b., 2 s. - Fuel: 710 l.t. - Range: 4,200 nm @ 15 ks. - Power: 92,000 hp. - Speed: 36.0 ks. - Main guns: 6 (2x2+2x1) 152mm/50 Marca W. - Antiaircraft machine-guns: 4 (2x2) 40mm/39; 6 (3x2) 25mm/70. - Torpedo launchers: 10 (2x3+2x2) 533mm. - Others: ASW. - Complement: 265. "Schultz" https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Felix_Schultz The Chilean/Panamerican Destroyer in WoWs I consider it a mix of three destroyers already present in WoWs: - The French destroyer "Mogador" as your configuration model. - The German destroyer "Schultz" as your gameplay model. - The British destroyer "Jutland" as its aesthetic model. In addition, to complement the little information available I will use: - The Chilean destroyer "Vickers 1113" to provide anti-aircraft. - The Argentine cruiser "La Argentina" to equip the gun Mark & Model. "Jutland" https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Jutland Hitpoints - Around: 21,650 hp. Maneuverability - Power: 92,000 hp. - Speed: 36.0 ks. Main Battery - Mark & Model: V.A. 152mm/50 Marca W on open mount. - Configuration 2x2+2x1. - Rate of fire: 8.0 rpm.- Reload time: 7.5 s.- Rotation: 10 dps.- Range: 12.5 km.- Dispersion: 55 m. - AP 152mm MEE-In.: 3,000 single shot; 18,000 barrage; 144,000 damage per minute; 307 mm; 900 mps; 45.4 kg. ["Mogador" 2,700 dmg & 162.000 dpm - "Schultz" 3,700 dmg & 180.050 dpm] - HE 152mm GAC-In.: 2,200 single shot; 13,200 barrage; 105,200 damage per minute; 25 mm; 11 %; 900 mps; 45.4 kg. ["Mogador" 2,000 dmg & 120.000 dpm - "Schultz" 1,800 dmg & 87.600 dpm] - Optional SAP 152mm GSP-In.: 3,750 single shot; 22,500 barrage; 180,000 damage per minute; 42 mm; 900 mps; 45.4 kg. Guns and projectiles as "La Argentina" on open ("worse") mounts. Torpedo Launchers - Mark & Model: V.A. 533mm. - Configuration: 2x3+2x2. - Rate: 0.8 lpm. - Reload: 75 s. - Rotation: 25 dps. - Speed: 62 ks. - Range: 10.0 km. - Flooding: ¿? - T 533mm: 15,550 single launch; 77,650 barrage; 155,350 whole launchers. Torpedoes as "Jutland" but in other launchers. Anti-aircraft Armament - 6x152 mm. - 4x40 mm. - 6x25 mm. 152mm? Yes, the guns were prepared for that anti-aircraft capacity, although with a limited angle (45 d.). Consumables - Slot 1: Damage Control Party. - Slot 2: Engine Boost. - Slot 3: Smoke Generator or Defensive AA Fire. Maybe We can push it into tier X with SAP and Specialized Repair Teams consumable. Scheme My own interpretation of these negotiations. Sauce - British Cruisers. Two World Wars and After - p407. Regards
  4. I’m aware there’s little possibility of these ships getting added into the game (or maybe there are on their plans, who knows). However, in the current meta full of so many paper ships, hybrid monstrosities and “we can assume…” (like the upcoming high tier Pan American cruisers), it would be interesting to see real historical ships once in a while (or other paper ships, but with a historical background). Again, it’s hard to see these added on the near future, but at least I can dream about it. So, this is my list of ships that would be interesting to see on WOWS. Disclaimer: this is all 100% my opinion. You can feel free to agree or disagree with some of them. No worries about that. Spoiler alert: there’s gonna be some CV, but please, stay with me. Submarines Just kidding. Of course there are options, but please no. Now, let’s start. Destroyers San Giorgio: a post-war Capitani Romani-class destroyer with 6 5”/38 caliber American guns and without torpedoes. Could be a decent Tier X gunboat with the Italian exhaust smoke and the engine boost. Johnston: we all know this one. I know, another Fletcher, but one that would sell like crazy (specially in the NA server) for her history. IMO, I’d see her at Tier IX with the heal of the Kidd (or even a zombie heal), the typical American smoke, the 10 torpedo launchers and an engine boost. Piourn: the Polish DD that screamed “I am a Pole” to the Bismarck the night before her last battle. Maybe at Tier VIII, similar to the Orkan but with smoke instead of radar. Laffey: an Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer (like Gearing, but a bit slower) that participated on the D-Day and survived a fierce kamikaze attack. Today is a museum ship. A similar concept like Gearing (Tier X), but with DFAA and maybe a heal. Churruca: a Spanish destroyer with 5 120 mm guns, 6 torpedo launchers and a decent top speed (36 knots). A solid Tier VI. ZH1: a Dutch destroyer captured by the Germans scuttled at the Battle of Ushant after being crippled by British forces. It was armed with 5 120 mm guns and 8 torpedo launchers. Could be a Tier VII. Holland: a Dutch destroyer similar to Friesland, but a bit slower. Could be a decent Tier VIII gunboat. Eversten: a Dutch destroyer (very similar to Acasta) that was sunk in 1942. At Tier V. Cavalier: a British destroyer that is currently a museum ship. Armed with 4 4.5” guns and 10 torpedo launchers. Would need IFHE. A good Tier VII torpedo boat. Cruisers Sheffield: a light cruiser with a rich history behind. A solid Tier VII. Similar to Fiji or Edinburgh, but with HE added. SMS Blücher: not to be confused with the Admiral Hipper-class cruiser sunk in 1940. The last armored cruiser built by the German Empire, which was also sunk. Good artillery (210 mm guns), good armor, but not so fast (25-26 knots) and pretty much no AA. A beast at Tier V, but will suffer when up tiered. Bolzano: in a nutshell, a Trento with Zara’s guns and forecastle. Another glass cannon. Because of it, I’d slot her on Tier VI (maybe with a small heal, like Maya’s). Canberra: a County-class cruiser in service with the Australian Navy and sunk off Savo Island in 1942. Very fragile, but with guns that can hit hard. As her sister ships, Tier VI. Duquesne: a French treaty cruiser with basically no armor that will explode only when you see it. Maybe a YOLO cruiser or a sniper one at Tier V. Gotland: a Swedish hybrid cruiser with also not armor, nor good guns, and slow (28 knots). Could be reliant on her aircraft (similar to the Swordfish with HE bombs) and torpedoes. I’d slot her at Tier V. Tre Kronor: a post war Swedish cruiser with the same guns found on mid-tier Dutch cruisers, but with torpedoes. A decent Tier VI or VII. Averof: another armored cruiser with an outstanding history. Similar to Blücher, good guns, good armor, but slow. However, with not-so-mediocre AA. A good Tier IV, or a Tier V that would struggle (like Viribus Unitis). Houston: an American cruiser which was between the Pensacola and the Indianapolis (much closer to the latter) sunk alongside the Perth in 1942. A similar concept to the Indianapolis, but without the radar, a bit less range and worse AA at Tier VI. Ajax: a New Zealand Leander-class that fought against the Graf Spee in 1939. Similar to Leander (Tier VI), but with HE added. Admiral Scheer: the sister ship of Graf Spee that received some updates throughout the war (different superstructure, a clipper bow, more AA). Same speed, with a thinner armored belt. Like her sister, Tier VI. Quebec: a Fiji-class transferred to the Canadian Navy. Quite similar to Mysore (Tier VI), with torpedoes and HE added. Veinticinco de Mayo: an Argentinian heavy cruiser built in Italy armed with 6 190 mm guns, but light armor. Could be slotted at Tier V. Battleships Royal Oak: a Revenge-class sunk early on WW2 while anchored at Scapa Flow. A bit slower than QE, with slightly better armor an this particular one with torpedoes at the bow. Could be good at Tier VI, with the gyroscopic torpedoes of battlecruisers. Maybe sold alongside the U-47 (just kidding). Almirante Latorre: a Chilean battleship built in the UK, served with the Royal Navy and fought at Jutland, before being sold again to Chile. Good guns (10 14”), decent armor and not-so-mediocre AA (in her 1930’s configuration). Either at Tier V or VI. Erin: a battleship ordered by the Ottoman Navy but seized by the Royal Navy at the beginning of WW1. Similar to Iron Duke, but smaller and with pretty much no AA. A decent Tier V. Ersatz Monarch: basically, a bigger and better Viribus Unitis with bigger guns. Still, slow and with pretty much no AA. A better Tier V. No. 13 battleship: a project of a big battleship with 8 18” guns and better armor than previous Japanese designs. Seems like a bigger Nagato. I’d put it at Tier X (with a similar refit like Amagi or Kii), because there’s already a lot of Tier IX Japanese battleships. New Jersey: yes, another Iowa. Maybe taking a similar approach to the Massachusetts or Georgia (a brawler with precise secondaries), but that could still be able to snipe if necessary. Tier IX. Salamis: a cancelled Greek battleship (which by armor seems more like a battlecruiser) with 8 14” guns and lots of secondaries. A good Tier V. Seydlitz: a German battlecruiser based on the Moltke-class with improved armor and machinery. Was a big piñata at Jutland. Either Tier IV or V. Tosa: a Japanese battleship that was never completed with 10 410 mm guns. Similar to Amagi, but a bit slower. Either Tier VII or VIII. N3: a big, slow battleship with 9 18” guns. Also, ugly as hell. Preceded the Nelson-class design. A Tier IX fattleship. Arkhangelsk: oh yeah, Soviet bias. Like Royal Oak, a Revenge-class that was leased to the Soviet Navy. Like her sister ship (Tier VI), without the torpedoes, but with less mediocre AA and Stalin-guided shells. Pennsylvania: the sister ship of Arizona that survived Pearl Harbor. She was given a refit, on which she received better secondaries and AA. Still, very slow. Unlike California, she should sit at Tier VI. Spanish Littorio: yes, there was a plan for build a Littorio-class for Spain. If this come into fruition, please not another copy-paste of the Roma. At least with different secondaries at Tier VIII. Riachuelo: a Brazilian battleship project similar to the Queen Elizabeth and Revenge classes. Also at Tier VI. L20e a: a proposed German battleship that was intended to succeed the Bayern-class. Armed with 8 420 mm guns, but somewhat slow at 26 knots. An interesting Tier IX with a “what if..” update. Rivadavia: an Argentinian battleship built in the US. She carried 12 305 mm guns an had a speed of 22 knots. She served for quite a long time. Either Tier IV or V. Aircraft Carriers (I’m sorry. Please, don’t be mad) Akagi: a famous Japanese carrier with similar characteristics as Kaga, but a bit bigger and faster. An aircraft printer at Tier VIII. Wasp: a deviate of the Yorktown-class carrier with a smaller air group and no torpedo protection. Also, slower at 29 knots. Could be slotted at Tier VI. Sparviero: an ocean liner intended to be converted into a carrier for the Italian Navy. Never completed. It was supposed to carry a small air group, and be slow at 20 knots. Due to the aircraft carried (same as Aquila), I’d put it at Tier VI. Unryu: one of the last fleet carriers built and commissioned by the Japanese. It was similar to the Soryū and Hiryū. Fast, agile, but lightly armored. With a smaller air group, but with late war aircraft, could be a “balanced” Tier VIII. Shinano: the sister ship of Yamato converted into a support carrier that wasn’t completed when she was sunk by a submarine (how the turnarounds). Even though it was supposed to be a support carrier, I’ll see her as a broken Tier X with an absurdly large hangar. Europa: a gigantic ocean liner planned to be converted into a big carrier. I’d see her as a hybrid of Loewenhardt (same planes) with the sheer amount of planes of the Kaga, at Tier VIII. Karel Doorman: a sister ship of Colossus that was sold to the Dutch Navy in 1948. Could be a similar concept to the Saipan (Tier VIII with small air group but up tier aircraft with Dutch air strike). Glorious: a British aircraft carrier sunk by the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau in 1940. A similar CV to Ark Royal at the same tier, with different fighters and carpet bombers (only the Swordfish torpedo bombers). Elbe: a proposed conversion of a German ocean liner. With the same planes as Weser (Tier VI), but quite slower. Intrepid: I know the plans for uneven carriers removed during the CV rework. However, there can be an Essex-class with characteristics between Lexington and Midway at the same tier as the latter. Jun’yō: a small Japanese carrier that looks like a mini Taihō. With a decent amount of aircraft aboard, decent speed at 25.5 knots and no armor. Could be slotted at Tier VI. Joffre: a French carrier project that was cancelled when Germany invaded France in 1940. With similar characteristics as Béarn, but with updated planes and at Tier VIII. So, these are my proposals. I know there’s little possibility of one of these getting added into the game, but again, at least I can dream. Let me know what you think about. If you have other proposals, or anything else, feel free to write it below. Just be respectful, please. Thanks. Good luck and fair seas!
  5. In addition to everybody's favorite punching bags, CVs and subs, I wish to add my pet peeve: DD domination at the low- to mid-tiers. I play Tiers III-VI at the moment. I play Co-Op when I'm trying out new ships and getting used to them-- cruisers and BBs. I also play co-op for my T3-T5 BBs, because they're nothing but sacrificial lambs to CVs in Random, who search them out because they realize that T3-T5s BBs effectively have no AA, given that they date to WWI, where aircraft carriers had not yet evolved. So I either play co-op in the BBs, or I just disappear in the first 2 minutes of Random. Sophie's Choice, as it turns out However, in co-op, the seal clubbers with 1,000 Random games to their credit, take their DDs, speed in, launch half-a-dozen to 10 torps at a time PER SIDE, and eliminate the bot opposition before the BBs and the lower-tier cruisers can even fire a shot. There are games where I literally have not scored 2K damage because there is nothing left to shoot at! At T2, there isn't a cruiser available in the game that can compete with a DD. Shell damage is low, and you can't fire fast enough, so the only option that is available is to run away. Even at the middle tiers overpowered DDs are a problem. Tonight I played five T5-T6 games and was hard-pressed to get 20K damage in any of them. DDs sailed in, spitting torps out each side, and the rest of us in cruisers and BBs are left impotently firing a few guns at smoking hulks. Where's the sport? The skill? It may be all the rage amongst the instant gratification crowd, but I find this behavior greedy and inconsiderate. Yes, I could--and do--play Random. But when I'm still coming up to speed in a ship, it's difficult to learn it in Random and remain alive. Besides, that is not fair to one's Random teammates who are expecting you to pull your weight. And I've already discussed why I don't do Random in lower-tier BBs (it's pointless). This is supposed to be a game, an opportunity for enjoyment, but am increasingly frustrated, and I find that the only time I can play some of these ships is during a 2-hour period in my early evening, which represents the wee hours of the am in the Western US. The number of players is noticeably less, few seal clubbers, and I actually get a chance to shoot at something! This rant is a bit of a stream of consciousness, and not as cogent as I might like bc it's been a long day, and I'm typing after 5 terribly frustrating games. To summarize, there are several gameplay factors that I bring up that are problematic: CVs need to be shifted up 2 tiers. CVs don't belong playing with BBs and cruisers that do not have AA (they're helpless). Side note: the endless supply of aircraft doesn't help either. CVs should have a limited number of aircraft---like they did/do in real life, and when they're gone, they're gone. Subs: guided torpedoes? Whose genius was that? Once locked on, exactly how am I to evade guided torpedos? Or am I not; I am just to sit back and take it up the smokestack? DDs are ridiculously overpowered. Recommendations: 1. limit the number of DDs on a team; 2. no-DD games; 3. limit the torpedo inventory--like in real life; this would prevent Okhotniks from firing 60 torps in a game when there isn't even room on the tiny ship for 60 torpedoes. Sharpen the bots so the cruisers and BBs can actually hit DDs. Player DDs realize that they're untouchable, which is why they're so overaggressive.
  6. Draza_Mihailovic

    Italian Destroyer Containers?

    It's been quite awhile since the Italian Destroyer Containers were obtainable, during the Italian Destroyers Event. I was wondering when will the containers be added to the Armory and Premium Shop for purchase, so for the people who didn't complete their collection may do so? P.S. I understand that it states that the containers will be added to the game in a future update, but it just seems like it's taking much longer than the other containers that were tied to a newly released line of ships. For example, the German Battlecruiser Event's containers seemed to have been added to the shop after two patches post-event.
  7. I earned the Tier 4 from Prime. Boosted captain to 14 points. I had the Yolo Emilio and the other premium dd. The tier 4 I cannot make work, not at all. On the other hand, The tier 2 I got this morning is AMAZING..... WHY CAN'T THEY ALL BE THIS GOOD? 2 matches, average of 1819 exp, 58k and 6 kills.... Average... Please rethink the ROF...
  8. Hey Forums, Looking for some more opinions on the overall best pick for T8 premium DDs for Clan Battles and/or Ranked. I DD main, and my favorites so far are the Russian line (kiting gunboat) and American line (jack of all trades). I enjoy the Japaense torp line, but find them less influential in a win against skilled teams. European line I've only just gotten to T8 but they're a blast. Posts I've searched from current to over 2 years ago can't pick a winner it seems! Cossack is my current first pick, but Le Terrible, Kidd and Loyang all stand out as excellent choices. More opinions, and ideally comments talking about why it matches your playstyle would be great. I rarely get dubloons so need to make this purchase & coupon count. Thank you all!
  9. Is this ship good or if anyone can, can i have a playstyle description
  10. Michael_Gary_Scott


    DDG(X) Article by USNI News
  11. James_I_of_Great_Britain

    o Juruá e seus irmãos

    Uma boa noite para você que veio para cá. Nesse topico, eu vou discutir um pouco sobre o destroyer Pan Americano/brasileiro Tier VI Juruá. Aqui eu vou falar um pouco da sua historia e de seus navios irmãos e dar uma ideia geral de o que eles fizeram durante a Segunda Guerra Mundial. Em 1938, o Brasil encomendou 6 contra torpedeiros (destroyers) da então classe Juruá do Reino Unido como parte do Plano Naval para 1939, mas, com o inicio da Segunda Guerra, o Reino Unido se viu na necessidade de expandir seu numero de contra torpedeiros, e por conta disso, o Brasil decidiu construir em territorio nacional a classe Acre de contra torpedeiros, que foram construidos na Ilha das Cobras e possuiam o design inspirado na classe H de contra torpedeiros da Marinha Real e possuia equipamentos e armamentos americanos. Os 6 Contra Torpedeiros da Classe Juruá eram: Juruá, que depois virou HMS Harvester (H-19); Javary, que depois virou HMS Havant (H-32); Jutahy, que virou HMS Havelock (H-88); Juruena, que virou HMS Hesperus (H 57); Jaguaribe, que virou HMS Highlander (H-44); e por fim Jupurá, que virou HMS Hurricane (H-06). A principal diferença desses navios em relação as outras unidades da classe "H" construídas para a Marinha Real era o fato dos nossos navios terem um reparo de 4.7 pol. a menos que os navios ingleses, além de uma maior capacidade de armazenagem de cargas de profundidade ou minas e diferenças nos equipamentos e no arranjo interno. Vamos agora dar uma olhada na historia de cada navio. Juruá (HMS Harvester) Recebeu esse nome em homenagem a um rio na Amazônia. Sua construção foi encomendada em 1936 e sua construção foi completada em 29 de setembro de 1939 ,Com o inicio da 2ª Guerra Mundial, nenhum dos navios de sua classe foi entregue, sendo requisitados pelo Almirantado Britânico em 4 de setembro de 1939 e Juruá foi rebatizado como HMS Harvester. Durante a Guerra, Harvester participou de missões de bombardeio, escolta de comboio e combates contra submarinos alemães no Atlantico, Canal da Mancha e Mediterrâneo. Harvester foi afundado em 11 de março de 1943 pelo submarino alemão U-432 enquanto escoltava o comboio HX-228 que saia do canadá. Javary (HMS Havant) Recebeu esse nome em homenagem ao Rio Javary, um dos afluentes do Rio Solimões. Foi encomendado em 1936 e construção completada em 17 de julho de 1939 mas foi comprado pela Marinha Real e renomeado HMS Havant em 4 de setembro de 1939. Havant possui a carreira militar mais curta dentre os seus 6 navios irmãos, tendo sido afundado em 1° de julho de 1940 em Dunkerque para evitar ser capturado pelos alemães. Jutahy (HMS Havelock) Recebeu esse nome em homenagem ao Rio Jutahy, um dos afluentes do Rio Solimões. Foi encomendado em 1936 e sua construção foi completada em 16 de outubro de 1939 e requisitado em 4 de setembro pela inglaterra e rebatizado como HMS Havelock. Havenlock possui uma carreira relativamente tranquila e chegou a servir durante toda a Segunda Guerra. Alguns de seus feitos mais notaveis são: Capitania da escolta do grupo B5 e afundou o submarino alemão U 767 em junho de 1944. Harvester foi vendido para desmanche em 31 de outubro de 1946. Juruena (HMS Hesperus) Recebeu esse nome em homenagem ao rio homônimo no Mato Grosso que é tributário do Tapajós. O Juruena foi encomendado em 1936, teve sua quilha batida em 6 de julho de 1938 e foi lançado em 1º de agosto de 1939 e sendo requisitados pelo Almirantado Britânico em 4 de setembro de 1939. Foi incorporado como HMS Hesperus. Hesperus foi o navio que mais esteve em combate dentre seus outros 6 irmãos, alguns de seus feitos notáveis são: Em 1940, O Hesperus, era capitânia do Grupo de Escolta B2. Em 7 de dezembro de 1941, acompanhado do CT HMS Harvester - H 19, participou do afundamento do Submarino alemão U 208, do Oberleutenant Alfred Schlieper, a oeste de Gibraltar. Em 15 de janeiro de 1942 afundou o submarino alemão U-93, e em 26 de dezembro entrou em combate com o submarino U-357 enquanto escoltava o comboio HX-219, onde arremeteu o mesmo submarino junto cm HMS Vanessa. Afundou mais 2 submarinos em 1943. Em 26 de novembro de 1946 , foi vendido para desmanche a uma firma de Grangemouth. O seu último comandante foi o Capitão-de-Fragata (RN) Stockler, que levou o navio para Grangemouth. O Comandante Stockler, mais tarde Comodoro realizou as provas de mar das nossas Fragatas da classe Niterói. Jaguaribe (HMS Highlander) Recebeu esse nome em homenagem ao rio e a cidade homônima localizada no Ceará. Foi encomendado em 1936, teve sua quilha batida em 29 de setembro de 1938 e foi lançado em 17 de outubro de 1939 e requisitado em 4 de setembro de 1939 e rebatizado HMS Highlander. Highlander teve uma carreira com pouco combate, a maior parte de seu serviço foi como escolta de comboio. Um dos atos mais notaveis enquanto esteve em serviço foi em 1940. Em 13 e 14 de setembro, acompanhado dos HMS Harvester, HMS Bulldog e HMS Beagle, bombardeou Cherbourg, quando realizava uma varredura pela Baia do Sena e em 30 de outubro, acompanhado do CT HMS Harvester - H 19, participou do afundamento do Submarino alemão U 32, do Oberleutenant Hans Jenisch, a noroeste da Irlanda. Highlander foi vendido para desmanche em 27 de maio de 1946. Japurá (HMS Hurricane) Recebeu esse nome em homenagem ao rio homônimo que é afluente do Solimões. Foi encomendado em 1936, teve sua quilha batida em 3 de julho de 1938 sendo requisitados pelo Almirantado Britânico em 4 de setembro de 1939. Foi lançado em 29 de setembro de 1939. Foi incorporado como HMS Hurricane.Serviu com o 1º Grupo de Escoltas, escoltando os conjuntos OS-62/KMS-36, e apoiou a FT americana do Porta-Aviões de Escolta USS Card. Em 12 de julho de 1943, recolheu um oficial e cinco praças, sobreviventes da tripulação do submarino U 506, afundado por um avião de patrulha Liberator - B 24 operando a partir de Gibraltar e os transportou para Casablanca (Marrocos), onde foram desembarcados e transferidos para o CT canadense HMCS Iroquois, que depois levou os prisioneiros para Inglaterra e em 24 de dezembro, às 20:57hs, foi atingido por um Gnat do Submarino alemão U 415, sendo afundado a nordeste dos Açores foi afundado no Atlântico Norte pelo Submarino alemão U415.Em 27 de dezembro, o CT HMCS Montgomery - G.95 partiu de Halifax para as Ilhas Britânicas transportando os sobreviventes do HMS Hurricane.
  12. Dmarvin

    Z44 Torpedo Spammer

    Hello, I recently bought the Z44 for coal after deciding against the Pommern and Thunderer and do not regret the decision. The monster is a better torp boat than the Shima and I wish I had not passed on a discounted Benham during that event. I have a screen shot of captain skills, equipment, and a recent game. The games seem to be fairly consistent so long as I do not get jumped by a dd or radar. The torpedoes are reloading in 65 seconds before AR, go 71 knots, and seem to be hard to dodge with my current build. I am planning on getting expert marksman to help with the turret traverse, but it does not seem to be necessary. I am thinking the Shim needs a buff to help with consistency...
  13. Seems Wargaming has forgotten the Poor destroyer Leone again, though its no surprise as her development hell time is a sign to show, and as if the ship didnt suffer enough with super slow long arcs on her shells, painfully long reload times on her guns, only 4 torpedoes that are as useful as sea mines (though do reload quickly and have good range) The ship still completely lacks any means of attacking submerged submarines unlike all her Tier VI and even tier V destroyer counterparts! Thats right she cant even drop as little as the Duca D'Aosta with her 2 depth charges in her salvoes. the Leone has 0 means of engaging submarines aside from her guns. Can the Leone get anything? even just a 4km depth charge air strike? just something so she's not basically helpless against them would be appreciated, Cheers.
  14. BliNkingg

    Some REAL Pan-Asian blueprints

    I found some blueprints for submarines, destroyers, cruisers, and aircraft carriers designed by other countries for the Kuomintang. The National Archives of Taiwan opened these drawings for viewing at the beginning of this year. Submarine: Destroyer: Cruiser: Aircraft carrier: I also found a Thai light cruiser designed by Italy: Taksin-class light cruiser The current Pan-Asian cruiser branch, to be honest, is disappointing. :(
  15. The Panamerican Destroyer Tech-tree This proposal is the result of the cooperative work of our team: Fr05ty, @The_Dark_Stark, @COLDOWN, @BrunoSchezer and @Talleyrand. Our team believes that the Panamerican ships will be a great addition to the world of warships universe. They bring a distinctive style of ships and concepts not reflected by other lines which could be even more distinct if submarines make it into the game. There is a common misconception that we want to refute: that Panamerican ships are second hand vessels or copies of other navies’ ships. While there are several cases of second hand ships used by Panamerican navies, there are plenty of other ships that are unique to these navies. Our proposed line pays special attention to these unique ship classes and makes use of NO second hand vessels. It is supremely important that a line is cohesive and has a distinct playstyle instead of just being an agglomeration of ships whose only similarity to one another is the flag they carry. That means that the progression and the gameplay of the ships in the line must be similar. We considered it crucial to achieve a distinctive style of play the player can expect in any ship of the line. Luckily for us, South America, despite the variety of countries involved, followed very similar guidelines when designing, building and buying destroyers. Especially in the postwar period, the various nations opted for their ships to have an anti-submarine and anti-destroyer focus which resulted in ships with few torpedoes, a strong focus on gunnery, anti-submarine weapons and sonar, and finally anti-aircraft weaponry. This gives us the cohesion sought in the line and the particular "flavor" of it. A note regarding the torpedoes we’ve used for this proposal: All of the torpedoes were used in Panamerican navies, but in some cases we choose to equip the ship in question with different torpedoes than the ones she might’ve historically used. This is for balance purposes. Especially in low tier, modern torpedoes, even in small numbers, could wreak havoc in the enemy team. Moreover this helps avoid having strange jumps in the performance of the torpedoes along the line. We thought it to be better to use other Panamerican torps in some cases. Description This is a gun-focused line, with some torpedoes as an opportunistic weapon. The line starts with balanced ships in the lower tiers, but tier after tier they begin to be more heavily skewed towards their gunnery and having faster-firing guns to the detriment of their torpedo armament, which starting at Tier 6 becomes composed of a single set of torpedoes, but with fast-firing dual purpose guns. There is a smaller secondary line that will be shown at a later date. Panamerican Fleet Destroyers Flavour Latinoamerican destroyers have several defining features that should make them stand out: The higher the tier, the more specialized into gunboats they become Meant for ASW warfare Low amount of torpedoes, but long ranged Decent-to-great AA suite Below average speed Medium-caliber main battery Tier DDL Prem. DDL DDT Prem. DDT 1 2 Cordoba (Arg.) Maranhao (Brazil) 3 Serrano (Chile) Almirante Villar (Peru) 4 Huitzilopochtli (Mexico) Antioquia (Col.) 5 Mendoza (Arg.) Alm. Clemente (Ven.) Juruena (Brazil) Caldas (Col.) 6 Greenhalgh (Brazil) Acre (Brazil) Buenos Aires (Argentina) 7 Chubut (Arg.) Marcilio Dias (Brazil) 8 Nueva Esparta (Ven.) Garcia y Garcia (Peru) 9 Mato Grosso (Brazil) Alm. Riveros (Chile) / Cuitlahuac (Mexico) 10 20 de Julio (Col.) Tech-Tree Destroyers Cordoba class Destroyer (Argentina) (T2) A class of big destroyers ordered as part of the Argentine 1909 destroyer program. The design had a balanced armament and very good speed compared to its contemporaries of foreign navies. Survivability Displacement: 995t standard; 1,368 t full (7,950hp standard; 9,600hp full) Armour: - Weaponry Main Battery: 4x1 102mm/50 Bethlehem QF Mk9 guns Reload: 7.5s (8-12) AP Shell: 14.97kg @884m/s (1750 damage) HE Shell: 14.97kg @884m/s (1500 damage, 6% fire) Traverse: 11.5 degrees per second (15.7s per 180 degrees) Torpedo Battery: 4x1 533mm torpedoes Model: 533mm Whitehead Mk.I S AR. Warhead: 101kg (6432 damage, 100% flooding) Speed: 50kts @6.85km / 50kts @6km / 67kts @2km Reload: 5.3m (14s) AA Battery: 2x1 37mm/43 11/2pdr QF Vickers AA guns (dmg = dps @km, 100% acc) Mobility Speed: 35kts - 28,000hp Size: 90m long, 9m wide, 2.8m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Speed Boost Notes: Analysis The Cordoba is a large and versatile destroyer, with a balanced approach to warfare. It is quite fast, has a large hitpoint pool to tank some hits with it but pretty bad concealment. The torpedoes have good range for the tier, but pack a light punch and have a long reload to make it into a true torpedo boat, still they will be quite decent to shoot across passages, from behind island cover and while jousting. The guns themselves are good, if slow-firing, and have very good individual shell performance, punching hard and with a good chance to set fires. A perfectly adequate early destroyer, though poor concealment is also a feature. Serrano class Destroyer (Chile) (T3) A class of destroyers ordered for Chile in 1928. She had a lighter construction than her predecessor designs which made them difficult to operate in heavy seas, though she was faster and more powerfully armed. Survivability Displacement: 1,107t standard; 1,453t full (8,450hp standard; 10,000hp full) Armour: - Weaponry Main Battery: 3x1 120mm/45 QF Vickers-Armstrong Mk E guns Reload: 6s (7-10) AP Shell: 22kg @810m/s (2050 damage) HE Shell: 22kg @810m/s (1700 damage, 8% fire) Traverse: 10 degrees per second (18s per 180 degrees) Secondary Battery: 1x1 76mm/40 12pdr QF MkI/II gun Reload: 3.5s (18) HE Shell: 5.67kg @680m/s (1300 damage, 5% fire) Torpedo Battery: 2x3 533mm torpedoes Model: 533mm Simil M/10. Warhead: 150kg (8634 damage, 138% flooding) Speed: 50kts @6km / 58kts @4km / 62kts @2km Reload: 6.435m (57s) AA Battery: 1x1 76mm/40 12pdr QF MkI/II gun (1dmg = 4dps @3km, 100% acc), 3x1 20mm/70 Oerlikon Mk4 (9dmg = 31dps @2km, 95% acc) Mobility Speed: 35kts - 28,000hp Size: 91.4m long, 8.84m wide, 3.86m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Speed Boost Notes: A hull AA: 1x1 76mm/40 12pdr QF MkI/II gun (1dmg = 4dps @3km, 100% acc), 3x1 7.7mm/87 Machineguns (4dmg = 14dps @1.5km, 95% acc) Possible improvement to reload from guns to 5s to buff up DPM A torps: Model: 533mm Bliss-Leavitt Mk 8 Mod. 0 Warhead: 146kg (8462 damage, 134% flooding) Speed: 47kts @11.43km / 47kts @9.14km Reload: 6.3m (54s) Analysis The Serrano is yet another step in the line, still holding some balance between guns and torpedoes. The caliber of the guns has been increased, their individual performance has improved as well as their reload rate, and to skew the balance even more towards gunnery, you get a single 76mm gun as a secondary weapon (not that it will do much)! You now have more torpedoes and they have good range, though unspectacular characteristics otherwise. The large hitpoint pool of its predecessor is still there and the good speed remains, just like the poor concealment does. The Serrano might best be described as an opportunistic destroyer, using long ranged torpedoes, speed and fast-firing guns to ensure that it gets the upper hand in engagements. It is not as good as a torpedo destroyer, nor is it a DPM machine as most gunboats are, but any captain that can leverage its concealment to strike first will surely find success with it. Huitzilopochtli class Destroyer (Mexico) (T4) A class of destroyers offered to Mexico, it featured a good balance between gunnery, torpedoes and speed. They would’ve been the most powerful and modern vessels in the Mexican Navy’s register and were equipped to be successful in several mission profiles. Survivability Displacement: 1,350t standard; 1,800t full (9,550hp standard; 11,550hp full) Armour: - Weaponry Main Battery: 4x1 120mm/45 QF Vickers-Armstrong Mk E guns Reload: 6s (7-10) AP Shell: 22kg @850m/s (2100 damage) HE Shell: 22kg @850m/s (1700 damage, 8% fire) Traverse: 10 degrees per second (18s per 180 degrees) Secondary Battery: 1x1 76mm/50 Mk. 10 gun Reload: 3s (20) HE Shell: 5.9kg @823m/s (1100 damage, 4% fire) Torpedo Battery: 2x3 533mm torpedoes Model: 533mm Mark 15 Mod 0 Warhead: 224kg (11600 damage, 190% flooding) Speed: 47kts @13.7km / 54kts @9.15km / 65kts @5.5km Reload: 6.883m (72s) AA Battery: 1x1 76mm/50 Mk10 gun (1dmg = 4dps @3km, 100% acc), 2x1 40mm/39 2pdr QF Mk II (7dmg = 24dps @2.5km, 100% acc) ASW Battery: 1 Depth Charge Rack Barrage: 3 charges/rack Damage: Mark VI (3,600 damage, 20% flood) Mobility Speed: 35kts - 34,000hp Size: 96m long, 9.6m wide, 3.86m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Speed Boost Notes: Vickers for Mexico (315ft) design A torps: Model: 533mm Whitehead Mk.I L AR. Warhead: 150kg (8634 damage, 138% flooding) Speed: 50kts @11km / 50kts @9.9km / 70kts @1.82km Reload: 6.3m (54s) Analysis The Huitzilopochtli is a balanced destroyer and a solid upgrade over its predecessor. When looking at the Serrano, it gains an extra gun over its predecessor and it carries more powerful torpedoes, though at the cost of a longer reload time for them. The Huitzilopochtli is a big destroyer for its tier and that translates in it having the 2nd most hitpoints, but that same size characteristic means that it has poor concealment and the relatively slow speed of 35kts. The poor concealment and slow speed means that the Huitzilopochtli has to be very careful with its positioning as other destroyers will be able to keep you spotted for their team to take you down. The Huitzilopochtli has a decent, though not great, gun suite. It has middling DPM, but decent fire-setting potential and rather decent ballistics which means that you will have a decent performance against other destroyers at mid range, but it will struggle against the full gunboat destroyers with high DPM and poor ballistics. Ideally, the Huitzilopochtli will use the long range of its torpedoes to harass enemies before going in with guns blazing to take down other destroyers. The Huitzilopochtli is a decent and balanced destroyer with only its hitpoint pool being particularly noteworthy. Mendoza class Destroyer (Argentina) (T5) Commissioned in 1929 as part of the Argentine rearmament efforts. They had lengthy careers in the Argentine Navy, participating in numerous neutrality cruises and visits to foreign nations. They were quite powerfully armed for their size. Survivability Displacement: 1,570t standard; 2,120t full (10,550hp standard; 13,000hp full) Armour: - Weaponry Main Battery: 5x1 120mm/45 QF Vickers-Armstrong Mk E guns Reload: 6s (7-10) AP Shell: 22kg @850m/s (2100 damage) HE Shell: 22kg @850m/s (1700 damage, 8% fire) Traverse: 10 degrees per second (18s per 180 degrees) Torpedo Battery: 2x3 533mm torpedoes Model: 533mm MI1929-38 W250 AR. Warhead: 250kg (12630 damage, 207% flooding) Speed: 46kts @12km / 62kts @4km Reload: 78s AA Battery: 1x1 76mm/45 Vickers Mk SS gun (1dmg = 4dps @3km, 100% acc), 2x1 40mm/39 2pdr QF Mk II (10dmg = 35dps @2.5km, 100% acc) ASW Battery: 2 Depth Charge Throwers & 2 Depth Charge Racks Barrage: 3 charges/launcher & rack Damage: Arg. M.I 1928 (3,600 damage, 20% flood) Reload: 40s Mobility Speed: 36kts - 42,000hp Size: 102.1m long, 9.68m wide, 3.81m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Speed Boost Notes: A torps: Model: 533mm MI1925 SI. Warhead: 250kg (12630 damage, 207% flooding) Speed: 44kts @10km / 62kts @4km Analysis The Mendoza is the start of what is the pure gunboat part of the line. Where the Serrano is a light destroyer with good concealment, the Mendoza is a large destroyer with poor concealment. Boasting 5 rather powerful guns, the Mendoza is quite comfortable raining shells on enemies at mid range while also having long-ranged, but very slow, torpedoes. The Mendoza is a mid-range specialist, it will not hold up against a pure gunboat in a duel simply because of the DPM of its guns is not that high, but if you can keep at range where the guns can continuously land shots and you can dodge return fire to make your large slab of hitpoints last. The AA of this ship is terrible and will not do much, while the average speed means that you will have to think properly as to where you appear as you might not get out of trouble otherwise. Sleepy battleship players will dread to play against the Mendoza. Greenhalgh class Destroyer (Brazil) (T6) A set of three destroyers built in Brazil with heavy influence of the American Mahan class. This class endured numerous changes in their building stage to enhance their anti aircraft and anti submarine capabilities as were required by the Brazilian Navy. Survivability Displacement: 1,500t standard; 2,200t full (10,200hp standard; 13,350hp full) Armour: - Weaponry Main Battery: 4x1 127mm/38 Mk 12 DP guns Reload: 3.33s (12-15 / 18) AP Shell: 25kg @792m/s (2100 damage) HE Shell: 24.5kg @792m/s (1800 damage, 5% fire) Traverse: 15 degrees per second (12s per 180 degrees) Torpedo Battery: 1x4 533mm torpedoes Model: 533mm Mark X*. Warhead: 275kg (13557 damage, 223% flooding) Speed: 49kts @12km / 56kts @8km / 63kts @5km / 67kts @3km AA Battery: 4x1 127mm/38 Mk 12 DP guns (7dmg = 25dps @5.8km, 100% acc), 2x2 40mm/56 Bofors (12dmg = 41dps @3.5km, 100% acc), 4x1 20mm/70 Oerlikon Mk 4 (10dmg = 34dps @2km, 95% acc) ASW Battery: 4 Depth Charge Throwers, 2 Depth Charge Racks Barrage: 3 charges/launcher & rack Damage: Mk.VI (3,600 damage, 20% flood) Reload: 40 Mobility Speed: 36.5kts - 42,800hp Size: 108.8m long, 10.6m wide, 3.00m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Speed Boost Hydroacoustic Search Notes: A torps: Model: 533mm MI1929-38 W250 AR. Warhead: 250kg (12630 damage, 207% flooding) Speed: 46kts @12km / 62kts @4km Analysis The Greenhalgh is where the line finally gives in to being mid-range gunboats. The Greenhalgh has enviable DPM on its guns, though gunnery might not be as comfortable as before, and they will serve her well in most engagements. The lack of torpedoes, with a single quad torpedo launcher is somewhat compensated by having long-ranged and decently powerful torpedoes, but more than anything it is made up by the DPM of its guns and the power of its AA aura (not that it is going to be significant at this tier). Gunnery beyond mid-range is going to be uncomfortable as any player of US destroyers can attest to, so keep within mid-range and rain hell upon enemies, or hide behind an island and catapult shells to slow enemies with reckless abandon. The Greenhalgh is just a small, powerful gunboat that will do best if it manages to keep at range, tossing shells downrange and throwing torpedoes down corridors to deny areas from larger ships or just farming some damage sporadically. Chubut class Destroyer (Argentina) (T7) A powerful destroyer design for Argentina. The design borrowed heavily from the British Lightning class, but with important differences to suit the Argentine Navy. She featured a lighter torpedo armament to enhance anti aircraft and anti submarine weapons. Torpedoes were seen as fleet engagement weapons and the likelihood of a fleet engagement was seen as too low when compared to the likelihood of convoy protection and anti-submarine duties. Survivability Displacement: 2,705t standard; t full (15,600hp standard; hp full) Armour: - Weaponry Main Battery: 3x2 120mm/50 QF MK XI DP guns Reload: 5s (6-10 / 12 / 13.3) AP Shell: 28.12kg @774m/s (2200 damage) HE Shell: 28.12kg @774m/s (1700 damage, 9% fire) Traverse: 20 degrees per second (9s per 180 degrees) Torpedo Battery: 1x5 533mm torpedoes Model: 533mm MI1939 WH53 AR. Warhead: 278kg (13667 damage, 225% flooding) Speed: 50kts @12km / 57kts @8km / 70kts @4km AA Battery: 3x2 120mm/50 QF MK XI DP guns (8dmg = 28dps @5.2km, 100% acc), 2x2 40mm/56 Mk X (STAAG) AA guns (13dmg = 45dps @3.5km, 100% acc), 4x2 20mm/70 Oerlikon AA guns (32dmg = 110dps @2km, 95% acc) ASW Battery: 4 Depth Charge Throwers, 2 Depth Charge Racks Barrage: 3 charges/launcher & 6 charges/rack Damage: Mk.VI (3,600 damage, 20% flood) Reload: 40 Mobility Speed: 35kts - 58,000hp Size: 126.2m long, 12.95m wide, 4.14m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Speed Boost Hydroacoustic Search Notes: Thornycroft 1947 design https://www.deviantart.com/tzoli/art/Thornycroft-White-Yarrow-Destroyer-Design-1947-820084186 AA refit needed A torps: Model: 533mm Mark X*. Warhead: 275kg (13557 damage, 223% flooding) Speed: 49kts @12km / 56kts @8km / 63kts @5km / 67kts @3km Analysis The Chubut is a powerful slab of a destroyer with a large hitpoint pool, powerful guns with good DPM and excellent AA. There are drawbacks to this though, your concealment is very poor, you are also very slow and you only have a single torpedo launcher which still fires very slow torpedoes at long range. The guns themselves will feel comfortable up to mid-range, with the low initial velocity of the shells somewhat countered by the heavy shells used to ensure that landing shells on cruisers and even some destroyers is possible. These guns will not allow you to engage destroyers at range with impunity, in order to win duels you’ll have to close into short or medium range and take advantage of your large hitpoint pool to overwhelm enemies. Against larger surface combatants, the shells pack a punch and a good fire chance so you should be able to stack some fires and build up damage over time. Defensively, your low speed and poor concealment will prove to be issues when trying to dictate the terms of engagement against other destroyers, and even against some cruisers, so using consumables properly will be crucial to success. Your AA power is great, but that’s only compared to destroyers so don’t count on it much unless an enemy flies through a flak cloud. Overall, a really solid and chunky gunboat. Nueva Esparta class Destroyer (Venezuela) (T8) Class of destroyers built for Venezuela in England. Based in the British Daring and Jutland classes but with significant modifications to fit Venezuelan operational duties. They were air-conditioned to allow for comfortable service in the tropics while carrying an enhanced anti-aircraft suite and a reduced torpedo load. Survivability Displacement: 2,600t standard; 3,300t full (15,150hp standard; 18,300hp full) Armour: - Weaponry Main Battery: 3x2 114mm/45 Mk IV DP guns Reload: 3.5s (15-20) AP Shell: 25kg @746m/s (2100 damage) HE Shell: 24.95kg @746m/s (1700 damage, 8% fire) Traverse: 20 degrees per second (9s per 180 degrees) Torpedo Battery: 1x3 533mm torpedoes Model: 533mm MRU1930 MkIX. Warhead: 340kg (15877 damage, 265% flooding) Speed: 50kts @12.35km / 56kts @9.6km Reload: 80s AA Battery: 3x2 114mm/45 Mk IV DP guns (19dmg = 67dps @5.8km, 100% acc), 4x2 40mm/56 Bofors (24dmg = 82dps @3.5km, 100% acc), 4x2 40mm/56 STAAG Mk 2 Bofors (26dmg = 90dps @3.5km, 100% acc) ASW Battery: 2 Depth Charge Throwers, 2 Depth Charge Racks Barrage: 3 charges/launcher & 6 charges/rack Damage: Mk.VI (3,600 damage, 20% flood) Reload: 40 Mobility Speed: 34.5kts - 50,000hp Size: 122.5m long, 13.1m wide, 3.90m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Speed Boost Hydroacoustic Search Notes: A torps: Model: 533mm MRU1930 MkIX*. Warhead: 327kg (15423 damage, 257% flooding) Speed: 50kts @12.8km / 56kts @10.05km Analysis The Nueva Esparta is where the final shape of this destroyer line shows its head. The torpedoes take more and more of a backseat to the guns, and the guns keep improving. Their rate of fire is getting faster and faster, their DPM is increasing and the AA continues to improve. The Nueva Esparta will be comfortable going against almost any other destroyer in a duel at close and mid range solely due to the combination of hitpoints and high DPM. The Nueva Esparta can also close into disputed areas with smoke thanks to its hydroacoustic search consumable, though the big size of the Nueva Esparta means that concealment will be poor and it shouldn’t be used as the team’s primary scout, especially since it has a lower speed than many cruisers it will face. Enemies other than destroyers are sure to be bombarded by a hail of shells and constantly set on fire, luckily they will not have to worry too much about torpedoes since the Nueva Esparta only carries a single triple launcher of slow, long-range torpedoes. The AA continues to be among the best for a destroyer at its tier, but that is not much. Overall, if you can tame the guns, you’re going to enjoy the Nueva Esparta quite a lot and your enemies will dread you. Mato Grosso class Destroyer (Brazil) (T9) Proposed destroyer design for the Brazilian Navy. The design was offered with numerous different weapon configurations. The Brazilian Navy decided upon a similar loadout to the British Daring class, but they were never built due to Brazil wanting to pay in Pounds Sterling and the British demanding payment in dollars. Survivability Displacement: 2,750t standard; 3,500t full (15,850hp standard; 19,200hp full) Armour: - Weaponry Main Battery: 3x2 114mm/45 Mk V DP guns Reload: 3s (12-24) AP Shell: 25kg @746m/s (2100 damage) HE Shell: 24.95kg @746m/s (1700 damage, 8% fire) Traverse: 25 degrees per second (7.2s per 180 degrees) Torpedo Battery: 1x5 533mm torpedoes Model: 533mm MRU1930 MkIX**. Warhead: 365kg (16740 damage, 280% flooding) Speed: 55kts @13.7km / 61kts @10.05km Reload: 132s AA Battery: 3x2 114mm/45 Mk V DP guns (22dmg = 77dps @5.8km, 100% acc), 6x1 40mm/70 Bofors (75dmg = 258dps @3.5km, 100% acc) ASW Battery: SQUID ASW Mortar, 2 Depth Charge Racks Barrage: 3 charges/SQUID & rack Damage: Mk. VI & SQUID (3,600 damage, 20% flood) Reload: 40s Mobility Speed: 35kts - 60,000hp Size: 118.6m long, 13.1m wide, 3.90m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Speed Boost Hydroacoustic Search Notes: Original AA: 3x2 114mm/45 Mk V DP guns (22dmg = 77dps @5.8km, 100% acc), 6x1 40mm/56 Bofors (26dmg = 90dps @3.5km, 100% acc) A torps: Model: 533mm MRU1930 MkIX. Warhead: 340kg (15877 damage, 265% flooding) Speed: 50kts @12.35km / 56kts @9.6km Reload: 132s Analysis The Mato Grosso is a linear upgrade over the Nueva Esparta in every single respect. The guns fire faster, there are 2 extra torpedoes in the launcher, speed is a bit better, the AA is more powerful, you have more hitpoints and better concealment. Yet again, you’re a mid-range harasser capable of dueling any other destroyer and very few will be able to stand against you in such a contest. Against other ships, you’ll probably be reduced to spamming fire over islands and seeing the flames go up along with your damage numbers. While the long-ranged torpedoes are now a bit more viable, they are still just a secondary tool and your guns will be doing the heavy lifting. You can use them to flush out enemies hiding in smoke so they feel the wrath of your guns, or you can just charge into the smoke with hydroacoustic search on and destroy enemies as they panic. The Mato Grosso is not a scout, nor is it a sniper, it is at home in the 2nd line where it can dodge some fire as it no longer has a large hitpoint advantage over other destroyers so dodging becomes more important. Overall, a good tier 9 gunboat which should prove to be a challenging enemy for destroyers and a nuisance for larger ships. 20 de Julio class Destroyer (Colombia) (T10) These destroyers were based on the Swedish Halland class. The Colombian Navy modified the design prior and during construction to incorporate a third gun turret, but this came at the expense of a large part of the anti-aircraft, torpedo and anti-submarine suite as well as a reduction in speed. Survivability Displacement: 2,650t standard; 3,300t full (15,400hp standard; 18,300hp full) Armour: - Weaponry Main Battery: 3x2 120mm/50 M50 Bofors DP guns Reload: 2.2s (42-45) AP Shell: 23.5kg @825m/s (2100 damage) HE Shell: 23.5kg @825m/s (1750 damage, 8% fire) Traverse: 25 degrees per second (7.2s per 180 degrees) Torpedo Battery: 1x4 533mm torpedoes Model: 533mm Torped 61. Warhead: 300kg (14464 damage, 240% flooding) Speed: 70kts @15km / 60kts @20km Reload: 84s AA Battery: 3x2 120mm/50 M1950 DP guns (61dmg = 210dps @6km, 100% acc), 4x1 40mm/70 Bofors (50dmg = 175dps @3.5km, 100% acc) ASW Battery: 1x4 375mm M50 ASW Rocket Launchers Barrage: 4 charges/launcher Damage: M50 Rocket (2,000 damage, 11% flood) Reload: 40s Mobility Speed: 32kts - 55,000hp Size: 121.1m long, 12.4m wide, 4.70m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Speed Boost Hydroacoustic Search Notes: Alt torps: Model: 533mm Mark 17 Warhead: 399kg (17900 damage, 301% flooding) Speed: 50kts @16.5km / 66kts @12.5km Reload: 86s Analysis The 20 de Julio is the pinnacle of the Latinamerican destroyer gunboats. There is no subtlety with the 20 de Julio, the focus is on its guns and the guns steal the show with the torpedoes just being an afterthought. The 20 de Julio no longer has a large hitpoint pool compared to other destroyers, it has a meager set of torpedoes, the worst speed of a destroyer at tier 10 with just 32kts and a mediocre concealment, but what it does have is the highest DPM of any destroyer. The 20 de Julio has 3 twin 120mm turrets of the kind seen on the Halland, but where the Halland has 2 turrets, the 20 de Julio has 3. It pays for the extra turret with most of the other characteristics of the ship, but those guns can cause a nightmare for anybody downrange from them. Individually the shells aren’t spectacular, but the barrage of them that the 20 de Julio can put out overshadows any other destroyer where damage output is concerned. The 20 de Julio just needs someone to spot for it so it can let the guns roar with abandon and nothing downrange will feel safe; battleships will be constantly on fire, cruisers will be under constant threat and destroyers will be forced to turn tail and disengage unless they want to be sunk immediately. Not even aircraft carriers will be safe from the 20 de Julio as its AA firepower is powerful enough to inflict losses to squadrons attacking it. The true weakness of the 20 de Julio lies in its low speed and concealment, meaning that if it is caught in a bad situation, it cannot run away nor can it chase down those stealthy destroyers that keep it spotted; if it is spotted, it must fight or die. There is little subtlety about the 20 de Julio, but who needs subtlety when you spew shells at an unmatched rate? ASW added - note: The 20 de Julio features lighter ASW armament compared to its predecessors (something had to give way for the incredible firepower), however it can be aimed and thus should compensate the lack of explosives with improved accuracy. Premium Destroyers Almirante Clemente Destroyer (Venezuela) (T5 Premium) A class of light destroyers built in Italy for Venezuela in the context of an ambitious Venezuelan fleet plan. They featured several interesting features such as being fully air conditioned, alumite construction and fin stabilizers to ensure a stable gunnery platform in rough seas. Survivability Displacement: 1,300t standard; 1,500t full (9,300hp standard; 10,200hp full) Armour: - Weaponry Main Battery: 2x2 102mm/45 Mk19 guns Reload: 3s (15-20) AP Shell: 17.35kg @811m/s (1800 damage) HE Shell: 15.88kg @811m/s (1500 damage, 6% fire) Traverse: 20 degrees per second (9s per 180 degrees) Torpedo Battery: 1x3 533mm torpedoes Model: 533mm Mark 15 Mod 0 Warhead: 224kg (11600 damage, 190% flooding) Speed: 54kts @9.15km Reload: 66s AA Battery: 2x2 102mm/45 Mk19 DP guns (dmg = 28dps @5.8km, 100% acc), 2x2 40mm/56 Bofors MkI guns (dmg = 41dps @3.5km, 100% acc), 4x2 20mm/70 Oerlikon guns (dmg = 49dps @2km, 95% acc) ASW Battery: 2x Hedgehog ASWRL, 4 Depth Charge Throwers, 2 Depth Charge Racks Barrage: 24 charges/launcher, 3 charges/thrower & rack Damage: Hedgehog (1,500 damage, 8% flood) & Mk.VI (3,600 damage, 20% flood) Reload: 40s Mobility Speed: 34kts - 24,000hp Size: 99.1m long, 10.8m wide, 3.4m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Speed Boost Hydroacoustic search Notes: Analysis The Almirante Clemente is a light and fragile gunboat that trades out its hitpoints, speed and torpedoes for absolutely blistering firepower. The Almirante Clemente is one of the slowest destroyers at its tier with a speed of 34kts, which combined with its small hitpoint pool of 10200 means that making use of concealment and choosing when to engage are crucial to survival. Once the Almirante Clemente chooses to engage though, provided it can reliably land its shells, it can cause large amounts of damage in a short period of time thanks to its best-in-class DPM. The guns themselves are rather small, being only 102mm and their ballistics are nothing to write home about, but the sheer amount of shells that the Clemente can output means that stacking fires against cruisers and battleships or knife-fighting other destroyers is a viable choice. Notice must be given to the Clemente’s consumables as the presence of Hydroacoustic Search combined with smoke and its gunpowder means that it is adept at pushing into enemy smoke or at firing on enemies from its own smoke making it excellent at dislodging enemy destroyers from crucial parts of the map. I haven’t touched much on the torpedoes of the Clemente and that is due to the fact that it only has a single triple launcher which makes it the worst torpedo boat at its tier, and while the torpedoes themselves are long-ranged and have a decent punch, they will be hard to land as they’re so few in number and thus can’t be staggered to fool enemies. Lastly, the Clemente has excellent AA for a destroyer, though as we all know that doesn’t mean much. The Clemente will manage to take down a few planes from lower-tiered aircraft carriers, but do not expect it to stop a strike on you. Overall, the Clemente is a solid gunboat that can cause a lot of havoc if it stays at range and avoids incoming fire. Amazonas Destroyer (Brazil) (T6 Premium) Lead ship in a series of destroyers named after prominent rivers built by the Brazilian Navy combining both British and American design features. They had a lengthy construction period and suffered numerous modifications while being built. Survivability Displacement: 1,516t standard; 2,102t full (10,300hp standard; 12,900hp full) Armour: - Weaponry Main Battery: 4x1 127mm/38 Mk30/21 guns Reload: 3.5s (15-20) AP Shell: 25kg @792m/s (2100 damage) HE Shell: 24.5kg @792m/s (1800 damage, 5% fire) Traverse: 15 degrees per second (12s per 180 degrees) Torpedo Battery: 2x3 533mm torpedoes Model: Mark 15 Warhead: 373kg (16633 damage, 279% flooding) Speed: 65kts @4.5km / 54kts @8.2km / 47kts @12.8km Reload: 73s AA Battery: 4x1 127mm/38 Mk30/21 DP guns (dmg = 25dps @5.8km, 100% acc), 1x2 40mm/56 Bofors MkI guns (dmg = 24dps @3.5km, 100% acc), 4x1 20mm/70 Oerlikon guns (dmg = 46dps @2km, 95% acc) ASW Battery: 2 Depth Charge Throwers, 2 Depth Charge Racks Barrage: 3 charges/launcher & rack Damage: Mk.VI (3,600 damage, 20% flood) Reload: 40 Mobility Speed: 36kts - 45,000hp Size: 98.5m long, 10.7m wide, 3.3m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Speed Boost Hydroacoustic search Notes: Analysis The Amazonas is a perfect opportunity for another premium like Texas, only instead of proceeds helping to preserve a museum ship, it’s a chance to get money for environmental work in the Amazon and give the Brazilian community a much-deserved premium. The Amazonas is a more generalist destroyer than the main tech-tree line is. It still carried fearsome guns, but it is a lot more balanced in regards to its other armament as it carries two triple torpedo tube launchers, but only one can be fired per broadside. The Amazonas has the 4th best guns for a ship at its tier, however it is also one of the flimsier destroyers at its tier so a balance of when and what to engage must be found to ensure that you survive encounters. There are however ways to leverage this gunpower without exposing one too much to retribution; the use of the famous 5”/38 guns from the US navy means that shell ballistics are rather poor and that is an advantage of sorts as it allows for firing from safety behind islands. The use of Hydroacoustic Search and Smoke Generator can also allow it to fire from safety from smoke and even allow it to shove out other destroyers from their own smoke. The Amazonas has average speed, anti-aircraft firepower and poor hitpoints so staying hidden is key to making the most out of the ship as that means you can be active throughout the whole battle, luckily, the Amazonas has tools that allow it to fight back even from hiding, as the torpedoes it carries have quite a heavy punch and reach out well beyond the Amazonas’ spotting range. The use of torpedoes gives the Amazonas a new vector with which to hit larger enemy ships without exposing itself and without having to shoot at an enemy for an extended period of time. Overall, the Amazonas has the chance to strike against all enemies and be relatively successful in such endeavours, your only issues of contention will be the small hitpoint pool and the presence of only two triple torpedo launchers, but it is a solid tier 6 destroyer. García y García Destroyer (Peru) (T8 Premium) The lead ship of the Holland class, she was bought by the Peruvian Navy in 1978. While in Peruvian Navy service, she served alongside the other former Dutch Navy ships of the De Zeven Provincien class. Survivability Displacement: 2,215t standard; 2,765t full (13,400hp standard; 15,900hp full) Armour: - Weaponry Main Battery: 2x2 120mm/50 Bofors No.10 guns Reload: 2.2s (42-45) AP Shell: 23.5kg @825m/s (2100 damage) HE Shell: 23.5kg @825m/s (1750 damage, 8% fire) Traverse: 25 degrees per second (7.2s per 180 degrees) AA Battery: 2x2 120mm/50 Bofors No.10 DP guns (40dmg = 138dps @6km, 100% acc), 1x1 40mm/70 Bofors (12dmg = 41dps @3.5km, 100% acc) ASW Battery: 2x4 375mm Bofors ASWRL, 2 Depth Charge Racks Barrage: 4 charges/launcher, 3 charges/rack Damage: M50 rocket (2,000 damage, 11% flood) & Mk.VI charges (3,600 damage, 20% flood) Reload: 40s Mobility Speed: 32kts - 45,000hp Size: 113.1m long, 11.4m wide, 5.1m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Speed Boost Hydroacoustic search Notes: Analysis The Garcia y Garcia is probably best compared to the Friesland as it was its predecessor class, and the Friesland is an improvement in most regards compared to the Garcia y Garcia. The Garcia y Garcia is a gunboat and only a gunboat, with a complete lack of subtlety of purpose. Where the Friesland has a few tools at its disposal, the Garcia y Garcia has put all of its eggs in the gun basket; it is the slowest destroyer at its tier (and a fair bit slower than many cruisers) at 32kts, it has a poor hitpoint pool and a decent, though not great, anti-aircraft battery with lots of flak clouds. The guns however make it worth all those sacrifices, as anybody who’s played with the Friesland can attest to. The Garcia y Garcia carries only two twin turrets with 120mm guns, but these guns are the same ones that the Friesland uses and that means overwhelming firepower at your disposal. There are few destroyers with the firepower necessary to beat you back in a gunnery duel and even larger ships will suffer if they’re downrange from your guns; either from your AP against their extremities or by setting them on fire with your HE. The Garcia y Garcia is a menace against any enemy ship, provided that it can dodge or hide from the enemy’s return fire. Be aware that its low speed and lack of radar means that it is a distinctive possibility to be perma-spotted by enemies and due to the low speed, it can leave you with no way to get out of that situation; on the other hand, your hydroacoustic search means that you can go into smoke and wreck whatever enemies you may find in there. Essentially, you’re playing a Friesland-lite, sacrificing a lot just to keep the guns. Almirante Riveros Destroyer (Chile) (T9 Premium) An innovative destroyer class built for the Chilean Navy. They were equipped with a brand-new class of automatic fast-firing dual-purpose guns, Dutch and English electronics and fully air-conditioned. Survivability Displacement: 2,774t standard; 3,353t full (15,950hp standard; 18,550hp full) Armour: - Weaponry Main Battery: 4x1 102mm/62 Vickers Mk Q guns Reload: 1.5s (40-50) AP Shell: 14.5kg @900m/s (1750 damage) HE Shell: 14.5kg @900m/s (1500 damage, 6% fire) Traverse: 25 degrees per second (7.2s per 180 degrees) Torpedo Battery: 1x5 533mm torpedoes Model: 533mm Mark 17 Warhead: 399kg (17900 damage, 301% flooding) Speed: 50kts @16.5km / 66kts @12.5km AA Battery: 4x1 102mm/62 Vickers Mk Q DP guns (dmg = dps @km, 100% acc), 6x1 40mm/70 Bofors (75dmg = 258dps @3.5km, 100% acc) ASW Battery: 2x3 305mm Squid Mk 4 ASWRL Barrage: 3 charges/SQUID Damage: SQUID (3,600 damage, 20% flood) Reload: 40s Mobility Speed: 34.5kts - 54,000hp Size: 122.5m long, 13.1m wide, 4m deep Consumables Standard Damage Control Party Smoke Generator / Surveillance Radar Speed Boost Hydroacoustic Search Notes: Guessed HE shell performance Analysis The Almirante Riveros is the Pan-American reply to the Friesland and Kitakaze, but with key differences. The Riveros has 4 guns as the Friesland does, but they are significantly weaker individually as they are 102mm guns instead of 120mm ones. The Riveros also carries a single quintuple torpedo launcher which gives it a bit more flexibility than the Friesland, but that is still fewer torpedoes than the Kitakaze, and weaker ones at that. So far, it might seem like the Riveros is a discount Kitakaze or a discount Friesland, but it is not quite so. The Riveros is slower than any other destroyer at its tier, except for the Jutland which is 0.5kts slower, and it only has above-average hitpoints, however it carries an excellent consumable suite to prepare itself either as a gunboat to hide in smoke or as a destroyer hunter. The combination of its guns, with the 2nd best DPM of destroyers at its tier, along with the possibility of mounting Surveillance Radar and Hydroacoustic Search means that you’re well positioned to push enemy destroyers from smoke and that any destroyer which keeps you spotted is at risk of being counter-spotted by your radar. The daunting firepower of the Riveros has some issues against larger ships as the 102mm guns will have trouble penetrating battleship and cruiser plating without some help such as IFHE, but this reduces the fires caused drastically. The Riveros can’t even claim to flee from such enemies easily as many cruisers (and even some battleships) are even faster than it is, and if you choose to use the Surveillance Radar that means that you don’t get smoke to protect yourself; aircraft might suffer a few losses as it has the 3rd best AA for a destroyer at tier 9. Overall, the Riveros can work as an excellent destroyer hunter, a firebug against other ships and an area denial ship thanks to radar and its small set of torpedoes; it’s a great tier 9 destroyer.
  16. LittleWhiteMouse

    Premium Ship Review - Fen Yang

    o The following is a review of Fen Yang, the tier VIII premium Pan Asian destroyer. This ship was provided to me by Wargaming for review purposes at no cost to myself. To the best of my knowledge, the statistics discussed in this review are current as of patch 0.10.0. Please be aware that her performance may change in the future. Quick Summary: An Akizuki-class destroyer with improved AP shells instead of improved HE shells commonly found on the Akizuki-class. She has weird, battleship & carrier-only deep-water torpedoes. Finally, she comes with a Defensive AA Fire consumable. PROS Large, 19,700 hit point pool. Improved auto-ricochet angles on her AP shells. Good fire setting ability. Comfortable gun fire arcs and nice gun handling. Good anti-aircraft firepower defence for a destroyer. Her Smoke Generator has two additional charges. Access to the Defensive AA Fire consumable. Suck it, duckies! CONS Shockingly slow 5.2 second main battery reload. Only has 17mm of HE penetration, making her unable to directly damage tier VIII+ destroyer hulls and battleship superstructures. Her guns are VERY skill hungry. Single torpedo launcher (with crappy fire angles) that can only damage carriers and battleships. Slow and clumsy. Large surface detection range. Horrible premium for training Pan Asian captains. Overview Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / CHALLENGING / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / HIGH / Extreme Fen Yang presents too many challenges to make her a comfortable ride for novice players. Her ammunition is temperamental. Her concealment sucks. She's slow. She has only a single torpedo launcher. She's very reliant on a 'proper' skill build to pad her strengths and mitigate weaknesses. Her saving grace is that she has a nice consumable suite to help correct some of these deficiencies, but even they require some knowledge to make them effective. New players beware. Fen Yang's gameplay largely revolves around being an angry smoke cloud and spitting hot death at anything that comes within range. Expert players will be rewarded with smart ammunition choices, making bold plays to get torpedo angles on targets and knowing which destroyers they can out gun. Options Consumables Fen Yang comes stocked with a glut of consumables. Her Damage Control Party is standard for a destroyer with unlimited charges, a 5 second active period and a 40 second cooldown. Fen Yang uses a standard Pan Asian Smoke Generator, identical to the ones found on Siliwangi and Hsienyang also at tier VIII. It comes with a 30 second emission time, 100 second reset timer and each cloud of smoke lasting 70 seconds. She has five charges to start. Her Engine Boost consumable is also standard for a destroyer, providing an 8% boost to engine speed for 120 seconds with a 120 second reset timer. It starts with three charges. Next up we have her Torpedo Reload Booster. When activated, it reloads her torpedoes in 5 seconds. It has a 160 second reset timer and starts with three charges. Finally, she has access to the Defensive AA Fire consumable. When activated, it provides an X increase to sustained DPS and Y increase to flak explosion damage for 40 seconds. It has four charges to start and an 80 second reset timer. Upgrades As far as upgrades go, there's not a whole lot of choice to worry about here. Main Armaments Modification 1 is optimal in your first slot. If you want to stem the tide of Fun and Engaging™ mechanics, then take Magazine Modification 1 instead if you don't want to dip into your supply of Juliet Charlie signals to mitigate detonations. The special upgrade Engine Boost Modification 1 is the best choice in slot two if you can afford it. It will set you back 17,000 from the Armory. If you cannot, default to Engine Room Protection. Aiming System Modification 1 is the only upgrade worth considering in slot three, and that's not saying much. Fen Yang loves camping smoke, so Propulsion Modification 1 is the best choice here for the extra pep in her engines when moving from a dead-stop. You can take Steering Gears Modification 1 instead if you prefer a more open-water play-style but it's the lesser choice. Finally, and perhaps to no one's surprise, Concealment System Modification 1 is still the best (and overpowered) option in her fifth slot. Don't even look at the other options. Skills You have to decide how often you're going to reach for Fen Yang's AP rounds before you settle on a commander's skill build. The primary difference will be if you decide to invest in Inertial Fuse for HE Shells or not. Generally speaking, IFHE will yield better numbers overall and it makes the ship much easier to play. But for the connoisseur, being all snooty and tossing mostly AP will necessitate a different build. Your core build for destroyers has changed with Priority Target no longer being a 1pt skill. Most of the tier I skills are pretty situational, but you can default to a "safe" (but not quite optimized) 10 points that look like this: Start with Preventative Maintenance. Take Last Stand. Next comes Survivability Expert. Finish it off with Concealment Expert. From here you have 11 points to spend. The default, no-brainer build is: Inertial Fuse for HE Shells Main Battery & AA Specialist Extra-Heavy AP Shells This gives a comfortable mix of improved HE penetration, better AP shells, and improved main battery DPM, allowing her to engage all targets she comes across with her guns. This leaves three skill points to be spent how you wish. Superintendent is the obvious choice, giving her an extra charge of all of her consumables. Adrenaline Rush is useful for propping up her low DPM. However, I found myself instead reaching for Priority Target (I love this skill too much) and Consumables Specialist. Alternatively, you could drop Inertial Fuse for HE Shells and take Pyrotechnician. This would give you four points to spend which could be put towards extra range (Main Battery & AA Expert) or increased rate of fire while spotted (Fearless Brawler). It is early yet in the 0.10 patch cycle, though. I am sure my preferences on skills will evolve as we all get more comfortable with the new skill system. This was the build I settled upon as being most comfortable (and ultimately brainless) for playing Fen Yang. This is a very specific build for this ship providing little overlap with other Pan Asian DDs, greatly limiting this ship's effectiveness as a tech-tree commander trainer. Camouflage Fen Yang has two camouflage option. The first is the standard Type 10 Camouflage. There is also the Lunar New Year - Fen Yang camouflage as a cosmetic option (which I like because it glows). Both versions provide the identical bonuses of: A 3% reduction in surface detection ranges. A 4% increase to the dispersion of enemy gunfire. A 10% reduction to post-battle service costs. A 50% increase to experience earned. It may not be realistic or historical but her Lunar New Year camo sure is pretty. Firepower Main Battery: Eight 100mm/65 guns in 4x2 turrets in an A-B-X-Y superfiring configuration. Torpedoes: Four tubes in a 1x4 launcher mounted on the centre-line. All four of Fen Yang's A & B gun turrets can fire 31º off her stern and her X & Y turrets can fire 30º off her bow. This is pretty good. You could be forgiven for imagining this ship providing you with hawt, ducky-action. Sadly, Fen Yang does not duplicate Akizuki's cork-screwing gunnery ability. Fen Yang may be an Akizuki-class destroyer but she does not replicate Akizuki's gunnery. I will say this again so it's crystal clear: FEN YANG DOES NOT HAVE AKIZUKI'S GUNNERY She has a 5.2 second reload, NOT 3 seconds like Akizuki She has 17mm of HE penetration, NOT 30mm like Akizuki In fact, other than gun handling, Fen Yang's main battery performance is a complete departure from Miss Ducky. DPM numbers can be terribly misleading as they don't account for things like accuracy, penetration and ricochet mechanics. Always take such numbers in context and with all of the facts possible. High Explosive Let Down Down the rabbit-hole we go. Starting us off, Fen Yang's HE shells are a far-cry from those of Akizuki. This is, in part, to compensate for her sloppy reload time, giving her a bigger punch and better fire starting on a per-shell basis. While these individual hits are bigger (and fierier -- I can't believe that's an actual word) she does not hold a candle to Akizuki's damage-per-minute or fire setting ability once you factor in the differences in their reload. Fen Yang's HE damage output is comparable to (in more than one way) to HMS Lightning, the tier VIII British destroyer. Her fire setting is better, but we'll get to that. Overall, her raw numbers aren't terrible but for a ship-class that's known to be a potent gunship this represents an enormous performance gap. Of course, with Fen Yang, her HE deficit goes beyond just raw DPM numbers. While her slow reload isn't enough to damn her HE performance, the lack of penetration on her HE shells certainly does. At 17mm, Fen Yang cannot directly damage the hulls of other tier VIII+ destroyers nor the superstructures of tier VIII+ battleships. The shells will simply shatter. While taking Inertial Fuse for HE Shells helps, bumping her penetration up to 21mm this comes at the further expense of the only thing really good about her HE rounds which is that respectable fire setting. So just to make her useful with her HE rounds against all targets, she has to kill the one thing she has going for her. To make this worse, Fen Yang's boosted 21mm of penetration is a far cry from Akizuki's 30mm of base value, to say nothing of the 37mm she accomplishes with IFHE. In short, while Akizuki's HE shells are ubiquitous, capable of comfortably damaging just about any opponent she comes across, Fen Yang's HE shells barely pass muster. Unmodified, use them to engage lower-tiered destroyers and light cruisers. You can also have them set fires on battleships, just be aware that they will not be doing much direct damage. Fen Yang's HE shells are incredibly situational and only get promoted to "meh" with a lot of skill points spent. For those who only speak Angry YouTuber: "They're useless." Note that there are two versions of Le Fantasque and Le Terrible. Those marked with an asterix (*) are using their Main Battery Reload Booster for 15 seconds of 60 seconds. Fen Yang has some very respectable fire setting potential, especially when fully gussied up for the role. Of course, this precludes her from stacking direct damage with her shells, so the trade off isn't a good one. Taking IFHE drops her fire setting to about 6.5 fires per minute, assuming you take all of the other buffs described here. Maybe AP Can Save Her! Fen Yang is designed instead to be an AP spammer. Dust off your shiny, new Extra-Heavy AP Shell skill, because here we go. With all of the problems plaguing her HE shells, Fen Yang's AP shells are a breath of fresh air. Like her HE rounds, they have improved damage performance over those found on Akizuki's. Again, the deficit in reload times means that even with this improved damage-per-hit, she cannot rival the overall damage output of the Japanese ducky-bote, assuming every shot hit and did damage. However, this gap narrows considerably with Fen Yang's improved auto-ricochet angles. Akizuki's AP shells have a chance to begin ricocheting at 45º and automatically fail this check at 60º or more. Fen Yang has the same angles found on "American Piercing" AP rounds found on their heavy cruisers, with ricochet checks not beginning until 60º with the automatic failure occurring at 67.5º. Her AP shells are thus less likely to slide off her target if they hit at a sharp angle which can (but doesn't necessarily guarantee) better performance in fighting scenarios. The extra damage and improved auto-ricochet angles are nice, but they do not make Fen Yang's AP rounds a universal shell. They still require a minimum of 17mm worth of steel to arm their fuses or they will over-penetrate and deal minimal damage. This precludes them from being effective against the broadside of lower-tiered light cruisers and destroyer hulls, along with the superstructures of lower-tiered battleships. Such targets need to be angled at a minimum of 20º for the relative thickness of the steel to be great enough for Fen Yang's AP fuses to arm. Against such opponents, she must reach for her HE shells. Finally, there's her raw penetration to consider. As high-velocity as Fen Yang's 100mm rounds are, their Krupp value is poor leading to lower penetration values. This means it's just one more think to keep track of when engaging targets; knowing which ones are vulnerable to AP and which are vulnerable to HE. Finally, as good as her auto-ricochet angles are, a target coming in too steeply will automatically bounce everything you throw at her. Without HE to fall back upon, Fen Yang simply cannot damage those targets. This is made worse by the specific ineffectiveness of her torpedoes which we'll get into. So while Fen Yang's AP shells are more use than on your typical destroyer, they are not without the usual problems facing lolibote pea-shooters. Fen Yang's torpedo arcs are pretty bad, only able to hit targets 55º off her bow or 63º off her stern, necessitating her giving her full broadside to launch. Feels and Fish Ignoring all other comparisons, Fen Yang's gunnery is barely adequate right out of the box. The inability of a main battery gun at tier VIII being unable to penetrate 19mm worth of steel without IFHE is inexcusable. The improvements made to her shells, both AP and HE do not make up for this deficit and she's an uncomfortable gunnery platform as a result. Wargaming is clearly trying to minimize the number (or effectiveness) of angry smoke clouds dispensing hailstorms of bullets. Honestly, I would have preferred losing access to a Smoke Generator in order to keep that vaunted 3 second reload of the Akizuki-class. Oh well. You can (and probably should) spend a lot of commander skill points to improve their performance. Extra-Heavy AP Shells is one such investment. Inertial Fuse for HE Shells, Main Battery & AA Specialist, and Adrenaline Rush are all but must haves. And let's not forget Main Battery & AA Expert, Pyrotechnician and even Fearless Brawler being capable investments too. It's far too easy to break the bank on skill combinations here and I profess having not found one with which I was 100% comfortable. Can Fen Yang's guns work? Sure. Is she a powerful gunship? Meh. She's far from optimized and she doesn't fill a niche that was lacking in any regard. What you have here is a worse ducky-bote. This leaves a lot of heavy lifting to be performed by her torpedo launchers. As you can guess, with but a single launcher, this is a pretty tall order, but Wargaming went on to decide this wasn't good enough and Fen Yang had to experience torpedo hard-mode. Her fish are the deepwater type but what's more, they're incapable of hitting not only destroyers but cruisers too. I say again: FEN YANG'S TORPEDOES CAN ONLY HIT BATTLESHIPS & CARRIERS. Hooray! (Please note the sarcasm). It almost makes you wish she didn't have them at all so her guns could be a little better. So not only does Fen Yang have selective targeting on her HE rounds, her torpedoes do too! If you get charged by a cruiser or other destroyer, fighting your way out is really, REALLY challenging. Summary Fen Yang's weapons are best described as "not good". Her guns demand a huge investment in skill points to bring them up to speed, making her a very poor commander trainer for your other Pan Asian destroyer captains. With the right upgrades & skills, she's a gunship worth respecting but she can never be the fearsome "do not touch!" threat a full-health Akizuki presents. Fen Yang's weapon systems are just too fussy to ever be endearing. Even Asashio's limited arsenal is more compelling -- at least she does one thing stupidly well. Fen Yang's weapons are very middle-of-the-road, at least once you get around to souping them up. But right out of the box? Hard pass. Blech. VERDICT: Her guns aren't good until you invest pretty deeply with commander skills. Her torps are never good unless a battleship is being an absolute moron. Durability Hit Points: 19,700 Minimum Bow & Deck Armour: 19mm It's not terrible! There's not a lot to go over here. Fen Yang has a nice chunk of hit points for a tier VIII destroyer. That's good. It's not excellent, though. She doesn't have improved armour beyond the 19mm base structural plate. Furthermore, she lacks a Repair Party consumable to recover health which becomes increasingly commonplace among destroyers at higher tiers. Thus, while she is setup to trade health at an advantage against many opponents, her durability isn't idiot-proof. Spending her hit points recklessly will greatly compromise her effectiveness. It's worth keeping her main battery DPM deficit in mind when going toe to toe with other gunships. Watch their health. Watch your health. If you start shattering HE rounds or ricocheting AP shells, even with a head start on HP, you can still lose. VERDICT: Pretty good. Heals would be nice, but I can't say bad things about her here. Agility Top Speed: 33 knots Turning Radius: 730m Rudder Shift Time: 4.5s 4/4 Engine Speed Rate of Turn: 5.9º/s Fen Yang sucks absolute monkey butts here. She is not only slow for a destroyer, she handles more like a chubby cruiser. That's pretty damning. If you split hairs, she has better energy preservation and thus a better rate of turn than Akizuki, but you'd never know it from day to day play. Treating Fen Yang like a destroyer will get you killed. Propulsion Modification 1 is a must-have if you intend to stay in smoke for any duration, with the acceleration needed to help avoid inevitable washes of torpedoes sent to scrub you out of cover. Her Engine Boost consumable is best used for emergencies -- for dodging fish or trying to control engagement distances when an enemy you can't fight gets too close. She's too fat of a destroyer (and a gunship besides) for Swift in Silence to be a reasonable investment, which is a shame given that she could really use the extra speed. Fen Yang is not a comfortable ride, agility wise. I'm being lazy, but I'm saving myself a couple of hours worth of work here by not redoing this graphic from my Z-35 review. Look all the way to the bottom. Fen Yang turns just slightly better than Akizuki but otherwise keeps her turning radius. Look at the difference between Benson and Loyang. It's like that -- just a nubbin on the end of Akizuki's pale green sadness. VERDICT: Horribad. Anti-Aircraft Defence Flak Bursts: 4+1 explosions for 1,400 damage per blast at 3.5km to 5.8km. Long Ranged (up to 5.8km): 112dps at 100% accuracy (112dps) Medium Ranged (up to 3.5km): 133dps at 100% accuracy (133dps) Defensive AA Fire: Very yes! Dauntless dive bombers from a stock-Lexington get a little too close to Fen Yang's angry smoke cloud. Fen Yang has good AA defence for a tier VIII destroyers. It's not just good, it's great even, besting a good number of cruisers out there. When you weight her sustained AA DPS by range, she's at the top of the pile among tier VIII destroyers. What's more, she also has a respectable amount of flak explosions (five of 'em) and finally she has Defensive AA Fire -- something that's been long overdue on an Akizuki-class destroyer given their design role. So why am I not more happy about this? Fen Yang's AA defence is comparable to that of USS Kidd; just slightly better. As has been painfully demonstrated in videos and memes since, even Kidd's solid AA defence does not keep her safe. Fen Yang may be able to fend off bot-driven carriers in Co-Op mode (and this is a great way to farm AA kills for missions, by the way), it's a different story against players. Yes, tier VI aircraft carriers will have a hard time making repeated runs against Fen Yang. Yes, she can make it expensive for tier VIII carriers as well. But let's not kid ourselves: This will not keep her safe from a determined opponent. They can (and will) still drop on you. If they can line up an attack on you, you're taking damage. The only defence is to Just Dodge™ or blow smoke and hide. Blasting at planes from smoke will net some nice damage so the carrier's planes are not likely to stick around. With the extra charges she has on her Smoke Generator this is one of the better uses for it. I miss the AA picket-ship role, I really do. I was hoping that the skill rework might give this a big shot in the arm but it just didn't materialize. Fen Yang's AA is almost good enough. Almost. VERDICT: She could have been made interesting here. Vision Control Base/Minimum Surface Detection: 7.76km / 6.1km Base/Minimum Air Detection Range: 3.55km / 2.88km Detection Range When Firing in Smoke: 14.2km Maximum Firing Range: 12.46km to 14.95km To no one's surprise (I'm sure), Fen Yang's surface detection range is pretty crappy. She matches Akizuki here, so it's not like this is beyond the norm. She is tied for 18th place out 23 tier VIII destroyers in terms of concealment which is pretty bad. Her 6.1km minimum surface detection range sits almost in the middle of the 5.37km found on the five Japanese torpedo-destroyers and the appalling 7.07km of Kiev, though this Soviet ship is an extreme outlier with the French destroyers coming in at 6.43km and 6.65km, showing that Fen Yang is a significant chungus. This deficit of concealment is further magnified if the Fearless Brawler skill is taken to try and pad her poor reload rate on her guns, giving her an (at best) 6.4km surface detection range. Fen Yang's lack of heals and her general lack of agility makes taking the skill Fearless Brawler a significant risk. It's an expensive skill and Fen Yang is not best suited to firing out in the open. You can make it work, but this is down more to the idiocy and complacency of your opponents than the brilliance of Fen Yang's own design. This is not a ship that dodges very well, given her pedestrian speed and clumsy handling. Trading health with a larger ship while spotted just doesn't make a whole lot of sense, especially not when her guns have reasonable ballistics to make use of islands (at least at range) and her plentiful Smoke Generator charges should preclude her from the necessity of being spotted in the first place. Pan Asian smoke may not last as long as the smoke from other nations, but she gets more charges to compensate -- up to six with Superintendent. There's an argument to be made that she'll be out-spotted anyway by just about any destroyer she faces, to say nothing about the predations of aircraft braving her AA power. There is a maximum of a 30 second gap between the last cloud generated by her Smoke Generator dissipating and the consumable being ready again which may prompt an open water fight. Fen Yang is going to be lit by Surveillance Radar, to say nothing about the occasional close-range knife fight by an enterprising destroyer or charging cruiser. Ultimately, Fen Yang punishes, rather than rewards getting in close. Her torpedoes are ineffective against ships that are likely to charge her hiding places. Her guns, while not incapable of fending off snoops, aren't the powerhouses her ship's class would suggest. Regardless if she's going to be out-spotted or not, keep back. This ship does not take well to being up front. VERDICT: Poor and inflexible, saved only by her smoke. Firing AP shells from smoke. Fen Yang's bread and butter. Watch those blind return-fire shots. Final Evaluation For those wondering, here is the list of all of the differences between Fen Yang and Akizuki: This was my early draft of the review from back in early January. Slap on a title, add a few snarky lines and call it done. I'm not sure that the full review is an improvement. You'll note that there are some differences between Fen Yang's final performance stats and those listed here, including changes to her range and ballistics. Such is often the case when composing these reviews, with last-minute changes between the final test version and the released version of the ship being commonplace. Thus, the final main battery gun range difference between the two ships is a whopping 3m in Akizuki's favour. There are some over-specialized premium ships that are defined by what they can do. Take everyone's favourite destroyer that single-handedly wiped out the battleship meta (HA!): Asashio. Despite all of the limitations placed upon this ship, she's known for being an excellent battleship-killer. She's known not for her weaknesses, but for that one insurmountable strength. The same goes for other specialist destroyers like Haida, Friesland or Kamikaze. You don't dwell on the slow speed of Black's torpedoes, for example. You focus on the (Balans'd™) combination of her Smoke Generator and Surveillance Radar consumables. The doesn't happen with Fen Yang. The closest she comes to that kind of comparison is with her AA-firepower. And it speaks to the horrible surface ship versus aircraft carrier meta that this isn't something worth celebrating. This was something worth celebrating in the past; take HMS Hood as an example, where her AA ridiculousness was meme-worthy. But we have not yet seen a premium of this type since the CV rework in 0.8.0. I do not like Fen Yang. I won't say she's terrible. She certainly can perform, but she'll make you work for it. She is to Akizuki what Belfast '43 is to Belfast. She leaves you asking the question: She might have been rescued with better AA firepower. She could have been saved by preserving Akizuki's rate of fire, even if this had come at the expense of smoke or torpedo performance. However, I think her cardinal sin is that Fen Yang doesn't work even as a commander trainer. The role of premium ships has changed with patch 0.10.0. Commanders can now have four builds at the same time, one for each ship type. Thus, you could conceivably buy a premium cruiser and use it to train a battleship commander as the skills you select for optimum (or fun) performance on the premium ship would not limit the performance of the battleship. But Fen Yang is a premium destroyer and, barring the tier I Chengan, there aren't any other Pan Asian tech tree ships that aren't destroyers. With Fen Yang demanding such a specific set of skills to unlock even an acceptable baseline level of performance which have little overlap with other Pan Asian lolibotes, she is worthless as a commander skill trainer. She misses the mark in so many ways, but this really bugged me. There's a lot of fail here. Fen Yang misses the mark. I cannot recommend her to anyone. If you want a good Pan Asian destroyer, Loyang is still top of the pile all of these years later. Gallery This are a few of the screenshots of Fen Yang I took making this review either that didn't end up in the review itself or that had words written all over them. For use as thumbnails on YouTube or what have you.
  17. Sovereigndawg


  18. ♦Don't ask me why the entire thing is bolded, I have no clue.♦ The real main characteristics of a Pan-American DD line is that there aren’t any. Sure, most might have bad AA, but the T9 & 10 ships get DFAA. These are ships built by different nations for different nations, so patterns can pop up and then disappear. Wargaming could always give them a trait like they did with the Pan-Asian destroyers(deepwater torpedoes), but I’m not a dev so I don’t know. My idea would be to give them improved AP penetration. This is just my suggestion to Wargaming, I’m doing the work for them. Tier 2: Rodriquez The theme of this ship is fast reloads. Three torpedo launchers are carried, 2 of them are on the centerline, 1 torp each. Reload is only 11 seconds. And what about that 3rd tube? Rodriquez has a unique trait: while destroyers like V-25 & G-101 have torpedoes that can fire almost directly forwards, Rodriquez has a tube mounted right in the bow. This is fixed directly forwards, and can give a nasty surprise to anyone trying to exploit a blind spot. It can also be used to feint a ram. The guns are also the smallest main battery of any ship in-game at 65 mm. As can be expected, penetration & a-strike is terrible, but with 4 in a broadside & 3 in axial fire, the amount of shells that can be put into the air in 10 seconds is astonishing. The ship has a new Pan-American Engine Boost & Smokescreen. Concealment is excellent with a 5.2 km surface detection range. Origin: France Operating Nation: Peru Armament: 65/50 main battery, 6 x 1 450 mm torpedo battery, 3 x 1 Base Max Speed: 28 knots from triple screws Tonnage: 520 Image: Blueprint: Tier 3: Maranhao This ship has several British characteristics, as she served in WW1 as HMS Porpoise. Her original torpedo armament was replaced by Brazilian ordnance & tubes, decreasing the a-strike but increasing the # of torps. Stock, Maranhao has no AA so the majority of players would likely appreciate the B hull. This gives three 20mm AA. Consumables include a tier 3 Engine Boost & Smokescreen. Later modernizations included radar and hydro, but the majority of the playerbase would not appreciate this. In WW2 the Maranhao patrolled the South Atlantic on ASW duty. She rescued the survivors of the torpedoed merchantman African Star. Origin: Great Britain Operating Nation: Brazil Armament: 102/40 main battery, 3 x 1 450mm torpedo battery, 2 x 2 20/70 light AA battery, 3 x 1(B hull only) Base Max Speed: 29 knots from twin screws Tonnage: 1300 Image: Blueprint: Tier 4: Almirante Villar Russian Bias confirmed! This ship changed nations many times: built by Russia, made Soviet, captured by Britain, given to Estonia, and sold to Peru! Turning radius is pretty large as a result of dimensions. I’ll leave it up to Wargaming whether to use Russian torpedoes or a new Pan-American type. Among the tier 4 destroyers, AA isn’t bad but it’s nothing special. Origin: Old Imperial Russia Operating Nation: Peru Armament: 102/60 main battery, 4 x 1 450mm torpedo battery, 3 x 3 40/39 2 pdr QF Mark 2, medium AA battery 20/65 Breda light AA battery, 3 x 1(B hull only) 7.62/94 light AA battery, 2 x 1 Base Max Speed: 34 knots from twin screws Tonnage: 1620 Image: Blueprint: Tier 5: Teniente Serrano The first of the Post-WW1 destroyers, Serrano is also the first that isn’t a hand-me-down. The Serrano-class destroyers were built by Thornycroft for Chile. Because of Chile’s immense coastline, the ships were made to perform well in various climates. Teniente Serrano served Chile for 38 years. Operating Nation: Chile Armament: 120/45 main battery, 3 x 1 533mm torpedo battery, 2 x 3 77/40 12pdr QF Mark 2, secondary battery/heavy AA battery 20/70 Oerlikon light AA battery, 3 x 1(B hull only) 7.7/87 light AA battery, 3 x 1(A hull only) 2 “K” guns Base Max Speed: 36.5 knots from twin screws Tonnage: 1430 Image: Blueprint: Tier 6: Antioquia In 1933, the Colombian government was alerted to a new development in the South American naval arms race: the purchase of 2 Estonian DDs by Peru, one of which has been mentioned above. In retaliation Colombia purchased 2 modern destroyers from Portugal. Antioquia is a direct upgrade from Serrano, carrying one more main cannon, a longer caliber main battery, and an additional torpedo in the launcher. Antiaircraft defense is drastically increased with the upgraded hull. Access to Hydroacoustic Search is also granted alongside the Engine Boost & Smoke. Origin: Portugal Operating Nation: Colombia Armament: 120/50 main battery, 4 x 1 533mm torpedo battery, 2 x 4 40/39 2pdr QF Mark 2 medium AA battery, 3 x 1 20/70 Oerlikon light AA battery, 2 x 1(B hull only) 2 “K” guns Base Max Speed: 36 knots from twin screws Tonnage: 1563 Image(a sister ship): Blueprint: Tier 7: Cervantes In 1926, España sold 2 of their uncompleted Churruca-class destroyers to Argentina. In honor of the deal, the ships were named after Spaniards who played a key role in Argentina’s development. Artillery is a direct upgrade from Antioquia, with 5 main battery guns and a small secondary gun. Cervantes has a faster torpedo reload & more powerful torpedoes at the expense of having 6 torps compared to Antioquia’s 8. Cervantes is also noticeably faster than her predecessor. She did not receive any upgrades, save for a modernization in the late 1940’s that is a downgrade for game purposes. Origin: España Operating Nation: Argentina Armament: 120/45 main battery, 5 x 1 533mm torpedo battery, 2 x 3 76.2/45 Vickers Mark SS secondary battery/heavy AA battery 7.7/87 light AA battery, 4 x 1 2 stern racks for depth charges Base Max Speed: 37.6 knots from twin screws Tonnage: 2087 Image: Blueprint: Tier 8: La Rioja Another Argentine destroyer, La Rioja continues the general design onward from Cervantes. She was able to make a passage of 5800 nautical miles across the Atlantic without stopping. Being both bigger & faster than Cervantes, La Rioja should feel like her predecessor on steroids. However, she remains vulnerable to air attack. The ship was not given any upgrades save for a postwar modification that removed the No.3 turret. Origin: España Operating Nation: Argentina Armament: 120/45 main battery, 5 x 1 533mm torpedo battery, 2 x 3 76.2/45 Vickers Mark SS secondary battery/heavy AA battery 40/39 medium AA battery, 2 x 1 2 “K” guns Base Max Speed: 39.4 knots from twin screws Tonnage: 2120 Image: Blueprint: Tier 9: Mariz e Barros The first DDs built in Brazil, the ships of this class were based heavily off American designs, and players who have played the USS Fletcher will notice the similarities. This ship is primarily a gunboat, with torpedoes that are a definite downgrade from Rioja. Gun handling is much more responsive than Antioquia, though the shells suffer in usefulness at long range. The AA gets a massive buff with the addition of DFAA alongside Boost & Smoke. After having Hydro as default for the last 3 destroyers, Barros now has the option to choose Radar instead. She was given a fire control upgrade in 1956 but no hull upgrades. Operating Nation: Brazil Armament: 127/38 main battery/heavy AA battery, 4 x 1 533mm torpedo battery, 1 x 4 40/56 Bofors medium AA battery, 2 x 2 20/70 Oerlikon light AA battery, 10 x 1 4 “K” guns, 2 stern racks Base Max Speed: 36.5 knots from twin screws Tonnage: 2200 Image: Blueprint: Tier 10: Nueva Esparta Arguably the most powerful ships of the Venezuelan Navy, the Nueva Esparta class was a Cold War design that focused on the main threats of the time: submarines & aircraft. The 6-gun main battery is dual purpose & semi-automatic. The ship carries more ASW armaments than any of the other Pan- American destroyers. Carrying the same consumable options as Barros, players will also find that torpedo armament is another downgrade(yet Nueva Esparta also has the fastest non-TRB torpedo reload of any Tier 10 DD). Speed also is decreased from Dias. Part of the design was to make a comfortable ship for the crew, so she does have a fairly large HP pool. The World of Warships version of this ship is following her 1960 refit. Operating Nation: Venezuela Armament: 113/45 main battery/heavy AA battery, 3 x 2 533mm torpedo battery, 1 x 3 40/60 Bofors STAAG 2 medium AA battery, 6 x 2 2 “K” guns, 2 stern racks, 2 Squid Base Max Speed: 34.5 knots from twin screws Tonnage: 3300 Image: Blueprint: I hope this happens. ♦
  19. The German "heavy destroyers" need to be re-balanced, specifically the tier IX and X. I'm not going to critique the VII and VIII, they're implemented fairly well. But the Schultz and Elbing seriously need to be tweaked for three major reasons: 1. High powered 150mm guns (part of design) 2. Destroyer traits such as low detection (much better than any cruiser), smoke, and torpedoes (part of design) 3. High health and no citadel (because it's a.... destroyer) Each fact on its own is not game breaking, however the way Wargaming has combined all these aspects into one historically unfinished design is ludicrous. Let me explain why a ship that combines all of these traits together is completely broken in this arcade style game. Just to make it clear before hand, this won't be a critique of realism, but simply how these ships fit in so far. 1. High powered guns. Unlike the previous tiers, the Elbing and Schultz both carry 6x150mm/60 SK C/25, the most powerful "6 inch" guns ever used by the Kriegsmarine. They also have a respectable 7.4/7.1 second reload time. With a muzzle velocity of 960m/s in-game and armour penetration of around 300mm+ point blank, 195mm at 8km, and 127mm at 14km the gun is a fairly big danger to most cruisers at the ships' battle ranges and increasingly lethal to all cruisers once entering the 8km zone and closer. Nevermind that catching any battleship broadside can quickly lead to tens of thousands of hit-points being chipped away through their extended belts or bow/aft sections. Now combine that with the fact that: 2. They have destroyer traits. They have a base detection of 8.1/8.3 km, bad for "destroyers" but you can understand since their so large (~5,800t standard or more, same as a Dido CL) and it can out gun most other destroyers fairly comfortably. It can also use a smoke consumable and find somewhere comfortable to pound big ships as if it was a British* cruiser (well it is a destroyer after all). It's also got torpedoes which are fast reloading but pretty slow, nothing to complain about just another weapon they have. 3. They have high survivability. These two ships also have the most hit points at their tier, tied with Paolo in IX and #1 of all DDs in X. This makes them very challenging to destroy through anything but continuous radar-guided gunfire (or if they get outplayed and torped somehow). They also have no citadel, meaning they can happily destroy British and American cruisers caught anything but nose-on looking for them and give a very hard time to most others while taking much less severe damage. And good luck if you want to aggro anything that has a lot of torpedoes in a big battleship. All together you can see why such a heavily built vessel with all these game privileges reserved for the weaker, smaller normal destroyers can be very devastating in all situations. I'm sure many players can relate to times when they had to stay away from capture zones when a Spähkreuzer is lingering about or have been ruthlessly mauled for getting too close or even farmed from a border wall while in the midst of a separate fight. Unless you have an obvious antidote like a Riga/Petro or a useful CV for example, it's very tough to deal with them in game. To cut to the chase: My solutions are one (and only one) of the following: -Remove the smoke consumable like the Swedish and many other large destroyers, OR -Completely mitigate smoke concealment during gunfire, OR -Add a citadel (you don't have to classify it as cruiser, but this at the least makes sense), OR -Sizeable reduction of hit points and perhaps a +1km detection increase, OR -Remove AP (harsh) like an "inverse" British cruiser If there's some big thing overlooked here that evens out all these strengths, I'm open to hear it. Disclaimer: This is by no means a personal attack against those who use this ship, and far to many times people overreact when it's their favourite thing under scrutiny. I don't like to wholly blame players for using objectively good gear. If there's a strong weapon in a game it's the developers fault for screwing up the game balance for others. Therefore, this is a message to Wargaming and also an open debate. Be nice.
  20. LittleWhiteMouse

    Premium Ship Review #128 - Hill

    The following is a review of the American Destroyer USS Hill, kindly provided to me by Wargaming. To the best of my knowledge, this represents the release version of the ship. Be aware her statistics may change in the future. Of the two ships that are new (Benham was released too), Hill has the less remarkable debut. She takes her cue from Nicholas but don't misconstrue: the comparison of the two becomes askew when their differences are run through. With this in mind, let us cut into this review: (enough of the rhymes, whew!) PROS Armed with 5 rapid fire guns with good damage output. Good gun handling and fire arcs on most of her mounts. Heavy torpedo armament of nine torpedo tubes. Good top speed of 37.5 knots. Agile with a good 560m turning radius and a high rate of turn. CONS Only a modest hit point total for a gunship. Bad ballistics on her guns. Horrible forward fire angles on her middle turret. Torpedoes are painfully short ranged at 5.5km with limited arcs per launcher. Enormous surface detection range of 7.38km Overview Skill Floor: Simple / Casual/ CHALLENGING / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / HIGH/ Extreme Hill is a typical mid-tier American destroyer. While she's easy enough to play when top tier, as soon as she steps out of the kiddy pool, she'll prove to be a challenge for novice players to wrestle. Her short range torpedoes, the poor ballistics of her guns, her enormous surface detection and modest hit point pool do not lend themselves well to the inexperienced. Veterans can make good use of her, though. Map knowledge can help mitigate her torpedo range and allow her to capitalize on island terrain. Her smoke is excellent and can be used and abused. Finally, her excellent agility makes her a potent knife fighter. – 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. Hill is reliant upon her guns to keep her firepower competitive. While they have great potential damage output, their ballistics really hold them back. Her torpedoes are too short ranged and too slow to be of much help. Hill's defense and agility have nothing wrong with them -- they just don't top the charts among the other tier V destroyers. Agility wise, she handles very well, but there are simply other destroyers at this tier which handle better. Anti-aircraft firepower remains a work in progress. Hill has a solid foundation here and should rank among the better tier V destroyers for AA power. What that will actually mean remains to be seen. We'll have to wait until the dust settles. Hill is visible from space. It's unfortunate. Her stealth sucks. Options Hill stands out in two areas. First, she lacks access to Defensive AA Fire. This isn't unusual in of itself, however the consumable is commonplace on upgraded American destroyers, so it's absence is worth noting. Second, Hill has access to two permanent camouflage patterns. Consumables The only consumable of note with Hill is the use of the American Smoke Generator with a longer emission time (30s vs 20s) and duration (115s vs 77s). Upgrades Upgrade wise, Hill is pretty standard. Start with Magazine Modification 1. If you don't mind detonations you can swap for Main Armaments Modification 1. Propulsion Modification 1 is the only consumable really worth considering in your second slot. Your third slot is a little weird with neither being especially good for a low tier destroyer. AA Guns Modification 1 gives your AA a bit more teeth against novice CV players. Alternatively, you can take Aiming Systems Modification 1 though this really is only useful for increasing your torpedo tube traverse. I've been playing tier VI+ destroyers for a while and I had forgotten how accustomed I was to the acceleration provided by Propulsion Modification 2. Hill, as a tier V destroyer, can't equip it and this has gotten me killed far too often. Ugh. So embarrassing. Camouflage Hill has access to two camouflage options, the standard Type 9 and the Master of the Water World. They are effectively cosmetic swaps of one another, providing the same bonuses. If Hill doesn't come with the second camouflage, it may be purchased for 2,000 doubloons. +50% experience gains -10% to post-battle costs. -3% to detectability by sea. +4% to enemy dispersion. The alternative palette swap for her base camouflage can be unlocked through completing the American Cruiser collection. I quite like the alternative palette. It reminds me of Easter. Firepower Main Battery: Five 127mm/38 guns in single turrets in an A-B-P-X-Y configuration with A-B and X-Y superfiring. P-turret is mounted between the two funnels (unfortunately). Torpedoes: Nine tubes in 3x3 launchers with a wing mount to each side and one mounted on the center line. American 127mm/38s, We Meet Again These are the staple of the American destroyer line from tier V+. They are characterized by the following: Dual Purpose. High rate of fire. Good gun traverse speeds. Low muzzle velocity and horrible ballistics. Poor fire chance per HE shell. As you climb in tiers, their rate of fire tends to improve and that's about it. It shouldn't be a surprise then that Hill's rate of fire isn't that impressive compared to some of the later offerings in the tech tree. Hill dispenses 12.5 rounds per minute (rpm) per gun, giving her a broadside of 62.5rpm before any upgrades. This is on the slow side, with most American destroyers with 127mm/38s spitting out a minimum of 15rpm per gun at tiers V and VI and jumping up to 18.18rpm by tier VII. She compensates for this deficit by mounting five guns, at least allowing her to keep pace with Nicholas at her own tier. The usual caveats with DPM charts apply. This only describes the potential damage output of these guns and it doesn't account for things like how easy it is to bring guns onto a target (traverse, fire angles), how easy it is to hit a target (dispersion, ballistics) or how easy it is to deal damage (penetration). But you're all smart enough to know that, right? This is sorted by HE shells for the simple reason that they get spat out more often. Gremyashchy has the most useful AP shells at this tier and is the most likely to do something effective with them. Hill just barely keeps ahead of Nicholas in terms of potential damage output but only if she can bring all of her guns to bear. Thankfully many of the low tier destroyers have gun angle issues, so it's a pretty close contest. To make the best use of Hill's guns, she generally has to get close. The ballistic arcs on the 127mm/38s is notoriously bad, making attacking ships at anything beyond stupidly-close ranges a challenge. The one benefit to this is that she's quite capable of lobbing shells over intervening terrain (or team mates) without issue, so she's quite apt at taking advantage of island cover. Still, when it comes to engaging enemy destroyers, she's going to need to grab them by their belt buckle which isn't always comfortable. For a ship reliant upon knife fighting to secure kills, at least her gun traverse is fast enough to keep up no matter how she wiggles or dodges (and she's good at the wiggles). On the whole, Hill's guns are pretty darned good, second only to Gremyashchy's guns for overall performance, but that's mostly owing to Gremyashchy's AP shells being so good. Hill's forward fire angles are pretty good except for her P-turret. This shouldn't really surprise anyone given that the darned thing is sandwiched between her two funnels. As a consequence, if Hill wants to top the DPM charts at tier V, she has to expose her full broadside in order to do it. She has much better fire angles to the rear which makes for better kiting performance. Keep this in mind when parking in smoke. It's better to turn away from your opponent and angle your butt towards them. Not only will you have an easier time bringing all five guns to bear, you can also prep for a quick getaway. Short Range Torpeedus I'm spotted here as I drop my torpedoes at this König. Anyone taking bets on if he attempted to dodge? Low tier American torpedoes suck. There. I've said it. They're short ranged, slow and they don't hit very hard. The one advantage they do have is that American destroyers have a lot of them. Hill doesn't quite pack as many, with only nine compared to Wickes, Clemson's and Nicholas' twelve launchers. One of the (additional) issues I had with Hill's torpedoes was the limited arcs. They can't aim at anything less than 50º off her bow and her center-line launcher can barely reach anything to her rear. Like with her P-turret on her guns, you've got to give up a lot of broadside to be able to put your swimmers into the water. Her fish are at least more versatile than low-tier Soviet torpedoes but that's not saying much. If you want to make use of Hill's fish, you're going to have to rely on close range ambushes or suicide-torping a target at point blank range. Just be aware that some of the higher tiered ships will have enough hit points to tank taking repeated hits and make you look like an idiot when your tubes are empty. You're not going to get much use out of them in higher tiered matches which makes her all the more reliant on her guns. Summary I dare say that Hill is almost under-armed. Bad fire angles keep her from being able to use all five her guns reliably. Her torpedoes are almost no help outside of top-tier matches. For a tier V boat, I guess that's good enough but this ship isn't winning any prizes. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Better fish or a higher rate of fire on her guns. It shouldn't be any surprise that Gremyashchy tops the charts here with the Kamikaze-sisters hot on her heels. Defense Hit Points: 12,100hp Minimum Bow & Deck Armour: 10mm Hill has two huge flaws. The biggest is definitely her surface detection. The second is her modest hit point total. For a gunship, Hill's hit points are kinda meh. While Survivability Expert is all but mandatory for destroyers, it's doubly so in Hill's case. She's too fat to hide and she's going to have to trade hit points in most encounters in order to deal damage (barring island humping and hiding in smoke). I mean, her hit point total isn't terrible, but it's uninspiring for a gunship, barely scraping together 12k to her name. 13,100 hp - Nicholas, Gremyashchy 12,700 hp - Podvoisky, Okhotnik 12,500 hp - Jianwei 12,100 hp - Hill 11,300 hp - Mutsuki, T-22 11,200 hp - Acasta 11,100 hp - Fujin, Kamikaze R, Kamikaze 10,900 hp - Minekaze A thousand extra hit points here could have easily changed Hill from a decent ship to an excellent one. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : A thousand more hit points would do it. Agility Top Speed: 37.5 knots Turning Radius: 560m Rudder Shift Time: 3.1s 4/4 Engine Speed Rate of Turn: 8.6º/s One of the best things about Hill is that she has a low-tier lolibote's agility. She's got that smol lolibote wiggle in her tush with a rate of turn that's oh-so tight...! ♥ Azur Lane's Ark Royal was drawn by HM & Tomodachi and misappropriated for this review. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : While Hill does have that smol-bote sway, most of the other tier V destroyers have it too. Minekaze is the princess of this tier when it comes to agility and Hill is way down the list. This just kinda illustrates the flaw in a ranking system. Hill may not be the best, or even the close to the best in this category, but she still boasts some amazing handling. To top Minekaze she'd need more speed while preserving all of her other characteristics. Anti-Aircraft Defense Long Ranged (5.8km-1.8km): 190 damage every 4.5 seconds and 1 explosion at 560 damage. Short Ranged (1.8km to 0.1km): 50 damage every 1.96 seconds. Look, AA defense and aircraft survivability is going to be all over the map between now ( and the next few patches (0.8.7 at least). There's not much point in reviewing a ship's given AA power at the moment. Don't buy a ship based on its AA power for the foreseeable future. Ugh, six more weeks of volatility. To the tune of AC/DC's "Thunderstruck", in memory of destroyer game play from patches 0.8.0 to 0.8.4. The pendulum has swung hard in favour of AA power in 0.8.5. Hill's AA defense is very comfortable against tier IV CVs at the moment, but will it last? Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Access to Defensive AA Fire. Of course this is all irrelevant anyway given how volatile AA power continues to be. Hill's in a good spot right now. We'll see if that continues. Refrigerator Base Surface Detection: 7.38km Air Detection Range: 2.85km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 6.44km Detection Range when Firing in Smoke: 2.75km Main Battery Firing Range: 11.35km (13.62km with Advanced Fire Training) Let's look at some numbers. I've listed all of the destroyers that Hill can face, ranking them by their upgraded surface detection. I've applied camouflage (3% surface detection reduction) and the Concealment Expert (10% surface detection reduction) to all of these ships and Concealment Modification 1 (a further 10% surface detection reduction) on Z-39 cuz she's hella balans. Now, it's important to keep in mind that the lower tiered destroyers -- specifically those at tiers IV and V (and even some VIs) might not be running with full concealment builds so take these numbers with a pinch of salt. Dangerous gunship opponents which are stealthier than Hill are highlighted in red. Those dangerous gunships she can out-spot are highlighted in green. When Hill is Top Tier (Tier IV & V opponents) 5.34km - Isokaze 5.41km - Minekaze, Mutsuki, Fujin, Kamikaze R, Kamikaze 5.50km - V-170 5.66km - Shenyang, Wakeful, Okhotnik 5.69km - T-22 5.81km - Nicholas 5.97km - Acasta, Jianwei 6.11km - Gremyashchy 6.13km - Clemson 6.44km - HILL 6.76km - Podvoisky Hill doesn't come out looking too good when she's top tier, but that's okay. She can effectively outgun most of her opponents here with only the American and Soviet destroyers being any real threat to her in a gun duel. Engaging torpedo destroyers successfully isn't too much of a problem here because the maps are so claustrophobic that you can abuse map borders and islands to cage them in. Still, Hill wins no prizes here. When Hill is "Mid" Tier (Tier V & VI opponents) One of the other possible matchmaking oddities for tier V is that they can end up just facing opponents one tier higher with nothing beneath them. This results in the following list of opponents: 5.41km - Minekaze, Mutsuki, Fujin, Kamikaze R, Kamikaze 5.66km - Okhotnik 5.69km - T-22 5.81km - Nicholas, Hatsuharu 5.97km - Acasta, Jianwei, Gallant 6.11km - Gremyashchy 6.13km - Fubuki, Shinonome, Gnevny, T-61, Fushun 6.29km - Monaghan, Anshan 6.44km - HILL 6.60km - Farragit. Ernst Gaede 6.76km - Podvoisky, Aigle There's a lot more dangerous opponents now, but Hill thankfully out-spots many of the new ones including the tier VI ships Aigle, Farragut and Gaede. Still, the Soviet and Pan Asian additions are worth minding. When Hill is Bottom Tier (Tier V, VI and VII opponents) Big surprise -- there's a lot of scary opponents two tiers higher. 5.41km - Minekaze, Mutsuki, Fujin, Kamikaze R, Kamikaze 5.66km - Okhotnik 5.67km - Haida 5.69km - T-22 5.81km - Nicholas, Hatsuharu, Shiratsuyu 5.97km - Acasta, Jianwei, Gallant 6.08km - Z-39 6.11km - Gremyashchy 6.13km - Fubuki, Shinonome, Gnevny, T-61, Fushun, Gadjah Mada 6.29km - Monaghan, Anshan, Jervis 6.44km - HILL , Akatsuki 6.60km - Farragut, Ernst Gaede, Sims, Leningrad 6.67km - Mahan 6.76km - Podvoisky, Aigle, Leberecht Maass, Blyskawica As you can clearly see, Hill's concealment doesn't do it any favours. Thankfully, her stealth is JUST good enough to keep her nose clean in higher tiered matches, though she barely has any reaction time between spotting some of those dangerous gunship opponents before being detected in turn. To be comfortable, I'd generally want a minimum of 250m worth of difference between the detection ranges of two ships to allow players time enough to make a decision whether to engage or begin retreating. This is not enough time to prevent being spotted in the first place (a 30 knot ship covers 250m in 3 seconds) but it can give you enough of a head start to make a decision. Hill is a big girl with all of the challenges that brings. This is, in my opinion, what really holds her back from being a "good" ship. She doesn't have the stealth to sneak up on much and her guns are reliant upon her closing the distance (to say nothing of her torpedoes). Worse, the extra range on her guns makes her visible from further out. This range is mostly useless given the horrible ballistics on her guns. This is probably her biggest weak point overall. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Hill's stealth rating is pretty terrible. It could be worse, but let's not go there. King of the Hill Hill accepts a standard American destroyer captain build and shouldn't give anyone any issues with skill compatibility. Your first 10 skill points should look like this: Start with Priority Target. Next take Last Stand. I really hope Wargaming does something about this skill. It's mandatory on all destroyers. Survivability Expert is next at tier 3. This will add another 1,750hp to your total which can give you the edge over the other low-tier gunships that haven't taken this. Concealment Expert rounds things off. As you double back through the line, take skills which emphasize her gunnery. Basic Fire Training is a great choice. Superintendent is nice too because it gives you another charge of smoke that you can use to camp out and spray down larger ships without being seen (just watch out for fish). Adrenaline Rush is always worth the points. Over the Hill To appreciate Hill you need to take a close look at Nicholas, the tier V American tech-tree destroyer. If you listen to the peanut-gallery, they'll tell you the two of them are very close. They're technically correct (the best kind of correct) despite the two ships having an enormous laundry-list of differences. While Hill and Nicholas share the same guns (127mm/38s) and torpedoes (Mark 11s) the soft-stats of the ships differ wildly. But don't you fret: this doesn't affect performance much. Let's get into the list: Where Hill is Better than Nicholas: + Hill has 5 guns to Nicholas' 4. + Hill has an 11.3km range to Nicholas' 10.9km. + Hill has better main battery firing angles than Nicholas. + Hill has better long-range AA firepower. + Hill has a top speed of 37.5kts to Nicholas' 37kts. + Hill has a 560m turning radius to Nicholas' 600m radius. + Hill turns at 8.6º/s, Nicholas turns at 7.9º/s. + Hill has premium economy, Nicholas does not. + Hill has TWO permanent camouflage options, Nicholas doesn't have access to any. Where Hill is Worse than Nicholas: - Hill has 12,100hp to Nicholas' 13,100hp. - Hill's hull armour is no thicker than 10mm, Nicholas has 13mm amidship decks and a 15mm hull. - Hill reloads in 4.7s, Nicholas in 4.0s. - Hill has three triple torpedo launchers, Nicholas has four. - Hill has worse torpedo fire angles than Nicholas. - Hill has worse short-range AA firepower. - Hill has has a larger surface detection of 7.38km to Nicholas' 6.66km - Hill has a larger aerial detection of 2.85km to Nicholas' 2.45km. - Hill is visible in smoke from 2.75km compared to Nicholas' 2.49km. - Nicholas can swap her Engine Boost for Defensive AA Fire. Now if you take a look at that list, you're probably going: "Hey, Mouse, those two ships aren't alike at all." Well, duh, no kidding. When you get into the nitty-gritty, it becomes a stretch to say that Hill shares much in common with Nicholas without a huge number of big ol' fat buts attached. This said, only a big ol' fat butt would try and lord over the differences like they really amounted to much. Boil it all down and the differences between the two comes to this: Nicholas is more survivable, being tougher and more stealthy. Hill is more agile. Overall, they're pretty damn close. They're both American destroyers sharing the same weapons, after all. Let's describe Hill on her own merits: Hill has good guns, good agility but terrible torpedoes and horrible concealment. Without a huge slug of hit points, it would be a stretch to call her "good". Her design is perfectly adequate when she's top tier, especially in the claustrophobic maps she finds herself in during those matches. She's especially effective at running down other destroyers with her rapid fire guns and using her agility to dodge attempts to torpedo her. However, Hill does not up-tier well at all. She's too fat. She's too fragile. She's too short ranged to hit hard enough to keep up with stronger opponents. This summation fits Nicholas to a T which is probably why the two destroyers are viewed so similarly. Of the two, I'd argue that Nicholas is the better boat, if only for the extra health and slightly better concealment. However, the reality is that Hill will perform better than Nicholas as a whole due her being a premium ship. You can put your tin foil hats away -- Hill's greatest strength is that she's likely to have a high skill-point captain commanding her. Nicholas, on the other hand, is hardly the darling of the American destroyer line and unlikely to have a commander exceeding 10 skill points at the helm. While there may be a few veterans about holding onto a Nicholas they've invested heavily into, she's overshadowed by Clemson and Farragut. Thus, Hill is likely to appear to be the better boat once stat-tracking gets some numbers to play with, even if Nicholas is objectively the better ship when you analyze her systems. So, yeah. Hill's alright -- I don't like her, but she's alright. She's a decent gunship destroyer when top-tier, for example. However, we have to pretend that Nicholas doesn't exist to reach that assessment. I'd much rather have one of the Kamikaze-sisters, Gremyashchy or Okhotnik if it came down to choosing a tier V premium and I'd still take Nicholas over Hill in a heartbeat. She doesn't really have a "point" compared to Nicholas other than simply offering more of the same in premium form. The huge stack of minor differences between her and her tech tree counterpart make her just different enough to be just that -- different for difference's sake. None of the tier V tech-tree destroyers are particularly fun to play, in my opinion, so take my saltiness over Hill with a pinch of ... well, even more salt. If you like Nicholas and want a mid-tier American trainer, then Hill is great news for you. Otherwise, Hill isn't worth playing, let alone paying for. Would I Recommend? There's a couple of ways of getting Hill. She was given away provided players completed a series of missions during patch 0.8.5. Alternatively you could just throw money at Wargaming if this was too much work. For PVE Battles? No. Gunship destroyers, especially ones with short ranged fish, aren't really a good choice for PVE battles. For Random Battle Grinding? No. There are better trainers and credit farmers out there for the US Destroyer line (Kidd comes to mind). For Competitive Gaming? Hells no. Take Nicholas instead if you're going to take a tier V American destroyer. There are much MUCH better choices at tier V for something like Ranked Sprint. For Collectors? No. Hill didn't exist in steel. The only real reason to want to collect her is that she had the potential of being free. For her Fun-Factor? No. I didn't enjoy playing Hill at all. What’s the Final Verdict? How would the ship rate on an Angry YouTuber scale of Garbage – Meh – Gud – Overpowered? GARBAGE– I hate it! Mehbote – An average ship. Probably forgettable. Gudbote – The best thing ever. Totally not overpowered because I like padding my stats in it. OVERPOWERED – I hate playing against it! And WG said that players don't care about cosmetics. HA. Art Credits The Mouse Paper-doll was designed and drawn by Chobittsu (and is super fun to play with). Ark Royal was drawn by HM & Tomodachi. In Closing I was originally going to glue this together with Benham and also talk about the loot boxes all in a single article. Well, that quickly bloated to a monstrosity that would make my Haida review look brief, so I've elected to cut it up. Benham will be the next ship reviewed and it should be out within the next week. For those who can't wait that long: Benham is good. She's fun, even, if you like torpedo destroyers. She reminds me vaguely Harekaze -- a good mix of gunnery and torpedoes. I'm not sure she's worth busting your butt over on the grind, but there it is. Thank you all for reading. 
  21. Here is a line I have made to get some unique US dds in the game and most notably the porter class also, compared to the normal line its a more aa and gun focused line with them being able to use defensive aa fire in a separate slot from engine boost and they also have access to short range hydroacoustic search but must trade it with engine boost like British destroyers but unlike British destroyers their smoke is standard American long duration smoke and they do not have British improved acceleration Features of the line 2 Quadruple centerline torpedo launchers with less damage and but reload better than their quintuple tube siblings Engine boost can be swapped for short range hydro Defensive AA fire in a separate slot akin to american light cruisers Better guns than their same tier counterpart in terms of number or reload Will have better hitpoints than their counterpart at the cost of a higher detection range for most ships Tier 7: USS Cassin A Mahan Class destroyer damaged at Pearl Harbour, the ship was rebuilt with Increased AA defenses and reduced armament to decrease topweight. Specs Survivability Stock 11800 uprgraded 14200 Guns 127 mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.21 mod.0 mount 4 х 1 pcs. Rate of Fire18.18 shots/min. Reload Time3.3 sec. Rotation Speed15 deg./sec. 180 Degree Turn Time12 sec. Firing Range10.61 km. Maximum Dispersion102 m. HE Shell127 mm HE Mk32 Maximum HE Shell Damage1,800 Chance of Fire on Target Caused by HE Shell5 % Initial HE Shell Velocity792 m./s. HE Shell Weight24.5 kg. AP Shell127 mm AP/SC Mk38 Maximum AP Shell Damage2,100 Initial AP Shell Velocity792 m./s. AP Shell Weight25 kg. Torpedo Tubes 533 mm Quad 2 х 4 pcs. Rate of Fire0.68 shots/min. Reload Time 88 sec. Rotation Speed25 deg./sec. 180 Degree Turn Time7.2 sec. TorpedoMk15 mod. 0 Maximum Damage11,733 Torpedo Speed64 knot Torpedo Range 9.2 km. AA Defense 127 mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.21 mod.0 mount 2х 1 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second9.6 . . . Firing Range5.01 km. 127 mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.21 mod.1 mount2 х 1 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second6.4 . . . Firing Range5.01 km. 40 mm Bofors on a Mk.1 mount 2 х 2 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second33.9 . . . Firing Range3.51 km. Stock 12.7 mm Browning on a single mount 6 х 1 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second15.2 . . . Firing Range1.2 km. Upgraded Hull 20 mm Oerlikon on a Mk.4 mount 6х 1 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second32.4 . . . Firing Range2.01 km. Maneuverability Maximum Speed 37 knot Turning Circle Radius 620 m. Rudder Shift Time 4 sec. Concealment Surface Detectability Range7.44 km. Air Detectability Range 2.56 km. Notes compared to the other ships in the line and at the tier she certainly lacks in firepower but makes up for it in utility and detection range due to her lower profile than her sister she sits at a respectable 7.4km detection stock in between mahan and sims in terms of detection range her guns on the other hand are worse than mahans due to the loss of a turret she takes 4 bofors guns as aa instead which gives her better aa than sims and mahan and due to being rebuilt her health is better than both albiet slightly and she sits at a weird middleground beween mahan and sims and also suffers from having more speed than mahan with a bigger turning circle at 620 m which makes her clumsier than sims who is faster and more nimble Tier 8 : USS Clark A Porter Class Destroyer Leader that was partially refit during the war with increased AA defenses Specs Survivability Stock 13700 uprgraded 16700 Main Battery Stock 127 mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.22 mount 3 х 2 pcs. Rate of Fire12 shots/min. Reload Time 4.5 sec. Upgraded 127 mm/38 Mk38 3 х 2 pcs. Rate of Fire12 shots/min. Reload Time 4 sec Rotation Speed14.7 deg./sec. / 20.7 deg./sec 180 Degree Turn Time 12.24 sec. / 9 sec. Firing Range10.72 km. stock 12.2 km upgraded Maximum Dispersion102 m. HE Shell127 mm HE Mk32 Maximum HE Shell Damage1,800 Chance of Fire on Target Caused by HE Shell5 % Initial HE Shell Velocity792 m./s. HE Shell Weight24.5 kg. AP Shell127 mm AP/SC Mk38 Maximum AP Shell Damage2,100 Initial AP Shell Velocity792 m./s. AP Shell Weight25 kg. Torpedo Tubes 533 mm Quad 2 х 4 pcs. Reload Time 78 sec. Rotation Speed25 deg./sec. 180 Degree Turn Time7.2 sec. Torpedo Mk 15 Maximum Damage 12,900 Torpedo Speed 55 knot Torpedo Range 9.15 km. AA Defense 127 mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.38 mount 3х 2 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second9.6 . . . Firing Range5.01 km. 40 mm Bofors on a Mk.1 mount 2x4 pcs. 2 х 2 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second33.9 . . . Firing Range3.51 km. Stock 12.7 mm Browning on a single mount 6 х 1 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second15.2 . . . Firing Range1.2 km. Upgraded Hull 20 mm Oerlikon on a Mk.4 mount 6х 1 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second32.4 . . . Firing Range2.01 km. Maneuverability Maximum Speed 35.6 knot Turning Circle Radius 630 m. Rudder Shift Time 3.9 sec. Concealment Surface Detectability Range 7.68 km. Air Detectability Range 3.42 km. Notes Unlike same tier American and American built destroyers Clark has the highest detection radius and hitpoints of all them in order to have AA comparable to Kidd who has one more bofors than Clark. the guns are enclosed in twin turrets similar to Somers with the same reload but however has the option to use the same guns as gearing albeit with slower reload at just 5 seconds which brings up her aa rating as her guns are not dual purpose like the rest of the destroyers until upgrading them. its also noticeably slower and clumsier than Cassin but makes up for it with harder hitting guns and the torpedoes which are the same ones as Bensons stock torpedoes reload faster and hit harder Tier 9: USS Davis A Somers Class Destroyer Leader , Which was fully refitted during the war with dual purpose Guns to decrease topweight and improve the antiaircraft armament Survivability Stock 14700 uprgraded 17200 Main Battery Stock 127 mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.22 mount 2 х 2 1x1 pcs. Rate of Fire12 shots/min. Reload Time 4 sec. Upgraded 127 mm/38 Mk38 2 х 2 1x1pcs. Rate of Fire 20 shots/min. Reload Time 3 sec Rotation Speed14.7 deg./sec. / 20.7 deg./sec 180 Degree Turn Time 12.24 sec. / 9 sec. Firing Range11.92 km. stock 13 .1 upgraded Maximum Dispersion102 m. HE Shell127 mm HE Mk32 Maximum HE Shell Damage1,800 Chance of Fire on Target Caused by HE Shell5 % Initial HE Shell Velocity792 m./s. HE Shell Weight24.5 kg. AP Shell127 mm AP/SC Mk38 Maximum AP Shell Damage2,100 Initial AP Shell Velocity792 m./s. AP Shell Weight25 kg. Torpedo Tubes 533 mm Quad 2 х 4 pcs. Reload Time 88 sec. Rotation Speed25 deg./sec. 180 Degree Turn Time7.2 sec. Torpedo Mk 16 Maximum Damage 17,900 Torpedo Speed 65 knot Torpedo Range 10.15 km. AA Defense 127 mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.38 mount 3х 2 1x1pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second9.6 . . . Firing Range5.01 km. 40 mm Bofors on a Mk.1 mount pcs. 3 х 2 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second37.9 . . . Firing Range3.51 km. Stock 12.7 mm Browning on a single mount 6 х 1 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second15.2 . . . Firing Range1.2 km. Upgraded Hull 20 mm Oerlikon on a Mk.4 mount 6х 1 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second32.4 . . . Firing Range2.01 km. Maneuverability Maximum Speed 38.6 knot Turning Circle Radius 610 m. Rudder Shift Time 3.9 sec. Concealment Surface Detectability Range 7. 48 km. Air Detectability Range 3.22 km. Notes: Compared to her lower tier near sister Clark, Davis has a bit more health and detection range due to her lower profile and she trades a gun for worse turret placement but better reload at 4.5 seconds stock and the single mount gun is at first an open mount but becomes enclosed with the gun upgrade to dual purpose mounts which share the same reload as gearing and she generally behaves like a fletcher that reloads faster and fires more accurately at the cost of two torpedoes Tier 10: Porter The lead ship of her class, the ship has a high number of guns compared to her peers and was designed to lead destroyer squadrons to combat special type destroyers (the ship is actually Moffett in its 1944 outfit before it lost a turret since porter sank in 1942) Survivability 19 700 Main Battery Stock 127 mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.22 mount 4 х 2 pcs. Rate of Fire12 shots/min. Reload Time 4.5 sec. Upgraded 127 mm/38 Mk38 4 х 2 pcs. Rate of Fire 20 shots/min. Reload Time 3.5 sec Rotation Speed14.7 deg./sec. / 20.7 deg./sec 180 Degree Turn Time 12.24 sec. / 9 sec. Firing Range11.92 km. stock 13 .1 upgraded Maximum Dispersion102 m. HE Shell127 mm HE Mk32 Maximum HE Shell Damage1,700 Chance of Fire on Target Caused by HE Shell5 % Initial HE Shell Velocity792 m./s. HE Shell Weight24.5 kg. AP Shell127 mm AP/SC Mk38 Maximum AP Shell Damage2,100 Initial AP Shell Velocity792 m./s. AP Shell Weight25 kg. Torpedo Tubes 533 mm Quad 2 х 4 pcs. Reload Time 88 sec. Rotation Speed25 deg./sec. 180 Degree Turn Time7.2 sec. Torpedo Mk 16 Maximum Damage 17,900 Torpedo Speed 65 knot Torpedo Range 10.15 km. Torpedo Mk 17 Maximum Damage 16,900 Torpedo Speed 65 knot Torpedo Range 16.55 km. AA Defense 127 mm/38 Mk.12 on a Mk.38 mount 4х 2 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second9.6 . . . Firing Range5.01 km. 40 mm Bofors on a Mk.1 mount pcs. 3 х 2 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second37.9 . . . Firing Range3.51 km. 20 mm Oerlikon on a Mk.4 mount 6х 1 pcs. . . . Average Damage per Second32.4 . . . Firing Range2.01 km. Maneuverability Maximum Speed 35.6 knot Turning Circle Radius 640 m. Rudder Shift Time 6.8 sec. Concealment Surface Detectability Range 7. 78 km. Air Detectability Range 3.42 km. Notes Porter albeit having the same guns as Somers, has faster reload at the cost of a torpedo launcher and detection range . porter can also use dual purpose guns with gearings 3 second reload also as an upgrade which puts it as a more gun focused destroyer compared to Somers torpedo focus and gearings middleground utility Overall I tried to keep them in the static middleground american dds hold while still venturing away from the general gameplay of the current line and I tried to use unique ships without putting in any more 1500 ton ships from the gridleys or bagleys as it would trump benhams uniqueness and also avoiding the gleaveses as there are already enough benson clones ingame already leave feedback below
  22. LittleWhiteMouse

    Premium Ship Review: Aigle

    The following is a review of Aigle, a ship kindly provided to me by Wargaming. This is the release version of the vessel and these stats are current as of January 24th, 2018. The Baker's Dozen Quick Summary: A massive destroyer with ridiculously powerful guns and hard hitting torpedoes. Cost: Undisclosed at the time of publishing. Patch & Date Written: Patch 0.6.14 to 0.7.01, November 30th, 2017 until January 24th, 2018. PROs Huge hit point pool for a tier VI destroyer at 17,000hp. Armed with five139mm guns -- the largest gun caliber that can still benefit from destroyer sized gun skills. Very long ranged for a destroyer with a 12.8km reach. Excellent fire chance per shell of 9% Enormous warhead charge on her torpedoes, dealing a massive 18,400 damage per hit. Engine Boost consumable lets her top 43 knots for two-minute stretches. Her horn sounds like a choo-choo train. CONs Horrible turret traverse. Low velocity shells with high ballistic arcs and long lead times at range. Appalling fire arcs on her guns and uninspiring ones on her torpedoes too. Large turning circle of 680m and sluggish handling for a destroyer. Punitive surface detection range and unable to stealth-fire torpedoes without Concealment Expert. Very reliant on commander skills to make her comfortable to play. Overview BAD - One of, if not the worst at its tier. This is a pronounced weakness. FAIR - Middle of the pack at its tier. Not terrible, but not terribly good either.GOOD - Has a significant advantage over her tier mates. A solid, competitive performer.BEST - No other ship at its tier does this as well as this ship. Aigle is enormous, with powerful artillery, ridiculously hard hitting torpedoes, a huge slug of hit points and the ability to do in excess of 43 knots. She pays for it with horrible anti-aircraft firepower and a terrible concealment values. Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / Extreme This isn't a destroyer with which you can easily hide and attack enemies. Inexperienced players will find her awkward and impossible to conceal. She has the striking power to impress veterans, provided they can stomach the limitations of her weapon systems. Knowing how to use and abuse island cover is one of the key skills needed to excel in this ship. Options Consumables: Aigle's Engine Boost consumable is worth taking a closer look. Aigle's Damage Control Party is standard for a destroyer with a 60 second / 40 second reset timer. Her Smoke Generator is also standard with a 20 second emission time. Each cloud lasts for 81 seconds and the consumable has either a 240 seconds or 160 second reset timer. Finally, her Engine Boost consumable increases the ship's speed by 20% instead of 8%. This lets Aigle reach theoretical maximums of 43.2 knots for up to two minutes with 180 second / 120 second reset timer. Premium Camouflage: Aigle has the tier VI Type 10 Camouflage. This provides 50% bonus experience gains, a 10% reduction to maintenance costs, 3% reduction in surface detection and 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. Module Upgrades: Four slots, standard destroyer options. In your first slot, take Magazine Modification 1. You may be huge. You may have a ton of hit points, but you're still a destroyer with squishy magazines. Next up, take Propulsion Modification 1 to help keep your engines from being disabled. If you have access to it, take Engine Boost Modification 1 instead -- it plays up to Aigle's strengths. Aiming Systems Modification 1 is optimal in your third slot, mostly because Aigle's AA guns are terrible. In your fourth slot, Propulsion Modification 2 to give you a little more acceleration from when you're hiding in smoke. Firepower Primary Battery: Five 139mm rifles in individual turrets in an A-B-P-X-Y superfiring configuration. P is rear facing. Torpedoes: Six tubes in 2x3 launchers Aigle has awesome weaponry. On paper, she's the knees of the bees. Unfortunately, this is largely undone by poor fire arcs, awful gun handling and the combined issues of range and concealment. How much these affect you largely depends on your tolerance for wonky fields of fire and how reliant you are upon being sneaky to succeed in a destroyer. Artillery Poor fire arcs on French destroyers is nothing new. Cyclone, released in July of 2017, gave us the first hint of the travesty that would be Aigle's fields of fire and I'm not terribly optimistic about future releases being exempt from similar issues. To fire all five of Aigle's guns, you need to present yourself at near a full broadside to your foe, with a 57º off your bow to fire forward and a 59º fire angle off your stern when firing backwards. This is largely untenable in the thick of fighting -- not unless you want to sail in a straight line and give your opponents an easy shot. It's more realistic to expect that Aigle will typically fire with three guns (ABX forward, PXY backwards) which undermines the fearsome damage-per-minute (DPM) numbers she should (in theory) be able to boast. Her sluggish turret traverse of 6.5º/s only further complicates matters, making Aigle's gunnery uncomfortable under any kind of manoeuvres. The last flaw to speak of in regards to Aigle's gun performance is her shell ballistics. Her guns are not the high-velocity rifles of the Soviet Navy which hurts her ability to bombard targets at range. They are comparable in shell flight time to Japanese destroyers at a distance, but with a lower initial muzzle velocity. This is exacerbated by Aigle's poor concealment characteristics where she's often forced to bombard targets from longer range. Nine and ten second lead times are not uncommon, and worse if you add on Advanced Fire Training. The plus side to her ballistics was that she could park behind some islands and lob shells at distant targets and hammer them over and over, undetected and safe from reprisals. This is just one extra challenge to unlock the awesome damage potential of these guns. You can undercut these traverse and fire angle flaws (though there's nothing to be done about floaty ballistics). Aigle's 139mm guns benefit fully from Basic Fire Training and Expert Marksman. The former will prop up your flagging DPM while the latter will increase her turret rotation speed to 9.0º per second -- more than enough to keep up with the manoeuvres you'll put Aigle through. You can also simply tank your way through return fire from enemy destroyers while keeping four or five guns trained on them, confident you can out trade their fire. Feel free to play with Advanced Fire Training if you'd like, but the ballistic arcs that far out are hilarious. You shouldn't worry too much about concealment issues, though -- Aigle is already one of the largest destroyers out there and hiding in open water just isn't something she does well. Seriously? Ew. In payment for the aforementioned flaws, you get a monster. Aigle feels like some Frankenstein's golem, combining facets from different destroyer gunnery and creating something entirely new. Her 139mm shells are huge. For a destroyer, they do great damage, penetrate well, start fires easily and all without sacrificing rate of fire. It's the little things which add up too. For example, Aigle's AP shells have the same longer fuse timer as American 127mm/38s found on their destroyers. This gives the shells more time to punch through the layers of armour that protect the machine spaces of some cruisers. This makes Aigle a greater threat to the citadels of cruisers than many of the other destroyers. You're more likely to see full damage citadel hits than just penetrations when you ambush an enemy cruiser at close range. Aigle's guns also boast similar penetration power to the high velocity 130mm of the Soviets, making her capable of besting up to 80mm at 11km and 100mm of steel at 8km -- values which echo the citadel protection around many tier VI and V light cruisers, incidentally. Her HE is also arguably the best at her tier. She inflicts high shell damage but she's also the best fire bug at her tier. With Inertial Fuse for HE Shells (IFHE), she's capable of damaging the extremities of all but the tier VIII battleships. As a destroyer, she only loses 1% fire chance for this skill, it still keeps her viable as a fire starter. Be advised that without IFHE, big as Aigle's guns are, they're not capable of damaging the extremities of tier VI and VII battleships and tier VIII heavy cruisers which will see a huge drop in your damage done. AP in blue, HE in violet. Aigle will often struggle to get all five guns on target. It's fair to say I have a love-hate relationship with Aigle's gunnery. Her damage potential is the siren's call which made me want to take her out time and again. For every game where I got into an ideal position and could rain Hell down on my enemies, there were games where I had to run and hide from enemy lolibotes and cruisers. This isn't a destroyer where knife fighting is comfortable -- even with Expert Marksman, your fire arcs are going to leave you way too vulnerable to broadsides of torpedoes if you want to trade DPM. If you can park and blaze away, you'll do well with Aigle. If you're asked to move and fight, these guns will trip you up every time. Torpedoes There's not much to say about Aigle's torpedoes. She doesn't get a lot of them, for one. This contrasts with the stupidly huge warheads grafted to them which hit harder than any other fish at her tier, including the Pan Asian and Japanese destroyers which typically have the monopoly on such things. Their chance for causing floods is second only to Fushun's at tier VI. There are two problems I have with Aigle's torpedoes and they compound. They're slow. They're very difficult to fire from concealment. Short of ambushes around islands or suicide-torp runs, landing torpedo hits with Aigle's torpedoes is difficult. Sure, they're hilarious as all get out when they smack something, but good luck setting that up. It's impossible to launch her torpedoes from stealth without a full concealment build on your ship and commander. What's more, her fire arcs aren't especially generous (they're not terrible, but they're not great), so whipping your ship around to dump fish against an enemy coming towards you can often give yourself away. And, once they've seen you, they're going to turn. The slow speed of Aigle's fish means even a minor course adjustment will see your fish swim past their target without biting. Overall, Aigle's torpedoes are a lot like her guns -- you want to use them but they'll fight you every step of the way. They're hilarious when they work though and that alone will keep you trying. Aigle's has narrow torpedo arcs directly off her sides, requiring you to expose her full broadside in order to launch. Summary: Hard hitting. Horrible fire arcs. Can you overlook the latter in order to enjoy the former? Evaluation: GOOD What it would have needed to be BEST: Aigle isn't a torpedo boat. She's a gunship, first and foremost with torpedoes as incidental backups. Thus her merits are largely weighed upon her gunnery. As good as Aigle's guns are, they aren't the best. Farragut's guns put out more damage and are better suited to knife fighting. Gaede's 150mm are better for punishing larger warships. Aigle is a generalist, and a good one, with guns that can make a destroyer balk with the first broadside and make a battleship player grind their teeth with frustration at the incessant 139mm bombs being dropped on their decks. And just wait until you read what T-61 can do... Manoeuvrability Top Speed: 36.0 knotsTurning Radius: 680mRudder Shift: 4.1s Maximum Turn Rate: 6.8º/s at 4/4 speed If there was one flaw upon which to set all of Aigle's manoeuvrability woes, it's her enormous turning circle which lets her down. It's not the worst we've ever seen among destroyers (Ernst Gaede is worse within the same tier), but it holds her back. Combined with her modest top speed, this leads to a sluggish rate of turn for a destroyer and makes her more akin in handling to a nimble light cruiser than her fellow lolibotes. However, with the touch of a button you can alleviate Aigle's woes. Her Engine Boost consumable is phenomenal. Aigle launches from a 36 knot top speed to over 43 knots for two-minute intervals (three minutes with Engine Boost Modification 1). This also spikes her rate of turn from 6.8º per second up to 7.4º per second allowing her to come about more quickly too. With her boost, Aigle transforms from a dumpybutt to a rocketbutt -- untouchable within her own tier and competitive with everything she may encounter. The only down side to her Engine Boost consumable is those two minutes in between (premium) reset timers where you have to go back to being terrible Evaluation: FAIR What it would have needed to be GOOD: Aigle is a long way off from "GOOD" and only spared a "BAD" label because of her Engine Boost consumable. Aigle is so fast with her Speed Boost active, even my screenshots of her have speed lines. Rate of Turn There are several factors which affect how quickly a ship comes about. The most significant are the ship's forward momentum and the size of her turning radius. As a ship slows down, her turning radius changes, but not always for the better. To make things more complicated, different ships also preserve speed better in a turn. When it comes to changing your heading, keep up your speed. If you want a tighter turning circle with Aigle, slow down to 3/4s or 1/2 engine power -- you'll shave off 100m of her turning radius which can help you avoid islands. Just be aware you will not come about as quickly. Steering Gears Modification 2 reduces Aigle's rudder shift time from 4.1s down to 3.3s. However, this does not noticeably affect her turning values. This upgrade is a placebo and not a practical bonus. When attempting to measure the gains made, some of the results fell within the margin of error of my reaction time and were impossible to tell apart. 360º Rotation Rate (Ship Maximums): 1/4 speed (8.8 knots): 2.0º/s rotation, ~688m turning radius 1/2 speed (16.9 knots): 4.5º/s rotation, ~581m turning radius 3/4 speed (23.6 knots): 6.2º/s rotation, ~592m turning radius 4/4 speed (30.3 knots): 6.8º/s rotation, ~687m turning radius BOOSTED (34.9 knots): 7.4º/s rotation, ~732m turning radius 90º Rotation Rate (Stock): 1/4 speed: 1.9º/s rotation for 46.8s 1/2 speed: 4.3º/s rotation for 20.8s 3/4 speed: 5.8º/s rotation for 15.6s 4/4 speed: 6.3º/s rotation for 14.2s BOOSTED: 6.9º/s rotation for 13.0s 90º Rotation Rate (Steering Gears Modification 2) 1/4 speed: 2.0º/s rotation for 46.1s 1/2 speed: 4.4º/s rotation for 20.5s 3/4 speed: 5.9º/s rotation for 15.4s 4/4 speed: 6.4º/s rotation for 14.0s BOOSTED: 7.0º/s rotation for 12.8s Durability Hit Points: 17,000 Maximum Protection: 16mm Ah, destroyer durability. So straightforward. Aigle has the most hit-points at tier VI -- even more than Ernst Gaede's 16,500hp. This makes her the defacto toughest destroyer. But, don't get complacent. Glue on Survivability Expert to top yourself up to 19,1000hp to keep your primacy. Remember to guard your magazines with Magazine Modification 1 and/or a Juliet Charlie signal lest you find yourself unseated. You're still a destroyer after all. The glut of hit points on Aigle will serve you well, provided you can spend them wisely. Use them to clinch knife fights -- just make sure you dodge those fish. Evaluation: BEST What it would have needed to be GOOD: Destroyer durability is pretty straight forward until you start to see weird bits of armour-plate capable of causing ricochet at higher tiers. None of that's present here, so barring her spawning multiple magazines running the length of the ship, Aigle is safely the best of the bunch with the largest hit point pool. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Battery Calibers: 37mm / 13.2mm AA Umbrella Ranges: 3.0km / 1.2km AA DPS per Aura: 5 / 19 Aigle's anti-aircraft firepower is all kinds of terrible and there's not a lot you can do to improve the situation. Given her size and her large turning circle, enemy aircraft are particularly dangerous for this destroyer and they have every reason to glue themselves to you and keep you from sitting safely back and using your guns to your heart's content. Aigle is so large that aircraft can spot her without even slipping into her AA bubble. A CV could (in theory), keep her permanently lit without any risk to her own reserves whatsoever. Evaluation: BAD What it would have needed to be FAIR: AA guns that were actually a threat to enemy aircraft. Vision Control Base Surface Detection Range: 7.74km Air Detection Range: 4.35km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 6.76km Detection Range when Firing from Smoke: 3.11km Main Battery Firing Range: 12.78km This isn't a destroyer you want to use to scout early on in a match. Aigle's surface detection range is enormous -- the worst at her tier. While she doesn't also have the worst surface detection range for a destroyer within her matchmaking spread, but she's close. There are all of two (2) destroyers that she will normally meet that she can out-spot: Mahan and Kiev. That's it. Your only hope otherwise is to run into players that are not running full concealment builds on their destroyers. You're going to be spotted first -- it's best to accept that early and change your play style to reflect it. Contesting cap circles early on in a match is probably not a good idea; not unless you know what you're facing and that they're unsupported.. Aigle does not knife fight with enemy destroyers well -- between her clumsy handling, bad gun fire angles and slow turret traverse, getting in close is an unnecessary risk. Pushing early means you're going to hemorrhage that hit point advantage of yours without gain. Save them for when you isolate an enemy destroyer later in a match and can out trade her. The biggest casualty to Aigle's poor concealment is the use of her torpedoes. She can't fire them from stealth without a commander using Concealment Expert and even then, your margin of error is a mere 240m. You're really just limited to ambush scenarios or firing them at distracted enemies. It's possible (and not necessarily a bad idea) to dispense with using Concealment Expert altogether and play Aigle like a light cruiser with added speed flexibility and immunity to citadel hits. Evaluation: BAD What it would have needed to be FAIR: A good start would be getting that glaringly obvious red X13 off the side of the hull. Contesting cap circles early on in a match isn't what Aigle is designed for. Countdown to Blastoff: X Minus 13 You're going to want a dedicated French destroyer commander for Aigle. I tried playing with my French Light cruiser commander during play tesitng and quickly grew to regret it. Start with Priority Target for your first skill. If you're omniscient (or just reckless), you can take Preventative Maintenance instead. You're a destroyer, so Last Stand is a must -- especially if you took Engine Boost Modification 1. Follow this up with Survivability Expert to boost up your HP even further. And finally, allow yourself to stay hidden with Concealment Expert. For your next nine points, sink them into the following: Inertial Fuse for HE Shells, Basic Fire Training and Expert Marksman. This will give you the punch you need to directly damage battleships, the extra rate of fire to spike your DPM and improved gun handling to help mitigate her terrible fire arcs when you do have to fight another destroyer. Alternative builds are possible, especially where you drop any pretense of trying to hide this ship and don't take Concealment Expert. The four points could be freed up for skills like Demolition Expert, Adrenaline Rush or Superintendent. Final Evaluation Mouse's Summary: Aigle: Big guns. Big fish. Big butt. Most premium ships have a paywall. Some premium ships have a skill wall. Aigle has a patience wall. Without the right commander skills, this is a terrible ship. Aigle looks so much better than she is This is one of those ships that if you only saw her statistics, you could be forgiven for getting really excited. Playing her is much more mixed. Sure, she can do a lot of damage when everything works right but it's a lot of work. It's safe to say that I didn't enjoy Aigle overmuch, even if I recognize how potentially powerful she could be for someone who could get over the frustrations of her weapon handling. Aigle is a good ship hamstrung by poor fire arcs. She's not a traditional destroyer. She shares more in common with some of the late tier Soviet destroyers like Tashkent, Kiev and Khabarovsk but without the stupendous ballistics that makes long-range gunnery on said ships so comfortable. Still, Aigle is advantageous with the right setup. Having that commander build is key. I found she played best when you could park her behind a low island and hammer cruisers and battleships over and over and over again with her shellfire while they dueled with my team mates. The sting of Aigle's fish guaranteed that pushing around the islands was a bad choice for my enemies. This only worked when CVs left me alone, but that's a common lament for most destroyers. The catch is, I had to know where on each map I could abuse this and not all of them were accommodating. This is a support gunship -- a baby cruiser, as it were. Play her with these expectations and you should do alright. The lack of concealment doesn't damn Aigle, nor does awkward gun handling (though the latter is a close thing). However, the two together does sour me. I am a big advocate for concealment dominating games. When concealment isn't available, then a ship must out fight or outrun from threats. Aigle struggles to do the former without the right build (get those 19,100hp and bump up your rate of fire!). And the latter? Well, Aigle's Engine Boost is all kinds of phenomenal. If it feels like I'm holding back on singing Aigle's praises, it's because I am. I hate feeling like I'm fighting with the ship to make it perform and bad fire arcs really soured me to her. It didn't help that I was playing with my French Cruiser commander through much of the early play-test and I had a less than ideal build going, but that's on me. I was so twisted against Aigle, I nearly slapped her with a bad review because of the negative bias I was feeling. It took putting a 19pt commander on her with the right build and just sitting down and weighing all the paper data that I had to finally cement in my mind that Aigle was a better ship than I was initially giving credit. I still didn't enjoy her, per se, but that didn't prevent her from being a good ship. She's well-balanced. She has her flaws (flaws that rub me the wrong way especially) but she's not some overpowered monster, nor some gutterfluff piece of trash. At the end of the day, it was difficult to pin an Angry YouTuber label to her. What finally clinched it for me was defining the role that Aigle took. She was a support ship, that much was evident, and looking at the other destroyers in her tier, she had the most overlap with the German destroyer, Ernst Gaede. I had to ask myself, between the two ships, which was better? I kept reaching the conclusion that even with Aigle's advantages in speed and hit points, Gaede was better between them. When it came to hammering larger ships, Gaede did it better. When it came to using torpedoes, Gaede does it better. When it comes to supporting a cap circle, Gaede is simply more versatile with her Hydroacoustic Search consumable. Sorry, Aigle. You're good. You're damn good, even. You're just not the best at your given job. Made in German smug. Would I Recommend? On the whole, I say "non, merci" to Aigle. France isn't hurting for good premiums at the moment. Maybe Aigle will look a little more attractive when the French destroyer line is closer to finished. PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? Yes. Aigle will do just fine in Co-Op and Scenarios. Between her range, firepower, that huge chunk of hit points and her Engine Boost consumable, she's very versatile. Random Battle Grinding:This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. Not especially, no. At the same tier you could get De Grasse or, for a few bucks more, Dunkerque. They would serve you better as commander trainers with France having a cruiser and upcoming battleship line. De Grasse practically prints Arsonist medals. The necessity of an experience commander with a lot of skill points works against Aigle being a good trainer. For Competitive Gaming:Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. No. Wait for T-61. For Collectors:If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. I'd give her a pass. Aigle didn't have a very auspicious career (she was sunk twice). However, that could be said of most of the more modern French designs in World of Warships. At least she was built in steel For Fun Factor: Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? Very nope. I did not enjoy this ship. If you have more patience than I for horrible gun arcs and bad turret traverse, have at her. 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 The Aigle has landed. Thank you to my patrons on Patreon for their support in January for helping get this review out. I actually managed to take some time for myself (gasp!) and enjoy the game over the last week. Much of this was spent playing Co-Op of all things, crunching through the High School Fleet event to grind out the flags and camouflages on offer. Musashi, Yamato and Harekaze got a lot of play time and I even poked out with HSF Graf Spee a couple of times to collect the boxes I needed. Meanwhile, I haven't really touched Roma at all since release. It's still early yet and I'm still in the middle of crunch time with content creation. When things get a little less hectic, maybe I'll have a better idea if any of these ships will become new favourites. Aigle's not likely to make the cut. As much fun as her choo-choo train horn is, I feel no inclination to add her to my roster. My current ten favourite premium ships. Top Row: Fujin, Atlanta, De Grasse, Prinz Eugen, Atago. Bottom Row: Scharnhorst, Nelson, Harekaze, König Albert, Warspite. Appendix A list of sites, programs and people I rely upon to create my reviews. Thanks go out to iChase, NoZoupForYou, the World of Warships Wiki staff and Pigeon_of_War for their assistance with research. Most of all, everyone's favourite box-bound kitty, Lert, gets a special thank you for being the first to volunteer whenever I need help. With every review, he's behind the scenes providing feedback, proofreading, monotonously twirling ships and assisting with screenshots. And last, and definitely not least, one final thank you to all of my patrons on Patreon who help make these insane research projects possible. If you enjoy my reviews, please consider offering your support. For the complete list of my reviews, please visit:
  23. The following is a VERY hasty review of HSF Harekaze II. This ship was provided to me by Wargaming for review purposes at no cost to myself. To the best of my knowledge, the performance discussed here is current as of patch 0.10.3. Please be aware that her performance may chance in the future.= So, first things first. It may be obvious to some but it isn't obvious to others. HSF Harekaze II is not HSF Harekaze. HSF Harekaze II does not come with multiple hull and camouflage options like her predecessor did. If you're hoping to play with Japanese 100mm/65 guns or a cute kitty camo, this isn't the ship for you. HSF Harekaze II comes with a singular armament of three German 150mm/55 SK C/28s as found upon the ship during the events of the High School Fleet: the Movie (2020) (or is it the OVAs?) to which this crossover ties in. The original Harekaze was a true hybrid with good guns (using her 100mm/65s) and good torpedoes. Harekaze II is a torpedo destroyer with German destroyer consumables and three of their 150mm guns (but weird ammo). Between the servers melting and the limitations imposed by the licensing agreement, HSF Harekaze II was not available for Community Contributors to play-test before her release. So this is kinda rushed. The last time I had a hold of her was August 11th 2020, where I wrote the following to Wargaming (she was play-tested under the working name "Arashi"). Oh, past-me. So young. So optimistic. So "hasn't just spent the last three days recovering from vaccine reactions so she probably isn't grumpy like I am now". I'ma rip this ship a new one. Harekaze did not get the German 1/4 HE penetration. Her gun performance remains very niche. Her AP shells allow you to citadel select cruisers with minimal citadel protection at very close ranges. However, having only three guns with a 5 second reload time precludes her from having anything close to competitive damage output with her small main battery. Harekaze II is a torpedo destroyer and her individual performance is dictated by how well you can land those incredibly powerful fish. However, unlike most Japanese torpedo destroyers, she turns things upon its head with her access to a Hydroacoustic Search consumable. Harekaze II has the potential to be a strong forward scout, good at projecting vision for her allies. This is a very high risk play, however, as she does not have the firepower, speed or health to survive an encounter that goes pear shaped. Before we begin... A bit of a caveat for this review: It has been made as quickly as I could. I played ten games in this ship yesterday as soon as I got up, made notes and compared them to my older notes back when this ship was called Arashi. I then borrowed my Fen Yang data-set (from January 2021) and began updating it. There are no pretty graphs in this review, just screenshots of crap I C&Ped into notepad. I did this for expediency's sake; each pretty graphic is anywhere from 30 minutes to several hours worth of work which would have added literal days to this reviews production. These collaboration ships are never on sale for very long and I wanted to get my take on this ship while it's still out there. If you want to hear more about elements I did not cover, such as fire setting, AP fusing angles versus destroyers, etc, I have the info available. So without further ado: PROS Large calibre guns for a destroyer providing good penetration and punchy individual shells. Excellent gun arcs and a 360º gun rotation on X-turret. Whoo! ♪ Love me some good gun arcs. Hard hitting torpedoes. Great concealment with a surface detection as low as 5.37km. Access to a German destroyer Hydroacoustic Search. Her permanent camouflage provides 50% bonus commander training. CONS Tiny hit point pool for a tier VIII destroyer. Bad gun handling. Poor main battery DPM. Not very fast or agile. Her AA defence is a joke. She uses a German Smoke Generator with shorter smoke duration time. Entirely reliant on never being spotted ever. Overview Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / CHALLENGING / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / EXTREME I'm normally pretty forgiving when it comes to evaluating the skill floor of torpedo destroyers. Her potential is through the roof. Actualizing that potential is another matter entirely. That doesn't make her powerful, per se, but it does mean you have to respect a Harekaze II in the hands of an expert more than you might a Kagero, for example; especially if she's in a division. Still, I gotta give HSF Harekaze II a bump up in difficulty for new players, if only because her survivability is so terrible. If you pull the trigger against the wrong target with your guns, you are doomed. If you over-extend, you are doomed. If you over-estimate the duration of your smoke: also doomed. Options Consumables HSF Harekaze II has German-destroyer consumables instead of those from a Japanese-destroyer. Her Damage Control Party is standard. It has a 5 second active time, unlimited charges and a 40 second reset timer. Her Smoke Generator is that of a German destroyer. It starts with 3 charges and it has a 160 second reset timer. It emits smoke for 20 seconds with each cloud having a 450m radius which is normal enough. However, the clouds only last for 69 seconds (nice) instead of the expected 89 seconds for a Japanese destroyer. We come back to normalcy with her Engine Boost. This provides the usual 8% speed increase for 120 seconds with a 120 second reset timer. It comes with 3 charges to start. And finally we have her glorious Hydroacoustic Search consumable. This has 3 charges to start, 100 second active time and a 120 second reset timer. It detects torpedoes up to 3.5km away and ships up to 5km away. This is identical to that found on ships like Z-23 or Z-35, for example. For those curious, this is still a step behind Loyang's and Siliwangi's. Upgrades It may appear that there's a variety of choice here, but there's really not; at least if you're worried about optimization. Take Main Armaments Modification 1 in your first slot. If you're allergic to Fun and Engaging™ game-play, then Magazine Modification 1 will help mitigate that somewhat. The special upgrade Hydroacoustic Search Modification 1 is the best choice in slot two. Engine Boost Modification 1 is the next best choice. Each of these will cost 17,000 from the Armory. If you can't (or won't) afford that, then default to Engine Room Protection. Harekaze II is a torpedo destroyer. Play to your strengths. Take Torpedo Tubes Modification 1 in slot 3. If you want to pretend that you can prop up this ship's weaknesses than take either Aiming Systems Modification 1 or Main Battery Modification 2 to assist with aiming and gun handling respectively. You do have an honest choice in slot four. You won't be sitting in smoke often, so Propulsion Modification 1 may not give you the mileage you might be used to with other destroyers, however I still think it the better of the pair. Otherwise you can put a tiny bit more precision in her agility with Steering Gears Modification 1. Finally, take Concealment System Modification 1 in slot five. Commander Skills Build for and prioritize survivability, stealth, speed and torpedo performance. In a perfect "I'll never be spotted never mind shot-at" world, your 21pt commander should look something like this: There's a lot of wiggle room here. At tier 1 you can swap for Grease the Gears. At tier 2, take Priority Target or Last Stand if you prefer. At tier 3 you do not want to deviate from the two skills listed, but if you can free up points from a tier 4 skill (or two), then Adrenaline Rush or Superintendent aren't terrible picks. At tier 4 you absolutely must keep Concealment Expert. Given Harekaze II's low speed, I strongly recommend Swift in Silence (it's a permanent Engine Boost while hidden) but between that and Radio Location you can drop one (or both) to free up points for other choices. Though you gotta wonder, if you're never supposed to be seen, do you really need Survivability Expert? Seems to me like that 'never being spotted' thing is a bit of a pipe dream, no? Camouflage The original Harekaze absolutely spoiled players for choice. It came with both the High School Fleet themed camouflage and a more traditional Japanese destroyer camo as her inclusion into the game predated the expanded use of content filters we now enjoy in port (before, if you disabled being able to see the High School Fleet camo, the game demounted the camo). This latter changed the geometry of the ship to appear "normal" removing the fantastic elements from the anime and, provided you completed the first part of the Isoroku Yamamoto collection, it also provided an alternate palette. Finally, you could later buy the infamous (and amazing) Isoroku camo which turned your ship into a kitty-cat. Harekaze II has no such options. She comes with a single camo which also means you cannot palette swap her skin if you disable viewing the High School Fleet content with your port-filters. It provides the following bonuses: A 3% reduction in surface detection ranges. A 4% increase to the dispersion of enemy gunfire. A 10% reduction to post-battle service costs. A 50% increase to commander experience earned. A 50% increase to experience earned.  (These bonuses are identical to the optional "Isoroku" camouflage on the original Harekaze. However, Harekaze's default camo had 100% bonus free experience instead of 50% commander experience found here). No fun kitty camo here. Summary HSF Harekaze II has German-destroyer consumables. She should be built as a torpedo-destroyer with her upgrades and commander skills. Her camouflage options are limited to a single camo unlike her predecessor. Firepower Main Battery: Three 150mm/55 guns in 3x1 turrets in an A-X-Y superfiring arrangement. Torpedoes: Eight tubes in 2x4 launchers mounted fore and aft of the rear funnel down the centre-line of the ship. Gun fire arcs are: A-Turret: 312º X-Turret: 324º with a full 360º traverse. Y- Turret: 314º While HSF Harekaze II may be using German guns, she's using very Japanese ammunition. And this is very good ammunition to be clear (despite it's faults). If she had more than just three guns to play with, this destroyer's main battery firepower might have been interesting in game rather than simply academically. Here's what it gives you: Her AP penetration is excellent for a destroyer; well above and beyond German and Soviet destroyer AP penetration. This makes her a credible threat to most broadsiding cruisers up to distances of about 8km or so. Her HE shell damage is much higher than expected for a German styled weapon. HSF Harekaze II's shells deal a maximum of 2,500 per hit instead of the wimpy 1,700 of German shells. They have very high fire chance for a destroyer-mounted 150mm shell at 11% per hit. Here's what you're not getting from their German heritage: Improved German 150mm-gun dispersion. Improved German 1/4 HE penetration. Improved (60º to 67.5º) auto-ricochet angles. Look, there is so much I could talk about with these weapons. The interaction of their fuse sensitivity with destroyer hull angles, their long (for a destroyer) fuse timers and how this interacts with her AP penetration over distance, how good they are at setting fires, etc. But the simple fact of the matter is that HSF Harekaze II does not have enough barrels to make these guns work effectively. Harekaze II's weapons are weapons of opportunity. If you see a vulnerable, low-health target? Feel free to open fire. It doesn't matter if it's a destroyer, cruiser, battleship or carrier. Otherwise, don't bother. It's never worth giving your position away and making landing torpedoes harder. You know you're in a rough spot when the Japanese torpedo destroyers look like better gunships than you. Taking HSF Harekaze II into a knife fight is the wrong move against nearly any full-health opponent you can name. Her AP performance is at least respectable which makes her much more of a threat against low-health cruisers and battleships; especially to the former if they flash their sides. I put this together for three reasosn. First, Harekaze II's AP shells are really neat. I popped a low-health München at 6.5km with a brace of citadel hits which felt amazing. Second, it's an excuse to show off how different HSF Harekaze II's AP shells perform compared to other German 150mm armed destroyers. Third, it also allowed me to show one of the many differences between the old German destroyer 150mm performance (Z-39) and the new (Maerker). Torpedoes Tier VIII destroyer torpedoes have this annoying habit of being "almost amazing". There's always something wrong with them. Maybe they don't hit hard enough. Maybe they're really slow. Maybe the destroyer simply doesn't have enough of them. This is, of course, to encourage players to continue to look every upward and push onto those tier X destroyers where such flaws are reduced (if not absent entirely). For HSF Harekaze II, that issue is range. Let's be clear: HSF Harekaze II's torpedoes are some of the meanest at her tier. They hit like trucks. They're fast. She fires a good spread. While the detection range (and reaction time) of Japanese fish is notoriously over-generous, their biggest flaw is that they put these fragile and flighty destroyers within Surveillance Radar range. Their 10km reach just isn't ideal and an extra 2km would make a world of difference in their efficiency, which is exactly why they don't have it. Each torpedo hit from HSF Harekaze II chunks the red team of up to 20,967 damage, so even a trio of hits is a decent battle result. Four to five is a solid game and should put you near the top of the team lists. Six or more and you should start to feel sorry for the Reds. While this may not seem like a tall order, the reality is that you're as much reliant upon your own skill set as your are on the misplays of the Red team in order to get these kinds of results. Torpedo destroyers are generally very inconsistent, with high peaks and low valleys when it comes to individual games. Their volatility is what makes them so exciting ... and frustrating. Worse, their efficiency can be neutered by something as simple as an overflying group of enemy aircraft that had no intention of dropping on her. HSF Harekaze II, like all torpedo-destroyers, works best when they don't see the attack coming. A wary target may not be able to avoid every torpedo thrown at it, but it's the difference between scoring multiple hits or getting MAYBE one. Between the time it takes to setup, get into position and her own reload, she can't put enough fish into the water to guarantee a reasonable result that way. This is, of course, nothing new. It's a common lament for all torpedo boats out there. Except for Asashio. Asashio don't play by those rules. Asashio makes her own damn rules. Both versions of HSF Harekaze use Kagero's torpedoes. The original Harekaze uses her stock fish while HSF Harekaze II uses her upgraded ones. VERDICT: Her guns suck not because they aren't good, but because she doesn't have enough of them. Her torpedoes are great, though. Durability Hit Points: 13,300 Bow & stern/superstructure/upper-hull/deck: 19mm / 13mm / 19mm / 19mm No. Just, no. HSF Harekaze II's effective health is pathetic for a tier VIII destroyer. VERDICT: Very, very bad. Agility Top Speed: 35kts Turning Radius: 640m Rudder Shift Time: 4s 4/4 Engine Speed Rate of Turn: 7.0º/s at 29.1kts A top speed of 35 knots is the basement of acceptable destroyer speeds. Anything less than that and it's a crippling flaw. So HSF Harekaze II's speed is barely adequate and will (frankly) get her into a lot of trouble. This is a ship that lives and dies by controlling engagement distances. While her excellent concealment does wonders for assisting her with this, without speed to back it up, it's by no means an easy contest. The worst case scenario for HSF Harekaze II is being pursued; especially by a ship equipped with either Hydroacoustic Search or worse Surveillance Radar. Her 35 knot top speed just isn't enough to open up the distance, If you touch her rudder at all, that speed falls below 30 knots and most cruisers going flat out can not only keep pace, but actively gain upon her. To this end, it's hard not to look favourably upon the commander skill Swift in Silence. The extra speed at least allows her to play keep-away from (most) cruisers. I'm recycling this from my Z-35 review for the sake of saving time. HSF Harekaze II has almost identical performance to Kagero, Harekaze, Asashio and AL Yukikaze. VERDICT: Okay, but only just. Anti-Aircraft Defence Short Ranged (up to 2.5km): 14dps at 95% accuracy (13.3dps) No. Very no. She struggles to shoot down summoned fighters, to say nothing of attacking planes. VERDICT: Even worse than her durability. I AM HAVING SO MUCH FUN RIGHT NOW! Vision Control Base/Minimum Surface Detection: 6.84km / 5.37km Base/Minimum Air Detection Range: 3.06km / 2.48km Detection Range When Firing in Smoke: 2.96km Maximum Firing Range: 11.4km There is a lot of good going on here. First thing's first, the Kagero-class (and related) destroyers are the stealthiest ships within their Matchmaking. They have the surface detection to outspot everything else out there. Similarly, HSF Harekaze II's aerial detection is downright excellent. Planes have to be literally over-top of her in order to spot her which makes rocket attacks difficult unless the CV knows well in advance where the destroyer is (or is going to be). And let's not ignore the fact she also gets access to Hydroacoustic Search, giving her the ability to screen for enemy fish and the potential (I stress: potential) to spot concealed enemies. The only downside, really, is there's not much HSF Harekaze II can do with this great concealment offensively on her own. As great as her Vision Controll toolkit is, what can she really do with it other than to play keep away? Taking the Radio Location and Swift in Silence commander skills are nearly a must to give her both the advanced warning and extra speed necessary to ensure she can control engagement distances on lurking lolibotes. While she may be able to outspot anything she faces, she's not agile enough to come about in the short span of time between spotting a destroyer heading her way and when they make up the difference in surface detection and spot her right back. With HSF Harekaze II's fragility and poor DPM, this is rarely an encounter she comes out the better for if it comes down to trading fire. And if you do the smart thing and keep your guns silent and run away, you're still going to sacrifice a big chunk of her admittedly small health pool. The bad news with taking Radio Location is that it warns ships that you're lurking in the area, which hurts the efficiency of her torpedo ambushes. But it's not like you can really afford to go without. To this end, HSF Harekaze II's Vision Control is so damn frustrating. It's god-tier, but slapped on a boat that can do almost nothing with it. I got myself killed time and again making bold plays for my team -- spotting lolibotes, contesting cap circles and hoping against hope whatever group of random players I was teamed up with would take advantage of the forward positions I was taking. You can guess how my average game went. In a division, HSF Harekaze II's god-tier concealment and access to Hydroacoustic Search are worth so much more. But for her own merits, she's just a sneaky torpedo destroyer that doesn't have to worry about getting hit by enemy torpedoes. This is a list of all of the tier VI through X destroyers, ranked by their fully upgraded surface detection range. When there's a tie, I sort them by the following criteria. First, lower tiered ships get preference over higher tiered ships. Next, I sort them by the date of their nation's inclusion into World of Warships (Japan, USA, USSR, Germany, etc). Tech tree ships have preference over premiums. After that, I try and go by release date but that's not strictly adhered to. VERDICT: So damn good and so damn frustrating. Final Evaluation Forward scouting in HSF Harekaze II is ... well, it's a bit of a loser move outside of divisions. I want to play HSF Harekaze II like Haida II, the Cobra Chicken Boogaloo. Her great concealment and that long-range Hydroacoustic Search? It's SOOOO good when it works. If it works. I must stress both that 'when' and 'if'. If you can't rely on your team mates to shoot at what you spot, when you put yourself up on the firing line like that, you're just going to die and lose. It takes only a mildly aggressive enemy destroyer to see you off. And if you're stupid (or stubborn) enough to stick around when they've already sniffed you out once and know they can outfight you, then this happens: I must stress that even an Asashio can outfight you. HSF Harekaze II just plain sucks at dealing with enemy lolibotes outside of those she can outspot by a mile (and I do mean a literal 1.6km mile) or those who walk into one of your torpedoes. To this end, even trying to contest cap circles is an idiot-play and will only serve you well if your opponents are idiots. Given the quality of Random Battle teams, this means it will happen just often enough to make you think you can pull it off on the regular only to wonder why it fails so spectacularly when one of the Reds decides to do more than run screaming from the cap-buoys. This takes the potential of this ship in solo-play from amazingly versatile to a one-trick pony. You spam torpedoes. That's it. Your team mates will get mad at you for not spotting, for not pushing caps, for not sticking your neck out and pew-pewing that low-health target but HSF Harekaze II's just not built to take those kind of risks without backup. I was genuinely terrified whenever I saw a Kidd, Cossack or Lightning on the enemy team, to say nothing of the higher tiered A-tier gunships. While this is a common lament in most torpedo destroyers, I kept (stupidly) trying to play the forward spotter and I kept feeding myself to these destroyers. Now I admit, that's my own damned fault for playing her this way, but I had to prove to myself that attempting this without division backup wasn't viable. I would have been much better served thinking myself a Kagero that had already taken a broadside from a British battleship and thus, low on health, I should play cautiously. This largely means discarding what makes HSF Harekaze II interesting: her Hydroacoustic Search. In solo play, don't try and use it aggressively. Pretend it's not there. Use it to screen for torpedoes for your team. This all changes in a division, of course, but for solo-play? Without good team mates? No. Very no. So that leaves HSF Harekaze II to be evaluated upon how well she dispenses torpedoes. And in that regard, she's really no better than Kagero with one fewer degrees worth of torpedo arc off her stern. Is HSF Harekaze II good? Well, 5.37km surface detection + Hydroacoustic Search is good. 21,000 damage, 67 knot torpedoes with a 10km range are good. The rest of her isn't. You need to bring a friend along to do the shooting for you if things get hot. Do I like this ship? No. Would I recommend this ship? No. She's a pale shadow of the original HSF Harekaze and if Wargaming wanted to sell a 150mm armed version of her, they should have figured out a way to monetize buying another upgrade slot on her original hull. I suppose that causes all sorts of issues with the crossover license, so that's my guess why we didn't see it. HSF Harekaze II's implementation just makes the original look all the better, so go buy that one instead if you want a piece. I won't be playing this ship going forward unless in a division where I can count on my team mates to shoot what I light up. Then she's fun. But alone? No. If I want to play a tier VIII dedicated torpedo destroyer solo, there's always Kagero, Asashio, AL Yukikaze, etc. Conclusion Not bad. This review took me a little over 30 hours to put together from start to finish, including getting those 10 games in and a good night's sleep besides. Please let me know if you want me to spend some time turning those notepad screenshots into pretty graphics. Otherwise, I'm putting this one to bed and begin the next one. Thank you very much for reading and a very special thanks to my Patrons on Patreon for helping keep my lights on.  
  24. 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/).
  25. Description: Nation: Pan Euro Entered Service: 1944 Originally completed as British Z-class destroyer HMS Zealous, Eilat was sold to the Israeli Navy in 1955. She was sunk shortly after the Six-day war by missiles launched from Egyptian missile boats Anti-Ship Armament: Main Battery: 4x1 113mm QF/45 Mk IV on Mk V mounting Reload time 5.0 Sec time to turn 180 degrees: 10.5 seconds HE shell damage 1,675 Armor penetration: 19 Chance of causing fire: 8% AP Shell damage: 2,100 Historical muzzle velocity: 746 m/s Historical range: 18.97 km in-game range: 11.0km Torpedo Tubes: 2x4 533mm PR Mk II Common damage: 15,733 common range: 7.0 km Anti-air Armament: Flak: 4x1 113mm QF explosions per salvo: 2 Damage per salvo: 1,150 Historical range: 12.46 km in game: 6.4 km continuous damage: 5x1 40mm Bofors total continuous damage: 100 historical range: 7.16 km In-game range: 6.0km Maneuverability: Top Speed: 37 knots Rudder shift time: 3.9s Abilities**: Slot 1: Damage control party Slot 2: Rapid-burst Smoke generator OR Surveillance Radar Slot 3: Engine Boost Or Defensive AA fire ASW: None mentioned for the sake of the eventual release of submarines Tier: VII Resource: Coal/doubloons notes: Please bear with me this is my first ship proposal * To maintain historical Accuracy, I refrained from making up figures including exact model of equipment when my access to exact specifics were limited. I cannot understate how much your feedback will be appreciated should you have greater access to information on this vessel than me. ** Abilities are both based on historical reference and what is available on similar ships of same-nation origin due to limited data. if it could not historically make use of an ability and/or could make use of one not listed please let me know. Once again I can't understate how much I appreciate polite assistance on this. Also I am having trouble deciding on the tier. Assistance on this part is not only appreciated but also requested.