Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'destroyers'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News and Announcements
    • Patch notes
    • Contests And In-Game Competitions
    • Support
    • The Pigeon's Nest
    • Player Gatherings and Events
    • Surveys
  • General Gameplay Discussion
    • General Discussion
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Off-Topic
    • Player Modifications
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests

Calendars

  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Found 200 results

  1. Lately I dislike playing tier 7 destroyers. I think it is somewhat because the tier 8 concealment expert module is so dominate on tier 8 + destroyers as it gives such a massive advantage. Frankly I would like to see the tier 8 module slot just completely disappear but I do not think that would happen. The concealment module makes such a massive difference, I would say tier 7 destroyers are not nearly as much fun as tier 7 cruisers, or battleships, but enough griping. :P The other module slots at other tiers have tempting alternative options to their best one, even the 500k cost module allows for secondary modification, anti air modification, and aiming system modification for different flavors that work for the skill. For the 2 million cost? It is just the concealment option. What other options for that module would be worth taking instead of concealment expert? * Maybe air concealment module? Reduce spotting by air by 40% * Element protection module? 10% reduction to fire and flooding damage, maybe even 5% more torpedo protection *High explosive charge module? +100 meters per second to shell velocity These are some ideas that may be competitive to concealment module and might make the tier 8 slot more interesting. These are just my thoughts. What kinds of modules do you all think could be competitive to the concealment module?
  2. I don't know what it is, but in the last few weeks, whenever I play my destroyers and carriers, I'm constantly getting harassed by battleships hanging in the back rows, asking for spotting. I get it. Long range guns need targets to shoot. But @#%$, if the people with the heaviest armor are too afraid to get close, they can spot their own targets. I'm tired of getting my destroyers shot up because I'm the only target within range (I get spotted by either a red DD, or aircraft, and smoke only does so much). I'm tired of losing my planes and people crying about lack of spotting, despite the fact that I haven't allowed a single red TB through (You're welcome). And these are people that typically, by battle end, have the least xp earned and the fewest kills, so it's not like they're hitting much anyways. There are plenty of reds visible once the rest of the fleet engages, and they're apparently not good enough?
  3. Why do only four nations have destroyers, and two nations have aircraft carriers? This isn't a very important question, but it just rubs me the wrong way that none of the British destroyers or aircraft carriers made it into the game. The same goes for the french! They had over 100 destroyers and I believe several battleships, but they're only given cruisers in the game, save for the Dunkerque. What is with the historical discrepancies? Is it because it would be too costly to include all the cool ships the nations have? I'm simply baffled. It's especially odd when you consider the British designed the first purpose built aircraft carrier, as well as the famed 'invincibility' of the British Navy during the wars. Links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_World_War_II_destroyers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_World_War_II_destroyers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Hermes_(95) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battleships_of_France
  4. Is there a source (WOW wiki?) that details the visibility stats of various torps across the game - and the ships that used them? I want to understand which ships have the lowest visibility torps - I understand this varies, with the IJN typically having the lowest. But would like to learn more. Thanks!
  5. It seems people are hyping about the Kidd mainly due to its AA capabilities. But there are reasons to ponder before an average player commits to buy the ship and use it to farm credits or experience. The Kidd is basically a Benson with 5 less torpedoes. The guns are almost identical (Kidd has slightly longer range, at 12 km with that arc it's a miracle to hit thing but a straight sailing BB). Being destroyers, the majority of the damage, especially % damage done to target, will be from their torpedoes. So having 50% less torpedoes is a great hindrance to credit and exp farming, because the game uses % damage done as a major metric for calculation. Harder to do large amount of % damage to enemies is one of the most important factor to consider before buying the Kidd. The extra consumable also means extra maintenance cost. A player can choose to run with non premium consumables but the ship's abilities will literally be greatly reduced. The AA consumable seems nice now, because for some reason, CVs have forgotten about the age old tactic of baiting out the defensive AA. Sooner or later, CVs are going to remember again (hoping a ship's performance based on enemies' idiocy is not a stable plan). On top, and the major reason, is that encountering a CV in game is not more than 50%, it's around 40%. So it's not optimal running premium AA all the time, and if not running non premium AA is more likely then CVs will simply bait and drop, making the consumable moot. Maneuverability wise, the Kidd has longer rudder shift. It makes turning in the restricted areas inside a smoke cloud harder, and thus making it more vulnerable to torpedoes. Even outside the smoke, longer rudder shift means harder to dodge torpedoes. Right now Kidd has slightly more avg damage done and slightly higher win rate than Benson, but judging by the distribution of Benson's "rating" (which is heavily based on avg damage) which skews heavily to the right (Kidd's distribution not out yet). The differences in performance between the two might not be statistically significant (variance too high). Compare to Fletcher (which has 5 more torps, and better torps), Kidd's average damage done is much lower. The higher avg exp in Kidd can be explained by much higher planes down than Benson, but that performance is heavily depending on meeting high numbers of subpar CV players. Otherwise, avg ships killed and kills per death between the two are identical (means match influence wise, the two are pretty much same, after all both are basically the same ship). Comparing to Fletcher, Kidd's kill to death ratio is also much lower, most likely due to the torpedo deficiency. Making a kill means extra credits, making a kill with a salvo of torps outright, mean crap pile of credits. So, having 50% less torps is really hurting the Kidd. Even judging by the top performing captains in Fletcher, Benson, and Kidd; Kidd's average damage is much lower than the first two. Kidd probably can perform fairly well in a seasoned player's hand, but it is by no means living up to the hype and can perform well for everyone (well it is true for every ship, but the point here is that Kidd will be a harder ship to play, unless someone wants to play the game like a serious business... it's not "fun", per se.) ps: Since it seems to be a trend of boosting AAs, WG starting to realize how OP CVs are. CVs even by WG's own admission to have too much influence on a match, and thus, CVs need nerfing.
  6. New player...having fun with the Empire's DD line! Looking at the tier V split now and wondering what's most effective? One of course, goes all the way to X, but there seem to be quite a few Akatsuki fans on here. I'm getting the hang of using smoke, spotting, and love opportunity torps in the lower tiers. Opinions? What are the strengths/weaknesses of the tree choices? Thanks! ~War~
  7. I have long been an advocate, and a vocal one, of playing the ships you regularly play against so you have an idea of how they perform; what and where their strong and weak points are. So a short while ago I decided to grind out the German and British BB's to remind myself of what those players love and hate. First, as slow as battleships sail, you can find yourself all alone incredibly quickly (sometimes within seconds of the red team firing their first salvo.) So, lesson one, stay with the herd and you will live longer. Second, no good CV driver needs cross drop to eliminate a BB; @Femennenly taught me that with a beautiful drop on my QE, never even had a chance to dodge that double drop. Again, stay with the herd as group AA is better AA. Third, ALL of my gunners need to go to an AA meeting; they can't hit anything anywhere where it does any damage. Pick skills that make you hit what you aim at because it doesn't matter how many shots you miss with. I remember now why I gave up battleship play; but having more games under my belt definitely gives me a better perspective and attitude. Still, when I re-bought the T-22 to see how much she had improved, it was like putting on your oldest, most comfortable shoes. Enjoyed the change of pace though.
  8. So with the common onslaught of new players from the Steam release, the inevitable seal clubbing that many WoWs players cannot help themselves against, there is going to be a huge influx of threads that boil down to, "What the hell is *insert semi-common-to-oft-misunderstood-mechanic-or-meta-thing*" And while Wargaming does provide some tooltips, they more, lets say, 'realistic' aspects of the way this game functions, are not often mentioned. Such as: Q: "I can deal with most ships I come up against at T3-4, but I notice this one, called the Nikolia, seems to be a huge pain to deal with. What's up with that?" A: It's genuinely overpowered, to a degree that the Developer (Wargaming) ceased selling it shortly after release and will not offer it ever again as a direct sale, this being Wargaming's preferred method of acknowledging something is Overpowered. Followup A1: Konig Albert, Belfast, Gremy, and Kutz all follow the same setup and have been deemed genuinely overpowered. Followup A2: Although recently Wargaming has started allowing for this as a warning on a sales page, they *generally* won't nerf, even an admitted overpowered, Premium (pay for with real money) ship. Things like this aren't discussed by Wargaming itself and perhaps, just *maybe* we can head off a bunch of 'Wot is dis' threads by populating one thread with general Q/A's. So post em here, and please, try to keep it general, not preference related. So yeah, I hate the Moskva's design and features in game, but arguing over whether or not it's really a BB hiding in the CA category is a discussion for a different thread.
  9. So... After playing quite a few games in Shinonome farming credits. It seems IJN DDs can have its own niche in DD vs DD gun fights. Post USN DD's gun arc nerf, IJN DD's does currently have an advantage in "knife fights", due to the flatter trajectory of their shells. IJN DDs can actually do quite well against USN DDs around 7-10 km range. At that range, USN DD's guns have high arcs and can be dodged (not all shells, but reasonable amounts), while IJN DD's shells are flatter and have more alpha damage. If played right, IJN DDs can keep a good distance while punishing USN DDs with high alpha salvos with very good accuracy. Also at that range, maneuverability short comings of IJN DDs are not that detrimental.
  10. So we have a brand new, fresh branch of IJN destroyers incoming. Given the problems the high-tier IJN DDs have been facing lately in light of their nuke-nerfing due to battleship main complaints ("I would push if I could, but I can't because torpedo soup! Honest! I'm not lying, and I won't keep hiding in the back if you nerf IJN torpedo boats even though that's totally what I'll keep doing because then I'll be complaining about fires and HE spam! I'll really push forward! Pinkie-swear!"), hopefully WG will take the opportunity, what with re-tiering and shuffling the IJN destroyers around and all, to tweak the balance a bit so ships like the Kagero and Shimakaze aren't quite so hobbled. Of course, the question does arise, if WG had time to craft these new IJN destroyers and organize a line split into two separate branches for them, exactly when will USN cruisers FINALLY get the same treatment? You know, where the USN cruiser line gets split into light and heavy branches, ships get re-tiered and re-shuffled, and all the disastrous imbalances (possibly) addressed? You know, the re-organization that people have been promising would solve USN cruiser balance problems, thus making the lack of temporary numerical tweaks, if not unnecessary, at least understandable, because it'd all come right in the end with the line being split? I can only assume WG has enough time on their hands to do so, since they're presenting a new IJN destroyer line immediately after introducing a brand-new German battleship line.
  11. I play with US Destroyers IV Clemson and V Nicholas. I don't understand why I can hit other destroyers with numerous rounds and barely make a dent where I am dead after about 3 hits from them. I can understand getting killed quick by a cruiser or battleship because their guns are bigger but from a destroyer, I don't understand. Some games I cruise just to die. I don't even get to engage. It makes me not want to play anymore even though I like playing. It doesn't happen in every game but it is frustrating when it happens.
  12. I'm starting to see a resurgence of this so I thought I would once again do a PSA on it. Maybe it's just me, but hear me out. "Carriers - do not park your planes over my destroyer - especially when I'm trying to stalk ships using a stealthy technique. Doing so - no matter your argument - tells me you do not understand why you ought not do this." First - when you see a red TB/DB circling an area you know the carrier driver has locked his plane in guard mode on his friendly. Since you see no other ships in the area, you know it must be a destroyer. You thank him for pointing out to you where HIS destroyer is... Get it now? Please stop doing this. Reason number two - it draws red fighters out to take on your TB/DB thereby lighting up your friendly destroyer to the reds - who will now park one of their fighters over your friendly destroyer until he is destroyed? Need more reasons? No, you don't need more reasons. Two are enough. Doing this in a Tier 8/10 game is even more ludicrous. It also tells, at least the destroyer, you possibly do not have a clue as to why it is a bad thing for your destroyer and your team. If the team doesn't know they do now. Please do not park your TB/DB/Fighters over your friendly destroyers who are out stalking red ships. Thank you.
  13. Hi guys! The Dev Blog posted this this morning: So for compensation for her one torpedo launcher she gets heal, interesting. Thanks @renegadestatuz for pointing this out. Fair winds and following seas captains!
  14. I kill destroyers. I drive a cruiser. I make mistakes. Unlike the noble battleship or sleek cruiser the destroyer gets no respect. They are considered by many as necessary evils, on the same level as attorneys. If you have to have one you want the meanest, nastiest one on your side. Like unwanted sandlot football player told to “go long for a pass” we watch as our destroyers often go like rockets into the battle solo. Everyone else are “pacing themselves”, well behind them, waiting to see how the battle develops. DDs “scout” (a polite term for being on your own) far away from friendly supporting fire while looking for trouble. I foolishly would shadow alone them as backup. When the rath of an enemy grouping was discovered the nimble DD and myself would take the punishment. I am changing my ways. I have seen “the light.” I will keep my DDs under my wing but always insure that I am under the wing of a battleship that has the range and firepower to help balance the scales. Lone wolves die alone. Cruisers can give friendly DDs covering fire but they can be outmannned and outgunned when they are the first to make contact with a battle group. A battleship’s cover is an awesome force. If a battleship expects a cruiser to prevent a destroyer’s torpedoes it must work as a team with that cruiser. The cruiser that supports destroyers needs support from the battleship. In a team those who give support get support... and survive.
  15. Sup everyone. So I'm a bit new to the game and I seem to find destroyers useless. I'm in the early American destroyer line and with a range of 4.5km for my torpedoes, I have to get ridiculously close to have a chance to hit the target. Being very squishy, that never ever ends with the enemy ship sunk. People told me to camp around straights, which I do in which one of two things happen. 1. No one comes, and it takes a full 3 minutes to reach the engagement area. By then we have already won or my team is decimated 2. More than 1 ship comes around the straight, in which even if my initial barrage hits, I'm left a smoldering wreck. So American destroyers were a hopeless cause. I then tried the Japanese destroyers. 7-8km range seemed amazing. I always fired at a distance and screwed off while I was told IJN destroyers did. However, there's a bit of a problem. Torpedoes move very, painfully slowly. If I am not 3km or less in range, I never, ever hit the targets because all they have to do is press the movement key in a different direction for half a second for my launch to be rendered useless. So what do I do? I feel pretty frustrated in this game and will probably go back to tanks.
  16. Alguem mais curioso sobre o que a WG deve estar planejando?? Já sabemos dos Destroyers Pan-asiaticos e seu DW torpedos. Mas o que a WG estará planejando, para o RN? Uma linha de CVs? Muito me interessa.Destroyers? Couraçados Russos e CVs Alemães( ambos apenas projetos) Musashi? E a continuação da linha do Akizuki? Isso está demorando bastante!
  17. With the recent admission that smoke is being abused in a way that Wargaming had not intended, i feel there needs to be a serious change made to the MM. this comes from a similar experience that came up in World of Tanks. Artillery used to be able to be deployed with a maximum of 5 per team, this issue was extremely irritating and was changed by WG to remove the boring camp style game-play. well unfortunately the camp style game-play is a disease that is infecting WOWS. within the past week i have noticed that Battleships are doing nothing but hiding behind rocks and are not fulfilling their role as the heavy armor on the front line. then i started looking at the team layout on both sides of the team. 90% of my matches this week have had 5 DDs per side. no only is 5 DDs completely unnecessary, but it is completely broken. DDs have smoke that is already being abused, but along side that, we have cruisers that have smoke that are assisting the DDs and it is causing gameplay to become extremely stale and drawn out. yes we know that smoke is broken, but the up coming patch is not going to fix it at all. DDs need to be restricted to a max of 3 per team to reduce the abuse of the broken smoke mechanic. until smoke is no longer a mobile pillbox, DDs need to be put in check.
  18. My current lineup has two destroyers (both tier IV), one BB (also tier IV) and a cruiser (tier V). I feel like committing to one ship type and staying with it: destroyers. I don't terribly mind playing my battleship, but destroyers are where I have fun. While I might get nuked in the first five minutes of a match by enemy fire (or the occasional teamkill), there's a thrill of sorts from hauling [edited]across the map and laying down the hate from up-close. The feeling of "can I survive long enough to drop these torps and get out?" just gets me in a way that trading fire in my battleship doesn't. The idea is to drop my other ships and committing to all the destroyer lines. To really mastering what it means to be a destroyer commander. The question is: is it really worth it?
  19. So i reached tier 6 Fubuki which used to be tier 8 i think, anyway how to play her? I cant get in close like i did with Mutsuki, what do I do any suggestions?
  20. Loved Operation Dynamo and HMS Anthony, and would definitely purchase HMS Gallant if it would become available again. Wonder if you could do some of the war built O to Z classes, Tribal class, 'V' and 'W' class and the Hunt class escort destroyers with a variety of camo schemes. They had some very interesting schemes. I have a number of profiles with the camo schemes if interested. Many thanks Typhoon51 (Derek)
  21. how do I play Harekaze? Im still new to destroyers Also what hull should i use?
  22. whats a good stealth dd (if there is any)?
  23. So, I have a question. As I move up the tier trees (all nations and almost all lines) I try not to use free XP (Gotsta have some Mo'). On this Nippon weekend I'll take advantage of sale prices. Should I buy the Fubuki or go back a tier and Buy the Minekaze? I have researched them both. Thanks for the thoughts and advice! Sinton
  24. WOWS need to rebalance destroyer and the game in general too. Smoke has hydro/radar to counter it (so for the most part it is useless as it only lasts like 30-40 seconds anyway). IJN DD have crappy dpm on their guns so they rely on Torps...however USA torps are more stealthy? AND they pretty much every other country for DD have way better DPM than IJN too. CV's are being played a lot now too, which also essentially negates the one thing most countries DD rely on...stealth. Add in that you can't stealth fire your guns anymore on DD and you have a class that is essentially useless now. I essentially get shots on stupid BB that don't pay attention to what they are doing. Destroyers need to be fixed, and the IJN line specifically needs to be fixed as well. Also, BB with radar/5.5 k hydro is just ridiculous... People in most matches i play complain about people camping (both teams). but really..the way things are set up can you blame them? Destroyers used to be able to scout/cap points early in the game. Now, you get spotted OR radar/hydro'd OR get spotted via planes and either taken out with torps/guns/planes. Most dd range from moderately fast (IJN to very fast (Russia) but it's hard to outrun multiple people shooting at you when it takes about 15 seconds to "re-stealth" after firing. Also the spotting mechanics are messed. I routinely check pre-game to see if my stealth is better than the other destroyers and 9 times out of ten it is better...but guess what..they spot me first nearly every time and i have a few seconds where they are not spotted for me....so if at 5.9 km det range, i get spotted by an american dd which has 6.2 or higher detection range..wth>? that should not be possible based on the numbers the game provides re: detection radius. WG has essentially changed the meta so camping is literally the new normal (As people don't like getting spotted and insta gibbed..go figure). I enjoy the game generally, but lately there have just been too many negative changes,both to the general play of the game (way more camping), the primacy of battleships above all else apparently, and the overall complete nerf that DD play has taken in multiple patches. Spotting (vision) should be something that shows up in our stats so we can see what it is. dd shouldn't be able to stealth fire anymore but radar and hydro shouldn't be on so many ships and should have longer cooldowns at least. Also, radar should not "let you see through mountains"...it doesn't work that way and also leads to cruisers/bb camping behind islands to "spot" dd (who then get wiped out in a few salvo's. BB should be a bit more manoeverable generally. Cruisers should be the main class with radar/hydro (as they are supposed to be supporting BB anyway). BB shouldn't have that, which should force them to stick with cruisers. Destroyers should also have even better rudder shift in general (especially IJN). whenever i get spotted by a CV they usually just focus on me (i can't outrun them...AA is crap on most DD and in IJN my rudder shift is crap too) so i usually end up dying. DD amongst countries needs to be fixed. IJN are supposed to be "stealthy, and mainly focus on torp builds". Yet other countries have stealthier torps and better smoke. All DD should be a bit faster (even the russians). That is their main defence once spotted. any ship who fires should still remain spotted, but not anywhere near as long as they currently do (like half the time). This prevents stealth firing, but also gives you a chance to escape if you are in a cruiser/dd that has been spotted and multiple ships are shooting at you. Desmoines (usa) should be fixed too. Minotour has crazy reload speed, smoke AND torps. Moskva is essentially a BB, pretending to be a Cruiser, that also has epic guns. DM has good AA, 5 sec reload but no torps, armor isn't as good as moskva and DPM while decent is outshined by literally every other countries tier x cruisers, and russian/american DD. DM should have either a faster reload, short range torps OR at the least an increase in speed to help balance amongst the other countries. since everything has a counter in the game (or is supposed to anyway) CV need to have a better means to counter them..especially in DD. once spotted you have literally no chance if they focus on you. Even chasing down some CV in a DD is nigh impossible...(this should also not be possible). i get that everyone may not agree with me, and that's fine. Just don't be insulting. I am not completely wedded to the above, if you have other ideas let me know. All i know for sure is that DD need to be fixed. BB shouldn't have radar/hydro AND some cruisers need to be fixed as well (Such as the DM). Other stuff could be done differently in some way OR more importantly, at least WG should be open to some ideas regarding how to fix the mess they have now created.