Jump to content

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
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • External testing groups
    • Supertest Academy
    • Supertest
    • Clantest

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Discord


Twitter


Website URL


Instagram


YouTube


Twitch


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 62 results

  1. This is for destroyers and aircraft carriers, but why Why WHY is there no reward for scouting and providing vision for your team to see and hit targets? It's just as important to WoWs as it is to WOT, but you don't reward or encourage the scout classes to actually scout. Submarines were obviously a mistake that should be removed so they aren't mentioned, but Destroyers and Aircraft Carriers really deserve rewards for doing their jobs well. I'm sure this has been posted 100x before, but in case it hasn't sunk in yet..........it bears repeating.
  2. So it's been a while since I offered up any fresh steaming piles of theroycrafting on this forum but I'm back baby! And I've brought along something that I've put off far longer than I anticipated: my thoughts on a Dutch destroyer branch. Part of the reason was simply due to the fact that needing to figure out just what their "deal" was, was going to be way harder than anticipated since the only Dutch DD in the game that we can reference at all is a torpedo-less one trick pony. How do you build a line around such ships without just making $&%@ up and slapping TTs on ships that clearly weren't designed for them? Luckily, 3 events in the game have occurred since my research began that has allowed me to, IMO create a pretty compelling if rather top-heavy line of ships to expand the Netherlands tech tree: Italian BBs (yes I've been working on this that long), The Netherlands line itself and the German Spähkreuzer (nee: Elbing) line. So without further ado, lets get into it! Starting at tier V we... Yes boys and girls, I'm pulling a Pan Asian and starting this line at V. Given the fact that low tier options for Dutch DDs are A) extremely limited and B) a mess, I was unsure how or even what I could use to start the line off with! That is before the Italian BBs showed up and started their line at IV, introducing the notion that WeeGee doesn't care where class lines start anymore, that is to say DDs and CLs at tier II, BBs at III etc. Having further cemented this notion now with the Pan Asian cruiser line (though I still vehemently disagree with that decision) we can avoid the whole low tier issue altogether. As I mentioned before, this is going to be a more top heavy line anyway so they'll still get a decent amount of DDs regardless. Anyway onto tier V where we start with this: Tier V: Admiralen-class (Witte de With pictured) Ah the good ol' Admiralens. In fairness these ships were surprisingly difficult to balance as they offer fairly generic capabilities armament wise. 4x1 4.7" guns of either an older Bofors design or a newer Siderius design on the 2nd batch. 2x3 TTs and varying AA armament as well. A displacement of around 1400 tonnes and top speed of 36kts makes these ships pretty standard in terms of interwar designs. Now many theorycrafters have suggested before that the batches can be split into to separate ships between tiers IV and V and admittedly this could help to flesh out those low tiers that I've so willfully ignored, even going so far as to introduce one of it's preliminary designs but I digress. In the end, I think that these ships are well suited to start off our line at V and the batch differences can be easily represented by a simple hull upgrade. Of course I would be remiss to not call out the fact that those first batch ships were also designed to carry a floatplane too, and as @Lert had suggested some years ago, such an equipped Admiralen could make for a fun tier V or maybe even VI premium with some massaging. Tier VI: Gerard Callenburgh-class The Gerard Callenburghs were a fairly straight follow-on from the older Admiralens. Displacing 1600 tonnes now and a speed of 37.5kts, they have one extra gun and 2x4 TTs as opposed to 2x3 on the previous ship. Of the two that were actually completed, they had some pretty interesting histories. Gerard Callenburgh herself was captured by the Germans before being launched, launched and refit with some German weaponry as ZH-1 before being sunk in 1944. Her sister, Isaac Sweers managed to escape to Britain where she was completely rebuilt with a fully Bri'ish weapons suite comprising of 3x2 4" guns (the ubiquitous Mk. XVI twin mounts), new torpedoes, radar controlled Bofors guns, mines DCs and naturally, all the usual refinements. Sadly, she didn't last as long as ZH-1 as she was torpedoed and sunk in 1942. Nonetheless, as a premium either tier VI or VII this ship would make a fantastic mid-tier option for a premium Dutch ship. And speaking of tier VII, we now come to: Tier VII: Van Galen (N-class) Uuuuungh I hear your eyes roll. "Not another N-class! We already have Jervis and Gadjah Mada at this tier we don't need another N!" "Also, did you just get through telling us about a ship that could be tier VII instead?!?!" Well yes but allow me to explain, as there are a few reasons why I'm choosing the N. First, to address the Isaac Sweers issue, that ship doesn't fit the... flavor lets call it of the line as I have crafted it. The ship would be more akin to a Fenyang, requiring a very different playstyle (and captain build to boot!) to the standard line ships. Secondly, from a historical perspective the N ships represent a period where British supplied DDs were the backbone of the surface fleet, especially in the immediate postwar period. Finally, in gameplay terms this ship will be the foundation of the higher tier playstyle, reducing reliance on torpedoes (or not having them at all!) in favor or more guns. This ship then, will not be simply a copypasta of Jervis or Gadjah Mada but rather a downtiered version of Orkan. This ship was ultimately equipped the same way, with only a singe quintuple TT launcher and a secondary 4" gun to go along with it's 3x2 4.7" guns. She also carries a heavier ASW suite than her predecessors, so I hope you can see where I'm staring to go with this. It is at this point now that the line will split. One the one side we will have the Flotilla leader style ships and the other the Freisland-esque ASW gunboats. We'll start by looking at the former with: Tier VIII: 1931 Destroyer Leader design Once again I give credit to @Lert for this one as he did a write up on this ship a couple of years back. This ship is considered a preliminary design to what ultimately became the Tromp-class and is laid out similarly. Gun armament is now 4x2 4.7" guns but only 2x3 TTs which from the looks of it (unlike Tromp) are on the centerline rather than on the beam but no matter, this is a gunboat first and foremost as well as an excellent bridge to the rest of the flotilla leaders. Which leads us to: Tier IX: Tromp-class Much like the German large destroyer line, these ships as you can see are essentially tiny CLs in DD clothing. In this case of this ship we have a main armament consisting of 3x2 15cm guns (really 149mm, the same guns basically as on the tier V Celebes), the aforementioned torpedoes and a number of smaller tertiary AA guns. While at one point I would have agreed with the consensus that this ship was at best a tier VII, with a little balancing, I genuinely believe that this ship is very much akin to the Felix Schultz or (to a lesser extent) Adriatico. This then leads us to tier X where we have, well, nothing really. So I am forced to do something I almost never suggest, a WeeGee imagineered creation. Tier X: Modernised Flotilla Leader follow-on So such as ship isn't completely without merit. In my own research I have come across vague mentions of such a follow on ship in future shipbuilding plans through the end of the 1940s. Of course these plans were all made before the war, and with the expectation that ships such as the 1047 BCs and the Eintracht-class full cruisers would have been completed for such a ship to compliment. Regardless, this ship would have to be designed around a more modern suite of weapons while still keeping the general principles of the Tromp-class in mind. In essence I imagine a scaled down version of the De Zeven Provinciën with 3x2 proper 6" Bofors guns, similar or slightly more torpedoes (like 4 to a side instead of 3) and a comprehensively modernized AA suite. I obviously didn't create a drawing of this ship but I think my word pictures get the point across. While far from ideal, this purported extrapolation would fit the mold of our flotilla leader branch. Let us now turn our attention to the second branch where we start with: Tier VIII: Onderzeebootjager 1947A design An early preliminary design of the ships that eventually became the Holland-class, but initially fitted with British weaponry including the 4.5" guns in Daring turrets. It also would have had considerably more Bofors AA guns that the actual Holland, though they were of older vintage. To get a better look at the various designs that led to Holland, check out the full thread over on shipbucket here. However this still doesn't address the elephant in the room; without torpedoes why should these ships exist when you can get the same idea just having Freisland Groningen in game. Luckily the Dutch have already given us the solution; airstrikes! While certainly unorthodox for a DD, it still allows these ships to remain torpedoless ASW focused ships as designed but now having a over the horizon stealth attack option. This is also the reason for using a series of prelims rather than the Holland itself. Tier IX: Onderzeebootjager 1949 design (A or B) The preliminary designs of what would become the Friesland-class. Sadly I haven't been able to find any images of plans or design features but nonetheless it would be here that the infamous 120mm twin Borfors would make their debut. Which finally leads us to: Tier X: Freisland-class (now with airstrikes!) The same ship we all know and love, just uptiered to tier X and given airplanes. So with all this what about Holland? Why isn't that ship in my lineup? Well the answer is simply that it doesn't fit very well. While still having equivalent ASW capability to the Freislands, she'd be the slowest DD in her tier in the game at 32kts, and would be severely lacking in AA firepower beyond her man guns. Additionally, coming in over 2600 tonnes full load means she wouldn't have great stealth to compensate. Nonetheless, she absolutely deserves to be in the game, and if given an airstrike module I could easily see this being a soft tier IX replacement for Groningen given that free XP ships are slowly on their way out. So there you have it, a top heavy, somewhat imaginary but very unique an uniquely Dutch line(s) of destroyers! As always let me know what you think about this idea! In my next installment, we'll be returning to European DDs (yes, again.) Stay tuned!
  3. Here is my Revised version of these DD splits as the older ones are locked due to certain events going on the forum so i am revising Them and Bundling them into one Post please leave feedback below compared to the current lines here are the features of each line Features of the American Destroyer line Each ship has: Two Shell types HE and SAP 2 Quadruple centerline torpedo launchers with less damage and but reload better than their quintuple tube siblings Will have better hitpoints than their main line counterpart at the cost of a higher detection range for most ships Consumable utility with multiple consumables to choose in different slots which are: Slot 1 Smoke Generator or Surveillance Radar (5km 50s) T8+ Slot 2 Engine Boost or Short Range Hydroacoustic Search Slot 3 Defensive AA fire or Repair Party (T8+) Features of the British Destroyer line Each ship has: Two Shell types HE and AP with the same characteristics as the Light Cruisers for the 4 inch gunned ships torpedo launchers with better range and reload better than their main line siblings with the ability to single fire them Will have worse hitpoints than their main line counterpart with the benefit of a lower detection range for most ships and 50 mm side plating from tier 7 Good Anti Submarine Performance with the Squid ASW Mortar on some ships from Tier 7 (not present on tier 8) Consumable utility with multiple consumables in different slots which are: Slot 1 Short Burst Smoke Generator Slot 2 Quick Long Range Hydroacoustic Search 30s duration 3km torp detect 6km ship detect 6 charges Slot 3 Engine Boost Slot 4 Repair Party (T7-8) /Specialized Repair Teams (T9+) Features of the French Destroyer line Each ship has: Generally average hitpoint pools for the tier with the same hull saturation mechanic as the main line Great concealment for destroyers of this nation Fast long range torpedoes with high damage Multiple Charges of Engine boost allows for quick escapes, which has the same characteristics as Le Terrible's Alongside Short burst Smoke and a Emergency Repair Party for patching up Battle damage Consumable utility with multiple consumables in different slots which are: Slot 1 Short Burst Smoke Generator emission time 15 seconds dispersion time 35 seconds reload time 50 seconds 6 charges Slot 2 Engine Boost 6 charges Slot 3 Emergency Repair Party (T8+) 4%/sec heal rate 10sec duration 75% ship hp restore 140s cooldown 3 charges (Basically supposed to be the british superheal cutdown to half the time) with the characteristics stated here is a view of the trees with the additions: Here are the British Destroyers Tier 6 : Partridge The Start of the line it ditches two torpedoes compared to acasta for Faster Firing guns of a lower caliber on the stock hull Tier 7 : Battleaxe From Partridge we are greeted by Battleaxe who lets you down on speed and is overall an improvement in the gun area Basically she's the unnerfed firepower of a black swan with torpedoes Tier 8 : Gurhka the odd ball of the line in a sense as it has the most gun barrels technically in both lines Tier 9 : Savage The gun count goes down significantly compared to the tier before like the jump from lightning to jutland due to the change to 4.5 inch guns Tier 10 : Gael The only paper ship in the line , it was to be an improved weapon class but its more of an improved savage its a secretive design and these are the only pictures I could find but if it was built it'd look similar to daring the armament specs are from wikipedia Onto The American Destroyers: Tier 6: USS Cassin A Mahan Class destroyer damaged at Pearl Harbour, the ship was rebuilt with Increased AA defenses and reduced armament to decrease topweight. Tier 7: USS O'Brien A Sims Class destroyer represented as commissioned, the ship was later rebuilt with Increased AA defenses and reduced armament to decrease topweight. Tier 8 : USS Porter A Destroyer Leader that was partially refit during the war with increased AA defenses (image is of the clark) 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 Tier 10: Castle A Allen M Sumner class Preliminary design that has two twin turrets on the bow and a single to the rear edit* a Model I made of What it would look like and Finally Here are the French Destroyers: Tier 5: L' Adroit Its basically an improved Bourrasque at tier 5 Tier 6: Le Corse Preliminary design for the Le Hardi class with one less turret Tier 7: Mameluk(5 Gun Le Hardi) This is a completely fictional destroyer who is just the Le Hardi but with X turret Switched to a Single Mount Gun Tier 8: Le Hardi looks like a 3 turret mogador and this ship is currently ingame in the form of zf6 in another form but it will be brought in the original nation it was intended for service in Tier 9: Lansquenet (improved Le Hardi) looks like a 3 turret Kleber and this ship represents the unfinished group of le hardis that zf6 was a part of that were supposed to have dual purpose mounts and two centerline triple torpedo tubes but for increased firepower over the previous tiers the mounts are two quadruples Tier 10: Maille Breze one of the t47 class destroyers , Maille Breze is basically a marceau lite except minus the speed(the lead ship of the t47 class is surcouf and that cannot be used since the sub is more famous than the dd)
  4. Since we are getting Dalarna, what about a similar-looking super destroyer, like that of the 'Super-Ragnar', and make it unique with a similar mechanic as the satsuma/hannover- the ability to run combat instructions in place of alternative firing mode. With that being said, this " super Ragnar " would be like Dalarna with 3x2 153mm (or whatever caliber the Ragnar's main battery is) guns. like Ragnar, it carries NO TORPEDOES, but like Dalarna, it as depth charges located on both sides of the ship, rather then bow on.....also, it carries more aa guns in place of the torps that was in Dalarna. unlike Ragnar, it carries normal speed boost and def AA as its consumables in place of radar, although it carries a heal (even though it would be like that of that soviet version of the RB German cruiser, which is still WiP, and it has long duration, and above normal reload rate, and more of them, only for this purpose, it would be 4 max, or less)... It carries HE and AP, with values exactly like Ragnar, if not (slightly) faster reload. Also, its maneuverability and CE would appear nerfed, with depth charges, artillery, survivability, and AA Defense being improved. Now for the big Question- Should it be a "split super ship" from t10 as its starting point of the split and cost 15% more creds then Dalarna, or should it cost Steel/RB/coal/etc. to get?
  5. rafael_azuaje

    BLACK 666 HISTORICAL HULL

    Petition to WG. Rework the USS Black (DD-666) and add the historical hull (Same as chung-mu, not the rounded one) has better radars antenas too! captain's bridge looks diferent real.
  6. Pretty_Rkless

    Naval Battles-fun?!

    Weekends I can usually only play a couple of battles. Our naval battles is kinda close so I decided to help push our points up.... With all the choices left, I had 2 "Easy" ones: Pan Asain dd-1050 European dd-1200 Took YY out and was hounded by cv, basically spotted to death....loss.1000 points.... Took her out again, cv game..... except my flank was ignored by cv and I was able to hold back a flank... 3 kills, cap and 1200 base exp. Yes!. .... Took Holland out for the first time in 6 months, AA build.... Started down "no battleship" lane to cap d on the side and maybe spot pushers on 9 line.... Wrecked a shimmy, dev strike 2st blood. Noticed I had 2 Georgia's pushing all out, so I helped. Both Georgia's died, but I got a Kremlin and was going for a Shikishima.... all of a sudden a Smolensk opens up on me...I was baited hard... Run away, just barely out of detection range for 3 torpedo reloads....dev strike. Back cap d, easy....115k damage over 1800 base.... ..... Thank You WG for these Naval Battles, otherwise I wouldn't play lost ships.... Yes 414 in port...
  7. The addition of subs is an interesting dynamic. However, as currently designed, subs have too much power against most DDs, at least in the mid-tier where I play, and this needs to be rebalanced before wide introduction. I'm sure this has been debated internally by your dev teams and throughout development in your test base. Let me throw my hat in the ring on the side of reducing the power of homing torpedoes. Subs are given homing torpedoes by default with effectively limitless ability to home. This is not only historically inaccurate, it is too powerful and is becoming worse as sub captains gain skill. One torpedo salvo of 2 is sufficient to take out even high HP DDs. There are few techniques that mitigate homing from a middle distance, even among the most agile DDs. No known ship-born counter exists. By analogy, DDs can smoke to counter visual detection and maneuver (accel/decel/turn) to counter ballistic weapons or "dumb" torpedoes and can prioritize sectors to improve AA effectiveness. Subs have very small detection radii when surfaced or submerged but can ping and home from quite a distance. Mid-tier DDs have no stock ability to spot subs when submerged until well within the homing kill radius. This adds to the imbalance. I suggest the following: Make homing torpedoes an option similar to AP and HE shells with the appropriate time penalty for switching torpedo types. Reduce the HP power of homing torpedoes by 25-40% from that of standard "dumb" torpedoes, similar to the way AP and HE act differently. Perhaps they cannot cause a detonation or they do less HP damage but have a high probability to cause flooding. Homing torpedoes should have some penalty to counter their accuracy Alternatively, make homing a consumable like radar or hydro search Give DDs some level of hydro search or ping triangulation by default. This is, of course, far more historically accurate than homing torpedoes. I suggest that the ping marking be much brighter and include a momentary "tail" pointing in the general direction of origin. I think this has been attempted by marking one side of the ship vs the other, but it misses the mark in terms of communicating useful information Alternatively, give DDs some skill or equipment option to mitigate homing torpedo effectiveness
  8. I have recently gotten Udaloi on my way to Grozovoi, and while the ship is fun to play and effective, it seems hampered by its atrocious concealment. With full conceal build, you can get it down to 7.2 which for the tier is only better than Mogador and Tashkent. For starters, the ship isn't even that big. Ships like Schultz, Paolo, and Kitakaze which are much bigger ships have significantly better concealment. Neither does it have the firepower to warrant such bad concealment, as many other ships at the tier have better gun power. It also does not fit with its line...I can see having the bad concealment when it was in the Khaba's line, but Ognevoi has 6.1 and Grozovoi has 6.0. It just seems out of place. I would recommend at least getting rid of the nerf that happens when you get the hull B upgrade which would let you get down to 6.8. But in reality I think it needs to be able to get down to 6.5 to be competitive. It still won't really be out-spotting any other dd's, but the margin would be much more reasonable. The Grozovoi line is more of a generalist line especially given their consumables, but Udaloi's concealment prohibits it from doing that, so I think a buff is in order to give the line more consistency, and to make Udaloi feel more natural, so please Wargaming if you're reading, please buff Udaloi's concealment.
  9. I recently transitioned from a cruiser main to a destroyer main, and I've been having a lot of fun; the amount of influence a dd has and the high risk high reward play style is really enjoyable. Anyways, it got me thinking...what would an all DD lineup look like for clan battles? And I'm not talking about taking 7 Smalands or even just the seven "best" overall DD's. Each DD has to have a role, and there can only be one of each DD. You'll have DD's in a "battleship" role, a "cruiser" role, and a "destroyer" role. No CV since there are no hybrid DD's. A typical lineup for clan battles would be 2 BB's, 3 cruisers, and 2 DD's I would say. A "battleship's" role IMO is hard hitting guns with preferably strong AP. A "cruiser's" role is utility and dpm. A "destroyer's" role in this case would be spotting and torpedoes. Now onto the lineup... "Battleships": Elbing Ragnar* "Cruisers": Grozovoi* Daring Smaland "Destroyers": Gearing/Somers* Halland *Ragnar is not out yet, so a suitable replacement would probably be Khabarovsk. *Grozovoi while not having insane dpm, has lots of utility. The guns hit fairly hard anyways, so it could be used as a heavy cruiser. *From what I have seen, Gearing and Somers perform very similarly, so one could go either way. As far as strategy goes, I would have Daring and Halland on the home/defensive cap. I would keep Elbing and Ragnar together on the middle cap side to utilize smokes more efficiently and to concentrate fire. Gearing/Somers would also go middle cap side providing spotting and smokes for the "battleships" while also throwing out torps. Grozovoi and Smaland will act as extra spotting and firepower on the middle cap side. Now I want to clarify that this is a lineup designed to fight a normal/rational lineup. I am not saying that this all DD lineup is actually competitive, this is just for fun. If anyone is interested I have some different ideas for an all DD lineup vs another all DD lineup and a couple other things. These are just my opinions, so please discuss down below.
  10. The combat missions which need to be completed for german tokens have disappeared. I really want to unlock Z-31 and its camo. WOWS please help...
  11. Nightlock_

    Best Torp Botes

    Hey Guys, I'm a relatively new DD player and i like being a torpedo boat, so naturally i tried IJN, im up to the Isokaze, and its great, I love it. I really like the line but i hear from every single person that the IJN dds are shiz after the nerfs to torp stealth and the guns, and tell me that ijn dds in general are crap, They say that shima is worst T10 dd in the game, and now i dont know if i really want to play through the IJN line anymore. I honestly dont care about guns, (i don't know how to use them without being nuked ;) because i dont use them that often, so what would you guys say?. Also how effective is the akizuki line at knife fighting and how is the manuevrability and concealment on them??
  12. There are a pair of ships in the game that are modeled and still in the game files, and I think one of them could be an interesting armory premium if WG would choose to refine the stats slightly. I am referring to the British tier V destroyer Anthony that was a special mission ship when the original Dunkirk mission was available. Anthony is an A type Destroyer and a sister to tech tree V Acasta, but with some notable differences. First, the Anthony, unlike Acasta, can stealth fire torpedoes before concealment expert due to haveing an extra kilometer of range with its torpedoes, giving it almost a full km to work with with concealment expert, as opposed to Acasta which has nearly the same detection and torpedo range with concealment expert. Another key difference is the very not typical choice of consumables Anthony has, forgoing smoke for both engine boost and defensive AA, which would need some serious buffing to its base AA to be worthwhile, but that would not be difficult to change. The final difference is in the damage of the torpedoes, with the Anthony getting an extra 4k damage per fish over Acasta. Basically, what I am saying is, please put in a good work to St. Petersburg to please give us this ship that the majority of the work has already been done for. It is a fun alternative to its tech tree sister. Thank you.
  13. Navis_Nobilite

    Akizuki - IFHE and fires

    I'm getting close to unlocking the Akizuki. I am pretty sure it needs IFHE. Is there any reason to get Demolition Expert, since it's not that great anymore? Does the Akizuki rely on fires for damage? Or would I be better off with the faster firing skill?
  14. SweetBabyRuth

    Russian Bias

    If wargaming wants to keep its Russian bias, the tech tree Russian ships need buffed ASAP! With the changes to the commander skill tree, and the game meta now being shifted to torp boats, A/J line BB sniping and FDRs, short range specialized ships that are can tank a lot of damage a straight up bad. The only viable ship from the Russian navy is well.... Slava, and maybe Slava, oh and Slava. Even Smolensk doesn't really make sense when everything is already outside of 19 kilometers. So WG, if you care so much about your Russian ships, then you probably should buff them, or else there will be no reason to play them... even on the RU servers.
  15. Soooo..... But when you look at cruisers, where the skill is useless... In order to get back to the builds I had before the rework, I'm required to have the last 2 points... but it takes 1.2 million exp to get the last 2 points. And now I'm seeing like this more and more. Who the heck okayed this "New and Improved" skill rework?
  16. So, I was working on my captain builds after the rework and I finally got to the French Destroyers. While selecting the skills to use for the Marceau I noticed something odd... If I select the tier IV skill "Main Battery and AA Expert" I get a dispersion nerf on my Main Battery Accuracy that's not specified in the skill effects (It increases from 94m to 110m if I select it) Now, this shouldn't be an issue on most destroyers because of the range, but it does seem problematic given the Marceau's high arcs and slow rounds. Is this a bug or a non-specified effect included in the skill? Screenshot included for evidence
  17. Hi all, Destroyers were always a fun ship type to play. So how about considering a new Tier 10 Premium destroyer for the US navy? Idea - I had this idea since starting from 10.0.2, USS Somers will become unavailable to obtain from the Armory for an undefined period of time. Although it will be replaced by the USS Austin, there will be no Tier 10 Premium Destroyers for US Navy. You might think that we don't even need a Tier 10 Premium destroyer for the US Navy, but in World of Warships, starting from Tier 5 (US), every tier has a premium destroyer: T5 Hill, T6 Monaghan, T7 Sims/ Sim B, T8 Kidd, T9 Benham and Black, and no T10 premium destroyer after 10.0.2 :( USS Allen M. Sumner DD-692. Ship Length - 376 feet Beam - 40 feet Draft - 15 feet Speed - 34 knots Hit Points - between 18,000 - 20,000 Armaments Main guns - Three 130mm double-barrelled guns Rate of Fire - 20 shots/minutes Reload time - 3 seconds Firing Range - between 12 - 13km Maximum HE Shell Damage - 2,200 Maximum AP Shell Damage - 2,600 AA Defence Twelfth 40mm Bofors Average damage per second - between 90 - 130 Firing Range - between 3 - 4km Eleven 20mm Oerlikon Average damage per second - between 45 - 65 Firing Range - between 2 - 3km Torpedoes Two quintuple(5) Torpedo launchers Torpedo Warhead - 533mm Rate of Fire - between 0.85 - 0.66 shots/ minutes Reload Time - between 70 - 90 seconds Firing Range - 16.5km Torpedo Speed - 66 knots Maximum Damage - 20,000 Possible Consumables Damage Control Party Smoke Generator/Hydroacoustic Search Engine Boost/ Enhanced AA Defence
  18. With the Indian Celebration a couple of weekends ago and the request for Indian ships in WoWS, I was reminded that at one point the subcontinent was part of the Commonwealth (and still participates in the Commonwealth Games). I would like to propose a new Commonwealth Tech Tree that contains mostly real ships in all four of the classes from Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand, and Pakistan. Characteristics: It is already established that the Commonwealth tech tree ship characteristics already include the creeping smoke generator, as well as both HE and AP for their main guns. For additional characteristics, I think it is appropriate that they be given an anti-submarine specialization once subs become part of the regular matchmaking. This can be approximated by giving all ships Depth Charges and an improved anti-sub Hydroacoustic Search Consumable. Aircraft carriers would have access to a squadron that could drop depth charges on top of Subs that they encounter. Cruisers: These will be Light Cruisers with better than average concealment and lower than average HP. Tier 1 - (AUS) Warrego (Grimsby-class) A sloop that provided escort duties in WWII. Provided some defence during the bombing of Darwin in 1942. Slow at 16.5 knots, it has three 4-inch guns so it will probably fit the RoF at Tier I, not like many people stay around at that level anyways... Tier 2 - (AUS) Pioneer (Pelorus-class) Built in 1897, transferred to Australia and commissioned in 1913, saw more actual combat than any other Australian ship of WWI, capturing several German merchants and helping blockade German East Africa. A bit slow, but should be serviceable at this tier. Tier 3 - (CAN) Aurora (Arethusa-class) Involved in the Battle of Dogger Bank in WWI, she was transferred to Canada in 1920. Became the victim of budget cuts and her equipment was cannibalized for other Canadian ships through the 1920s. Her specialty could be only 2 main guns and a lot of secondaries. However, she may be undergunned for the tier and may also be confused with the Russian Cruiser of the same name. Perhaps the Sydney and Adelaide should both be moved down one Tier with something else (paper ship?) to replace at Tier V. Alternately, choose: (CAN) Niobe (Diadem-class) Commissioned in 1898, was transferred to Canada in 1910 as one of the first ships of the new RCN. Reassigned as a depot ship partway through WWI, she was damaged in the Halifax Explosion of 1917. She has a lot of guns, similar to St Louis. Tier 4 - (AUS) Sydney (Chatham-class) Commissioned in 1913, she defeated SMS Emden at the Battle of Cocos. Had Depth Charge chutes, so would be good for Anti-submarine warfare (ASW). Tier 5 - (AUS) Adelaide (Birmingham-class) Similar to Sydney but with an extra main gun. Might be a too-highly tiered, but WG can probably tweak the design to fit at this level. Tier 6 - (NZL) Achilles (Leander-class) The legend. Similar to Perth. (AUS - Premium) Canberra (County-Class) This would be the one Commonwealth Heavy Cruiser option, with characteristics similar to Devonshire/London but with crawling smoke. Or maybe can fit it at Tier VII if the smoke makes it that survivable. Tier 7 - (PAK) Babur (Dido-class) Originally HMS-Diadem which covered convoys and raided german shipping routes in WWII, transferred to Pakistan in 1956 and participated in the Indo-Pakistani wars of 1965 and 1971. This class would have a similar performance profile to the Atlanta/Flint cruisers, so should fit at this tier. It was small, so should have the best concealment at it's tier and small HP pool to match. There might be an option to add the variant that had 5 turrets instead of 4. Tier 8 - (CAN) Ontario (Swiftsure-class) Commissioned for the RCN in 1945, she was too late to see service in the WWII Pacific theatre and had a relatively uneventful career. It has the same guns a Fiji with one less turret, but more secondaries. Since it wouldn't be a clone, there is leeway to make it's specs that would fit at this tier. If the original main battery RoF is too slow, have the ability to research and mount the Neptune guns to increase RoF. Tier 9 - (IND) Mysore (Crown Colony-class) Acquired by India in 1957, she served as flagship of the Western Fleet and commanded the missile attack on Karachi Harbour during the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War. Granted this is an uptiered Fiji, but having access to both Slot 5 and 6 upgrades (possibility of improved concealment and RoF) should keep it competitive with other Tier IX CLs. If WG really wants to, maybe give it an option to upgrade the main battery and torpedos to Neptune guns/torps so it will be squishy offset by high DPM. Tier 10 - (???) Commonwealth (Minotaur-class?) May as well use the RN TX design here, but could make a complete new design (not like many of the TX ships were ever real anyways). But should still have both HE and AP, Crawling Smoke, and ASW options instead of radar. Destroyers: These will be similar to RN DDs, with crawling smoke, Depth Charges, and improved ASW Hydro. Tier 2 - (CAN) Patrician (M-class) WWI destroyer transferred to the Royal Canadian Navy in 1920. Tier 3 - (CAN) Vancouver (S-class) Acquired from RN in 1927, ended up used as a training ship. Tier 4 - (AUS) Stuart (Scott-class) A Flotilla Leader purchased from Britain in 1933, saw action throughout the Mediterranean and Pacific during WWII. Tier 5 - (CAN) Saguenay (River-class) Active in the Atlantic duing WWII, survived a torpedo hit and a ramming before eventually serving as a training ship until the end of the war. Tier 6 - (IND) Rajput (R-class) Originally HMS Rotherham and used in WWII, she was transferred to the Indian Navy in 1949 and saw active service in the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War. Tier 7 - (AUS) Norman (N-class) Commissioned for the RAN in 1941, she was active in the Indian and Pacific oceans and was involved in freeing Burma, the Madagascar campaign, and Battle for Okinawa. Tier 8 - (CAN) Athabaskan (Tribal-class) This ship was built to replace the original Athabaskan that was sunk in the English Channel while operating with her sister ship HMCS Haida. Note that the Guns are 4x2 102mm, differing it both from the Haida and Cossack. Tier 9 - (PAK) Khaibar (Battle-class) Originally HMS Cadiz, she was sold to the Pakistani Navy in 1956 and was sunk during the 1971 Indo-Pakistani war by Styx anti-shipping missiles from Indian Fast Attack Craft. Tier 10 - (AUS) Vendetta (Daring-class) Commissioned in 1958, she had a relatively quiet career except for providing naval gunfire support during the Vietnam War. Carriers: To differentiate these CVs from others in the game, they should have an ASW-aircraft option. Crawling smoke might be fun on this as well. Additionally, these could pioneer a Light Carrier concept: Being a CV with only 2 squadrons available instead of 3, with faster regeneration and captains can choose what squadron types they want on board (flexibility for the Captain, uncertainty for the opponent). Another option is to design them like regular CVs, but with smaller squadron sizes that regenerate faster. Or just have higher tier Aircraft available. Tier 4 - (CAN) Puncher (Ruler-class) Mostly a Bogue by any other name. A bit of a cheat, was run by the RN but crewed by Canadians. Tier 6 - (AUS) Vengeance (Colossus-class) WWII carrier that didn't see active service, she was loaned to the RAN from 1952 until 1955 then sold on to Brazil and renamed Mineas Gerais. Propeller aircraft included the Fairey Firefly and Hawker Sea Fury. Tier 8 - (CAN) Magnificent (Majestic-class) It was this ship or the HMCS Bonaventure, but this seems to fit better at its tier and the Bonnie only ever operated jet aircraft. Participated in transporting Peacekeeping forces to Port Said during the Suez Crisis in 1956. Aircraft are later generation Firefly and Sea Fury. Tier 10 - (IND) Viraat (Centaur-class) Originally the HMS-Hermes that participated in the Falklands Conflict. This is a real stretch as it operated early versions of jet aircraft and I don't know what type of aircraft complement WG would want to give it, but this could be the one carrier that gets jets (Sea Vixens and Buccaneers) and ASW prop-job Gannets. I'm not sure what else could fit at Tier X. Battleships: Not much choice here, as really there was ever only one class. Tier 5 - (NZL - Premium) New Zealand (Indefatigable-class) This Battlecruiser was paid for by the New Zealand government but spent most of it's time defending Britain During WWI. She participated in the battles of Heligoland Bight, Dogger Bank, and Jutland. Much more interesting history than her sister ship, HMAS Australia. Some might say this should be Tier IV, but Tier V is the breakpoint for a lot of directives and matches what WG did with the Viribus Unitis.
  19. Are French Destroyers any good? Do they stack up favorably or unfavorable to other nation's destroyers? The French Destroyer thread is mostly made up of threads about the Premiums. I also saw Yuro take a jab at Pan-Asian Destroyers saying their torpedoes were obsolete now, is that line pretty much dead?
  20. Felipe_1982

    ST 0.9.7, KITAKAMI

    Looks like there is a new DD coming: ST 0.9.7, KITAKAMI Please note that all information in the development blog is preliminary and subject to change during testing. Any showcased features may or may not end up on the main server. The final information will be published on our game's website. In Update 0.9.7, Japanese Tier X cruiser Kitakami will enter the test. Kitakami is an unusual cruiser, with her main armament consisting of 5 quadruple torpedo launchers on each side. These torpedoes can travel up to 15 km at a speed of 57 knots and deal up to 15,633 damage. Because of her relatively fragile armor, weak AA defense, and low HP pool, Kitakami has to rely on her low basic detectability - 10.6 km - and her special Smoke Generator, which has a low smoke duration time but a large number of charges. The main gameplay of the cruiser revolves around stealthy attacks using a large number of torpedoes from a safe distance. To balance Kitakami's efficiency in the control of straights and flanks, she will only have access to narrow and "super narrow" torpedo spreads. We will carefully watch how this unusual cruiser will prove herself in battle, and will implement the necessary changes to make playing her and against her interesting. Additionally, we understand there might be concerns about the ship dealing damage to allies, and we plan to take them into account when the ship will be released. Ship's characteristics Japanese cruiser Kitakami, Tier X Hit points – 28,500. Plating - 16 mm. Main battery - 4x1 140 mm. Firing range - 13.1 km. Maximum HE shell damage – 2,400. Chance to cause fire – 10%. HE initial velocity - 850 m/s. Maximum AP shell damage - 2,700. AP initial velocity - 850 m/s. Reload time - 6.0 s. 180 degree turn time - 21.2 s. Maximum dispersion - 123 m. Sigma – 2.00. Torpedo tubes - 10x4 610 mm. Maximum damage - 15,633. Range - 15.0 km. Speed - 57 kt. Reload time - 141 s. Launcher 180 degree turn time – 7.2 s. Torpedo detectability - 1.9 km. AA defense: 10x3 25.0 mm, 1x2 127.0 mm. AA defense short-range: continuous damage per second - 105, hit probability - 85 %, action zone 0.1-2.5 km; AA defense long-range: continuous damage per second - 18, hit probability - 90 %, action zone 0.1-5.8 km; Number of explosions in a salvo - 1, damage within an explosion - 1,610; action zone 3.5-5.8 km. Maximum speed - 32.0 kt. Turning circle radius - 640 m. Rudder shift time – 7.0 s. Surface detectability – 10.6 km. Air detectability – 7.2 km. Detectability after firing main guns in smoke – 4.6 km. Available consumables: Slot 1 - Damage Control Party Slot 2 - Smoke Generator (Action time 15 s; Duration time 40 s; Reload time 80 s; Charges 6; Radius 450.0 m) Slot 3 - Engine Boost Slot 4 - Repair Party All stats are listed without crew and upgrade modifiers but with the best available modules.
  21. Soviet_Bias_Is_Just_Myth

    Ognevoi is... good?

    Before this newest patch Ognevoi was pretty bland. Slow torps and a lack of guns kept it from being fun for me. Now though I played a few games and find that it’s really good. Def AA saved my tail in a few encounters with CVs and the torps go 60KTS with the module so I’m now over leading my targets. Plus the rudder feels more maneuverable than before. I was dodging Bagration shells at 6km while kiting away. It’s a real gem now in my own opinion. And Udaloi is looking like a real fun ship to get next. Has anyone else played Ognevoi after the buffs? If so what did you think?
  22. Roamer0101

    ASW thoughts

    Played a few games today in DD's as I have been the one of the unlucky ones not to get a sub yet. I think ASW could be a great deal of fun and redefine how to do DD. I concentrated on staying alive and harassing from distance until the Subs started to go into the caps. Then I chased them down. One question I have is what is the distance that a Depth Charge will do damage? How far away can you start dropping? Is there an "Optimal" distance? I would like to hear from the Sub drivers so far on how effective the DC's are? It seemed like they did a lot of incidental hits and saw some fires and flooding. Is it something you fear?
  23. Got frustrated playing my Gearing in Ranked, so I decided to revisit an old friend. She only has a 10 point captain these days, but she plays as tough as I remember. The game wasn't easy; I had to work hard and keep my head on a swivel, but the results speak for themselves. The Clemson is still a powerful ship at her tier. It was nice to get a little affirmation that I'm not a complete potato player So, if you're feeling a bit frustrated this weekend, try going back to your roots. The Clemson, the Nicholas, the Farragut are all great ships, even with the CVs lurking about. Try getting reacquainted with an old friend.
  24. In the newsfeed today, WOWs is featuring the Kidd. I love this little ship, but she's not an easy ship to be good in and with the current meta, you can't just sail into caps thinking that you're going to bully any other dd out. RED DDs BRING FRIENDS, usually of the cruiser variety and often with radar or hydro. From the newsfeed, " VIII Kidd is a U.S. destroyer that can pose a real threat to Key Areas and is ideal for short-range knife fights with enemy counterparts". So, how often this weekend are we going to watch new KIdd drivers sail into caps to pick a fight with dds only to get crossfired by the cruisers that they didn't see? Heal and smoke aren't enough to make up for stupid. The worst part of this is that these players will have payed $40 for a premium USN dd that has a steep learning curve and when they don't do well, they will trash her name......and they will break my heart. She is a REAL museum ship (usskidd.com) if anyone wants to visit her. Watching multiple Kidds die in the first 5 minutes of battle over the weekend is not going to be fun. I think that I need a virtual hug.
  25. I haven't played the IJN DD line much, focusing on other things instead, but have decided to give it a go. I know that the detection range for torpedoes is horrific and it has a lot of problems, but it's just what I've been in the mood to play lately. I am at the Isokaze and am not sure what line I should go up. I was just curious on opinions about the main line as opposed to the alternative line. Thoughts?
×