Search the Community

I want to like her, but she's terrible. Maya is woefully worse than the FREE T7 Myoko, with significantly worse shells, fewer guns, slower reload, nearly twice as bad rudder response, and 2km less torp range (her torps are also spotted from 2.5km). For this she gets a repair party and a reload booster with base 2 charges. It is not NEARLY enough to make the ship comparable to Myoko and especially for a premium ship that you get either by chance (instead of a different ship) or by spending money. This is a shame because with some tweaking of her values to make her more competitive, this historical and powerful cruiser would be a viable alternative to the tech tree line. Guns -- Myoko: 10x 3300 HE damage. Reload is 14.0 sec. Maya: 8x 3000 HE damage (inexplicably, the same shells do 10% less damage on Maya each). Reload is 16.5 sec. This is a whopping 40% firepower reduction for Maya when compared to the tech tree ship (87k vs 142k HE dmg per min). Maneuverability -- again Maya is woefully worse. This WILL result in more citadels. Myoko: 5.7sec, 780m (upgraded) Maya: 8.1sec, 780m (upgraded) AA -- the "calling card" of the Maya and why she lost the extra turret, but still near identical values to Myoko and still paltry AA in today's meta. Myoko: 131 continuous, 2x shell explosions Maya: 155 continuous, 3x shell explosions All for a repair party that can heal around 6k hp on each of its two charges, and a reload booster that gives her an extra salvo in that 16.5sec reload time, with two charges only and 60sec cooldown.

Should new Premium carriers for tier 6 be made? I feel like they would be nice for operations, and crew training. I would like them to be strong but no ware as strong as lowenhart, bearn, and ark royal. Give them a gimmick with a good cooldown, and decent weaknesses for Balance. That can only be enchanced barely by crew skills.

So I discovered recently that the Isoroku Yamamoto Kraken heal will only heal "healable" HP (the stuff that you heal via the repair party consumable). Now that's fine in itself, if it wasn't for the fact that it will prevent you from using a regular heal because you've run out of "healable" HP. If your confused, think about it like this: Your HP is a basket of eggs and everytime you get hit, some of them fall out and some of those that fall break. Your heal puts the unbroken ones back in the basket. Now a free heal like the Kuznetzov "I'm about to die" one just adds new eggs to the basket, which still allows you to pick up some of the ones that fell out. On the other hand, Yamamoto's just slowly picks up the non-broken eggs leaving your actual heal with none or very little to pick up, preventing you from using it effectively. I personally think this is a big issue and needs to be fixed. I don't think the reward for a Kraken should be "Congrats, you can't use your heal now!" Here is a replay demonstrating it if you wanna confirm it for yourself: 20211105_200832_PJSB507-Ashitaka_35_NE_north_winter.wowsreplay (Any periods of static camera is probably me typing) Note: If it wasn't obvious, this only affects ships that actually have the repair party consumable.

One of the oldest lines in the game does not have a line split yet and its the Japanese cruisers and i propose a light cruiser line for them in essense its based on the mogami and the agano classes . most of the ships in this line are paper but that doesnt really stop wargaming from implementing them so this wont be as indepth as my other proposal. they are similar to american light cruisers in which they dont have to choose between defensive aa fire and hydro instead they have to choose between torpedo reload booster and defensive fire this line is for those who suffer from japanese cruiser syndrome and fire their torpedoes as soon as they get the chance. Traits: Good fire chance on main guns excellent torpedoes with reload booster from tier 5 excellent concealment low armor very maneuverable slow turret traverse High range Consumables hydro defensive aa fire /torpedo reload booster (tier 5+) spotting plane/fighter(tier 8 +) heal (tier8+) the torpedo reload booster is thirty seconds akin to monaghan from tier5 to 6 then from tier 7 to ten its 15 seconds. unlike american cruisers japanese cruisers were to do reconaisssance using their floatplanes so they start off with spotter planes instead of fighters as a consumable. Tier 4 : Sendai yes the line splits at tenryu I wanted to fit in another 5500 ton cruiser without up tiering it Same shabam as kuma floating citadel but with the single quadruple launchers it got in a refit as the only gameplay difference not much to say here Tier 5: Agano this is a queen elizabeth warspite situation her characteristics are the same as yahagi but with better dispersion and she trades engine boost for defensive aa or torpedo reload booster and swaps fighter with spotter Tier 6: Minase (Improved Agano) also known as the Kai Agano class the class was part of the 6th naval supplement plan from 1942 to build an extended version of the aganos who were lightly armed for their size slight increase in health ,detection and firepower from Agano and is quite similar to leander .The name minase was taken from one of the uncompleted sendai class cruisers who were re-planned to be the furutaka class. Tier 7 :Omono imagine Agano with mogamis 155mm turrets This ship is the preliminary design for agano where the ship was supposed to carry nine 155mm guns in three triple turrets . the turrets were too wide for the agano class' narrow bean so they were used to arm the yamato class battleships and oyodo instead. this version is a widened agano that could fit the turrets. so its slightly wider than agano being the same size as the tier before. the name Omono was taken from a river in Akita prefecture, Japan based on Japanese cruiser naming conventions. Tier 8: Chikugo complete fantasy version of improved Agano with 12 155mm guns just imagine the 155mm turrets on this. compared to the current 155mm mogami she gains 2 seconds less reload albeit ahistorical to be more competitive at high tier. The name Chikugo is from a river in Fukuoka Perfecture, Japan. Tier 9: Suzuya 155 mm mogami but uptiered As like Z-23 , Mogami loses the 155mm gun option which is replaced by the 203s and the upgrade for them increases the rate of fire. The turrets however are installed into suzuya who performs the same as the current 155mm Mogami but has a gun upgrade that drops it to the 8 seconds of the tier before. Tier 10: Sagami complete fantasy of a 155mm mogami with either quadruple turrets , an additional rear triple turret or faster firing dual or triple turrets the quadruple turret version reloads in 15 seconds, the additional turret version has 10 second reload still, the improved dual or triple versions cut the reload down to 6 seconds fot the triples and the duals 4 seconds. The name Sagami is from a river crossing the Kanagawa and Yamanashi prefectures in Japan. Premiums here are some unique japanese ships that would be premiums alonside what is already present Tier 3/4: Isuzu not much to say about it other than its armed with the same firepower as a kagero on a hull the size of two of them . tier 3 at best could be tier 4 with the torpedoes it had before they were removed Tier 5/6/7 : Oyodo did not want to put this in the tech tree as its unique and could fit at three different tiers depending on how its implemented: it fits at tier 5 in terms of vanilla armament, tier 6 if you give it both spotter and fighter at the same time and maybe tier 7 as a hybrid weird cruiser definitely hard to tier but it wouldn't be tech tree for sure Leave your thoughts below on this line

The following is a review of Hizen, the tier IX Japanese battleship and reward vessel for the Christmas 2020 Dockyard event. This ship was provided to me by Wargaming for review purposes at no cost to myself -- I didn't have to grind or spend doubloons on it (but I did anyway). To the best of my knowledge, the statistics discussed in this review are current as of patch 0.10.2. Please be aware that her performance may change in the future. Quick Summary: A Japanese battleship armed with twelve, slow-firing 410mm guns. PROS Thick lateral citadel protection. Armed with twelve 410mm guns, giving her the equivalent of a tier X alpha strike potential. Comfortable fire angles on her main battery guns. CONS Soft structural armour making her highly vulnerable to cruiser-calibre HE spam. Terrible (AWFUL) base reload time of 38 seconds per salvo. Slow for a high-tier battleship with a top speed of 28.2kts. Terrible anti-aircraft firepower. Visible from space. Her Repair Party has one fewer charges than a standard version of the consumable. Overview Skill Floor: Simple / CASUAL / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / MODERATE / High / Extreme Hizen offers stereotypical Japanese battleship game-play; the kind of stuff you cut your teeth on back with Myogi and Kongo back at tiers IV and V. Namely: keep back, stick to AP as much as possible and protect your citadel. It's not quite as idiot proof as say British or German battleship game play (which definitely deserve a "Simple" rating for most of their ships), it is pretty bare bones in terms of complexity. The biggest hurdle to overcome is reliable long-range gunnery. Her slow rate of fire punishes novice players in this manner, with every missed salvo hurting that much more. Sadly, this same lack of complexity reduced the carry value of this ship. Hizen doesn't brawl well. She's not fast or flexible. Expert players can make good use of kiting skills, ammunition choices and knowing where on the map to properly set up, but there are faster, tougher and overall better ships which can do Hizen's job and more besides. Options Consumables Hizen's consumables are normal for a Japanese battleship barring her Repair Party which has one fewer charges than expected. Her Damage Control Party is standard for a Japanese battleship with its 10 second active period. It has unlimited charges and an 80 second reset timer. Hizen's Repair Party is a disappointment, starting with only 3 charges instead of the usual 4. It heals back up to 14% of the ship's health over 28 seconds, queuing 10% of citadel damage, 50% of penetration damage and 100% of everything else. It has an 80s reset timer. In her third slot, you have the choice between a Spotter Aircraft and a Catapult Fighter. The former comes with four charges, increases her main battery range by 20% (up to 24.4km standard or 28.3km with Gun Fire Control Modification 2) for 100 seconds and has a 240 second reset timer. The latter launches 4 fighters which stay on station, orbiting the ship at a range of 3km for 60 seconds. It comes with three charges and has a 90 second reset timer. Upgrades Hizen's upgrade choices are bog-standard for a not-brawling, un-American, high-tier battleship Start with Main Armaments Modification 1 Mitigate fires with Damage Control System Modification 1 in slot two. You're a sniper, so grab Aiming System Modification 1 in slot three. Reduce fire and flooding damage with Damage Control System Modification 2 in slot four. Concealment Expert is still the best choice in slot 5. Boring, I know. Main Battery Modification 3 is the best choice for slot 6. Hizen's 38 second reload is appalling and you can reduce this 38 second warcrime down to a 33.44s political oopsie-daisy. However, if you want to buff your range from 20.33km to 23.58km instead, then Gun Fire Control System Modification 2 isn't a terrible choice. Commander Skills The more things change, the more they stay the same. There are a couple of "must have" skills for Hizen, namely Dead Eye (tier 4), Fire Prevention Expert (also tier 4) and Basics of Survivability (tier 3). Collecting these three skills is a must. After that it's down to recommended skills for you to mix and match to make your ideal build. At tier 1: Gun Feeder or Emergency Repair Specialist are your best choices. I'd only take one at this tier. At tier 2: Grease the Gears and Priority Target are the ones to focus on. On one of my builds, I grabbed both but this compromised the high-tier skills I could take. I prefer the latter to the former. At tier 3: After you take Basics of Survivability you're going to want Adrenaline Rush to attack her awful reload time. At tier 4: Dead Eye, Emergency Repair Expert, Concealment Expert and Fire Prevention Expert are all good skills. For Hizen, Concealment Expert is probably the weakest of the four while Dead Eye and Fire Prevention Expert are the strongest. Mix and match as you please. If you intend to take three tier 4 skills, you will end up with a build like the following: Gun Feeder (1) Priority Target (2) Adrenaline Rush (3), Basics of Survivability (3) Dead Eye (4), Emergency Repair Expert (4), Fire Prevention Expert (4). Camouflage Hizen has access to two kinds of camouflage. Type 10 and War Paint - Hizen. They provide identical bonuses of: -3% surface detection +4% increased dispersion of enemy shells. -20% to post-battle service costs. +100% to experience gains.  Hizen's Type 10 camouflage offers an alternate palette if you have completed the appropriate section of the Isoroku Yamamoto collection. In port, Hizen's War Paint camouflage will have 60 sailors out on deck in parade formation (I think that's what it's called). Firepower Main Battery: Twelve 410mm guns in 4x3 turrets in an A-B-X-Y superfiring configuration. Secondary Battery: Nine 155mm guns in 3x3 turrets and sixteen 127mm mounts in 8x2 turrets. Secondary Specialist Musashi Hizen's secondaries are crap. Hizen shares a similar secondary armament to Musashi barring the addition of two, faster-firing 127mm/40 guns per side. While the range of Hizen's secondaries is perfectly functional, their rate of fire is is slow. Were it not for the improved HE shell performance on Japanese battleships, her DPM would be in the doldrums with their crap reload. As it is, individual hits are chunky enough that on a raw DPM chart, she holds pace with Pommern and Friedrich der Große but with (much) worse fire angles and accuracy. Thankfully, the 0.10.0 skill rework made secondary-builds even less optimal than they once were, so you should have zero inclination on specializing Hizen down this route. Cross-Eyed Sniper It's all too easy to myopically focus on Hizen's 38 second reload and dwell on nothing but. However, she is decidedly more flawed than this mere lapse in reload-speed. Ostensibly, Hizen has a tier X armament that has been shoe-horned in to tier IX by nerfing the crap out of it. Wargaming managed this by giving Hizen's artillery three cardinal sins: Her reload is butts. Her accuracy is butts. Her range is butts. Hizen has slightly better penetration than Amagi (and her tier VII sister Ashitaka as well as Nagato). This is owing to a higher muzzle velocity and slightly reduced shell drag which provides better energy preservation over distance. This doesn't quite hold a candle to the punch of Izumo (and Bajie's) improved weapons which have more velocity, Krupp and even less drag. However, Hizen's reduced range makes it difficult to fully capitalize on this advantage. Let's start with the last thing first and begin with her range. Barring the new Italian battleships, Hizen has the worst range among the tier IX battleships, sitting 50m behind the Sovetsky Soyuz-sisters. After that, most of them best her by at least 1km with the American ships (aside from Georgia) being particular stand-outs given that they'll balloon their range up with third-slot upgrades to increase the gap even further. This range deficit might not be so bad if: (a) Hizen had better concealment... which she doesn't and... (b) Hizen had better armour protection ... which she also doesn't. Her 19.33km range may not seem like that big of a flaw; after all, it's just one upgrade away from being corrected and her Spotter Aircraft can provide some temporary relief. However, her lack of reach makes taking an influential, central map position more difficult. Again, her Spotter Aircraft may be enough to make up the gap, but if it's on cooldown when you need it most, the opportunity is wasted. Furthermore, if you upgrade her range, you then suffer the full force of her horrible reload. This largely relegates Hizen to straight up, heads-on engagements or waiting forever and a day fire between salvos if she does buff her range to enable flanking shots. While going heads-up works fine against smaller vessels (her 410mm guns are perfectly capable of overmatching the bows of any light, heavy or super-cruiser she comes across) she is less capable when facing other battleships. I make a lot of lists when putting together reviews. Notepad is my friend. This is the range of the tier VIII, IX and X battleships in order. 180 AP shells fired at 15km at a stationary Fuso-bot that has no camouflage. Shots are coming in from right to left, with the Fuso-bot effectively bow-tanking. All three firing vessels used Aiming System Modification 1 but did not use Dead Eye. Hizen's gunnery is a lot less comfortable than either Amagi's or Izumo's. It's frustrating how badly she scatters her shots like a shotgun blast. Hizen's gunnery woes compound further with her dispersion antics. While Japanese battleships have reduced horizontal dispersion over distance, their vertical dispersion at high tiers is much less forgiving. The overall area that Hizen blows her loads over is enormous and reminds me very much of some of my gunnery tests with Italian battleships. Admittedly, it's not as bad as that but after a few frustrating matches, it was hard not to draw the comparisson. Couple this with Hizen's 1.7 sigma value and her reliability just isn't there. For a ship with such a painfully long reload, watching your shells disperse to the four corners of the globe is infuriating (doubly so if you aren't using Main Battery Modification 3). Hizen's broadside of twelve guns will usually ensure that something hits, but it's easy to be blinded to their reduced efficiency that way. Hizen is slower firing and less accurate besides and this really hurts her damage output. Dead Eye is a must. Don't leave port without it and keep as far back as you can so that it's always working. Hizen's appalling reload time means that even with twelve guns she simply keeps pace with the eight and nine-gun armed ships at her tier. So, she's comparable DPM to an Iowa-class but with bigger alpha strike potential ... and worse accuracy. Japanese battleship HE shells do almost as much damage as British battleship HE shells. They just don't have the increased penetration or high fire chance of the British rounds. Which brings us now to Hizen's defining trait: her 38 second reload. Her twelve 410mm gun armament should stand out more, but it's caged and butchered behind this awful reload. Main Battery Modification 3 corrects this somewhat, morphing it down to a "mere" 33.4 seconds. With so many battleships at her tier firing between seven and ten seconds faster, Hizen's trades are dirt-poor. Despite what the DPM charts will tell you, her awful dispersion further throttles her damage output. She may appear to be able to keep pace (or be slightly better than) some of the nine-gun armed ships but the reality is that barring some spectacular RNGeebus-blessed alpha strikes, Hizen just doesn't keep pace. This is born out by performance stats where her damage totals are rather middling for such a large broadside. She's not terrible, but it would be a mistake to imagine that her large armament conferred any kind of advatage with all of these other flaws stacked against her. Hizen's fire angles are soooo close to being ideal, if only her rearward angles were a little more tight. Keep this fact in mind when we discuss kiting. Taking Main Battery Modification 3 guts her turret rotation rate from 4º/s down to 3.5º/s, allowing her to out-turn her turrets which is annoying. Summary The premise of Hizen is delivering these massive, twelve-gun alpha strikes at the expense of sustained fire. But she works at cross-purposes to herself with a lack of range and accuracy to facilitate dropping those bombs across people's decks. For such a long reload, another kilometer or two's worth of reach would have made all of the difference, allowing her to cross-fire from a central position. Her bad dispersion could have been swallowed as a throttling measure to keep her reliability down, necessitating taking several bites at the apple. As it stands, Hizen can put out some respectable damage and she can be an impressive artillery platform, but that's largely owing to RNGeebus being your close, personal friend and the Reds playing like idiots -- neither of these things should be counted on. Hizen's firepower doesn't open up opportunities. She's forced to have them handed to her. This kind of passivity is frustrating and uninteresting. VERDICT: Oh boy, "worse than it appears, but not so bad that it's terrible" summarizes Hizen's gunnery best. Durability Hit Points: 75,900 Bow & stern/superstructure/upper-hull/deck: 32mm / 19mm / 32mm / 32mm Maximum Citadel Protection: 356mm belt + 108mm to 115mm turtleback Torpedo Damage Reduction: 37% Hizen's defence is ... well, meh. (This uninspired sentence has been brought to you by: Chemical Dependence™. "Bring me caffeine or I'll eat your skin.") Hizen's armour protection is almost reasonable -- meaning that it's surprising how bad it is because it fails to meet even the low-set bar of Musashi and Izumo. I am shocked (shocked!) that Hizen's amidship deck is only 32mm while Musashi and Izumo both manage 57mm. Combined with her massive superstructure, Hizen is an easy damage farm for any cruiser-calibre HE shells. So that's unfortunate. She also inherits Izumo's buttacular shell-trap when she tries to kite. That stepped freeboard is an easy opening for incoming AP rounds to strike and there's no way to angle it to prevent that from happening. This is a shame because there's some very handsome extended waterline belt stretching out towards her butt which should foil attempts to penetrate her when angled. But all one needs to get around that is simply aim a little higher. You can't count on high-tier players to constantly derp shells into the waterline anyway. Bots will, players won't. Unless you're planning on using Hizen exclusively in co-op, her armour scheme gives away a lot of penetration damage, even when angled. It's best not to present any kind of target in the first place because her hit points drain fast when she gets focused. Which brings up the other thing: Hizen's Repair Party isn't good. While she has a very chunky hit point pool, having one fewer charge of her heals with no improvements to the consumable in compensation just means that she has less staying power than comparable battleships. Building for fire and flooding mitigation is doubly important because she simply isn't capable of recovering from them as readily as everyone else. Her citadel protection is ... well, like everything else, it's not great. It's slightly improved over Izumo's own, but only slightly. Given the sheer amount of metal in place, Hizen is generally safe from Citadel hits if she camps out at her maximum range. However, there are a few battleships out there that can manage in excess of 500mm of penetration out to 20km and those ones can still punish Hizen for giving up her sides, so be careful of flanking fire. Hizen herself doesn't quite have the range to comfortably sit back any further without compromising her already terrible rate of fire. Finally, there's some funny geometry going on with here forward citadel protection with the barbette of A-turret plugging a "hole" in the transverse bulkhead of Hizen's forward magazine. While this may present a "cheek" weakness similar to Yamato, I never received a citadel hit through it (that I'm aware of), nor was I able to generate citadel hits on the few opportunities I had to test it out in my games. It might be a weakness, but it wasn't easily replicable in my experience, so be aware that it might be a weakness, just not as enormous as Yamato's blushing cheeks. Overall, I can't call Hizen a durable ship. She has a lot of hit points, sure, but she doesn't hold up under concerted punishment. With homogeneous 32mm worth of structural plate, Hizen is an easy HE damage farm. Her citadel protection is improved over Izumo's, at least. But it's not so much better that I got super excited. Well, someone's got to be at the bottom. Hizen's effective health is lower than expected due to her missing a charge of her Repair Party. VERDICT: Not appallingly bad, but barely adequate. You would think for a ship with such troubled firepower that she'd be amazing here but nope. Agility Top Speed: 28.2 knots Turning Radius: 880m 7Rudder Shift Time: 17.1 seconds 4/4 Engine Speed Rate of Turn: 3.8º/s at 21.2 knots Were it not for the other Japanese battleships, Hizen would be the least agile ship at her tier. This is largely owing to her sub-30 knot top speed which, when combined with an average turning radius for a tier IX battleship, she ends up feeling very sluggish. This is compounded by her slow rudder-shift time, though at higher tiers, such an affliction becomes increasingly commonplace. There are only two curiousities when it comes to Hizen's agility (which I rate as "poor" overall). The first is that she turns a bit more tightly than her in-port turning stat would suggest. She's closer to an 870m radius than an 880m. But as this still falls into my +/- 10m margin of error, I'll still consider the in-port stat accurate enough. The other oddity is more of a new trend where Wargaming have divorced themselves from top speeds that end in either full or half-knot values. It's only within the last year that we've seen ships like Hizen that end in something other than zero or a point-five. Neither of these curiousities have any redeeming value on Hizen's poor performance in this category, though. For nerds like me? They're interesting but nothing else. Hizen's agility is pretty trashy. VERDICT: Anti-Aircraft Defence Flak Bursts: 4 + 1 explosions for 1,540 damage per blast at 3.5km to 5.8km. Long Ranged (up to 5.8km): 105dps at 75% accuracy Short Ranged (up to 2.5km): 304.5dps at 85% accuracy Crap. Seriously. At least this is comfortably familiar. A Japanese battleship with bad AA? Totally unsurprising. VERDICT: No. Vision Control Base/Minimum Surface Detection: 17.38km / 13.66km Base/Minimum Air Detection Range: 12.96km / 10.5km Detection Range When Firing in Smoke: 17.01km Maximum Firing Range: Between 19.33km and 23.58km (max of 28.30km with Spotter Aircraft). Hizen is a big, fat battleship with a big, fat surface detection range. Aside from her Spotter Aircraft she brings absolutely nothing of value to the table here. She is a chunktacular travesty, visible from Mars and suffering for it besides. She needs more space than most to activate Dead Eye and she hasn't the range to capitalize on it either. This forces you to choose between boosting her range with Gun Fire Control System Modification 2, thus suffering the full wrath of her 38 second reload or coping with having a smaller activation window if you buff her rate of fire with Main Battery Modification 3. Hizen has similar tolerances as Marco Polo in this regard, which is pretty damning. VERDICT: Terrible and made worse that you need to choose between a bad reload or bad range in order to counter it. Final Evaluation Hizen is a Japanese Minnesota -- slow, fat and with a main battery armament that somehow manages to be disappointing despite its huge size. Being disappointing does not preclude Hizen from being effective, however. World of Warships is designed in such a way that even an aberrant, mediocre vessel can still perform in the hands of someone with the inclination (and enthusiasm) to squeeze some numbers out of it. The question becomes how much you have to work for it and Hizen is going to make you toil. Nothing for Hizen comes easy and her lists of serious advantages begins and ends with "twelve 410mm guns". I would much rather play Amagi at tier VIII or Izumo at tier IX than Hizen. Their advantages are much more clear cut, with Amagi offering almost as much firepower with slightly worse protection and penetration but increased agility and Izumo having great range, penetration and accuracy in exchange for slightly less potential DPM. Hizen doesn't slot well between them and feels clunky as a result. For those who have read my short summary of Hizen, I gave her a GARBAGE rating and I stand by it.: I think she performs fine, but I do not like this ship which is all I need to slap that label on her. She was not worth the grind, in my opinion, and worst of all, she's not fun to play. Those who failed to get her over 2020-2021's New Years aren't really missing out.

i was reading thosr 2 commanders description and i see we can get more than 2 of each. is it worth? if you run all japanese lines and wants quick leveled commanders, it will be good to have then running on many ships? (without switching ship to ship) i know it is cheaper to get dasha on armory and i will eventually get her on as many countries as i can. those Japanese special commanders are always available? i see when there are AL collab some japanese commanders come along, maybe north american and british too. does anyone get 3 fubuki shirakami or marine houshou? azur lane collab always comes with countainers? 100% chance of getting commanders? i have seen a video where the youtuber got at least 2 kagas and 2 atagos.

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?

I'm going the american heavy cruisers, american light cruisers, and german cruisers. I do have an Atago and I was wondering what other line I should go up. Any suggestions?

#2 The Korean “Geobukseon” (turtle ship); what happens when a revolutionary design is wielded by a naval genius. Hello and welcome to the second installment of Bizzare Naval Tech, this time with a very interesting design from Asia, the “Geobukseon” or turtle ship. In addition, we will see how it’s “inventor”, Korean Admiral Yi Sun-sin managed with the help of this ship to triumph against the Japanese, often overcoming overwhelming odds. Please forgive any mistakes in my English, not my mother tongue. Introduction The era we will be examining this time is the late 16th century, more specifically 1592-1598, a time period during which the Japanese attempted to invade Korea twice (and China) under the leadership of Toyotomi Hideyoshi. The Japanese way of fighting at sea was inspired by land battles, with boarding actions by samurai and widespread use of well drilled Ashigaru (common troops) armed with matchlock firearms. Some of the Japanese ships even resembled fortresses with superstructures. Most lacked cannons. Of course, such ships were mostly suitable for coastal actions. The Japanese had some distinct advantages over the Koreans; samurai were unparalleled in hand to hand combat in boarding actions, matchlock firearms were pretty deadly. Most importantly we are talking about a Japan near the end of the Sengoku Period, with numerous troops being battle hardened and very experienced thanks to a century of almost constant war. This lead to the Japanese being dominant in land battles during both invasions of Korea. On the other hand Korea at that time was at the forefront of naval technology in the region. They employed large numbers of cannons on their ships, with the more common “panokseon” type of ship outranging most Japanese ships. However the Koreans found themselves early in the war being forced to scuttle a large portion of their fleet, with the Japanese warships outnumbering them. This is when “Geobukseon” and Admiral Yi Sun-sin appear. Design of “Geobukseon”: “Geobukseon” or turtle ship was one of the newest breakthroughs in Korean naval technology. It’s creator is considered to be Admiral Yi Sun-sin, although the design already existed and he simply realized it to it’s full, at that time modern potential. So, what was a turtle ship? Simply put, it was a type of large and relatively fast warship that was armed to the brim with cannons, was strong enough to protect it’s crew from matchlock fire and was covered at the top with spikes to make boarding nigh impossible. On the bow there was a good luck dragon’s head. It could house a cannon, or could be used as a form of sulfur smoke projector to conceal the ship. The ship itself could turn on its radius and because of the combination of sails and oars was surprisingly quick. As you can see, it was a vessel perfectly designed to counter the preferred Japanese naval fighting method. A bit more detailed information from a historian describing the ship: http://aas2.asian-studies.org/EAA/EAA-Archives/12/1/772.pdf A modern full sized replica of a turtle ship, this one is a museum piece. You can barely notice the spikes covering the deck. A small replica of the ship in a museum From Admiral Yi’s report to King Sonjo on the ship itself: One of the earliest drawings depicting a turtle ship. Notice the front anchor, it was often used for ramming as well Some sources consider turtle ships to have had a metal cover on the top deck, making them the first iron clad ships in history. This is disputed however since iron at the time was in short supply and the thick wood was already proof to most forms of damage. While not many of these ships were made (at the height of the war about 6 to 8 are considered to have been in use), they were used to tip the scale in the many naval battles during the war. They were used as breakthrough vessels, able to enter deep within enemy formations and use the cannon to wreak havoc, often focusing on sinking the enemy flagships. Usage of the turtle ship and disadvantages For this section I chose two of the better known battles in which turtle ships were used and were important in securing victories. The first one is the battle of Sacheon (1592). Always under the command of Admiral Yi, the Korean nay encountered 12 large battleships in the harbor of Sacheon. By feigning retreat the Koreans managed to lure the Japanese ships. Then, the Korean fleet turned, and with a turtle ship at the front rushed to fight the Japanese. Due to the inability of the Japanese to cause any damage they lost all their battleships, while the Koreans only had 5 wounded (including Admiral Yi). At the battle of Tanghanp’o, the same tactic of feigning retreat was used, followed by an ambush at open waters. Again the turtle ship played an important role in the win, rushing to the enemy flagship, ramming it and devastating it with cannon fire. From Admiral Yi’s report to King Sonjo on the battle: A turtle ship in it’s favorite place, in the middle of everything and rushing an Atakebune (particularly large Japanese warships that served as flagships) While impressive, turtle ships weren’t invincible machines of naval war. They were more suited to coastal actions and not open waters. In addition they were very expensive to produce and required many resources. Last, their performance relied on good leadership and tactics; when Admiral Yi lost command of the fleet for a time, his successor, eager to prove his worth managed to lose almost his entire fleet pretty quickly. Admiral Yi Sun-sin While the focus of these articles is on naval designs, there has to be some further mention on Admiral Yi Sun-sin, an admiral that had no naval training, was never defeated, never lost a single ship and lost his life while fighting for his country in 1598. He was considered by historians and military leaders as one of the greatest naval minds in history. In the words of Admiral George Alexander Ballard: Statue of the man himself in Seoul Thanks to his ships and tactics he managed to always emerge as the victor, utilizing his ships in the best possible way and using every possible factor to secure advantages in battle.He is famous for the feigning retreat tactics as we already saw, as well as the “crane maneuver” that gave him victory in important battles such as the one on Hansando A depiction of the crane formation during the battle of Hansado; blue depicts the Koreans, red the Japanese; this maneuver enabled the numerically inferior Korean navy to surround the Japanese and ensure a decisive victory. Perhaps his greatest victory however was in the battle of Myeongnyang in 1597 during the second invasion of Korea. After most of his fleet was lost thanks to the incompetence of his predecessor he decided to make a final stand at Myeongryang Strait. The reason for this choice was the narrowness of the Strait as well as the currents that flowed in different directions every three hours. He faced 130 Japanese warships with just 13. At the start of the battle, due to his own fleet being scared and shaken, he fought alone in his flagship against the whole Japanese fleet. In his words from his diary: Managing to rally his fleet and using the current that had shifted by that time, he delivered a crushing blow to the Japanese fleet, destroying 30 ships and killing half of the enemy forces to no ship losses on his side. Conclusion: With the successful use of turtle ships and the leadership of Admiral Yi, the Japanese land forces quickly found themselves with their supply lines in peril. They were unable to seize any advantages their superiority on land provided them thanks to the Korean dominance at sea. Eventually their plan of conquering Korea failed. I specifically chose the turtle ship as a prime example of how in the end technological advancements often require the human factor to really shine. In combination with the genius of Admiral Yi they were deadly weapons that succeeded in defending their country. Thanks for reading and I hope you enjoy this subject as much as I did writing and researching about it. As usual I would welcome any comments, be they negative and giving me some constructive criticism, or positive for my work. Thanks again for reading! Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtle_ship http://aas2.asian-studies.org/EAA/EAA-Archives/12/1/772.pdf https://deadliestblogpage.wordpress.com/2017/07/23/great-warships-of-history-korean-turtle-ship/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_invasions_of_Korea_(1592%E2%80%931598) http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Turtle_ship http://www.antiquealive.com/Blogs/Geobukseon_Turtle_Ship.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Myeongnyang Previous article in case anyone is interested

Looking for mod/sound files to replace Anime and national non-English speaking captains. I've got a few 6- 10-point captains from events and such (e.g., Isoroku, the grunting Japanese cat, and Admiral Hipper, the annoyingly breathy anime Japanese girl). I'm looking for a way to replace their sound files with the standard USN sound prompts in the game (or even the UK files, chaps). I admit that I do key into the audio for game prompts so I don't have to take my eyes of the screen and minimap. I don't play the non-English captains (even my Dasha or Overchkin) enough to learn the language phrases. Any thoughts? Thanks

I know they were around for the release of the Cadenza special but if the High School Fleet is getting a season two then why not make the ARP ships available again? I started after the event for them ended which was the main reason i had started playing so for them to be completely out on availability had me bummed out. Put in Japanese cruisers since a fair amount are Japanese cruisers.

Greetings my fellow Captains. It is my pleasure to present you with the 2nd project I have completed as part of my continued ONNI Recognition Manual. This page featuring the Tier IX Cruiser IJN Azuma (formally Tier X). And I do believe this entry will be close to, if not the, format I will be making use of from here on in. Of which, I would like to thank all those that gave feedback and criticisms. The suggestions of adding a top down view makes for a far better perspective of the ship. In addition to providing a pleasant challenge that was darn worth it. I have also changed to something close to the suggested Courier font. Both of these additions giving this work a more authentic look. I will admit my initial want to create one entry for the ONNI guide each month was a mite ambitious. Especially having a collective 5 months of experience drawing in vector under my belt haha In reality, adding the top down view may be taking these back to 10 in a year due to the added load. With that said, I am still learning the intricacies of Inkscape. So things may pick up the pace with the more knowledge I gain. As a side note I had planned on having this completed 2 days ago. Then the recent devblog post announced some changes to the Azuma. This changed her armor model for one. As you can imagine that required some further editing haha To bookend matters; If you fancied catching updates on my progress for future ONNI guide entries feel free to hop on over to the Numpty Navy Discord - https://discord.gg/EJ4YMM4 *Keep things laid back and civil* Updates are posted in the onni-teaser channel.

OK, so this has bothered me for a while since I am a student of history. So I did some research on cruise speed, top speed of the fighters listed for Japan and the U.S. What I found confirmed my suspicion. The U.S. fighters are given a 28% boost in speed, while the Japanese were given a 13% penalty. This results in a whopping 41% difference from reality. I know it's just a game and maybe it's compensated on the damage and HP. But when one pass from the 5 American fighters can down 18 Japanese fighters, something is off.

Durante un largo tiempo me he dedicado a recolectar información sobre ciertos buques construidos durante, entre, y después de las guerras mundiales y que podrían destacar como candidatos al juego que actualmente nos presenta WG. Traté de meterme en la cabeza de los desarrolladores deduciendo las ecuaciones a partir de las cuales se determina los puntos de vida de cada buque basándose en el deslazamiento de este, aunque como se darán cuenta algunos no concuerdan con los presentados en el juego. Algunas ramas también presentan problemas relacionados con la ubicación de sus buques en el tier adecuado, como es el caso de los destructores franceses e italianos, otros como los cruceros japoneses presentan problemas por la información poco clara respecto a sus desplazamientos en tonelaje, y para el caso de algunos portaaviones, sus valores de HP están calculados basándose en su desplazamiento estándar y no su desplazamiento a plena carga, como en el caso de Kaga. Algunos buques no están situados en el mismo tier en el archivo que en el juego, eso se debe a una diferencia de opiniones personal contra WG. También hay buques que no están dentro de las ramas pero se indican en las tablas o debajo de las ramas mismas, esto se debe a que su ubicación es difícil de decidir. Las ramas están ordenadas por colores y estas incluyen; portaaviones, conversiones a portaaviones, acorazados, cruceros de batalla, grandes cruceros, cruceros, cruceros antiaéreos y destructores. Los asteriscos representan navíos que fueron inventados por el equipo de desarrollo de WG. Las fechas indicadas entre paréntesis indican que el buque es un diseño que nunca se construyó o terminó su construcción y el año indica su fecha de diseño. No se incluyen barcos que pertenezcan a clases ya mencionadas en naciones mas grandes, un ejemplo claro sería el crucero argentino General Belgrano que ya está representado por la clase Brooklyn. Los cuadros de distinto color dentro de las tablas de HP representan tonelajes modificados por WG o por mí haciendo referencia a un incremento del tonelaje original debido a una modernización ficticia del buque. Los nombres de los buques dentro de las tablas de HP que están centrados no obedecen la ecuación principal para la clase, como es el caso de los grandes cruceros que no siguen la ecuación general de los cruceros y por eso tienen una ecuación propia. Lo mismo ocurre con algunas de las naves convertidas a portaaviones, que por su excesivo desplazamiento, tienen una ecuación diferente a la del resto de los portaaviones. Espero sus comentarios y sus críticas. Compartan si lo consideran oportuno o interesante. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wckrRPErjwJ46erYOaJ1Cx3ycs8AClPx

With the new update they made US carriers the top of the food chain again, starting at ranger I believe, you gain access to a 1/1/2 rather than a 1/1/1 that was standard for everything. But you can’t swap in for a 2/0/1 anymore, as the drawback of this new update. But it will get better. At Lexington(Tier 8) you may upgrade your DIVE bombers to equip AP bombs that can deal massive damage. These bombs were on the enterprise(Tier 8 premium carrier). At tier 9 (Essex), you have a 2/1/2, which is powerfull. Drawback, and it’s a big one, the fighters for the Essex only are stock tier 8’s and you cannot get tier 9 fighters. One thing is that the torpedo bombers past Lexington STAY at tier 8, with no upgrades to 9 or 10. But of course at Essex you can still get those AP bombs with tier 9 DB. Midway is probably the most beneficial from this update as it has a 2/2/2. With stock T9 fighters that can be upgraded to T10. Course you only have tier 8 torpedo bombers, but torpedo damage does not increase with tier. And you still get those awesome tier 10 AP dive bombers. In my opinion. Go USN as the AP bombs wreck havoc against most battleships and some cruisers, and the bombs have a INSANLY SMALL targeting reticule, that can be smaller than the superstructures on most battle ships. But you only get them at tier 8 and up. Moving on. IJN, where to start. Easy way to say how the play is swarm the skies. These carriers have a really good amount of squadrons. But that comes at a cost. When IJN fighters take a squadron of USN fighters, the USN’s are going to win, as the squadron capacity for all USN carriers is 6, beating the IJN’s 4. Plus the USN planes ( all types ) do more damage and more health. But since IJN has a 2 fighter load out that puts it a 6v8. I can’t say much more because I only really made it up to Lexington and never played a IJN carrier before. But the grind to the tier 8 Lexington is worth it because when you go into the first battle with your AP bombers bought ( point, you get stock HE so then you can upgrade them to the tier above with HE OR AP ) you can deal a CRAZY amount of damage on a battleship draining almost 7/8 of its health for certain types and if you get a good hit.

So I have been grinding the new IJN Gunboat Destroyers and this is my second game in the Tier 9 Kitakaze. In this replay I showcase how to fight for the win and use my game knowledge to predict what the enemy is trying to do.

Hi all This is more of a PSA to all players out there who forget that japanese destroyers besides the Akizuki and up on that tech tree line have guns. The guns are not great yes but in the right cases can do some serious damage. Just dont forget about them. Just thought id share the game that sparked this post. The proof of my point P.S Shame at the end the enemy Carrier gave up despite being in the lead with points. Simple needed to run to win instead he turned off his aa and did not send any more planes. Dont do this even if you are the last ship alive on your team. You can still win on points Enjoy the rest of your day