Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'japanese'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Player Gatherings and Events
    • Community Programs Corner
  • Feedback and Support
    • Support
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Contests and Competitions
    • Clan and Divisions Hub
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 13 results

  1. 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?
  2. So I have to wonder why WOWS chose to go with the Hakuryu, a ship in blueprint only, when they had the Shinano they could have gone with, an actual ship that entered service and was superior to the Hakuryu. Granted she was sunk by the USS Archerfish and 4 well placed torpedoes on her first operational voyage, but she actually entered service and was the equal of the Midway, vs the Hakuryu, which never went beyond blueprint phase. That and the Shinano was the largest aircraft carrier of the war (56,000 tons dry weight, 69,000 tons fully loaded), since she started out as a sister ship to the Yamato and Musashi in 1940, but was converted to a CV after the Japanese soundly lost the Battle of the Midway.
  3. rooster_007

    What is the best cruiser line?

    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?
  4. #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
  5. 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
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. 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