The systematic nerfing of the entire destroyer class

[MrManiacSir]

I am and have been a destroyer player since alpha/beta testing.  I am unhappy with nerfing of the class as a whole.  Over time the destroyers have been gradually nerfed because of complaints from cruiser and battleship players who have fallen to the destroyers strengths.  The ending of concealed fire, to the changes of the captains experience point skills, to the reduced effectiveness of the smoke screen and  more have reduced the effectiveness of the destroyer to the point where they are as a class of boats nearly impossible to be effective in combat.  I have watched cruisers, battleships, and carriers be nerfed and buffed but as a class  they general stay effective.

I'm sure there are many arguments that would in face value make my observation seem incorrect but I maintain that the destroyer class has consistently over time been reduced in their effectiveness to the point where they just are not competitive. 

[Terrible_Turtle]

Destroyers are just as effective as they've ever been. They simply have clearer counters now than they did before. 

[Doomlock]

13 minutes ago, Kombat_W0MBAT said:

Destroyers are just as effective as they've ever been. They simply have clearer counters now than they did before. 

This. Also, sometimes, tactics that worked in the past are no longer viable and thus need changing.

[TheCloudraker]

I agree with the two post before me, in the meta now, its a little more challenging to play destroyers, but also it feels much more rewarding from it as well. 

[Herodotus4]

On one hand destroyers can still be effective by playing stealthy and carefully. On the other hand, Radar Shiver. Especially the &*$% Missouri, I would love to see that thing lose radar; after all if a cruiser decides to sit in the open and radar cap it gets deleted, with that thing it takes 10k damage.

[Terrible_Turtle]

5 minutes ago, Herodotus4 said:

On one hand destroyers can still be effective by playing stealthy and carefully. On the other hand, Radar Shiver. Especially the &*$% Missouri, I would love to see that thing lose radar; after all if a cruiser decides to sit in the open and radar cap it gets deleted, with that thing it takes 10k damage.

 

There are only a few instances where radar scares me as a DD main. 

 

-Belfast

-Baltimore

-Chapayev

-Minotaur

 

The first three give me almost no reaction time because, if I'm the first one to spot them, then I'm practially in radar range already... and they know it.

 

The Minotaur worries me simply because it always takes me by surprise. 

 

Almost every other instance of radar can be anticipated or planned around. 

[FitsHeSits]

I'm no Beta player....but I can say nobody who played then (OP) looked at the team lists and went shiiiiiiit....Missouri, Missouri, Belfast, Saipan, Chappy......fml. Safe to say he can complain about the class being nerfed all he wants to. I'm fast becoming a DD main, some matches are just hopeless. Spot, smoke your team, dodge everything from 6 ships shooting you because you're constantly chain radared 

[Kerrec]

It doesn't matter what ship class I'm playing, BB, Cruiser or DD... Enemy DD's will always be priority target #1.  And there's a good reason for that; they are by far the most influential ship class in terms of winning games.  I don't care how often they've been nerfed, they are still potent.

[Panzer1113]

The chipping away of DD tools, and the amount of radar has made DD play more challenging.  High tier DD play can be especially frustrating, pushing me to limit my tier 10 stealth DD play and if I wish to play DDs, stay in tier 4/5/6/7. 

[GabeTheDespot]

GIB ME MY TORPS BACK!!!!!!!!

-Khabarovsk (even though what I really want is higher gun range)

-Shimikaze

[CapinJoethegrey]

Destroyers are over powered now, they need to be nerfed more, not less.   No destroyer could fire as many torpedoes as are fired routinely in the game.   WWII destroyers usually only had the torpedoes in their tubes, when they were fired, they were gone.   Jap DDs did carry one reload, but it took a long time to reload, and could not be done in combat conditions, with the ship radically maneuvering.    The whole invisibility cloak with smoke is a game only thing.   A smoke screen is for blocking the enemy line of sight to escape.   You can no more see out of a smoke screen than you can see in.   Have you ever tried to drive in the fog?   If you cannot see in, you cannot see out, simple physics.    The idea that a DD could stand off and gun a BB under is also way out of line.   In two world wars, no BB was lost to small caliber fire.   The closest was the Hiei, which was so damaged by 5,6,8 and 14 inch shells (Friendly fire from Kiroshima), that it could not escape and was finished off the next day by aircraft.  

[dionkraft]

2 hours ago, CapinJoethegrey said:

Destroyers are over powered now, they need to be nerfed more, not less.   No destroyer could fire as many torpedoes as are fired routinely in the game.   WWII destroyers usually only had the torpedoes in their tubes, when they were fired, they were gone.   Jap DDs did carry one reload, but it took a long time to reload, and could not be done in combat conditions, with the ship radically maneuvering.    The whole invisibility cloak with smoke is a game only thing.   A smoke screen is for blocking the enemy line of sight to escape.   You can no more see out of a smoke screen than you can see in.   Have you ever tried to drive in the fog?   If you cannot see in, you cannot see out, simple physics.    The idea that a DD could stand off and gun a BB under is also way out of line.   In two world wars, no BB was lost to small caliber fire.   The closest was the Hiei, which was so damaged by 5,6,8 and 14 inch shells (Friendly fire from Kiroshima), that it could not escape and was finished off the next day by aircraft.  

Could NOT agree with you more....I am hoping that the next mini-patch will fix that so that SMOKE is what it is...in it you can't see out and ships outside it cannot see in as you described so simply. The only condition I can add is that if any ship fires from within smoke becomes exposed for lets say..20 seconds as a game mechanic for a said amount of radius according to its ship class.  Namely a DD will have less radius than a BB firing within smoke.  Okay thats fair enuff...the ONLY thing which puts a wrench in the works is when there is a smoke condition and there are opposing ships on each side of that smoke how will it be treated?  

They technically should NOT see each other and no icon marker should be displayed. But how about if one launches a spotter plane?  The one who launched should SEE over the SMOKE and spot the other enemy ship.

Now were talking about a situation of NO other ships are spotting for either ship in this example - Its a 1 x 1 situation.  I know the Devs are still pondering the tweaks on this SMOKE mechanic...what are yours y'all? 

[n5bar]

A couple of questions and then a comment about smoke.

There are a few gamer specific terms I am not familiar with: Clearer counters? Meta?

I agree with CapinJoethegrey about Destroyers in WWII. If you go look at photos of smoke, it only becomes a solid wall if the DD/DE is going slow/medium speed and or in a circle and especially when more than one ship is generating smoke. DDs going full speed did not have effective smoke. It strings straight out behind the ship and is thinner as well. The smoke also tends to lay on the sea (depending on wind conditions). My father's DD laid smoke while at Okinawa and they were strafed by a Japanese plane who could still see them from above. I don't recall reading any case of US DDs using smoke successfully as an offensive weapon. It was strictly defensive. There were lots of DD actions in the pacific. Smoke was rarely used.

n5bar

[TechnoSarge]

The ability to generate heavy smoke was not restricted to destroyers (and British cruisers!). It simply came down to: who was most nimble, hard-to-hit... and expendable.