Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
jkirschy

HMAS Vampire - An unlovable abomination

101 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

129
[GAMMA]
Members
594 posts
12,222 battles

H.M.S/H.M.A.S. Vampire - An unlovable abomination
 20j5pgh.jpg
Reviewed by: jkirschy
    

Little White Mouse recently reviewed the new, tier 3, premium destroyer HMAS Vampire. Her assessment was that while it can be a challenging ship it is a "gudbote". Normally when Mouse reviews a ship, I find I generally agree with the core of her analysis and conclusions. However I cannot agree with Mouse this time. This ship is not a "gudbote". Vampire simply does not meet the definition of a "gudbote" supplied by Little White Mouse. So that raises the question of what Vampire is. This review is intended to provide my answer to that question and a direct rebuttal to Little White Mouse's review because of the different opinion I've formed from playing this ship in co-op and random.

k2g2me.png
 
Gudbote? I think not.


This was a ship that I initially had very high hopes for when it was annouced that Vampire was coming to the game because the V/W class destroyers had a good reputation and long service life that equalled that of the American Wickes and Clemson classes. Well that and it was a premium, low-tier, British/Commonwealth destroyer. When the armament of Vampire was leaked my enthusiasm quickly turned to great concern about this ship. Quite frankly, my initial reaction was that Wargaming had once again [edited] up a premium ship, though this time it appeared it was due to the apparent bias of the development team against torpedo armed destroyers. When I initially raised these concerns with Mouse, she responded that I should wait until Vampire was formally released, she was able to publish her review, and that I could play Vampire myself. All of those things have happened and my hopes for Vampire have been sunk more decisively than Vampire herself was on April 9, 1942. So lets get this review underway so you, the reader, will understand what I consider to be wrong with Wargaming's version of HMAS Vampire.

4qmlp4.jpg

The real HMAS Vampire  (pre-refit, note the 2 torpedo launchers)

HMS Vampire was a Admiralty V class destroyer leader which launched and entered service with the British Royal Navy in 1917.(1) Destroyer leaders were essentially slightly larger than normal destroyers with enlarged command and control facilities for the staff of the officer commanding a flotilla of destroyers.(2) As built Vampire displaced 1316 tons, had an over-all length of 312 feet, a beam of 29.5 feet, and draft of 11.75 feet. She was armed, as built with four 4" Mk5 guns with director control in super-firing mounts, six torpedo tubes in a 2x3 arrangement, and a 3" anti-aircraft gun. Her machinery was designed to deliver 27,000 ship horse-power for a top speed of 34 knots. She had a designed maximum range of 4000 miles at 15 knots.(3)(4)  
    

Vampire's World War I service with the Royal Navy was unremarkable by all appearances. Following the war, Vampire served with the Royal Navy in home and Mediterranean waters.(5)
    

In 1933 HMS Vampire was loaned/transferred to the Royal Australian navy becoming HMAS Vampire. She was used as a depot ship until 1938 when she was re-activated and served with the "Australian Squadron" in home waters until the start of hostilities in 1939. From there she transferred to the Mediterranean with other Australian destroyers as part of the "Scrap-Iron flotilla" where she served escorting convoys, fought in the battle of Calabria, escorted heavy units of the British Mediterranean fleet, participated in the battle and evacuation of Crete, escorted still more convoys, attacked shore positions in support of the Western Desert Campaign, and helped supply the troops defending Tobruk. During this time she was repeatedly attacked by Italian and German air-craft. She was also refitted several times which resulted in rather haphazard modifications to her armament which included the removal of three torpedo tubes to reduce top-hamper and weight and increased anti-aircraft armament to help make her a better convoy escort in the confined waters of the Mediterranean Sea. By May 1941 Vampire was badly in need of major overhaul and was sent to Singapore for repairs.(6)
    

When hostilities began with Japan, Vampire operated in company with HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Repulse until their loss. She then escorted convoys in support of the British defense of Malaya. On January 26, 1942 Vampire and HMS Thanet attacked IJN transports escorted by the light cruiser Sendai and a force of six IJN destroyers. Following this fiasco which resulted in the loss of HMS Thanet, Vampire resumed convoy escort duties and participated in the British withdraw to the Indian Ocean and operations there. It was during operations there  in support of the carrier HMS Hermes that Vampire would be sunk by dive-bombers from Admiral Nagumo's carriers on April 9, 1942 during their raid into the Indian Ocean against the British colony of Ceylon.(6)
    

So it is fair to say that HMAS Vampire had a distinquished World War II service history.  But however impressive her service history that doesn't address what she is like in World of Warships.  It certainly doesn't address why I referred to HMAS Vampire as an unlovable abomination in the title of this review and why I disagree with Little White Mouse's conclusions. Lets look at this now so that you the reader will understand why I felt a firm rebuttal was needed to Little White Mouse's review.
    

In World of Warships, HMAS Vampire is a tier 3 premium destroyer. If you earn Vampire as a reward ship, she comes with a 6-point captain and a port slot. If you purchase her as part of a bundle in the premium shop for $26.29 American, you get Vampire, a 6-point captain, main armaments mod 1, propulsion mod 1, one thousand doubloons, fourteen days premium time, and a decorative flag which offers no special benefits.
    

Some aspects of Vampire are actually fairly respectable for a tier 3 destroyer. While she has no appreciable armor and thinner hull plating than most of the other tier 3 destroyers, her 9,500 HP compares favorably giving her respectable durability. Her top speed of 35.7 knots, turning circle of 520 meters, and rudder shift of 2.5 seconds are also good. Her AA rating of 10 is top notch for a tier 3 destroyer. Her surface detection range of 6.3km with the default camo is not great; but it is slightly better than that of Wickes and G101 and only marginally worse than the other tier 3 destroyers before you take into consideration camo and captain skills. However that's where the good ends with regard to HMAS Vampire.
    

Overall, Vampire's armament is atrocious. The gun armament would be good if Vampire had an adequate torpedo armament. However Wargaming chose to give Vampire the pathetically inadequate torpedo armament of 1x3 21" tubes that was a result of her haphazard refits in the Mediterranean rather than the standard 2x3 21" tube torpedo armament that she carried for the majority of her service life. As a result Vampire's guns are your primary, nay almost exclusive method of dealing damage to enemy ships. And that's just not enough.


2rhqt4w.png 

Vampire's forward 4" guns

Vampire carries four 4" Mk5 in super-firing mounts. These guns have a reload time of 5 seconds, which can be improved to 4.5 seconds with basic firing training, and a range of 10.1km. Muzzle velocity is 805m/s. This means that the shells have marginally better shell arcs than the atrocious American 5"/38's 792 m/s. However the muzzle velocity of Vampire's guns is not nearly as good as the American 4"/50's 884m/s, which remain the gold-standard for destroyers at this tier range. The relatively low velocity and resulting pronounced arcs of Vampire's shells mean is that hitting small, rapidly moving targets at extended range, over about 5-6km becomes difficult. This is due to the amount of lead needed and  the shell arc, which combined with dispersion, can and will cause scoring hits to become progressively more difficult at longer range. The fire chance is an unremarkable 5%. Dispersion is a slightly above average 90-91 meters at maximum range, though in my experience it feels a bit worse than the stats imply. The stats in the game client say the dispersion is 91 meters. Wargaming's wiki says 90 meters.(7) Hence the disparity in dispersion cited. Damage done is comparable to the shells for the American 4"/50 with 4 shot salvos typically doing between 1200-1900 damage when the majority of the shells hit. Or to put it another way, expect to do about 300-500 damage per shot that hits with the HE shells, depending on what you hit and where it hits. AP shell performance is unimpressive with the armor of tier 2 cruisers like the Chester and Chikuma being adequate to mitigate most of it unless you're lucky enough to punch through the flat side of your target at close range for a citadel. So basically Vampire's guns are a bit better than average for a destroyer of her tier. And that would be fine, if these weren't your primary method of doing damage to enemy ships.
 

2e4930j.png

Vampire's entire in-game torpedo armament
    

The reason Vampire's guns are your primary method of doing damage to enemy ships is because her torpedo armament is a pathetic, crippled abomination. Vampire has three 21" torpedo tubes in a 1x3 arrangement. The three torpedoes these tubes launch have a range of 6km and a speed of 53 knots. They do a maximum of 10,000 HP damage. Those torpedo stats are actually quite respectable. The torpedo reload of 62 seconds on the other hand... That's the worst in its tier by a huge margin. The remainder of the tier 3 destroyers have torpedo reloads of between 22 and 40 seconds. While it is possible to use captain skills to reduce Vampire's torpedo reload time by 10%, doing so is a waste of captain skill points because of the limited number of tubes Vampire has. You're better off spending the points trying to make the guns work better instead of the torpedoes reload faster. The torpedoes will be spotted at 1.1 km which coupled with the small number of torpedoes you can launch in a spread means that its far too easy to dodge her torpedoes. As far as actually firing Vampire's torpedoes, you have two choices. You can either fire a wide spread which results in such a pathetically thin torpedo spread that you're unlikely to hit anything except at the shortest of ranges, or you can single fire the torpedoes. Personally I've come to the conclusion that for most situations single-firing the torpedoes is probably best. Vampire really needs the option to fire the torpedoes in a narrow spread as well as the above options. Then again to truly be well rounded Vampire needs the second 3 tube launcher that Wargaming opted not to give her. Without it you don't have enough torpedoes to delete full health battleships from the game. And without it you don't have the ability to launch a sufficiently dense torpedo spread to guarrantee kills on other DDs. Or agile cruisers for that matter. And without the second torpedo launcher, Vampire fails to be viable in co-op. She simply is incapable of quickly doing the massive amounts of damage needed to do well in co-op.
    

So where does this leave Vampire. Because of her crippled torpedo armament she is forced into a single role, which she admittedly does well. That role is being a gunboat DD that specializes in hunting other DDs since Vampire literally lacks the flexibility to do anything else effectively. The problem I see is that at this tier range, DDs don't normally use their guns to kill other DDs. In my experience most DD captains normally use an approach to killing other DDs that utilizes the complete mix of their ships available weapons. Guns are used as a chase armament, once you've been detected, to probe and soften the enemy up as the DDs close on each other. Then as the DDs reach knife fighting range, torpedoes become the decisive weapon that either ends the fight with single blow or leaves the opponent on such low health that a quick gun salvo finishes the cripple off. This approach isn't just because low-tier DD drivers like watching massive columns of water sprout from the side of an enemy ship as it is being ripped apart by several hundred pounds of torpex. (Not to say there isn't something deeply satisfying about watching that happen and that we don't enjoy seeing it...) Its also because using nothing but guns to sink another DD usually takes too damn long. Low tier battles are chaotic. Maps are small. Captains tend to be more aggressive than in higher tiers, regardless of ship type. Battles can quickly descend into free-for-alls. So if you fail to quickly take out an enemy DD, you risk heavier units and other DDs moving up and focusing you down as you're occupied with your current opponent. There is also the little matter of regardless of who wins a gunfight between a pair of low-tier DDs, the winner is likely to walk away having lost a not insignificant amount of HP. So DD drivers tend to favor high risk, high reward tactics that let them end fights quickly and decisively so they can then move on to the next enemy. Since Vampire can't launch a sufficiently dense torpedo spread to guarrantee hits on a small, agile enemy destroyer she can't do this. This forces Vampire to use her guns to try to kill enemy DDs while avoiding the knife fighting ranges where torpedos become the preferred weapon for dealing with an enemy DD. While Vampire's guns hit fairly hard for a DD and can kill a DD relatively quickly, I find it is just not enough since you will still hemorrhage health doing it, especially if the enemy DD driver is supported by something bigger and nastier or gets a bit of luck and slams one or more torps into Vampire's side.
 

23vxf0y.png

Mouse admits Vampire is hard to play...

dxmekx.png
 
Then argues that a single role is what makes her so good.

    

It should be obvious at this point that Vampire is a challenging ship to play. Even Mouse admitted that. However Mouse argues that the single role this ship is forced into by her crippled armament is what makes her compelling to play and that justifies an over-all rating of "gudbote". And I can't agree with that. Based on what Mouse said in her review, Vampire is at best an average boat with some strengths and massive weaknesses which rob her of any compelling reason to play this ship instead of a better rounded and more versatile destroyer. Regardless of how important Mouse thinks Vampire's role of being a destroyer hunter is, that would make her a "mehbote" according to her rating system. And I can see a good case for rating her a "mehbote". Personally I think she is worse than that since her crippled armament means she cannot carry a team to victory if she has to, cannot effectively contest caps in the face of heavier ships and/or more well-rounded destroyers (especially in groups), or delete idio... eh... battleship drivers who insist in sailing in straight lines from the game. Chasing down carriers is possible, but due to the need to sink them with guns, its not easy. Or fast. And you should expect to be focused fired on by every enemy ship in range because while you're firing your guns you will be visible to the entire enemy team; and, well, everyone loves killing destroyers. And then there's the little matter of being unsuited for co-op play... Its when you start taking all those things into consideration that I personally can't justify giving her that good of a rating. So I have to rate this little abomination as a turd. Before someone objects that I'm being too hard on Vampire because they can play her well or find she's fun... I've had a few good games in her myself. And Vampire can be a fun ship if you get favorable matchmaking. However just because you sometimes get a good game with Vampire depending on matchmaking and/or the enemy team making mistakes; and just because Vampire can be fun, that does not mean Vampire is a good ship. The USS Smith is one classic example of a ship that objectively that is not very good but which can do well and be fun in the right hands or with the right matchmaking. The same applies here. While Vampire can perform well and be fun with favorable matchmaking and a good DD driver, she is still a turd.
    

What I think might be even worse than having to rate Vampire a turd is that two simple changes would have made Vampire a very good, well-rounded ship able to handle any of the jobs a destroyer can be called on to do while still playing the gunboat DD role on par with USS Clemson. The first is to drop her torpedo reload down into the average range for her tier, say somewhere in the vicinity of 35-40 seconds. The second change is giving her back that second torpedo launcher. Yes, giving her back the second launcher would reduce her AA substantially. That would not be a huge loss since she only faces Langley and Hosho in her matchmaking spread, and no other tier 3 destroyer except the Phra Ruang has an AA rating half as high as Vampire's. And the payoff would be enormous since it would radically increase Vampire's flexibility and chances against larger ships while still allowing her to be the capable DD hunter which Mouse seems to feel is so necessary in this matchmaking spread. (Why she thinks that when such capable DD killers as Dresden, Wickes, Bogatyr, St. Louis, Clemson, Danae, Kuma... are in this matchmaking spread I haven't a clue. But she evidently does...) Even picking one of those two changes would go a long way to making Vampire a better, more flexible ship.
    

So what needs to happen with Vampire on Wargaming's end? I see two options. The first is that someone at Wargaming realizes what a collossal turd Vampire is and pushes through at least one of the two modifications suggested above. The second option is that someone at Wargaming drives a stake through this abomination's heart, cuts off her head, burns the  body to ash, loads the remains in a coffin, wraps the coffin in anchor chain, puts the coffin in a block of cement, and dumps the block of cement in the nearest fast flowing river so that Vampire will never again be seen in the premium shop.
    

This brings us to the question of should you get Vampire. And I suppose it all depends on how you plan to go about getting her. If you are considering adding Vampire to your port via the Vampire Christmas mission running until 20 December... Go for it. Grind the Vampire missions out in co-op and then give her a try since the missions really aren't that hard and can be done in a day or two. If you get her that way the absolute worst case scenario is you try this abomination, find you hate her, and sell her for a free port slot and credits. In which case, you can tell Wargaming "Thanks for the free port slot!" just like the tankers tell Wargaming "Thanks for the free garage slot!" every year when the folks at World of Tanks give out free premium turds, err... tanks for Christmas.(8) And who knows you might be one of those rare folks who Vampire clicks for. However if you're considering spending actual money for this ship the answer is a firm no.

1pvwrb.png 

If I had to spec out a 19 pt captain this would be what I'd pick
   

For those people who do get Vampire... One last thing remains, what commander skills should you get. I would recommend the following build: preventive maintenance (since you have to take a 1 point skill), expert marksman (to increase the turret traverse speed), last stand (to keep your steering gears and engine running in case of battle damage), basic firing training (since it will reduce the reload time to 4.5 seconds), inertia fuse HE (to improve the penetration of your HE shells since they'll need it against heavier ships). That is your first 12 points and probably the most critical. Following that I would pick survivability expert (for the extra HP), high alert (to get your damage control party off cool-down quicker), and adrenaline rush (to improve your gun's reload time further as things get more desperate). And that is the 19 point build I would pick for this abomination.
    

So at this point... The review is done. Hopefully its a bit clearer why I said I Vampire is not a gudbote. And hopefully why I wrote a review to rebut Mouse's conclusions. All that's left for me to do is to end this right. Time to drive a stake through Vampire's heart and call it a day.

333g7mg.jpg 

Strike true and put Vampire out of her (and our) misery

 

________
Works Cited:
1. Wikipedia V/W Leaders: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_and_W-class_destroyer#Admiralty_V-class_leaders
2. Flottilla Leader: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flotilla_leader
3. Janes Fighting Ships of WWI. New York: Military Press, 1990. p 67.
4. Wikipedia V/W Leaders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_and_W-class_destroyer#Admiralty_V-class_leaders
5. Wikipedia - Vampire operational history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Vampire_(D68)#Operational_history
6. HMAS Vampire I - RAN page: http://www.navy.gov.au/hmas-vampire-i
7. Wargaming's wiki-page for Vampire: http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Vampire
7. Meethead Militia - free garage slots: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpPX50IoYBU

Edited by jkirschy
  • Cool 5
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,256 posts
8,148 battles

So, did you earn it or win it?  And, how many games have you played in it?

I "earned" it, I don't buy ships, ever.   If you didn't buy it, why complain?  I mean, who pins their dreams on a free T3 DD?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
129
[GAMMA]
Members
594 posts
12,222 battles

Only if the match-making gives you teams composed largely of DDs and you are able to dictate the engagement ranges. In battles w/ heavier ships, Vampire is at a disadvantage IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
129
[GAMMA]
Members
594 posts
12,222 battles
Just now, Nukelavee45 said:

So, did you earn it or win it?  And, how many games have you played in it?

I "earned" it, I don't buy ships, ever.   If you didn't buy it, why complain?  I mean, who pins their dreams on a free T3 DD?

I earned it through the missions.

 

As for why post a negative review... One I don't think its good enough for people to spend real money on. Two I enjoy low tier game-play. That's the reason I have 4,000+ battles in DDs in Vampire's matchmaking spread and why I was excited when it was announced a V/W class DD was coming to the game. And then the armament details leaked...

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
159
Members
733 posts

All that text just to moan you think that it should have more torpedoes and weaker AA than what she had when she was sunk by a bomb from an aircraft.

 

Image HMAS Vampire, 4th March 1942:

HMAS_Vampire_1942.jpg

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
725
[CUTER]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,842 posts
7,398 battles

Its a very fun destroyer for a FREE t3. It fights other light boats well, and with the stacked torpedoes, can deliver a crippling blow to any bb that hasn't learned to steer yet. Low tier premiums don't need to be good, as that would help abuse the new players. They just need to be fun.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
129
[GAMMA]
Members
594 posts
12,222 battles
2 minutes ago, b101uk said:

All that text just to moan you think that it should have more torpedoes and weaker AA than what she had when she was sunk by a bomb from an aircraft.

Actually all that text to explain why I think she should be balanced differently, why she doesn't need the AA she has in game as much as she needs the torpedoes she lost in the Med since she's not going up against the equivalent of tier 7-8 carriers but will regularly see Bellerphon's Nassaus, Wyomings, Ishizushi's..., and why I disagree with a respected reviewer like Mouse.

Edited by jkirschy
  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,710
[HINON]
Modder, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
6,498 posts
3,751 battles
49 minutes ago, jkirschy said:

six torpedo tubes in a 2x3 arrangement, and a 3" anti-aircraft gun.

Actually correct. Disregard my words.


 

She's a hilarious bote with the ability to out DPM most every destroyer she sees, and bring more guns to bear bow on than any other DD save Clemson. (She cheats) The torpedoes are an aside to your main armament, your guns.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
129
[GAMMA]
Members
594 posts
12,222 battles
Just now, Doomlock said:

She never had both together.

 

She's a hilarious bote with the ability to out DPM most every destroyer she sees, and bring more guns to bear bow on than any other DD save Clemson. (She cheats) The torpedoes are an aside to your main armament, your guns.

I listed the armament Jane's Fighting Ships of WWI gave for the Admiralty V-type destroyer leaders. If Vampire was different, Janes did not note it.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,242
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,711 posts
9,112 battles
12 minutes ago, jkirschy said:

Only if the match-making gives you teams composed largely of DDs and you are able to dictate the engagement ranges. In battles w/ heavier ships, Vampire is at a disadvantage IMO.

Every non-stealty DD is at a disadvantage against heavier ships. You have a 56% W/R in it compared to your overall 50% so you must be doing something right with it. Personally I find her to be a fun little gun boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
129
[GAMMA]
Members
594 posts
12,222 battles
Just now, BrushWolf said:

Every non-stealty DD is at a disadvantage against heavier ships. You have a 56% W/R in it compared to your overall 50% so you must be doing something right with it. Personally I find her to be a fun little gun boat.

Its true that the less stealthy DDs can be at a disadvantage against heavier ships. However if you take something like Clemson, you have the ability to put enough torps into the water to delete a cruiser or battleship from the game in one massive salvo. And that can save your bacon quite often. Vampire can't do that against an alert opponent.

As for the WR... Part of that is luck. Part of that is that I've been playing Vampire like a Clemson w/o the torpedoes.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,242
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,711 posts
9,112 battles
1 minute ago, Lillehuntrix said:

Diversity of opinions in reviews is always helpful, so kudos for the effort to research and write that.

This, what others think of something will often be completely different from what you think of it, YMMV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
159
Members
733 posts
Just now, jkirschy said:

Actually all that text to explain why I think she should be balanced differently, why she doesn't need the AA she has in game since she's not going up against the equivalent of tier 7-8 carriers, and why I disagree with a respected reviewer like Mouse.

so your making a song and dance over how in this instance something that should be taken with a pinch of salt didn't quite meet your peculiar set of expectations that you had set yourself, based on one instance of your personal interpretation of their words?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
259
[LWA]
Members
625 posts
8,947 battles

The Vampire is a seal clubber.....I am really enjoying her.  All because YOU don't know how to play it, doesn't mean it is a bad ship.  LWM was spot on in her review....it is a destroyer hunter.  

 

8 battles in her with a 75% win rate.  25,252 avg damage, 1279 xp avg, 3.3 kill/death ratio, 1.6 avg kills per game, 50% survival rate, and WTR of 1166.  This is a great ship if played properly.  Obviously, you aren't playing it properly.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
129
[GAMMA]
Members
594 posts
12,222 battles
Just now, b101uk said:

so your making a song and dance over how in this instance something that should be taken with a pinch of salt didn't quite meet your peculiar set of expectations that you had set yourself, based on one instance of your personal interpretation of their words?

Isn't that what any review is? A "song-and-dance" about whether or not a ship meets the expectations and standards that the person reviewing it has? As for what Mouse said... You can check her review. She includes a definition of the ratings she uses in it. I looked at the definition she gave, looked at what she wrote, shook my head and questioned her on it. I considered her answer, shook my head again, and said something doesn't add up. And after pointing this out several times, I decided to write my own review as a rebuttal since I disagreed with her.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,710
[HINON]
Modder, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
6,498 posts
3,751 battles
1 minute ago, jkirschy said:

I listed the armament Jane's Fighting Ships of WWI gave for the Admiralty V-type destroyer leaders. If Vampire was different, Janes did not note it.

Actually, I have that confused with Blyskawica, that was actually correct. She did have them both for a brief time, but they were removed (3" gun and aft torpedo mount) for some 2-pounder AA mounts.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
129
[GAMMA]
Members
594 posts
12,222 battles
2 minutes ago, Doomlock said:

Actually, I have that confused with Blyskawica, that was actually correct. She did have them both for a brief time, but they were removed (3" gun and aft torpedo mount) for some 2-pounder AA mounts.

If memory serves the torpedoes were removed in 1940-1941 in the Med during one of her refits at Alexandria. Not sure if the 3" AA gun was pulled at the same time or earlier. The initial armament specs I listed were the ones for the V-leaders as of 1917.

Edited by jkirschy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,157
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
7,010 posts
7,530 battles

Having played her myself, I fond that I agree with you all the way up to captain's skills. A DD without PT is a very dead DD. AR for a DD at T3 is, well, I just don't see how it truly helps. I'd take JoaT in it's place, as the reduced time on speed and smoke has a better chance of saving you than a tiny increase in gun reload. You will need CE and IFHE both, and I personally take Super over BFT in almost every DD, exceptions being Ohk and Isokaze, and there I take both Super and BFT. EM for Vamp, while somewhat useful, I feel should be replaced with the smoke skill. As far as how she plays, I'm in complete agreement, I feel she's garbage. That said, of course exceptional players can do great in her, however, they can also do that with any ship in the game. I look at how a ship performs with an average player skill, and by that reckoning, Vampire is horrific.

 

WG has been dropping a LOT of very specialized, very bad premiums over the last few months. At least this one was free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
241
[ICOP]
[ICOP]
Members
735 posts
11,973 battles

Played one battle in the Vampire immediately after I won it. Three kills, 69k damage and a lot of laughs later I parked her in port. I am not disputing any of your facts, only that I found her to be a lot of fun and very effective. Though obviously my experience with the ship is very limited.

Respects,

Am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
3,666 posts
7,192 battles
48 minutes ago, jkirschy said:

 

Another person who thinks Vampire sucks because they don't realize she is a DD hunter, who also thinks she is wrong because she has a triple torp launcher even though she is completely correct for when she sank as @Doomlock has said?

2oDMSK7.gif

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
129
[GAMMA]
Members
594 posts
12,222 battles
6 minutes ago, RipNuN2 said:

You do a rebuttal review of LWM's review but don't activate the LWM signal? For shame . . . 

 

@LittleWhiteMouse

Actually I sent her a PM shortly after this went live as a courtesy since I had told her I was doing a review of Vampire. I figured it was only polite, especially since it was a rebuttal.

6 minutes ago, Fog_Repair_Ship_Akashi said:

Another person who thinks Vampire sucks because they don't realize she is a DD hunter, who also thinks she is wrong because she has a triple torp launcher even though she is completely correct for when she sank as @Doomlock has said?

 

Actually I'm fully aware that the version in game is Vampire following her refits in the Med and Singapore. I said that several times in the review. What I said, is the version in game suffers from not having the 2nd torp launcher or a faster torpedo reload because it makes her a less versatile ship.

What Doomlock and I were talking about was Vampire's original armament. And he acknowledged that the information I cited from Jane's was correct.

As for my not knowing she is a DD hunter... Gonna quote a portion of what I wrote in the review for you. In fact I'll even highlight the relevant section.

Quote

So where does this leave Vampire. Because of her crippled torpedo armament she is forced into a single role, which she admittedly does well. That role is being a gunboat DD that specializes in hunting other DDs since Vampire literally lacks the flexibility to do anything else effectively.

I understand that Vampire as she is in game is optimized as a gunboat for use against DDs. The problem is she's over-specialized and lacks the versatility to do other things well in addition to that. Unless a cruiser captain screws up or you're really really lucky, you're not going to win a fight w/ a Bogatryr or a St. Louis. Unless a BB captain screws up or you're really good, you won't win a fight against a Bellerphon, Ishizushi, or an Orion who has HE loaded...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×