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

In response to the recent WG QnA regarding IJN DDs

50 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

In a recent Dev QnA, WG stated that the IJN DDs are not in line for any love. While I can understand where they're coming from, I do disagree heavily with WG's decision. This post is written for the purpose/aim of being presented directly to and considered by the WG developers.

In the QnA, the question was "With the introduction of the PA DD's super-stealthy DWT, can the IJN DDs have their torpedoes un-nerfed?" WG's answer was a simple "No plans currently......" followed by their argument. According to WG, the IJN DD torpedoes out-damage those of other nations, which is true, and thus is a fair trade-off for the high torpedo detect.

What is the flaw in this argument? Simple. Torpedo Reaction Time. Coming straight from the WoWs wiki, the TRT formula goes:

(TorpDetection[Kilometers]) / (TorpedoSpeed[Knots] * 2.6) * 1000 = Reaction time.

Using this formula, the reaction time of the fully upgraded type F3 torpedoes aboard Yūgumo is found to be ~9.6 seconds. Next, using the same formula for Fletcher, the American tier IX destroyer, the reaction time is found to be ~6.4 seconds. Also worth noting is that Yūgumo type 93's are 10 knots faster than those found on Fletcher(76 knots vs 66, respectively), yet Fletcher torpedoes still have near a 3 full second advantage in reaction time. In short, the final question from all this: Is the increased damage done by IJN torpedoes worth the difference in reaction time?

My answer is no. It is not. With the difference in reaction times, Fletcher torpedoes are far more likely to land multiple hits due to the much short reaction time. In terms of torpedo damage, Fletcher's top torpedoes, the ones used in this example, do 17,100 damage top. Yūgumo F3 torpedo damage caps at 21,366. Is a 4k damage advantage worth the disadvantage? Not really.

That difference may not sound like a whole lot, but believe it when you're told that the amount of difference that those 3 seconds make will blow your mind. How?  The rate of turn and rudder shift. While it varies between ship types and each ship themselves, it goes without saying that the easier they would be to dodge. For every second the torpedo is spotted, most players will turn either towards or away from them. Regardless of which route the player chooses, every second the torpedo is spotted before it hits is time the rudder is turning, and time that the target is turning. 

Think of the tier X american battleship Montana, for instance. In her straight-out-of-the-box configuration, Montana will take ~11 seconds to turn her rudder from straight forward to hard port/starboard. If Montana were to be the intended target, and also the one to spot the torpedoes in the water, by the time the torpedoes strike home, Montana's rudder will have shifted almost entirely to hard flank and will be turning at maximum rate to minimize hits, usually resulting in only 1-3 hits. 

In the same scenario, Fletcher torpedoes have a significant advantage. With their reaction time of 6.4 seconds, the battleship's rudder would have only shifted about halfway and the ship itself will still take more time to fully react to the turn orders desperately being spammed by her captain. But in the end, with their shorted reaction time, Fletcher would land 4-6 hits on a target that, in an identical situation, her IJN counterpart Yūgumo would only have landed 1-3 hits. Conclusion: Fletcher torpedoes do more damage, because more of them hit. 

On top of that, Fletcher would also have an easier time striking more maneuverable targets such as cruisers if the destroyer manages to catch them off guard. A Yūgumo stands a chance to miss a torpedo salvo completely, 

"What's all this leading to, anyways?" is probably the thought running through most of the heads of the readers right about now. Bear with me here. Now, as shown in the previous example, Yūgumo torpedoes are less deadly than Fletcher ones for the difference in reaction times. The difference between the two results in a massive advantage in terms of landing hits vs targets. And why play a feast or famine ship, like Yūgumo, when you can pick mainly feast aboard a ship like Fletcher? How many people feel that way? Well, a lot. 

Untitled.png

Data from https://na.wows-numbers.com/

Note the difference in overall battles played. Fletcher beating out her competitors and even the second place contender by over double. Again: Why play a feast or famine ship when you can only play feast?

If its average damage you want to go by, then:

Spoiler

Untitled2.png

Raise your hand if you were surprised by Yūgumo being at the very bottom, and the old Kagero even lower

 

And if you wanna go by WR:

Spoiler

Untitled3.png 

Surprise, surprise

Now, I'm not normally one to bring stats into an argument, but as shown by these numbers, it is safe to conclude that the IJN DDs are under-performing on average compared to other destroyers. And these are just the tier IX DDs in the game. The story with Shimakaze and Gearing at tier X is a similar story, but Shimakaze is managing herself quite well against her competitors as opposed to Yūgumo at tier IX. A very similar pattern appears when comparing other tiers, like VII and VIII, albeit better than Yūgumo. If you wish to view those, please refer back to https://na.wows-numbers.com/ as I will not be posting screenshots of those for the sake of time.

"But it's not the ship, its the captains playing it!" Arguable, but think of it this way: The IJN DDs have the highest skill floor compared to other lines. This can result iin not only deterring players from the line to begin with, but the ones who do play the line are the MOST punished for mistakes. The line is definitely a "Skilled captains only" line to play, but given the state of the line in general, and with the amount of things that can so easily go wrong (Space between torps)or just happen (Radar) , even the best players can sometimes have a hard time making the line work, as, once again, the line is a very Feast or Famine line to play. Also once again: Why play a feast or famine line when you can play anything else and just FEAST?

CONCLUSION and suggestions to help the line: 

The IJN DDs have the most going against them. They're the greatest ones to be effected should hydro, Radar, and catapult aircraft be present. RNGesus forbid a tier X CV. While this does not make them BAD, it DOES give them the absolute highest skill floor to play. As stated countless times before, the line is a very heavy feast or famine, and requires very specific circumstances to be met before they can really shine. Minimal Radar, Hydro, preferably no CV at all, but if there is, the bulk of the aircraft are somewhere else and fighters aren't trailing you like a bunch of pilot fish, permaspotting you and all your torpedoes the second you launch them. They are really more a one-trick pony when its all said and done, and they aren't even as good at their trick as other lines of other nations are, especially at higher tiers. They have the worst guns and arguably the worst torpedoes as well. They're the least flexible line, and the approach to fixing the line, IMO, would be to increase the flexibility that the line lacks currently. While currently, the IJN DDs are certainly not bad by any stretch of the imagination. But they require very specific scenarios to perform at their peak, and those cases are fairly rare. There are many things that can screw over an IJN DD more so than any other line, such as Radar and Hydro. Unspotted enemy DDs. Aircraft. 

What would be the best approach to "fixing" the line? In the end, that is up to WG. Although my suggestions to help the line would be:

  • Lower their torpedo detection to give them a little bit more room to work with, especially vs maneuverable targets. 
  • Give them a little buff to their reload and turret turn times. Nothing major, but give the line a little more flexibility that the other destroyers offer with ease
  • Maybe some sort of new national trait. Maybe hydro won't have as big an effect on their torpedoes as it would on others. Maybe give the IJN the option to slot two torp modules and switch between them in battle for changing circumstances (Doubtful, but one can hope and dream)

The aim of these changes and suggestions is to overall increase the competitiveness of the "Possibly Worst Best torpedo line in the game." The ending of this post was a little bit rushed because of time, and will be updated sometime within the next 24-48 hours.

As stated at the beginning, the goal of this post is to be presented to and considered by WG devs, and if anyone else would like to have a nice, constructive debate down in the replies I would love to be a part of that. Share your thoughts and opinions. What do you think of mine? Are these valid points, or are the the stupidest ideas you've heard of ever since shock collards for blue whales? Discuss!

Edited by Destroyer_Zekamashi
  • Cool 16
  • Boring 2
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zhoyzu    481

WG didnt understand the question or pretended they didnt. I still dont see the issue. The IJN have a higher skill requirement to play and perform well in than the hold-mouse-button-and-hope-for-best USN DDs

  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prothall    83

The Pan-Asian line was just the latest slap in the face to IJN DDs. Below average BB players do not want to be bothered with WASD hacks. Since they are a potentially huge revenue source guess who gets listened to. I repeatedly see the good BB drivers say stealth DD torps are not a huge problem.

IJN DDs are not the fastest. Their torps are the easiest to spot, and their stealth margin on other DDs is very narrow on some lines. They have no AA so can do nothing against the perma spotting planes.  I would GLADLY trade a little damage on hits for a better chance to get those hits.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
warpath_33    122

Please Wargaming?

Pretty please?

It's not like we're asking for DWT concealment on our torps, just 100-200m less concealment.

...I'll even be okay if you lower the damage of each torpedo a bit...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GuntherPrein    66

Lool IJN DD are trash ships now I know cause I play them a lot a Kami or a Fujin yeah can get alota torp hits from those After that Ive seen BB do a complete 180 on your torps from 4 km out cause of a float plane or any other various ways  for torps to be spotted by BB nowadays would be nice to see the reaction time go down for sure cause the only people you hit with IJN torps are braindeads honestly, sure you can get 100 000 + games in them but its a lot easier to do that in any other DD for sure

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AraAragami    5,215

Just wait for Grizley to come in here and post his expert thoughts on how to play the line he's barely touched, openly admits he hates playing, which belongs to a nation he has nothing but contempt for.

Edited by AraAragami
  • Cool 6
  • Funny 2
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GuntherPrein    66
6 minutes ago, AraAragami said:

Just wait for Grizley to come in here and post his expert thoughts on how to play the line he's barely touched, openly admits he hates playing, which belongs to a nation he has nothing but contempt for.

true true +1 for you

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Umikami    1,224

WoW's opinion is that IJN torps do greater damage, thus need a greater spotting range, but the fact is that IJN DD's need better torps because their guns are so sub-par. All nations torps should be spotted at the same range, regardless of speed or damage.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AraAragami    5,215
9 minutes ago, Umikami said:

WoW's opinion is that IJN torps do greater damage, thus need a greater spotting range, but the fact is that IJN DD's need better torps because their guns are so sub-par. All nations torps should be spotted at the same range, regardless of speed or damage.

I could get behind this. Then speed would actually matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chewonit    336

And get rid of the stupid perma-spot of torps.

  • Cool 6
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mofton    955

The advantage of the faster but less stealthy torps is when they are detected by some other means the reaction time advantage reverses, they're also less likely to be avoided by the target becoming distracted by a pretty birdy during the travel time. Fire both types into a hydro-protected target and the F3's have all the advantages, such as they are.

In general and having played them a decent amount I think the IJN destroyers are pretty good. The problem for Yugumo - which I think is far from a bad ship - is that Fletcher's one of the best destroyers in the game, and should not get a 106s torpedo reload (number should be >120s). Even then stats-wise Yugumo does ok. I also think that Kagero and Yugumo should be played with the TRB and that that's how WG balance them. Akatsuki I think is a superb ship at a competitive tier. Fubuki isn't great but has 9x 10km torpedoes at T6, and gets to fight idiots.

Shimakaze I bought, played and sold - she's potent but a basic 150+s reload kills the enjoyment for me, it's too boring sailing around waiting for a reload.

 

Overall IJN DD's aren't as bad as they're sometimes made out to be.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AraAragami    5,215
2 minutes ago, mofton said:

Overall IJN DD's aren't as bad as they're sometimes made out to be.

They're not as good as they're made out to be by the counter-argument, either.

 

Someone will post a single good game screenshot acting like that's what always happens, but it's more like that's what happens in 1 out of 10 games, the other 9 running the gamut from boring to infuriating.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mofton    955
3 minutes ago, AraAragami said:

They're not as good as they're made out to be by the counter-argument, either.

 

Someone will post a single good game screenshot acting like that's what always happens, but it's more like that's what happens in 1 out of 10 games, the other 9 running the gamut from boring to infuriating.

'Middling' isn't bad. Certainly the torpedoes are very hit and miss, but that's the nature of throwing 20,000 damage dealing objects around the digital battlefield, if they hit with regularity it'd be beyond brutal. If you want to land lots of hits play a game of Russian speedboats.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AraAragami    5,215
Just now, mofton said:

'Middling' isn't bad. Certainly the torpedoes are very hit and miss, but that's the nature of throwing 20,000 damage dealing objects around the digital battlefield, if they hit with regularity it'd be beyond brutal. If you want to land lots of hits play a game of Russian speedboats.

And battleships get to throw 15k damage dealing objects 8-12 at a time down the battlefield every 30 seconds or so, but that's okay because they're battleships.

 

Maybe IJN torpedo reloads should be looked at.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wulfgarn    2,073

Fixing the torps would mean WG was wrong, and that ain't happening.

I would be down for testing lower det torps in small increments, even at the expense of say range/speed.

Honestly, anything to get ball rolling for testing.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AraAragami    5,215

Actually I think the best solution to fixing destroyers would be to force WG's developers to play the damn things.

 

Seriously, based on the decisions they've made over the years, I don't think anyone in St Petersburg plays any non-Russian destroyers.

 

They certainly don't play carriers in that building.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sventex    931

IJN stealth torp line is about the only ship line the in the game where I'll regularly get no ribbons in an entire match.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AraAragami    5,215
2 minutes ago, Sventex said:

IJN stealth torp line is about the only ship line the in the game where I'll regularly get no ribbons in an entire match.

Fun, exciting, engaging, rewarding!

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jason199506    114

you think they'd care.......

i bet WG devs themselves havent recovered from shima torp PTSD yet

 

back then when S_O said shima was the 2nd best performing DD(before 1.9→1.7 buff), i posted this in pigeon's nest

i doubt they ever saw my post

 

 

small correction:

fletcher torp does 19k not 17k, its a 2k difference, not a 4k difference

but considering fletcher is tier XI IJN DD.....justifyable(?

Edited by jason199506
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mofton    955
5 minutes ago, AraAragami said:

And battleships get to throw 15k damage dealing objects 8-12 at a time down the battlefield every 30 seconds or so, but that's okay because they're battleships.

Well, sure, can't remember the last time I got a huge amount of XP for just turning up early in a cap in a battleship though... or the last time I missed a target with my 16in AP and saw it fly down another 5km to nuke someone who'd never even been spotted. Pretty sure my target's never angled and taken 0 damage from a torpedo either.

Destroyers are different, running into a destroyer where one lives and another dies means one walks away with <20k damage and the other's wrecked, do the same with T10 battleships and the minimum damage is mostly higher.

If you're bored and want to change to a more rapid torpedo reload but lower damage I could see the attraction.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Greenday4537    52

Having played IJN DDs finally, I get it. Torps are all IJN DDs have. US DDs may not do as much torp damage but their guns are definitely better. IJN torps should be less detectable. They are sacrificing survivability to go after the big fish whereas US DDs sacrifice going after big fish to defend themselves (including better AA).

I played American BBs at first and I thought those complaining about IJN DDs were just whiners. But having played both lines now...I get it.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlcatrazNC    92

IMO fixing IJN DD line isn't really that difficult :

 

-Put the same detection on all torps. Let's say 1.2km. 

-Change the spotting mecanic regarding planes.  At middle-high tier, almost everyship can send catapult aircraft making torps strike less effective. Remove the ability to spot torps with catapult aircraft . Make hydro more relevant to the game

 

Also while we're at it, buff Torps reload boost 1. Seriously,  6 min CD ? This is the worst consummable ever. 

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wulfgarn    2,073
13 minutes ago, AraAragami said:

Actually I think the best solution to fixing destroyers would be to force WG's developers to play the damn things.

 

Seriously, based on the decisions they've made over the years, I don't think anyone in St Petersburg plays any non-Russian destroyers.

 

They certainly don't play carriers in that building.

:Smile_great:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, jason199506 said:

 

small correction:

fletcher torp does 19k not 17k, its a 2k difference, not a 4k difference

but considering fletcher is tier XI IJN DD.....justifyable(?

Was going by what was on the WoWS wiki because I didnt have my game client active to check. Gonna get around and fix things likt that later. Fletcher torps are 19k and Yugumo is a little over 23k so either way its still ~4k difference

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×