Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
dwightlooi

How to fix the Japanese DD Mainline

48 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

38
[TNG]
Members
131 posts
8,600 battles

Numerous nerfs later nobody plays the high tier Japanese DDs -- at least not competitively. Here's how we can fix it without changing the game balance too mu

Torpedoes -- minor adjustment here to make the choices more usable.

  • Mk.93 Mod 3 610 mm Torpedoes -- 12km 67 knots 16km 67 knots (equivalent to current 20km torps using torpedo acceleration skill)
  • Mk.93 F3 Torpedoes -- 8 km 76 knots 10 km 73 knots (slightly slower, longer ranged F3 that cannot hit DDs; you can still get an 8km 78 knots torp by using torpedo acceleration)

We are not changing a lot here and we are not giving away anything which is a pure buff or which you cannot already get using the right skills today.

 

Guns -- Tier VIII+ Japanese DDs get a choice of two turret types

  • 127mm/50 Type 3 -- 1800/2200 dmg; 7% fire; 5.7 sec reload ; 22.8 sec rotation ; 915 m/s
  • 127mm/40 Type 89 DP -- 1800 [no AP ammo] dmg; 7% fire ; 4.3 sec reload ; 16 sec rotation ; 725 m/s

We are expanding the gunboat choice beyond why the Akizuki and the Harekaze. The 127/40 DP is a historical mount found on just about every IJN CL, CA, CV and BB built from the 1930s onwards. It is not quite as fast firing as the 100 but it won't need IFHE to use effectively. It is faster rotating and it imparts AA DPM. However, it is still slower than USN 127/38s and its muzzle velocity is the wort in the game making long distance hits difficult. Also, unlike the USN 127/38s there is no AP shell for the Japanese 127/40 DP. Players electing to use the 127/40 will be able to engage DDs better and HE spam better. But, they will have to deal with worse shell arcing than USN mounts and these are still a second slower in reload compared to USN mounts. The Akizuki and HSF Harekaze continue to enjoy their exclusive access to the 100mm/65.

Edited by dwightlooi
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
9,434 posts
11,601 battles

the issue with IJN is that their torps do too much alpha dmg, so they have to nerf the ship in other ways.  the bote may be balanced in long term, but just bad to play.  

 

I would recommend reducing dmg but reduce  detection so you get more hits.    (may be combined with reduced reload)      get rid of trb as well but make them best in class stealth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38
[TNG]
Members
131 posts
8,600 battles

I disagree... Japanese DDs are not that fast, they maneuver like cruisers, their guns turn SLOWER than many heavy cruiser turrets, their guns have the slowest rate of fire. They should have the torpedoes that do the most damage, go the fastest and go the furthest -- both because it is true of the 610mm "Long Lance" Oxygen Torpedoes they used historically and because that is their one advantage.

They do have best in class stealth, but at high tiers that is largely a non-factor. It is both because the difference in detection are very minimal or non-existent, and because of the proliferation of RADAR in higher tier games.

Edited by dwightlooi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
842 posts
13 hours ago, centarina said:

I would recommend reducing dmg but reduce  detection so you get more hits.    (may be combined with reduced reload)      get rid of trb as well but make them best in class stealth

I'd agree with this:  the way to fix IJN DDs to make them more consistent and thus fun to play is to insure a more even torp hit distribution per game. That is, you want to have a MUCH smaller standard deviation across all your games.

To do this, you need to do two things:

1. Lower the detection distance of the IJN torps a bit, as this reduces the reaction times.  I'd advocate for a 15-20% reduction, or whatever puts them as the LEAST amount of reaction time (i.e. spotting distance/speed) of any normal torpedo from any nation.

2. Narrow the dispersion of the spreads, so that torps aren't aren't already ridiculously far apart half way to their max range.

Both of those will substantially increase hits.

In exchange, since you don't want IJN DDs absolutely blowing everything out of the water, a damage nerf is necessary. Again, I'd vote for something in the15% range - enough to make them slightly more potent than the #2 nation's torp damage, but not substantially more. They gain potency not by alpha damage, but by being able to land more hits more often, and having a huge flooding chance.

Landing more hits will result in more kills, even if the actual damage total for the game remains the same.  Especially since you significantly increase the ability to land multiple hits at once. And kills are what makes torpedoes frightening, and thus impactful (game tactics-wise).

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38
[TNG]
Members
131 posts
8,600 battles
10 hours ago, EAnybody said:

1. Lower the detection distance of the IJN torps a bit, as this reduces the reaction times.  I'd advocate for a 15-20% reduction, or whatever puts them as the LEAST amount of reaction time (i.e. spotting distance/speed) of any normal torpedo from any nation.

IJN Torpedoes are historically larger (24" vs 21"; 610mm vs 533 mm) and 50%  longer (9 m vs 6 m). In addition, they use pure oxygen instead of compressed air for their engines. This gave them higher speeds and substantially longer range (about 4x that of most allied torpedoes). And, yes, they also carry about 50% larger a warhead. The Type 93 is a monster.

So, yes, it'll make sense for them to have longer range, higher speeds and more destructive power. It'll also make sense that they are more detectable. However, the Type 93 has a detection range of 2.5 km vs about 1.1 to 1.2 km for 533mm torpedoes. This is way in access of what is reasonable. Japanese torps are 227% more detectable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
842 posts
11 hours ago, dwightlooi said:

IJN Torpedoes are historically larger (24" vs 21"; 610mm vs 533 mm) and 50%  longer (9 m vs 6 m). In addition, they use pure oxygen instead of compressed air for their engines. This gave them higher speeds and substantially longer range (about 4x that of most allied torpedoes). And, yes, they also carry about 50% larger a warhead. The Type 93 is a monster.

So, yes, it'll make sense for them to have longer range, higher speeds and more destructive power. It'll also make sense that they are more detectable. However, the Type 93 has a detection range of 2.5 km vs about 1.1 to 1.2 km for 533mm torpedoes. This is way in access of what is reasonable. Japanese torps are 227% more detectable?

Actually, the fact they ran on pure oxygen rather than compressed air made them SIGNIFICANTLY harder to spot - they left virtually no surface wake at all as there was very little leftover gas from combustion to expel from the torpedo.  WW2 IJN torpedoes, despite being bigger, were notably much more stealthy than their American counterparts.

 

But all of that is irrelevant to the discussion. We're talking about balancing a fantasy video game, and real life performance is really beside the point. People aren't educated enough about the technical differences between IJN torpedoes and other nations torpedoes to cause a cognitive break within the bounds of the game play.  Unlike, say WoWs' radar, where EVERYONE goes "Huh? Radar doesn't work that way!"

Here, we're talking about trying to balance a DD line that's extremely dependent on its torpedoes for the very large majority of it's game impact. In this case, it makes sense to trade off some alpha damage potential for a larger hit percentage, with the latter being achieved by increased torpedo stealth and better dispersion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
603 posts
7,095 battles
12 hours ago, EAnybody said:

Actually, the fact they ran on pure oxygen rather than compressed air made them SIGNIFICANTLY harder to spot - they left virtually no surface wake at all as there was very little leftover gas from combustion to expel from the torpedo.  WW2 IJN torpedoes, despite being bigger, were notably much more stealthy than their American counterparts.

 

But all of that is irrelevant to the discussion. We're talking about balancing a fantasy video game, and real life performance is really beside the point. People aren't educated enough about the technical differences between IJN torpedoes and other nations torpedoes to cause a cognitive break within the bounds of the game play.  Unlike, say WoWs' radar, where EVERYONE goes "Huh? Radar doesn't work that way!"

Here, we're talking about trying to balance a DD line that's extremely dependent on its torpedoes for the very large majority of it's game impact. In this case, it makes sense to trade off some alpha damage potential for a larger hit percentage, with the latter being achieved by increased torpedo stealth and better dispersion.

except in game the Type 93 make a foam like wake behind its tail and thus get spot from space. I guess CO2 doesn't mix well with the in-game water......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
96
[CUTE]
Members
413 posts
6,085 battles
On 09/03/2018 at 3:50 AM, dwightlooi said:

Numerous nerfs later nobody plays the high tier Japanese DDs -- at least not competitively. Here's how we can fix it without changing the game balance too mu

Torpedoes -- minor adjustment here to make the choices more usable.

  • Mk.93 Mod 3 610 mm Torpedoes -- 12km 67 knots 16km 67 knots (equivalent to current 20km torps using torpedo acceleration skill)
  • Mk.93 F3 Torpedoes -- 8 km 76 knots 10 km 73 knots (slightly slower, longer ranged F3 that cannot hit DDs; you can still get an 8km 78 knots torp by using torpedo acceleration)

We are not changing a lot here and we are not giving away anything which is a pure buff or which you cannot already get using the right skills today.

 

Guns -- Tier VIII+ Japanese DDs get a choice of two turret types

  • 127mm/50 Type 3 -- 1800/2200 dmg; 7% fire; 5.7 sec reload ; 22.8 sec rotation ; 915 m/s
  • 127mm/40 Type 89 DP -- 1800 [no AP ammo] dmg; 7% fire ; 4.3 sec reload ; 16 sec rotation ; 725 m/s

We are expanding the gunboat choice beyond why the Akizuki and the Harekaze. The 127/40 DP is a historical mount found on just about every IJN CL, CA, CV and BB built from the 1930s onwards. It is not quite as fast firing as the 100 but it won't need IFHE to use effectively. It is faster rotating and it imparts AA DPM. However, it is still slower than USN 127/38s and its muzzle velocity is the wort in the game making long distance hits difficult. Also, unlike the USN 127/38s there is no AP shell for the Japanese 127/40 DP. Players electing to use the 127/40 will be able to engage DDs better and HE spam better. But, they will have to deal with worse shell arcing than USN mounts and these are still a second slower in reload compared to USN mounts. The Akizuki and HSF Harekaze continue to enjoy their exclusive access to the 100mm/65.

Why not make it selectable in game between 20km 62kts (1.7km detection range) vs 12km 67kts (1.7km detection range) vs 10km 72kts (1.7km detection range)? No significant different in term of the torpedo mechanics, just make the boat more torpedo specific and encourage IJN DDs to get close to enemy while they have the chance (knowing radar is on CD or the BB is alone?)instead of just throwing torpedoes randomly like the USN DD ones. This also reward players for getting close to BBs before releasing the torpedoes, high risk, high reward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
200
[ICOP]
Members
942 posts
3,420 battles

Allow Yugumo and Shimakaze to use both smoke & torp reload consumables as opposed to one or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38
[TNG]
Members
131 posts
8,600 battles
On 3/11/2018 at 12:12 AM, l1nv5 said:

Why not make it selectable in game between 20km 62kts (1.7km detection range) vs 12km 67kts (1.7km detection range) vs 10km 72kts (1.7km detection range)? No significant different in term of the torpedo mechanics, just make the boat more torpedo specific and encourage IJN DDs to get close to enemy while they have the chance (knowing radar is on CD or the BB is alone?)instead of just throwing torpedoes randomly like the USN DD ones. This also reward players for getting close to BBs before releasing the torpedoes, high risk, high reward.

Because the game -- as it currently stands -- have no provision for changing torpedo specifications in game. Changing that is not a matter of fixing the IJN DD line, it requires changing the whole mechanics of the game for everyone.

BTW, the IJN 20km torps are NOT 1.7km detect. They have 2.5km detect and are essentially unusable. Currently, this leaves the 12km 67 knots torps and the 8 km 76 knots torps. The 8km torps ae near suicide to use in a Tier X game. So most people use the 12km. The problem with the 12km torps is that they are 4.5 km less in range compared to the 16.5km Gearing Torps and about the same speed 67 vs 66 knots. This means that the Gearing has guns that fire twice as fast as the Shima. The Gearing is more maneuverable than the Shima. The Gearing has the same concealment as the Shima. The Gearing has BETTER torps than the Shima. BTW the Shima is not even that fast with all the 43 knots Khabarosk taking the speed crown. So what is the Shima good for? Not much, and that is why nobody plays it competitively.

The Advantage of the Shima is that it sucks and playing it makes your gaming experience more challenging. That's about it..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38
[TNG]
Members
131 posts
8,600 battles
On 3/12/2018 at 10:49 AM, Junostorm said:

Allow Yugumo and Shimakaze to use both smoke & torp reload consumables as opposed to one or the other.

Minimum changes to fix the line. That is a HUGE buff you are suggesting.

All I am saying is that the IJN line needs usable Torpedo options not really better torps. A 16 km 67 knots torpedo is not anything to scream about. The Gearing has 16.5 km 66 knots torpedoes with LOWER detection range!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,312
[-TAB-]
Members
1,605 posts
5,174 battles
2 minutes ago, dwightlooi said:

The Advantage of the Shima is that it sucks and playing it makes your gaming experience more challenging. That's about it..

gasp. as you might be aware, the Japanese handed the Russian their soggy asses at the battle of tsunima straights. even though it was over 100 years ago, this is not to be forgotten, nor forgiven. I get it, I hold grudges too. it's payback time.

I hope they don't ban you for your statement! in the last 20 battles played in the shima, I sank a ship or two, and won a couple battles. you may be underrating it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38
[TNG]
Members
131 posts
8,600 battles
On 3/14/2018 at 11:17 AM, Spud_butt said:

gasp. as you might be aware, the Japanese handed the Russian their soggy asses at the battle of tsunima straights. even though it was over 100 years ago, this is not to be forgotten, nor forgiven. I get it, I hold grudges too. it's payback time.

I hope they don't ban you for your statement! in the last 20 battles played in the shima, I sank a ship or two, and won a couple battles. you may be underrating it.

Vengeance has already been wrought! Have you played the Mikasa lately? If you want to see Togo Heihachiro get his [edited] kicked, do it sometime.

Edited by dwightlooi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2 posts
2,277 battles

I haven't gotten above Tier 7 in this line yet, but I agree with the points here.  IJN DDs only have their torpedoes and stealth to rely on, and they need a bit of a buff.  Has anyone sunk a ship using flooding to gain those flags recently? I haven't in over a year, when the Minekaze and Isokaze were still very powerful.

I think the one thing that would increase IJN DD value beyond all else is more consistent CV play.  The lack of CVs means that cruiser players in particular can focus their skills and loadouts on anti-DD work, and even BB players can focus on skills that enhance torpedo acquisition.  There's just not enough balance (like taking defensive fire vs sonar in cruisers, or fighter vs radar) in the game for IJN DDs to be effective.  If carriers were more commonly played, especially at higher tiers, then there wouldn't be as much skill specialization on anti-DDs, and they would be much more effective.

Fixing the CVs would take a lot more work though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
282
[CVA16]
Members
2,293 posts
9,867 battles
15 hours ago, Fecal_Magnet said:

I think the one thing that would increase IJN DD value beyond all else is more consistent CV play. 

Nope. I think the downsides of having more CVs in the game far outweigh the upsides you mentioned. Most IJN DDs (does not apply to Akizuki) have lousy AA for tier and are easy targets for a competent CV. Even more so when they can be cross dropped. IJN DDs are best as stealthy scouts operating as some distance from any friendly AA cover. Being forced to hug your  Cleveland makes you much less effective. You cannot flank the enemy. More aircraft means your devastating torp  barrage on that clueless red BB probably gets spotted in enough time for even most WASD challenged BB and all other red ships to avoid them. They are the line most neutered by being permaspotted. No long range AA to make the CV pay for spotting you, your primary weapon system is made worthless, your guns are subpar to begin with and the entire red fleet will now target you until you are dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2 posts
2,277 battles

I don't disagree that it would change how the DDs were played to some extent, but let me clarify that I still only mean 1 CV per side per game.  I just want a CV to be in the game more consistently, not have more CVs per game.  I totally agree that in the lower tiers when there are 2 CVs then the game gets a lot harder.  That said, I have my best games in IJN DDs when there is 1 CV present.  The key is simply to avoid getting spotted and to go for them first.  Don't cap and run away from planes as soon as you know where they are.  If you can do that, you flank the CV and take them with long-range torps.  The presence of a CV also changes how DDs and CL/CA approach the game and to me it seems to result in the most balance.

It works both ways too- the CV on your team makes it easier to see where enemy DDs are before you run into them point-blank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
282
[CVA16]
Members
2,293 posts
9,867 battles
18 hours ago, Fecal_Magnet said:

It works both ways too- the CV on your team makes it easier to see where enemy DDs are before you run into them point-blank.

The CV on my team never seems to help me as much as the opposing CV hurts me. Especially if the red CV is competent. Even if not specifically targeted or permaspotted, I have to be much more cautious approaching enemy ships since I might be spotted by a squadron going by. My torps will likewise be spotted far from their target (and closer to me better locating me) more often.

 

Used to be a thing for DDs to go CV hunting early game  but not so much any more. Some see it as a bad use of a DD to spend so much time doing nothing but stalking the red CV. The playerbase has gotten more experienced too so know how to react when someone is getting spotted by hidden DDs in their rear. Cruisers will hunt you down when they know there must be an intruder around spotting the CV. It still can be done, just not something that I do  (successfullly) very often anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,034 posts
95 battles

Ehm... Personally I think IJN line is fine. Fun and challenging. In a general sense have you noticed how stealth games are usually significantly harder than normal action games, so US DDs are Doom (2016) and IJN is Thief 2 :Smile_teethhappy: It's fun to challenge yourself sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,734 posts
9,901 battles

The IJN DD torps are fine.  The issue is people play too scared to get good angles.

Any torp changes that remove an IJN DDs ability to torp another DD is a massive nerf to IJN DDs, as this is a really common way of fighting enemy DDs.

They only tweak I would like to see is reducing Shimas concealment to 5.6km and restoring the IJN DDs identity for how to  gunfight other DDs.  Namely the highest alpha HE, good fire chance, and longest reload.  This "buff" they did on the reload was garbage.

 

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
535
[WORX]
Members
1,855 posts
12,893 battles
2 minutes ago, Destroyer_KuroshioKai said:

The IJN DD torps are fine.

I would want to agree with your argument that the IJN DD line is fine as is, maybe for you its cool. Evidence in the "top ships episode" would lead me to believe that the IJN DD line is losing its influence to the other nations.  I hope that trend dont continue because I really want to agree with you but I am a realist.In terms of total games played I would rank IJN DDs as 2nd to last behind the last place Pan Asian DDs in 2017.But that is my opinion and I do respect your so Cheers !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,734 posts
9,901 battles
1 hour ago, Navalpride33 said:

I would want to agree with your argument that the IJN DD line is fine as is, maybe for you its cool. Evidence in the "top ships episode" would lead me to believe that the IJN DD line is losing its influence to the other nations.  I hope that trend dont continue because I really want to agree with you but I am a realist.In terms of total games played I would rank IJN DDs as 2nd to last behind the last place Pan Asian DDs in 2017.But that is my opinion and I do respect your so Cheers !

IJN DDs are without a doubt the most misplayed DDs in the games.

Its common to see people here claim they shouldnt cap in the early game, that they should avoid fighting with other DDs, and tons of other poor advice.  Listening to advice here trashed my early IJN DD stats.  Just how many posts have been posted here begging these players to use their guns every month? 

A significant portion of the player base does not understand how to play these boats.  They require two functional brain cells to use properly.  Unfortunately most dont seem to have that.

To put it in perspective I am playing Shimakaze for my clan this season in CB.  I have every T10 DD with a 19 point captain, I could  run any of them.  I chose a supposedly inferior IJN DD in a mode where everything is stacked against DDs.  In my near 200 games I have around a 72%WR and we have been in the top 5 ranked clans in the server for a while now.  All of my stats are similar, and in some cases superior to the Yue Yangs, Gearings, or Z-52s that we have been running.  If the boat was weak it would have failed, despite several Hurricane teams specifically targeting my Shima as a weak point on my team.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
408
[WOLFB]
Members
1,728 posts
8,256 battles
2 hours ago, Destroyer_KuroshioKai said:

They only tweak I would like to see is reducing Shimas concealment to 5.6km and restoring the IJN DDs identity for how to  gunfight other DDs.  Namely the highest alpha HE, good fire chance, and longest reload.  This "buff" they did on the reload was garbage.

 

 

Eh... Not really convinced here.

 

I heard the old IJN gun had something like 9 sec reload which is huge. Right now it feel quite comfortable to gun down other DD with a Kagerou or Yuugumo. I don't know how were the old IJN HE but right now I don't think it's garbage.  I wouldn't mind a buff to HE tho, I don't know why they nerfed it in the first place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,734 posts
9,901 battles
On 3/25/2018 at 2:48 AM, AlcatrazNC said:

 

Eh... Not really convinced here.

 

I heard the old IJN gun had something like 9 sec reload which is huge. Right now it feel quite comfortable to gun down other DD with a Kagerou or Yuugumo. I don't know how were the old IJN HE but right now I don't think it's garbage.  I wouldn't mind a buff to HE tho, I don't know why they nerfed it in the first place. 

Thats because most never understood how to use the old guns.

Rate of fire didnt really matter as you were not getting into protracted knife fights.  Slow turrets didnt matter if you planned ahead.  The slow ROF let you dodge slower US shells during your reload with hard turns, then bring the guns back on target for a good volley.  Rinse repeat.  3.5 to 4k volleys were pretty consistent, not to mention a better fire chance.  It was common practice to have planned 2 volley engagements where you duck into cover limiting your exposure to higher DPM.  Such engagements were a real threat to US DDs as they usually lost around 25% of their HP, while you lost much less.

The current guns ROF means you cant dodge as hard while maintaining full DPM meaning you are easier to hit.  You are forced to choose between full DPM or limiting damage received.  Often times you are forced to choose between EM and AR in 19 point builds.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
904 posts
4,261 battles
On 3/24/2018 at 11:41 PM, Destroyer_KuroshioKai said:

IJN DDs are without a doubt the most misplayed DDs in the games.

Its common to see people here claim they shouldnt cap in the early game, that they should avoid fighting with other DDs, and tons of other poor advice.  Listening to advice here trashed my early IJN DD stats.  Just how many posts have been posted here begging these players to use their guns every month? 

A significant portion of the player base does not understand how to play these boats.  They require two functional brain cells to use properly.  Unfortunately most dont seem to have that.

To put it in perspective I am playing Shimakaze for my clan this season in CB.  I have every T10 DD with a 19 point captain, I could  run any of them.  I chose a supposedly inferior IJN DD in a mode where everything is stacked against DDs.  In my near 200 games I have around a 72%WR and we have been in the top 5 ranked clans in the server for a while now.  All of my stats are similar, and in some cases superior to the Yue Yangs, Gearings, or Z-52s that we have been running.  If the boat was weak it would have failed, despite several Hurricane teams specifically targeting my Shima as a weak point on my team.

I would like to see a replay. Because looking at stats (I always try to learn from better players and compare statistics to see where I lack), your solo shimakaze stats are not better than mine, but I find playing shimakaze an exercise in frustration. I cannot fight other dds, because turret rotation is worst and it is never 1v1, planes constantly spot torpedoes (even though my average damage is 71k), I always cap in the beginning, but overall I feel like the only way I have a great game is if enemy team has dumb BBs. With terrible concealment of type93s, hitting non potato cruisers is borderline impossible.

That is speaking for random games though, since I only play solo. I hit a wall, where I have no idea how to improve my game to start having fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×