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

DD players, do the RN DD tweaks significantly improve them?

9 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

821
[ARS]
Beta Testers
2,395 posts
2,173 battles

Per Notser's video, RN DDs will be getting some changes.  They are all clearly improvements, but are they enough to make the ships desirable?  The changes are torpedoes getting options for single and narrow spread rather than single and wide spread, turret angle improvements here and there and RN cruiser style acceleration so that while slow they don't really lose speed when maneuvering, even accelerating in turns.

Is this enough, particularly the third change, to address concerns about them and make them fun to play?

Video in question:

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,362
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
7,024 posts
10,703 battles

In my opinion these are great changes and in short yes, greatly improve them - though I'm less excited by some more than others.

  • RN CL 'Hydrofoils' - a positive change, actually giving something for flavor instead of 'oh yes it's flavorful to just not have engine boost but no compensation' - that said I don't think it's as nice as people think. From what I remember destroyers/cruisers/battleships each suffer a different speed reduction for turning with DD hit the least and BB/CV the most. In that context retaining more of your speed is less impactful on DD (turn at 90% speed say) than CL (turn at say 75% speed).
    • On the further plus side for hydrofoils, it means your acceleration may improve while you can take rudder shift mod - Daring's 4.6s shift is significantly worse than Gearing's 3.3s, Jutland's 4.2 worse than Fletcher's 3.0s etc.
  • 360' turrets - great! Some ships needed them for a bare semblance of balance, for instance Jervis is now merely a less stealthy, worse-torpedoes, maybe worse firing angles version of Gadjah Mada rather than all that plus being unable to 360' the rear turret - progress! Lightning is also helped out a chunk. I think the 360' on the forward turrets is less relevant but it's nice
  • Icarus - 133s to 120s torpedo reload. Remember when Icarus had 6km torpedoes and 133s reload and I said 'this is a waste of a testing round' well, it was a bloody waste of time. At 7km they're still not great, but 120s instead of 133s is a nice, sane improvement to a more reasonable (though still slow) number - 133s was almost twice the reload of Fubuki.
  • Lightning - looked ok, bit undergunned on first show and weak torpedoes, I was a bit surprised to see her in between a 12 RPM and 17.3 RPM ship with a paltry 10 RPM, now bumped up to 13.3 RPM is a good step.
  • Smoke - nice flavor, not sure on effect, likely preferable than 'oh it's uselessly wide but middling otherwise' smoke. Good that if you have to give one up to radar it's not nearly as crippling, you can motor off and come back during the radar cooldown and only 1/7 instead of 1/4 of your smokes are a write-off. On the downside your total smoke duration per game with SI for 7 charges is just 280s, in comparison a Gearing with SI gets 520s and a Shima 388s.
    • I'd say this new smoke is pretty useless for friendlies as 40s duration is just not enough to let them use it and a huge risk for cruisers who will need time to get back up to speed.
    • On the plus side with a 20s downtime you're not 'between smokes' for long - but the USN and PA smoke is down for just 30s.
    • 10s of emission is also note-worthily bad, I really hope you can crash the speed successfully - the RN CL with the acceleration had the smoke bumped to 15s because they'd outrun it if starting smoke at full speed.
  • Single/Narrow torpedo launch angles - a sensible outbreak of sanity, a massive quality of life improvement. I don't think they should ever have been tried as single/wide it's just a pain in the neck to basically be stuck clicking 8-10 times - I play a lot of Gallant/Minotaur and if in a hurry I will just flush the tubes as narrow spreads. As an aside I don't think single-launch is particularly good, it's useful but niche and putting more eggs in fewer baskets still has the same number of eggs.

 

I don't think these changes were rocket science, the acceleration's certainly been suggested by people on this forum and elsewhere. The starting position for a lot of these ships was pretty farcical and was probably a waste of time - starting at about this level would have been far more sensible (in particular looking at Acasta-Jervis).

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
821
[ARS]
Beta Testers
2,395 posts
2,173 battles
1 hour ago, mofton said:

Lots of stuff...

Interesting.  Thank you for taking the time to detail all of that.

44 minutes ago, Th3KrimzonD3mon said:

Yes, it greatly improves them. However, they were so bad, from all I've seen, that it just isn't enough, I feel.

What do you think would be enough?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
372
[P2W]
[P2W]
Members
1,240 posts
2 hours ago, Helstrem said:

Per Notser's video, RN DDs will be getting some changes.  They are all clearly improvements, but are they enough to make the ships desirable?  The changes are torpedoes getting options for single and narrow spread rather than single and wide spread, turret angle improvements here and there and RN cruiser style acceleration so that while slow they don't really lose speed when maneuvering, even accelerating in turns.

Is this enough, particularly the third change, to address concerns about them and make them fun to play?

Video in question:

 

I saw the video before I left for work today. The truth is, I won't know til I can play it myself. I can say I'm not especially excited for them and I don't play the Gallant I got for free at all. I do want to play the IJN gunboats though. I'm not a fan of gunboats, although I do occasionally enjoy the Akizuki (particularly in ranked), but they look more like light cruisers so we'll see.

EDIT: On paper they look like a waste of time mostly. Maneuverable Cap fighters that are too slow to give chase? Doesn't matter. Radar. Hydro. CVs (there are MANY more lately at mid and high tiers than there were even a month ago, not sure why). The older videos hinted at broken levels of concealment (like 100m shy of IJN or so) not sure if that's still the case. Depends on how good the guns are really. Their smoke looks mostly useless which it would be no matter what happened and they have no other options iirc. I used to play almost exclusively T8+ DDs, I got a Yamato 2 days ago, I'm half way up the USN BBs now, I bought a T-61 too (which desperately needs 10 KM torps imo), most T8+ DD games aren't worth the hassle anymore.

Edited by w4spl3g

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,331
[SYN]
Members
7,341 posts
7,771 battles
28 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

Interesting.  Thank you for taking the time to detail all of that.

What do you think would be enough?

They need speed boost back, especially since they're slow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
821
[ARS]
Beta Testers
2,395 posts
2,173 battles
10 minutes ago, Th3KrimzonD3mon said:

They need speed boost back, especially since they're slow.

As an additional slot or as a choice in the same slot as hydroacustic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,331
[SYN]
Members
7,341 posts
7,771 battles
1 hour ago, Helstrem said:

As an additional slot or as a choice in the same slot as hydroacustic?

Like Haida, just give it an additional slot. I mean, the hydro is pretty bad, anyway, so, yeah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43
[USFF]
Members
101 posts
5,277 battles

The changes were really needed but I still don’t feel like I must grind this line. They mostly seem just meh to me and are just missing the fun factor. I’m just not feeling the excitement like I did for PA DDs with deep water torps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×