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

They will need to use the akizuki treatment on the Jutland and Daring

49 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

314
[TOG]
Members
2,366 posts
14,622 battles

The 113mm guns need IFHE to be reliable, otherwise it's RNG hope of fire starting because the shells tend to shatter more often than not. You're also going to need RPF due to being out spotted by any DD below 6km concealment. And t if you take CE to keep 6 km. The 100 mm guns on the IJN DD gun line had  had the same issue, which they fixed by giving the 100 mm 1/4 penetration. I suspect they will have to do the same to the Jutland and Daring. Hopefully they don't wait a year to resolve it.

Edited by Bill_Halsey
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
247 posts
11,881 battles

I hear you only use the op ap ammo.

Edited by Viscount

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
290 posts
5,044 battles

Eh, I don't know about that. Something I've quite enjoyed about the Daring thus far is that I can use AP to create damage that sticks rather than healable damage. On the other hand, the "angle and you now do zero damage" is very frustrating. For something like the Daring that doesn't have the benefits of 10 guns, speed boost, 12 torps with good range and damage, or a smoke screen that lasts for a little bit, something might have to be done.

As someone in my discord said, great guns, awful ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
123
[ENDVR]
Members
368 posts
5,203 battles

Having a good time in my Jutland with IFHE and no RPF.  Pretty sure it was intended this way: with baked in IFHE, there isn’t much of a choice between builds since you get can get practically everything you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WoWS Wiki Editor
7,216 posts
6,433 battles

If anything, the Akizuki treatment needs to be toned down on the IJN line. The reasoning was to decrease the need for IFHE on these ships, but it made them ridiculously powerful. imo it should be toned down to 1/5 pen to make it possible to pen DDs without IFHE, and IFHE would allow them to penetrate 25mm, an important treshold.

Daring and Jutland have a better AP performance than the IJN DDs, that‘s what you should use to your advantage.

  • Cool 4
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
107
[KNTI2]
[KNTI2]
Members
166 posts
8,138 battles

From my understanding, they buffed IJN 100 mm DDs to be a powerhouse in DPS because they were slow, large, and very poor turn radius (poor maneuverability in general) with the fact that they only have one set of torpedo launchers. Daring and Jutland on the other hand have 2 full set of torpedo launcher and way better maneuverability characteristics compared to the IJN so it's hard to justify their request when you compare to the IJN's flaws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
472
[WOLF8]
Alpha Tester
1,038 posts
4,367 battles

I love how every time Notser or Flamu puts out a video someone makes a thread on the forums.

The Akizuki and Harugumo are horribly broken and shouldn't be held up as an example, unless it's what not to do, and the Jutland and Daring has an even faster rate of fire, longer range and flatter trajectories. While I agree that no skill should be mandatory, that isn't how you fix it.

  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
472
[WOLF8]
Alpha Tester
1,038 posts
4,367 battles
8 minutes ago, SireneRacker said:

If anything, the Akizuki treatment needs to be toned down on the IJN line. The reasoning was to decrease the need for IFHE on these ships, but it made them ridiculously powerful. imo it should be toned down to 1/5 pen to make it possible to pen DDs without IFHE, and IFHE would allow them to penetrate 25mm, an important treshold.

Daring and Jutland have a better AP performance than the IJN DDs, that‘s what you should use to your advantage.

Honestly if they just lowered the rate of fire on the IJN DDs they would be much closer to balanced.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WoWS Wiki Editor
7,216 posts
6,433 battles
1 minute ago, KingCakeBaby said:

Honestly if they just lowered the rate of fire on the IJN DDs they would be much closer to balanced.

The problem with Harugumo especially is that she is in essence a Minotaur with HE shells. And Minotaur with HE shells was a thing that did not become one for a very good reason. If there is one combination I deem to be broken in this game, it‘s Cruiser HE firepower with a smokescreen. Examples of this are ships like Kutuzow, Payfast and now Harugumo (Perth is an exception given how the rest about her is mediocre, and the smokescreen rather gimmicked).

If you ask me a touch to the dpm would not address the key issue with this. It‘s the penetration, the ability to just sit in a smokescreen 15km away raining down death, and on top of that being able to outfight any DD that dares to get close.

  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
669
[BASIN]
[BASIN]
Members
1,940 posts
2 hours ago, Bill_Halsey said:

The 113mm guns need IFHE to be reliable, otherwise it's RNG hope of fire starting because the shells tend to shatter more often than not. You're also going to need RPF due to being out spotted by any DD below 6km concealment. And t if you take CE to keep 6 km. The 100 mm guns on the IJN DD gun line had  had the same issue, which they fixed by giving the 100 mm 1/4 penetration. I suspect they will have to do the same to the Jutland and Daring. Hopefully they don't wait a year to resolve it.

:Smile_great:

48 minutes ago, AdmiralHattori said:

From my understanding, they buffed IJN 100 mm DDs to be a powerhouse in DPS because they were slow, large, and very poor turn radius (poor maneuverability in general) with the fact that they only have one set of torpedo launchers. Daring and Jutland on the other hand have 2 full set of torpedo launcher and way better maneuverability characteristics compared to the IJN so it's hard to justify their request when you compare to the IJN's flaws.

:Smile_great:So this

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
669
[BASIN]
[BASIN]
Members
1,940 posts
1 hour ago, SireneRacker said:

If anything, the Akizuki treatment needs to be toned down on the IJN line. The reasoning was to decrease the need for IFHE on these ships, but it made them ridiculously powerful. imo it should be toned down to 1/5 pen to make it possible to pen DDs without IFHE, and IFHE would allow them to penetrate 25mm, an important treshold.

Daring and Jutland have a better AP performance than the IJN DDs, that‘s what you should use to your advantage.

:Smile_facepalm:Lawl

1 hour ago, AdmiralHattori said:

From my understanding, they buffed IJN 100 mm DDs to be a powerhouse in DPS because they were slow, large, and very poor turn radius (poor maneuverability in general) with the fact that they only have one set of torpedo launchers. Daring and Jutland on the other hand have 2 full set of torpedo launcher and way better maneuverability characteristics compared to the IJN so it's hard to justify their request when you compare to the IJN's flaws.

:Smile_facepalm::Smile_sceptic:

1 hour ago, KingCakeBaby said:

I love how every time Notser or Flamu puts out a video someone makes a thread on the forums.

The Akizuki and Harugumo are horribly broken and shouldn't be held up as an example, unless it's what not to do, and the Jutland and Daring has an even faster rate of fire, longer range and flatter trajectories. While I agree that no skill should be mandatory, that isn't how you fix it.

:Smile_facepalm::Smile_sceptic:

1 hour ago, KingCakeBaby said:

Honestly if they just lowered the rate of fire on the IJN DDs they would be much closer to balanced.

:etc_swear::Smile_sceptic:There's that Russian  Bias

1 hour ago, SireneRacker said:

The problem with Harugumo especially is that she is in essence a Minotaur with HE shells. And Minotaur with HE shells was a thing that did not become one for a very good reason. If there is one combination I deem to be broken in this game, it‘s Cruiser HE firepower with a smokescreen. Examples of this are ships like Kutuzow, Payfast and now Harugumo (Perth is an exception given how the rest about her is mediocre, and the smokescreen rather gimmicked).

If you ask me a touch to the dpm would not address the key issue with this. It‘s the penetration, the ability to just sit in a smokescreen 15km away raining down death, and on top of that being able to outfight any DD that dares to get close.

:etc_swear::Smile_facepalm:A   Harugumo  comparable  to a Minotaur!  you say?!?!?    You just have to be joking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:Smile_veryhappy:  1st  A   Minotaur  is more agile  harder to sink  does more damage me thinks you've got an agenda and if I had to guess it would be that old Russian Bias coming up once again

Edited by shadowsrmine
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WoWS Wiki Editor
7,216 posts
6,433 battles
1 hour ago, shadowsrmine said:

:Smile_facepalm:Lawl

Much counterargument, such constructive...

1 hour ago, shadowsrmine said:

:etc_swear::Smile_facepalm:A   Harugumo  comparable  to a Minotaur!  you say?!?!?    You just have to be joking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:Smile_veryhappy: 

Once more, a portion which fails to actually discuss the point and serves no real purpose. 

1 hour ago, shadowsrmine said:

1st  A   Minotaur  is more agile

Whereas Harugumo is faster and has half the rudder shift, and can if required mount the acceleration module.

1 hour ago, shadowsrmine said:

harder to sink

Minotaur is a floating citadel, perhabs the easiest Cruiser to nuke from T8 and upwards. Harugumo even has a stronger plating than Minotaur, and lacks a citadel which greatly reduces the chance of getting nuked with one salvo.

1 hour ago, shadowsrmine said:

does more damage

Minotaur‘s dpm is largely reliant on the enemy showing the side. If the target angles however, the damage output drops. Good thing that HE shells work at all angles, regardless of range, and on top of that have the ability to set fires.

 

Now, what are the three most important features of a Minotaur, which define its gameplay?

1. Poorly armored: applies to Harugumo as well

2. A crap load of dpm: applies to Harugumo as well

3. Carries its own smoke screen: applies to Harugumo as well

 

 

Unknown to you, obviously, is that Minotaur used to have HE shells during the early testing. Know why they weren‘t implemented? Because it was deemed broken. Oh lord, we got that exact ship now...

1 hour ago, shadowsrmine said:

me thinks you've got an agenda

Joke‘s on you, if I had an agenda and would allow it to influence me it would be against USN ship. Also, how does that relate in any way to the discussion? Wait, it doesn‘t.

1 hour ago, shadowsrmine said:

if I had to guess it would be that old Russian Bias coming up once again

Good joke, keep them coming.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
669
[BASIN]
[BASIN]
Members
1,940 posts
14 minutes ago, SireneRacker said:

Much counterargument, such constructive...

What I said

:Smile_great:And  the the above say it so well

You and the Rest are just too Ridiculous for words, :Smile_facepalm:  Tell me have you ever thought about forming a group for something called The Gong Show  or the like?

Edited by shadowsrmine
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WoWS Wiki Editor
7,216 posts
6,433 battles
1 minute ago, shadowsrmine said:

You and the Rest  are just too Ridiculous for words, 

Attempting to ridicule your opponent is one way of admitting defeat~

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
669
[BASIN]
[BASIN]
Members
1,940 posts
3 minutes ago, SireneRacker said:

Attempting to ridicule your opponent is one way of admitting defeat~

Tell me what your Ax is in this fight?    Seems to  me I've seen you going on and on about ships like the Worcester as well  perhaps  your a  BB  Main and you just hate that DD's and Cruiser at last  have an effective way to fight  BB's?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
601
[HYDRO]
Members
1,317 posts
3,668 battles

I have been playing Akizuki extensively before the HE pen changes, was possibly one of the few that didn't really like them. 

Seriously people, 20mm of pen with or without IFHE is enough to pepper any superstructure without any issues.  In addition this encouraged switching immediately to AP whenever a broadside was presented. Why we had to be spoiled and get lolpen with HE is beyond me. 

It has gotten so lazy nowadays that I think in 200-300 battles in Tier VIII+, only in 1-2 cases was I shot at while broadsiding by Aki/Kita/Haru AP.

Regarding Daring/Jutland, 113mm with IFHE is good enough to do the job, you then get the improved AP and a high fire chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WoWS Wiki Editor
7,216 posts
6,433 battles
1 minute ago, shadowsrmine said:

Seems to  me I've seen you going on and on about ships like the Worcester as well  perhaps  your a  BB  Main and you just hate that DD's and Cruiser at last  have an effective way to fight  BB's?

FYI I have played 52% of my games in Cruisers, have played all nations and all lines in this game with the exception of American Carriers and Russian Destroyers (though also some games in those, just very few).

So not only is your accusation off-topic, it‘s also false.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
669
[BASIN]
[BASIN]
Members
1,940 posts
12 minutes ago, SireneRacker said:

FYI I have played 52% of my games in Cruisers, have played all nations and all lines in this game with the exception of American Carriers and Russian Destroyers (though also some games in those, just very few).

So not only is your accusation off-topic, it‘s also false.

:Smile_sceptic:<<<---<<  Says all I need  say

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[WAIFU]
[WAIFU]
Members
16 posts
3,526 battles
51 minutes ago, shadowsrmine said:

:Smile_sceptic:<<<---<<  Says all I need  say

@SireneRacker is many things, but a liar he is not.

You should stop, you look rather silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
60
[AAA]
Members
396 posts
5,169 battles

I have Jutland but haven’t respeced capt for ihfe. Tried ap on dd. That ap absolutely chews dds up. 

It is frustrating on bb and ca lobing he that just shatters Hoping for a fire. When I get a free respec I’ll add ihfe 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
123
[ENDVR]
Members
368 posts
5,203 battles
2 minutes ago, wstugamd said:

I have Jutland but haven’t respeced capt for ihfe. Tried ap on dd. That ap absolutely chews dds up. 

It is frustrating on bb and ca lobing he that just shatters Hoping for a fire. When I get a free respec I’ll add ihfe 

I wouldn’t wait, gameplay improves to a crazy degree with IFHE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
552
[WOLF6]
Members
1,799 posts
4,826 battles

The Notser video pointed out that people have figured out that angling solves the short fused AP problem, making IFHE a must. I think the issue with the RN DDs is the same basic issue - AP broadsides, HE the rest - with a twist or two. The AP is more forgiving WRT angles for pen, but HE is useless if you can’t reliably hit superstructures. The precident is set, though, with the IJN gunboats. There’s no possible justification for not treating the RN botes the same way. 

You can make the case that it’s a bad idea, but Pandora is out of this box. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
314
[TOG]
Members
2,366 posts
14,622 battles
6 hours ago, Viscount said:

I hear you only use the op ap ammo.

 

4 hours ago, SireneRacker said:

Daring and Jutland have a better AP performance than the IJN DDs, that‘s what you should use to your advantage.

You know you have problems when a Shima starts bow tanking and your AP shells bounce off.

5 hours ago, SmokeHenge said:

Having a good time in my Jutland with IFHE and no RPF.  Pretty sure it was intended this way: with baked in IFHE, there isn’t much of a choice between builds since you get can get practically everything you want.

IFHE is not baked in. 

 

4 hours ago, SireneRacker said:

The problem with Harugumo especially is that she is in essence a Minotaur with HE shells. And Minotaur with HE shells was a thing that did not become one for a very good reason. If there is one combination I deem to be broken in this game, it‘s Cruiser HE firepower with a smokescreen. Examples of this are ships like Kutuzow, Payfast and now Harugumo (Perth is an exception given how the rest about her is mediocre, and the smokescreen rather gimmicked).

If you ask me a touch to the dpm would not address the key issue with this. It‘s the penetration, the ability to just sit in a smokescreen 15km away raining down death, and on top of that being able to outfight any DD that dares to get close.

The drawback to even moving around in smoke in the Haragumo is that the acceleration is not good enough to dodge torps. I have noticed that it's better not to use smoke in high tier matches because of the prevalence of many radar ships.  

CA HE firepower with a smokescreen got nerfed with the smoke rules. A Kutuzov can be made visible if a ship is within aprox 8 km when the ship fires. Even the Perth can be seen if a dd (especially a German one) gets close enough to use hydro and reveal the ship w/o even firing. I like the Perth (and Haida) smoke. You're a moving target rather than a sitting one. 

One of the thing I like about the Lightning if that it's not IFHE dependent. I would been happy if Daring and Jutland kept that characteristic.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[WAIFU]
[WAIFU]
Members
16 posts
3,526 battles

For realsies though,

If WG implemented what OP is suggesting, that would bring Daring HE pen up to 28mm, w/o IFHE. 

I think these numbers speak loud enough.

thonkifhe.PNG.9bb2f0e204447ff261f327985926f81b.PNG

 

5 minutes ago, Thornir said:

You can make the case that it’s a bad idea, but Pandora is out of this box. 

I don't want to be that guy, but Pandora was never inside the box. Pandora was the one who possessed the box and opened it. :fish_book:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×