Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Landsraad

On Destroyer Balance

15 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,580
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,304 posts
6,266 battles

So destroyers are, have been, and always will be a very influential class in the game. Heck if you leave aside thoughts about carriers and subs out of the equation they're probably THE most controversial class of the trinity of surface combatants. As such this of course leads to discourse surrounding them being really... Explosive, to say the least. Now I'll fully admit that I'm not really a DD main and I even admit that I think a lot of the moaning coming from DD mains can be a bit overblown at times; but I also know that nothing in this game is really 100%, nothing really ever can be, and I wanted to make known a couple of thoughts I had on the various destroyer lines and how they could be improved. I beseech the Don to not put a hit out on me for this... Anyway, let's dive in and go roughly from newest to... Actually let's just go in whatever order I feel like:

France:
Being the new hotness on the block the contre-torpilleurs of the Marine Nationale don't have a long history behind them in the game, but it's certainly been an eventful one. They started out panned as just being all around bad at being destroyers because of their large detection range and lack of smoke. But the thing is that they're not destroyers, they're destroyer HUNTERS. So call them destroyer leaders, pocket cruisers, large destroyers, what have you, they're not designed to play like normal destroyers. Once people figured that out they started doing really well with them. Myself included, I love my Le Fantasque. They can also be really powerful versus other destroyers thanks to their MBRB and ability to go to plaid. Heck from tier 8 onward they can even OUTRUN certain torpedoes with speed boost and a Sierra Mike flag, it's kind of insane. I'm not sure if they necessarily need to be reigned in stat-wise though, the most obvious way to curtail them from running roughshod over other DDs is to increase the presence of their main predator: Carriers. Yeah, I'm sure people would love that. Without that, maybe a tweak to their turning (ruddershift or radius) or their torpedoes (slightly reduced damage or speed) would help. As it is they feel *close* to balanced, but just a little ahead of the curve.

Germany:
I think the the torpedoboots of the Kriegsmarine are honestly in a pretty good place. They play similarly to the US, but have a increased emphasis on torpedoes over gunnery that helps differentiate them. Their agility and AA means that planes are a problem, but not a death sentence. Oh, and of course HAIL HYDRO! The most notable feature of the German line is definitely their strongest point and something that has kept them solid in the meta despite multiple lines of new destroyer hotness coming out since their introduction. I think they're fine, but there was a proposal a while back (I'll try and find the link later) to split them into a torpedo-focused line armed with 128s and a more gun-focused line armed with 150s to make the line more consistent. I think something like that would be a great way to expand them.

UK:
So until the French and their more destroyer leader type ships came into the game it was safe to call the Royal Navy's destroyers the most different of the lines from what you would consider the "baseline" destroyer of the game. No speed boost, built in engine mod, single-fire torpedoes, short range long acting hydro, short duration smoke, and heals; that's a LOT of changes from the norm. As such once again people decried them as trash when they first came out. I love these ships, I think they're in a good place right now and that with subs coming we'll probably see them as the premier ASW destroyers to cement them into a more permanent niche in the game. I mean now they're sort of light hunter-killer anti-DD ships, but you can fill that role just as well with a French or German boat. You take a British destroyer over others if you need utility and versatility right now. Also are we ever getting a second line for them? There's probably enough ships, and I'd love to get a tech-tree Tribal-class. Just a thought though, I haven't looked into that much at all. Also I feel like their AA could use a little bit of a buff. I'm not saying give them DefAA, but just a little nudge to their AA damage output, it doesn't feel right to me that these little ships have been plane punching bags since day one of the rework when they're so well rounded everywhere else.

Pan-Asian:
So these used to be some of the best destroyers in the game from what I hear (yeah I took a pretty long hiatus, oops), but nowadays you rarely see them. I mean, Gadjah Mada is still pretty common for the gun arcs her British heritage gives her and Loyang is pretty commonly held up as THE tier 8 destroyer for competitive thanks to her versatile consumables and US guns, but when was the last time you saw somebody tout the Yueyang or Chung Mu as the top of their tier? Now the main issue here is obviously the nerfs to their guns combined with their use of deep water torpedoes meaning that these ships have trouble fighting other destroyers. Also they have radar, which is useful for hunting destroyers, but their weapons suck for fighting destroyers so... It all seems a bit hollow. But there is something that could be done to improve their anti-destroyer capabilities and gunnery without simply walking back the nerfs or messing with their ammo and ballistics: Give them a main battery reload booster. MBRB from tier 8 on would give a nice bit of burst damage without bringing them back up to their previous levels. If they had it in a new consumable slot this would be a powerful upgrade, but if you had to swap out speed boost for it then I feel like the line would get a neat bit of versatility of consumable combinations that would make them more appealing to players without overpowering them. Radar and MBRB would give you a sort of pseudo-British setup, smoke and MBRB would help for ambushes and early-game caps, and if those aren't appealing then you can still keep speed boost and your current build.

Russian:
Voenno-Morskoj Flot destroyers... Man I have a checkered past with the Russian fleet. I love the battleships, and I've come to an understanding with their cruisers, but the destroyers and I? We have an agreement: I don't grind them more than the odd mission or two when I'm bored, and they don't take me to gulag. As to the two lines themselves, let's start with the OG. The Khabarovsk line is one that keeps being bemoaned as being powercrept, but at the same time it used to be THE example of unbalanced Russian ships that everyone would point to when screaming "RUSSIAN BIAS!" so I'm not quite sure what to think there. Khabarovsk in particular seems to be the main example used by both sides. And, yes, she's no longer the fastest gunboat on water nor definitively the destroyer with the best gunnery at tier 10, but I think that this is less "power creep" and more of a change in the roles that destroyers fill in the game's meta changing. After all she still has that 50mm plating for bouncing stupid shots and her armament is still pretty potent, if you want to kill a Khaba with another DD the best way to do it is to corner them in an area where they can't use their speed to its fullest extent, but also stay far enough away that they can't torpedo you effectively with those slow-moving fish. I think that with her optional heal and plating Khaba is fine where she currently is. Grozovoi on the other hand you don't hear a lot about, which is weird to me because this is a tier 10 destroyer with a heal, DefAA, smoke, speed boost, AND reasonably good torpedoes for her tier all at the same time. That's kind of nuts to me, but aside from a little blip of popularity during the rework from the "I hate carriers" crowd I don't hear or see a lot of Grozovoi. Which means that I can't really comment on her and with that consumable layout I can only assume this is because she's living in Khaba's shadow because at a glance this ship looks stupid good. Like, "why would any destroyer player go for Khaba when Grozovoi exists?" good.

US:
So as one of the two oldest destroyer lines in the game a lot of people will say that the USN's destroyers have been powercrept... I can KIND OF see it, I won't say that they're perfect right now as something feels off about them when I play them, but I also feel that some of it has to be the same changing meta scenario that the Russian destroyers have been caught up in. Again, once upon a time these were THE gunboats of the game, but now they're very much hybrid ships and that's not at all a bad thing. That being said, I feel that their gimmick of alternate hulls granting the ability to use DefAA could use some tweaking to make them feel a bit more comfortable. I like the idea, but I don't think that the implementation is quite right given the the rework and the consumables that other lines get access to. So instead of the current setup, where on Farragut, Mahan, and Benson you have to mount the C-hull and lose a gun in order to get the OPTION to swap smoke for DefAA, I think that these ships would be better served by having the option of swapping consumables right off the bat (or starting with Farragut's B-hull) and have the C-hull give the option to swap one gun turret for the ability to use smoke AND DefAA in separate slots. This would also apply to Fletcher's upgraded hull and Gearing. So now if you have a US destroyer you can sacrifice some surface DPM in order to more easily buddy up with another destroyer and provide air cover for both of you. Also I feel like an alternate branch would be very nice to see at some point, but with Benham and Somers as premiums I'm not really sure what that would be.


IJN:
Ah yes, the long and sordid story Japanese destroyers. Personally I feel they're *mostly* okay, but I won't deny that a bit of power creep has effected them from both sides. We'll start with my preferred line. Much ado has been made of the Japanese gunboat destroyers, though I feel the term "pocket light cruisers" fits them better, mostly over their gun performance. Honestly I think that the solution to that is already there. Either they'll be reigned in by the proposed changes to IFHE (ie: Getting rid of it) or a simple change to 1/5th HE penetration rather than 1/4th will get the job done. But while they undoubtedly have their own flavor it's not what Akizuki and Akizuki-kai were supposed to be historically, and that irks me. So one more change I would propose is giving them the option to swap their torpedo reload boost consumable with DefAA. Now they get to choose between being this weird hybrid of Japanese torpedo excellence and insane guns, or being more dedicated surface support ships. As to the OG torpedoboat line, I think most of them are in a good place right now. Really the only one that may warrant a look is Shimakaze. A lot of people say that they should undo the concealment nerf to her torpedoes, but I honestly feel like maybe shaving a bit off of her gun reload could do wonders for her. Also it strikes me as odd that Kagero and Yugumo both get TRB, but Shimakaze never has had it. I get why, but it feels wrong for a line to gain a consumable only to lose it (the exception is the French battleships and their catapult planes, that feels pretty natural with Richelieu's upgrade). So I have an... Interesting proposal: Give Shimakaze the ability to swap smoke for TRB, BUT! not the 8 second version that Kagero and Yugumo get. With 15 tubes and the most powerful fish in the game the absolute MOST that Shimakaze should get is Monaghan's odd 30 second TRB, maybe even a 45 to 60 second one with only a charge or two. Also I feel like a short branch coming off Akizuki and ending in Ayanami of post-war JSDF destroyers in sort of a pseudo-Friesland role would be pretty cool, a sort of line that maybe trades some torpedo effectiveness for improved ASW gear and fast-firing but low damage guns.

 

So anyway those are my thoughts on the lolibotes. Please leave any comments or additional (reasonable) suggestions you have below. Like I said I am by no means a DD main, this is just a spur of the moment thing mostly meant to once again bring up my crusade to give Akizuki the one consumable she has always been lacking.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
527
Members
596 posts
10,792 battles
41 minutes ago, Landsraad said:

Germany:
I think the the torpedoboots of the Kriegsmarine are honestly in a pretty good place. They play similarly to the US, but have a increased emphasis on torpedoes over gunnery that helps differentiate them. Their agility and AA means that planes are a problem, but not a death sentence. Oh, and of course HAIL HYDRO! The most notable feature of the German line is definitely their strongest point and something that has kept them solid in the meta despite multiple lines of new destroyer hotness coming out since their introduction. I think they're fine, but there was a proposal a while back (I'll try and find the link later) to split them into a torpedo-focused line armed with 128s and a more gun-focused line armed with 150s to make the line more consistent. I think something like that would be a great way to expand them.

Well that is kind of the theory but the reality is much harsher...

I'm going to focus on the Z-52 as the lower tiers (Z-23 and below) are pretty decent and fun to play.

The problem with Z-52 is that she is a hybrid that struggles both on guns and torps, the AP is second worst due to a incledibly bad Kruup value, the speed and weight should make them pen much much more. Hell, Gearing with much slower and lighter shells has more AP pen.

She was advertised as the "AP DD" when in reality the pen is awful, you overpen DDs broadside to you and the HE is worse than loading potatoes into the barrels. "But muh built in IFHE" except no German DD gets it, they sacrifice the HE alpha to gain absolutely nothing in return.

The torpedos... Well they are a joke, T22 (her own Tier 5) has only 900 less damage but reloads 30 seconds faster, what's the point when US DDs can launch much much better torpedo's just 10 seconds slower? It's like building a Sims or Kidd for torps, biggest waste ever.

In the lower tiers they have very good HP pools and even Z-46 is pretty healthy but Z-52 has barely any increase over her little sister, even more insulting is that Daring gets a heal and has more HP than Z-52...

Sure, the smoke + hydro is decent... for randoms. Any competent player would just run away or rush the smoke, taking no damage from you AP shattering on the nose or the HE doing absolutely nothing with the incredibly low alpha...

Another big issue is the concealment, 6.1 makes her tie with all the gunboats that eat her alive all day long, even a Shma can severely cripple her only with guns in a fair duel.

And to top it all German DDs have the worse smoke on the entire game because... Stalingrad battle? Like really, there is no reason whatsoever for them to have so [edited] smokes...

 

58 minutes ago, Landsraad said:

MBRB

Pan Asia really needs love but PLEASE no more gimmicky unnecessary consumables... The issue with YY was that her radar and Gearing-bullying skills were very good on competitive but instead of nerfing her radar, they just obliterated her offensive stats. Also along the way Gearing got the legendary module, basically she turned from YY's food to eating them for breakfast... 

Nerf her radar but restore her offensive stats, the ship itself was fine, it was the radar making her strong.

 

1 hour ago, Landsraad said:

UK

Improved version of German DDs in every way just for a slower top speed with heal because muh printing new ships with a single key.

1 hour ago, Landsraad said:

Russian

Khaba: worse French DD

Grozo: Daring's russian cousin specialised in bullying at longer ranges than his British relative.

1 hour ago, Landsraad said:

Also it strikes me as odd that Kagero and Yugumo both get TRB, but Shimakaze never has had it. I get why, but it feels wrong for a line to gain a consumable only to lose it (the exception is the French battleships and their catapult planes, that feels pretty natural with Richelieu's upgrade). So I have an... Interesting proposal: Give Shimakaze the ability to swap smoke for TRB, BUT! not the 8 second version that Kagero and Yugumo get. With 15 tubes and the most powerful fish in the game the absolute MOST that Shimakaze should get is Monaghan's odd 30 second TRB, maybe even a 45 to 60 second one with only a charge or two.

Many people (myself included) want a split like the Russian DDs have with another T10 torpedo boat more on the line of 2 launchers with TRB and the glorious 5.4 concealment of the T8 IJN DDs. No, Hayate is not that, Hayate is a poor attempt of mixing Shima with Haru and ending up with a poor hydro that cannot no any if the two things properly, she dies to gunboats every time and lacks the sheer number of toroedos to be effective at that, TRB is almost a death sentence on her with a 6.1 concealment.

 

As for the Shima suggestion... 30 seconds TRB would be alright, 45 would be insanely high, I sometimes play Monaghan (torpedo hull) and the 30 seconds is painful and requires a lot of planning in advance compared to the 8 seconds, 50% slower reload to then would be extremely overkill nerf specially giving up smoke. I won't even consider the minute TRB because that's just insanely bad, nobody would ever consider that. MAYBE the full minute TRB would be to make it go along side Smoke and not a choice but seems very iffy, the second hypothetical like from T9 and T10 would already have smoke + torpedo reload booster in exchange for having only 2 launchers, much like Asashio for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,966
[USCC2]
Members
6,170 posts

@Landsraad +1 :Smile_honoring: A very well thought out piece and my next question is a genuine one:

I'm not sure what your main point is unless you are just discussing DDs in general; are you looking for change? If it is a general discussion then I think the DDs are no more influential than any other ship type IMO.

  • During the game a DD cannot cap unless it has support, whether it be his team directly supporting him or otherwise running interference.
  • Towards end game the DD is in a better place to take the cap - but that is because the team has won the upper hand and he has more freedom to do so.

Absolutely this depends on teams being 'teams', but if a team doesn't play as a team we know everything is in the air anyway.

I think the DD being hailed as the most 'influential' just comes from the fact it has the worst average survival and the worst average damage - so the game has to give it something lol. It can do nothing without good support - like every other ship.

 

Don't get me wrong - I think the game is in a reasonable place. I love playing all ship types as they all have strengths and weaknesses. It's just you need to know what ship will give you what type of gameplay - then choose the 'national flavour' in search of finding the perfect fit for you in that particular ship type.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
196
[ANKER]
Members
366 posts
6,337 battles
2 hours ago, _WaveRider_ said:

@Landsraad +1 :Smile_honoring: A very well thought out piece and my next question is a genuine one:

I'm not sure what your main point is unless you are just discussing DDs in general; are you looking for change? If it is a general discussion then I think the DDs are no more influential than any other ship type IMO.

  • During the game a DD cannot cap unless it has support, whether it be his team directly supporting him or otherwise running interference.
  • Towards end game the DD is in a better place to take the cap - but that is because the team has won the upper hand and he has more freedom to do so.

Absolutely this depends on teams being 'teams', but if a team doesn't play as a team we know everything is in the air anyway.

I think the DD being hailed as the most 'influential' just comes from the fact it has the worst average survival and the worst average damage - so the game has to give it something lol. It can do nothing without good support - like every other ship.

 

Don't get me wrong - I think the game is in a reasonable place. I love playing all ship types as they all have strengths and weaknesses. It's just you need to know what ship will give you what type of gameplay - then choose the 'national flavour' in search of finding the perfect fit for you in that particular ship type.

This.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
318
[BIER]
Members
463 posts
7,411 battles

here's what I'm seeing, rated from in the best place to worst

 

IJN Gunboat:  they're idiot-mode, left mousebutton held the entire game. They're extremely low-skill, and have far too much damage potential with very little effort made. Everyone loves them, because anyone without a lobotomy can get 100k damage games easy. A pox on the game.

French - Super-strong AA makes them the only line to really be able to deal well with CVs. Reasonably balanced, with the upper tier ones having some problems with too strong DPM.  They can also outrun most radar.  Friesland, in particular, should NOT have a smoke. It's nothing more than an IJN Gunboat in terms of brain-damaged.

US - by far the most effective torpedo boats in the game. They also have sufficient AA (mostly) to deal with CVs. Their smoke is also by far the most useful. Generally, not in the least bit power-creeped; indeed, the current meta favors them heavily.

UK - currently the best cap contenders, with hydro and VERY strong guns. Also, by far the best knife fighers around, and their single-torps are extremely good for digging out bow-tanking BBs/CAs. Suffer at mid-tiers from awful detection range, though (similar to US DDs). This is flipped at upper tiers, where they have almost the best detection around.

Russian - still quite strong as the "run-and-gun" gunboat. They do suffer a bit in the AA level, which makes the vulnerable to CVs. But their speed makes them mostly immune to Radar, being able to handily outrun it, like French DDs. That said, the ludicrous speeds of French DDs make them dangerous, and the USSR DDs are showing significant issues with being power-creeped.

PA - kinda meh these days, as their guns are now outclassed by everything except US DDs, and they have lost their cap ability to the UK DDs. Not terrible, but not really useful either.

KM - in a very bad spot.  Their Hydro is now not terribly useful, as both UK and French DDs have it as well, and have either equal or better health, and certainly FAR better guns and smoke (the latter of which is particularly badly power-creeped).  Their torpedoes are nice, but so long as there are other DDs around, they are generally fairly useless, as their big detection range means they can get blapped quite easily, as everything out-guns AND out-detects them now (even IJN DDs). CVs have a field day with them, as they have crappy AA and can't maneuver well.

IJN torpedo - the long-standing sad sack. Still suffering from torpedoes which are worse in pretty much all regards to everyone else.  "High Alpha Damage" is pretty meaningless when it's extremely hard to land them. And it is - detection times are stupidly long, and their dispersion is ludicrously bad. Their out-reloaded, too, by a significant number of their counterparts.  IJN torp boats are by far the weakest, and most vulnerable to radar. They're also slower than pretty much everything else they fight, and seriously out-gunned in any fight they can't set up well ahead of time. And their vaunted concealment is now really not that much, given UK (in particular) but also US and PA DDs have either equal or only slightly worse.  They're heavily dependent on having RL these days to warn them, and that requires a minimum of a 14 point captain.  They're also just fresh meat to CVs, and generally will die to them, even at 100% health.  They're thus extremely weak if CVs are around.

Edited by LAnybody
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
6,164 posts
7,839 battles
12 hours ago, Landsraad said:

IJN:
Ah yes, the long and sordid story Japanese destroyers. Personally I feel they're *mostly* okay, but I won't deny that a bit of power creep has effected them from both sides. We'll start with my preferred line. Much ado has been made of the Japanese gunboat destroyers, though I feel the term "pocket light cruisers" fits them better, mostly over their gun performance. Honestly I think that the solution to that is already there. Either they'll be reigned in by the proposed changes to IFHE (ie: Getting rid of it) or a simple change to 1/5th HE penetration rather than 1/4th will get the job done. But while they undoubtedly have their own flavor it's not what Akizuki and Akizuki-kai were supposed to be historically, and that irks me. So one more change I would propose is giving them the option to swap their torpedo reload boost consumable with DefAA. Now they get to choose between being this weird hybrid of Japanese torpedo excellence and insane guns, or being more dedicated surface support ships. As to the OG torpedoboat line, I think most of them are in a good place right now. Really the only one that may warrant a look is Shimakaze. A lot of people say that they should undo the concealment nerf to her torpedoes, but I honestly feel like maybe shaving a bit off of her gun reload could do wonders for her. Also it strikes me as odd that Kagero and Yugumo both get TRB, but Shimakaze never has had it. I get why, but it feels wrong for a line to gain a consumable only to lose it (the exception is the French battleships and their catapult planes, that feels pretty natural with Richelieu's upgrade). So I have an... Interesting proposal: Give Shimakaze the ability to swap smoke for TRB, BUT! not the 8 second version that Kagero and Yugumo get. With 15 tubes and the most powerful fish in the game the absolute MOST that Shimakaze should get is Monaghan's odd 30 second TRB, maybe even a 45 to 60 second one with only a charge or two. Also I feel like a short branch coming off Akizuki and ending in Ayanami of post-war JSDF destroyers in sort of a pseudo-Friesland role would be pretty cool, a sort of line that maybe trades some torpedo effectiveness for improved ASW gear and fast-firing but low damage guns.

I would say that I mostly agree with the above. There is one sticking point for me though, the underlined part.

While I won't say that Shima doesn't need to be revisited again, it's all anyone ever talks about when they discuss the IJN torpedo DDs. Shima, Shima, Shima. It's been a long standing problem. There are other DDs in the line and while most are in a good spot there are two, in my opinion, that stick out as more in need of some attention. The first one, the elephant in the room (heh), and the one I'd love to see actually looked at and adjusted is Akatsuki.

Her concealment is the main issue, and has been for a long time. I don't have the numbers with me at the moment, but if I'm remembering correctly, she falls into the bottom half of DDs concealment wise within her MM spread. Of course, concealment isn't just an issue with her, but rather T7 DDs as a whole, but that's an entirely different topic. As it stands right now, there's just more gunboats at T7 that have better or matching concealment. She breaks the mold of IJN torpedo DDs prior and succeeding her. She can't outspot the ships she can't outfight, while the T5, T6, T8, and T9 can. Even accounting for the concealment at T8+ being much closer between the many different nations, IJN torpedo DDs still hold a concealment advantage over the opposing nation's counterparts. Personally, I'd like to see her concealment dropped to Fubuki's maximum, 6.1km. Akatsuki is a Special-Type III after all, and still considered by many as a sub-class of the Fubuki's rather than it's own class. The only other thing with her are the T7 IJN torpedoes. But, they are workable and if Akat's concealment was lowered, I'd see no reason to mess with the T7 IJN torpedoes (sorry Harekaze).

The other DD would be the other T7 IJN DD, Shiratsuyu. I hardly ever see them being played anymore. I don't even think I saw that many in the last T7 ranked sprint, to be honest. While she was powerful with both TRB and smoke back in the day, I feel like the game has advanced enough where that particular change feels like too much. She's too slow for starters (which largely can't be remedied), every other DD within her MM spread can run her down except Akizuki. The other sore spot is, again, those T7 IJN torpedoes, coupled with the fact that her 2x4 banks are at a disadvantage at tier vs. Akat's 3x3 banks plus many other nations having larger banks of arguably more effective torpedoes, like Jervis' 2x5. Granted most don't have the alpha or the range of Shira and those with larger banks have a longer reload, but in my experience with some of the other T7 DDs, you don't feel it as much as you do with Shira.

While I won't call for a reinstating of Shira having access to both TRB and smoke, I do think she needs to be looked at again. She was once the flavor of the month, but now, I can't say I ever see them except for once in a blue moon.

Edited by GhostSwordsman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,580
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
4,304 posts
6,266 battles
17 hours ago, XurMP said:

*Germany, Pan Asia, and Shima critique*

Okay fair point on the Z-52, not one that I would have come to because, well, my biggest German destroyer is Maass.

I get where you're coming from on the MBRB consumable, just tacking on a consumable can indeed be pretty gimmicky at times, but I honestly feel that the unique mix and match consumable layout proposed would make the whole package more than just a simple gimmick. After all this is the line with Loyang as a premium, a destroyer known for her versatility in consumables. Lastly, if you cut the radar range by much more then it starts to become short duration diet hydro that cant' detect torpedoes.

I just threw the numbers for the TRB suggestion on Shima out as a wild estimate, again it's a destroyer where my experience is limited to being on the receiving end. I suggested the higher numbers mostly because potentially having 30 torpedoes coming at you in less than a minute still sounds terrifying enough to change the color of my pants.

16 hours ago, _WaveRider_ said:

@Landsraad +1 :Smile_honoring: A very well thought out piece and my next question is a genuine one:

I'm not sure what your main point is unless you are just discussing DDs in general; are you looking for change? If it is a general discussion then I think the DDs are no more influential than any other ship type IMO.

I don't really have a specific goal, I mostly just wanted to spark discussion and throw some ideas at the wall. That being said, if you're listening Devs I wouldn't mind if we implemented some of these, the US and IJN ideas in particular! :Smile_Default:

I'd also argue that destroyers' influence comes not only from their capping ability and speed, but the fact that on a fair number of them (any one that can stealth torp) destroyers are the only class of ship in the game that can attack and kill an enemy without them realizing an attack is even taking place until death is less than 2km away.

9 hours ago, LAnybody said:

*post*

Uh... Which French line are you looking at? Because the ones I'm driving have middling AA at the absolute best and hydro nowhere to be seen. So far as I know the only destroyers with hydro are the Germans, the British, Loyang, Friesland, and Haida. And since when is Friesland French?

6 hours ago, GhostSwordsman said:

*Akatsuki and Shiratsuyu*

That's not really something I have a lot of recent experience with, my grind through Shiratsuyu was quite a while ago and I'm not even halfway through Akatsuki yet. I wouldn't personally call them underpowered, but I wouldn't object to a buff either.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
527
Members
596 posts
10,792 battles
6 hours ago, Landsraad said:

Okay fair point on the Z-52, not one that I would have come to because, well, my biggest German destroyer is Maass.

Wouldn't suggest spending much more time with them, Z-23 with the 150mm guns is fun but it's the last one with those guns and the last one that you can play efficiently. Sure, Z-52 and Z-46 can be fun in randoms but if the enemy has any idea of what they are doing they are just painful to play.

 

6 hours ago, Landsraad said:

I get where you're coming from on the MBRB consumable, just tacking on a consumable can indeed be pretty gimmicky at times, but I honestly feel that the unique mix and match consumable layout proposed would make the whole package more than just a simple gimmick. After all this is the line with Loyang as a premium, a destroyer known for her versatility in consumables. Lastly, if you cut the radar range by much more then it starts to become short duration diet hydro that cant' detect torpedoes.

I was not thinking about range, 7.5km is already pretty low, I was thinking about duration, make it last 15 seconds so you can get a few salvos off but not kill the enemy DD, just damage them quite a bit.

The problem with MBRB is that it would make YY OP again, WG for some reason never nerfs the consumables and instead just balance the ships around the gimmick so just like French DDs, they would brutalize the base DPM before giving her the MBRB and not sure if we need a 5 second reload YY... 

7 hours ago, Landsraad said:

I just threw the numbers for the TRB suggestion on Shima out as a wild estimate, again it's a destroyer where my experience is limited to being on the receiving end. I suggested the higher numbers mostly because potentially having 30 torpedoes coming at you in less than a minute still sounds terrifying enough to change the color of my pants.

Well it's much less scary than you think, with 30s reload on Monaghan and incredibly slow torps (52kts IIRC) the distance between them is so huge that if the enemy BB turns even a bit to dodge the first set, you will miss the second one completely just for how much that slight maneuver affects over time. With the 8 second TRB you can kind of compensate launching the second wave as soon as the 8 seconds are gone with one set ahead and the other behind the lead indicator to maximize chances of hitting.

TBH Shimi torps are so visible (not only the 20km ones) that the only moment when I'm afraid of one in a BB is when she rushes me, not saying that I have never been dev strike by one, just saying that usually you can dodge most of them and get away with 1 or 2 hits even on slow BBs like Yamy.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,966
[USCC2]
Members
6,170 posts
5 hours ago, Landsraad said:

I'd also argue that destroyers' influence comes not only from their capping ability and speed, but the fact that on a fair number of them (any one that can stealth torp) destroyers are the only class of ship in the game that can attack and kill an enemy without them realizing an attack is even taking place until death is less than 2km away.

I worry about answering your comments as they require discussing a particular ship type that tends to polarise people. I have stated I think the game is in a good place and enjoy playing all ship types - so here it goes lol:

Again I would agree with your comments above IF the statistics/facts didn't show:

1. I have already covered the capping ability in my first post; a DD requires support to cap. It's speed does not outrun radar, aircraft or incoming rounds from multiple directions.

2. Torpedo hits average around a 8-10% hit rate on average. On top of that add the fact:

    a.  Torpedo armour belts reduce damage.

    b.   Flooding damage has been reduced.

2. Torpedoes once spotted are always spotted. It also sounds as if you talk about them hitting an unsuspecting target? To succeed in hitting they need to get past a screen of DD, CL/CA, Hydro, Aircraft, mini-map awareness, and the old WASD.

3. If we are talking about the DD getting closer 'ambush' style, wouldn't all the above detection elements come in to play? In the majority of cases the DD dies more than any other ship type; it shows the above mechanics for catching a DD works very well. Again this is supported by 2x BBs being in the top 5 for torpedo hits ratio last time I looked (a while ago granted) - this is because they can tank their way and get up close and torp point blank.

 

As stated I play all ship types. I do not fear torpedoes as if I get hit from afar, then I have been stupid, or am sufficiently occupied by other things - the evidence/stats reflects this.

If I get hit up close, then again, I've either been stupid, am preoccupied, or in the majority of cases the enemy team has won the ability to dictate the battle - i.e. the enemy are/have beaten us. I just can't whine about how I end up getting killed if my team have lost the battle. Fair play to the better team!

 

My reply has revolved around DD/BB mechanics and I have looked to use the known gameplay mechanics and evidence available. I believe you have tried to do the same. :Smile_honoring:

The only area where I disagree with you is the IJN DDs. Your original statement seemed to paint them as easier? I disagree and see them a  little like the German BBs - I believe if the player is trying to play for their team, then they both have suffered over time.

 

We are where we are, if you play all ship types then you have a wide choice in playing how you want to. All types have strengths and weaknesses. Add the national flavours and you can tailor it to suit even more!

The only toxicity comes when people have 'favourites' and feelings come into it. If you feel another ship plays more the way you want or has an advantage - play it! If everyone plays one. ship type WG will change it (I'll not go into the Russian topic lol).

Another +1 for (so far) not getting dragged into the toxic pit of destruction that many threads like this can end up. Thank you. :Smile_honoring:

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13
[NAUTE]
Members
50 posts
8,879 battles
On 11/3/2019 at 5:57 AM, _WaveRider_ said:

We are where we are, if you play all ship types then you have a wide choice in playing how you want to. All types have strengths and weaknesses. Add the national flavours and you can tailor it to suit even more!

A fair statement. If there is an issue with DD's, my opinion is no ship should be more than it should be...DD's are the weakest ship on the map but because of the game mechanics they control the map. Four DD's in the map for each team pretty much stymies the game. That in itself should be a clue to the tech folks that the game becomes frustrating....I own DD's and play them mostly in co-op or scenarios as I am impatient with them in Random....getting killed by a DD that is invisible for most of the game is worrisome at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
318
[BIER]
Members
463 posts
7,411 battles
8 hours ago, Max0017 said:

A fair statement. If there is an issue with DD's, my opinion is no ship should be more than it should be...DD's are the weakest ship on the map but because of the game mechanics they control the map. Four DD's in the map for each team pretty much stymies the game. That in itself should be a clue to the tech folks that the game becomes frustrating....I own DD's and play them mostly in co-op or scenarios as I am impatient with them in Random....getting killed by a DD that is invisible for most of the game is worrisome at best.

Actually, I've noticed a strong trend in games, depending on how many of them there are:

1 DD = the winner of the game is whichever team's DD doesn't die within the first 4 minutes. Which, in 90% of the games, happens to at least one side.

2 DD = pretty balanced games

3 DD = wildly unbalanced games that end quickly. Inevitably, one side's DDs all die within 5 minutes, leaving the other side with 2 (typically), who then proceed to do not a whole lot for the rest of the game except take open caps (mostly because those DDs are usually at 15% health, and 1-hit wonders if detected). The better players left here also are the ones you can count on to spot well. But they're seldom doing any damage at all, as they can't afford to be seen ever, by virtue of being down to 5k or less health almost instantly in the game.

4 DDs = every DD dies within 3 minutes. The sole exception is the one DD who refuses to go anywhere near a cap until at least the 8 minute mark. Sometimes that's intentionally good play. More often not, it's the DD player off hunting CVs or wandering around not doing anything useful at all.

If there's a CV in the game, count on at least 1 DD kill inside 3 minutes. 2 CVs, count on a DD being Dev Struck by the very first squadron, and at least one other dies to aircraft inside 5 minutes.  The few games where this doesn't happen means that the DDs don't do anything useful until at least 5 minutes into the game.

 

I play DDs heavily, and the above is pretty much the absolute norm these days. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13
[NAUTE]
Members
50 posts
8,879 battles

Your analysis may be right on the money. I just don't play in the games that you have described. I check the team results after each battle. Inevitably the highest kills are associated with DD's. That being the case, it doesn't matter when they get killed. The damage from their attacks is evident and four DD's per side extend the game regardless when they are killed. They are weakest ships but their influence on the game results depends which team has the best DD's captains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32
[M-T-B]
Members
99 posts
8,043 battles
On 11/2/2019 at 3:40 AM, Landsraad said:

So destroyers are, have been, and always will be a very influential class in the game.

What I like about this write up is you show how the game has a different playstyle for each country's DD line.  That takes some imagination on WG's part.  As for likes or dislikes its Ford vs. Chevy.  Complaints?  The short story is some us just grind the wrong line for our playstyle and now there's buyers remorse.  The good news is we can grind another line.  There's no pretenders in the DD class and there's no other ships that make you bang on the desk like DD's.  There's also no other class that has so many comments on how someone can get better.  It's a ballet and you're going to misstep a lot. I know, I know but the guys in the videos make it look so easy ... Right!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,830
[BASIN]
[BASIN]
Members
4,332 posts
16,729 battles
On 11/2/2019 at 4:40 AM, Landsraad said:

 

US:
So as one of the two oldest destroyer lines in the game a lot of people will say that the USN's destroyers have been powercrept... I can KIND OF see it, I won't say that they're perfect right now as something feels off about them when I play them, but I also feel that some of it has to be the same changing meta scenario that the Russian destroyers have been caught up in. Again, once upon a time these were THE gunboats of the game, but now they're very much hybrid ships and that's not at all a bad thing. That being said, I feel that their gimmick of alternate hulls granting the ability to use DefAA could use some tweaking to make them feel a bit more comfortable. I like the idea, but I don't think that the implementation is quite right given the the rework and the consumables that other lines get access to. So instead of the current setup, where on Farragut, Mahan, and Benson you have to mount the C-hull and lose a gun in order to get the OPTION to swap smoke for DefAA, I think that these ships would be better served by having the option of swapping consumables right off the bat (or starting with Farragut's B-hull) and have the C-hull give the option to swap one gun turret for the ability to use smoke AND DefAA in separate slots. This would also apply to Fletcher's upgraded hull and Gearing. So now if you have a US destroyer you can sacrifice some surface DPM in order to more easily buddy up with another destroyer and provide air cover for both of you. Also I feel like an alternate branch would be very nice to see at some point, but with Benham and Somers as premiums I'm not really sure what that would be.


IJN:
Ah yes, the long and sordid story Japanese destroyers. Personally I feel they're *mostly* okay, but I won't deny that a bit of power creep has effected them from both sides. We'll start with my preferred line. Much ado has been made of the Japanese gunboat destroyers, though I feel the term "pocket light cruisers" fits them better, mostly over their gun performance. Honestly I think that the solution to that is already there. Either they'll be reigned in by the proposed changes to IFHE (ie: Getting rid of it) or a simple change to 1/5th HE penetration rather than 1/4th will get the job done. But while they undoubtedly have their own flavor it's not what Akizuki and Akizuki-kai were supposed to be historically, and that irks me. So one more change I would propose is giving them the option to swap their torpedo reload boost consumable with DefAA. Now they get to choose between being this weird hybrid of Japanese torpedo excellence and insane guns, or being more dedicated surface support ships. As to the OG torpedoboat line, I think most of them are in a good place right now. Really the only one that may warrant a look is Shimakaze. A lot of people say that they should undo the concealment nerf to her torpedoes, but I honestly feel like maybe shaving a bit off of her gun reload could do wonders for her. Also it strikes me as odd that Kagero and Yugumo both get TRB, but Shimakaze never has had it. I get why, but it feels wrong for a line to gain a consumable only to lose it (the exception is the French battleships and their catapult planes, that feels pretty natural with Richelieu's upgrade). So I have an... Interesting proposal: Give Shimakaze the ability to swap smoke for TRB, BUT! not the 8 second version that Kagero and Yugumo get. With 15 tubes and the most powerful fish in the game the absolute MOST that Shimakaze should get is Monaghan's odd 30 second TRB, maybe even a 45 to 60 second one with only a charge or two. Also I feel like a short branch coming off Akizuki and ending in Ayanami of post-war JSDF destroyers in sort of a pseudo-Friesland role would be pretty cool, a sort of line that maybe trades some torpedo effectiveness for improved ASW gear and fast-firing but low damage guns.

 

 

Gearing's guns need to be buffed and  Shimakaze's  torps load and reload either  need to be sped up or their spotting needs to be reduced as the fact they can spotted so from far enuff away they are easily spotted and avoided by all but total noobs

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,966
[USCC2]
Members
6,170 posts
On 11/11/2019 at 5:44 AM, Max0017 said:

A fair statement. If there is an issue with DD's, my opinion is no ship should be more than it should be...DD's are the weakest ship on the map but because of the game mechanics they control the map. Four DD's in the map for each team pretty much stymies the game. That in itself should be a clue to the tech folks that the game becomes frustrating....I own DD's and play them mostly in co-op or scenarios as I am impatient with them in Random....getting killed by a DD that is invisible for most of the game is worrisome at best.

Hi max, apologies for late reply but access to computer/online has been poor this week as I've been away from home.

I think the game is in a reasonable place and the different ship types have their strengths and weaknesses.

Many of the claims made (about OP types or performance of ships) can be generally disproved or supported with the communities stats.

DDs are strong towards end game and their concealment and torps will give them the advantage the fewer enemy they face. However, at the beginning of a match they face many and have a low HP threshold (hence their worst survival rating on average). Fact is, mistakes are not as easily forgiven as in a BB for instance.

This doesn't mean other types don't have their weak areas - just for me we are in a good place in general (IMO) with WG just needing to address certain ships. :Smile_honoring:

Edited by _WaveRider_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×