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

Yashima sucks(WIP), Yoshino sucks, Yukikaze sucks, Azuma sucks, Shimakaze sucks

The Yashima  

21 members have voted

  1. 1. The Yashima(work in progress) is

  2. 2. The Yashima if underpowered should get

    • Nuclear tipped HE shells like the thunderer
      0
    • Turtle back armor and improved secondaries
    • Improved Pen Angles like stalingrad
    • Better dispersion and perhaps worse turret rotation.
    • Improved Shell fuse detonation timer like stalingrad
    • Balanzed as enemies of our great country should be.

15 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

70
Members
159 posts
3,762 battles

Wargaming,

 

You guys keep releasing God tier Russian ships like the stalingrad, Kremlin, and Smolensk. Then you release absolute garbage ships like the yukikaze, Yashima, yoshino, and Azuma. Please, no one is going to grind 30000 steel to get this stinky pos. They should rename the ship to Tsushima as there is clearly some hate against the IJN ships. 6 guns for same dispersion as yamato, overpen city, slower shell velocity, slow reload, and Lack of overmatch benefits. Best part is that it gets the same giant citadel as the yamato so they can get instablapped if getting to those closer ranges where your slow velocity shells can actually hit something. You guys always shoot yourselves in the foot releasing these ships.

It's okay. This is a work in progress ship so I hope to see you guys buff it appropriately. I'm just worried that More than likely it will turn out to be like the Azuma, yoshino, and yukikaze. All absolute Meh- trash boats.

 

Now don't worry I am not the person who would criticize without offering constructive criticism ;)

 

Here's what you can do:

Slow down the turret traverse and improve the dispersion for that medium-long range passive build

Or/and

Give it super nuclear tipped HE shells for massive 6 shell explosions :) just like the thunder. Something I would spend steel on.

Or/and

Beef up the secondaries and give it turtleback armor for a close range brawling beast.

Or/and

Improved penetration angles like your beloved stalingrad.

Or/and

Improved shell explosion timer like your beloved stalingrad

 

 

Edited by Pyun
  • Cool 3
  • Boring 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts

Oh come on, your second question offers no Yashima is balanced or underpowered option. Not even Bacon.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13,522
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
32,296 posts
27,061 battles

I don't think Yashima is going to stay bad.  Her current stats are pretty terrible for a Tier X Battleship.  Yamato is better.

 

However, when WG announced that Yashima was going to be a Steel Ship, it's my belief that she's going to get massively buffed before she goes Live as the new Tier X Steel Battleship.  Because there is no way in hell her current stats are going to be worth the crazy amount of Steel she is going to demand as a Tier X ship.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,482
[SR-_-]
Members
5,023 posts
46,984 battles
16 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

I don't think Yashima is going to stay bad.  Her current stats are pretty terrible for a Tier X Battleship.  Yamato is better.

 

However, when WG announced that Yashima was going to be a Steel Ship, it's my belief that she's going to get massively buffed before she goes Live as the new Tier X Steel Battleship.  Because there is no way in hell her current stats are going to be worth the crazy amount of Steel she is going to demand as a Tier X ship.

I don't like spending steel to begin with. Coal is easier. I would rather buy this ship outright than grind the steel for it.

WG could at least offer two ways to get it. Research bureau and steel.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
528
[DCMA]
Members
596 posts
12,247 battles
3 hours ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

I don't think Yashima is going to stay bad.  Her current stats are pretty terrible for a Tier X Battleship.  Yamato is better.

 

However, when WG announced that Yashima was going to be a Steel Ship, it's my belief that she's going to get massively buffed before she goes Live as the new Tier X Steel Battleship.  Because there is no way in hell her current stats are going to be worth the crazy amount of Steel she is going to demand as a Tier X ship.

Steel or not is a IJN prem so it will be bad no matter the resource

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,361
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,281 posts
12,191 battles

Yashima is WiP so things are like to change. But I'd like to point out that yes, it has Yamato dispersion on 6 guns, same way Georgia and Ohio are with Iowa and Montana - because they have bigger guns. Hell the ship breaks Wargaming's long standing policy no ship would have bigger guns than Yamato (mostly because of overmatch issues, why every gun since has capped at 457 mm) a 51 cm gun is going to likely punch through damn near anything, over match everything, and hit like a cruiser got thrown at you.

Also Azuma/Yoshino are good when used properly, and one of the only things of 9.2 that should stay is the changes to their 100 mm secondaries. Playing the long range HE kite game at match start can be annoying, bu late game especially against cruisers and DD's, even weakened BB's they can cause havoc. I'e carried or turned games around in them. They take more skill and thinking than some of the other ones, usually yeah the Russian ships, but they are still good, just not great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13,522
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
32,296 posts
27,061 battles
On 3/2/2020 at 3:29 AM, XurMP said:

Steel or not is a IJN prem so it will be bad no matter the resource

Considering the track history of IJN Premium Ships in this game, that's a valid concern.

On 3/2/2020 at 4:44 AM, WanderingGhost said:

Yashima is WiP so things are like to change. But I'd like to point out that yes, it has Yamato dispersion on 6 guns, same way Georgia and Ohio are with Iowa and Montana - because they have bigger guns. Hell the ship breaks Wargaming's long standing policy no ship would have bigger guns than Yamato (mostly because of overmatch issues, why every gun since has capped at 457 mm) a 51 cm gun is going to likely punch through damn near anything, over match everything, and hit like a cruiser got thrown at you.

Also Azuma/Yoshino are good when used properly, and one of the only things of 9.2 that should stay is the changes to their 100 mm secondaries. Playing the long range HE kite game at match start can be annoying, bu late game especially against cruisers and DD's, even weakened BB's they can cause havoc. I'e carried or turned games around in them. They take more skill and thinking than some of the other ones, usually yeah the Russian ships, but they are still good, just not great.

Georgia's 6 guns got help by using the Graf Spee dispersion model late in her WiP development, and that's what she went Live with.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,008 posts
6,589 battles

I think Yashima can use a faster reload like 20 seconds, so she can catch up with the Russians regarding balans.:cap_haloween:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
319
[BIER]
Members
463 posts
7,417 battles
On 3/2/2020 at 10:44 PM, WanderingGhost said:

Yashima is WiP so things are like to change. But I'd like to point out that yes, it has Yamato dispersion on 6 guns, same way Georgia and Ohio are with Iowa and Montana - because they have bigger guns. Hell the ship breaks Wargaming's long standing policy no ship would have bigger guns than Yamato (mostly because of overmatch issues, why every gun since has capped at 457 mm) a 51 cm gun is going to likely punch through damn near anything, over match everything, and hit like a cruiser got thrown at you.

Also Azuma/Yoshino are good when used properly, and one of the only things of 9.2 that should stay is the changes to their 100 mm secondaries. Playing the long range HE kite game at match start can be annoying, bu late game especially against cruisers and DD's, even weakened BB's they can cause havoc. I'e carried or turned games around in them. They take more skill and thinking than some of the other ones, usually yeah the Russian ships, but they are still good, just not great.

I can't speak to the Yashima's possibilities, but both the Azumo and Yoshino are sub-par, with the Azumo being really crap.

The 25mm-everywhere armor on both the Az and Yosh is ludicrously pathetic.  They make the Ibuki look well-protected.

A "supercruiser" that (almost) every BB it faces can overmatch it's ENTIRE armor scheme it not a super-cruiser. It's a bathtub toy.

And the guns on both are no better than the 203mm on the Ibuki in use  They AP lack penetration at long-range, and you REALLY don't want to get close enough to have them be effective at pen. Their HE is good, but the slow ROF and not very good dispersion accounts for a far worse ratio of hits than the Ibuki, which translates into a much poorer fire starting chance.

The Azuma's lack of torps makes it bottom-barrel in effectiveness.

Both the Azuma and Yoshino compare VERY unfavorably with their tech tree counterparts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,361
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,281 posts
12,191 battles

I can't compare directly to Ibuki and Zao as I'm still on Mogami but I haven't had some of these issues.

21 hours ago, LAnybody said:

AP lack penetration at long-range

Against a BB or some angled ships, yeah, but I've punched through to citadels on light cruisers this past week at range. And BB's I'm usually firing HE anyway because it's usually angled and the guns are only the same range as Scharn, good for crushing cruisers, not so much BBs.

21 hours ago, LAnybody said:

slow ROF and not very good dispersion

They are 12 inch guns, they are comparable in RoF to Scharnhorst that actually has smaller guns, in fact Yoshino fires faster than it. Azuma and Yoshino have guns 30% bigger than the tech tree counterparts and fire 6.5 and 5 seconds slower respectively. And while again I don't have Ibuki and Zao, they both have the same hit rates as most any other 203 mm cruiser I use. 

23 hours ago, LAnybody said:

which translates into a much poorer fire starting chance.

The Azuma's lack of torps makes it bottom-barrel in effectiveness.

Both the Azuma and Yoshino compare VERY unfavorably with their tech tree counterparts.

And yet they outperform them. My 56k average damage in Azuma is considered bad given server average is over 72k compared to Ibuki's 52k - not to mention higher WR, frags, KD and planes downed. Yoshino is only about 6k ahead of Zao, either close to or beating it in other stats as well. 

 

23 hours ago, LAnybody said:

The 25mm-everywhere armor on both the Az and Yosh is ludicrously pathetic

Yoshino's upper sides and deck in the center have 30 mm of protection, same as Xao/Ibuki generally other than one of them has 32 mm areas - however both them, Azuma and Yoshino have 25 mm areas fore and aft that are usually targeted anyway and none are immune to IFHE carrying ships anyway, so the armour as is when it comes to that is moot. Azuma may be weakest in deck armour proper - but has 125 mm of citadel deck protection, as does Yoshino behind it, against Ibuki and Zao's 55 mm. to say nothing of the Anthwartship armour up front that is 101/195 mm on Azuma and Yoshino and heavy side armour as well compared to the other two beyond the thin outer plating. And far better turret protection. Of the 4 released anyone could get, only Alaska really isn't covered in 25 mm armour. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
319
[BIER]
Members
463 posts
7,417 battles
5 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

I can't compare directly to Ibuki and Zao as I'm still on Mogami but I haven't had some of these issues.

Against a BB or some angled ships, yeah, but I've punched through to citadels on light cruisers this past week at range. And BB's I'm usually firing HE anyway because it's usually angled and the guns are only the same range as Scharn, good for crushing cruisers, not so much BBs.

Zao and Ibuki have the same AP as you get on other IJN 203mm cruisers. It pens CA/CL armor very well, and, in fact, has LESS of an issue with overpen as the 310mm on the A or Y (which get hit with the auto-overpen on DDs).  The 310mm on them have really two advantages:   overmatch against British CL armor, and it WILL citadel most BBs up close.  The latter is EXTREMELY ill-advised, because if you're close enough for the 310mm to work on a BB, you're dead meat, as they just shove AP straight through your citadel every salvo, regardless of angling. 

 

Quote

They are 12 inch guns, they are comparable in RoF to Scharnhorst that actually has smaller guns, in fact Yoshino fires faster than it. Azuma and Yoshino have guns 30% bigger than the tech tree counterparts and fire 6.5 and 5 seconds slower respectively. And while again I don't have Ibuki and Zao, they both have the same hit rates as most any other 203 mm cruiser I use. 

But these are T9 and T10, not T7.  And that makes a world of difference as to who they face.  The typical Scharnhorst target is armored about HALF as well as the typical Azuma target.   

The 310mm do use cruiser dispersion charts, but they're noticeably less accurate than the Ibuki and Zao, both of which have EXCEEDINGLY accurate guns.   Just as a back-of-the envelope estimate, the 9 gun A & Z typically hit 5 or 6 per salvo, so 60% or so.  The 10 and 12 gun I & Z hit closer to 75%.  IIRC, the Ibuki and Zao have a 2.1 Sigma while the supercruisers have a 2.0. The other consideration is that, at the same distance, the dispersion on the 310mm is about 10-15% more than on the 203mm.   You're also looking at guns on the I & Z that fire 50% faster, and since they have more guns as well, the 33% per-shot more damage that the 310mm do is pretty irrelevant.

The problem is that since the A & Y are HE spammers, Alpha strike is not important. It's DPM.  And both the I & Z  are superior in DPM.  20% more DPM on the Zao vs Yoshino, and 10% more on the Ibuki vs Azuma, and that doesn't account for the better accuracy of the I & Z.

The only place 310mm HE really is important (vs 203mm HE) is against BBs with thick (> 32mm) deck armor. That's KM, RU, and US BBs. 

And then there's torps. Azuma has none, the ONLY IJN cruiser above T2 that doesn't. Ibuki can stealth torp (just barely), and it's 10km torps are very useful in actual play.  Zao can comfortably stealth torp with the excellent 12km torps.  Yoshino's 8km ones are pretty useless, since you REALLY don't want to be closing in it (and non-BBs can see you well before you can get into range to use them), and the 20km ones are of marginal use (mostly for area denial, not actually hitting anything).  

 

Quote

And yet they outperform them. My 56k average damage in Azuma is considered bad given server average is over 72k compared to Ibuki's 52k - not to mention higher WR, frags, KD and planes downed. Yoshino is only about 6k ahead of Zao, either close to or beating it in other stats as well. 

That's because of who the players are.  A & Y are owned almost exclusively by very experienced people. Very few were bought - the large majority of them were obtained for resources or FreeXP, and the thresholds to purchase are VERY high.  You have to compare apples to apples when looking at stats.  Look at the top-100 players in each, and you'll see that they're pretty much at parity, at best.  Take a good look at how well the other nation's T9 and T10 supercruisers do compared to their tech-tree equivalents.  They totally dominate their tech tree equivalents, even when doing the player-quality comparisons. 

 

Quote

Yoshino's upper sides and deck in the center have 30 mm of protection, same as Xao/Ibuki generally other than one of them has 32 mm areas - however both them, Azuma and Yoshino have 25 mm areas fore and aft that are usually targeted anyway and none are immune to IFHE carrying ships anyway, so the armour as is when it comes to that is moot. Azuma may be weakest in deck armour proper - but has 125 mm of citadel deck protection, as does Yoshino behind it, against Ibuki and Zao's 55 mm. to say nothing of the Anthwartship armour up front that is 101/195 mm on Azuma and Yoshino and heavy side armour as well compared to the other two beyond the thin outer plating. And far better turret protection. Of the 4 released anyone could get, only Alaska really isn't covered in 25 mm armour. 

Azuma in particular is god-awful armored, with 25mm all over the exterior excepting the belt armor.  It's pretty much identical to the Ibuki, which is known for having tissue paper for armor, but even the Ibuki's 32mm deck armor is a HUGE advantage, as it won't be overmatched by BB guns like the 25mm will.  Azuma's armor is noticeably inferior to Ibuki's in use, as the thicker citadel overhead armor is pointless (It's still penned by BB armor, which just ignored the deck armor, unlike Ibuki's where the deck armor provides a large benefit).  An Ibuki can bounce AP from BB shells landing on the deck, while Azuma cannot, and Ibuki will shatter 203mm HE from most non-BBs, while Azuma eats a pen.

The problem is functionality, not actual thickness. Having more armor doesn't really provide much benefit until you cross major thresholds;  So the reality is that 100mm of belt armor on the Ibuki performs almost identically to the 175mm of belt armor on the Azuma (100mm is "good enough" against virtually all incoming HE and there isn't much AP that can pen 100mm but not 175mm), while the 32mm deck vs 25mm deck is a HUGE performance difference due to overmatch.  This is one of the major issues with WoWS, where various thresholds and the incredibly complicated armor schemes make assessing ACTUAL performance of a given armor layout hard to understand.

A similar situation occurs on the Zao vs Yoshino comparison, but, truth be told, it's not as bad as the above, and the Yoshino isn't as much of a dog as the Azuma is.

But you also have to take into account detection, size, and maneuverability when worrying about "protection".  Both Ibuki and Zao are among the stealthiest of cruisers, and have extremely good maneuverability. The ibuki is a very hard target to hit as well due to small size, and the Zao is only somewhat worse.  Compare that the A & Y, which are HUGE, ponderous, and can be seen from orbit.  The Azuma is almost twice the target size the ibuki is, and has no real ability to dodge incoming fire, given the very clunky maneuverability. Yoshino is only slightly better in comparison to Zao.  It doesn't really help to have 50% more HP if you take 2-3 times as many hits, and don't have functionally better armor. 

 

The sad thing is that both Yoshino and Azuma are substantially worse than the Herni IV (an available tech tree ship) and Alaska (available for the same or less FreeXP), and offer no advantages to make up for their noticeable deficiencies. Even in the IJN Tree, the Zao and Ibuki offer better play for free. 

Edited by LAnybody
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
70
Members
159 posts
3,762 battles

Garrrbage ship.
 

Improved AP angles like the stalingrad would fix this ship really quickly.


 

 

Edited by Pyun
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×