Icarus — British Tier VI destroyer torpedo Upgrades are Unfair

[DevilD0g]

Currently we have the stock torpedo  of mark V for Icarus which is historically correct then upgraded to Mark VII which is not historically correct and was only used on heavy cruisers.

This also takes the stock reload from 95 seconds, (nearly the highest in the tier)  to 120 seconds (also the highest in tier 7 and nearly double one other type) Which is a huge penalty and not a fair level playing field.  It severely discriminates against the British destroyer in reload in comparison with all the other Destroyers of its tier which already has to load longer on stock torpedoes.

If  you want to add an Upgrade, I would suggest to go from 533mm Mark IV  to Mark V as the Mark V was its actual operating ordinance.

Both had similar explosive capacities I would imagine except that the Mark V was faster and they were only developed 5 years apart with the mark IV at 1912 and the mark V at 1917

Mark IV at  Operational range (7,300 to 12,300 m)   (of course these are actual ranges and in WOW subject to change.)
                    Maximum speed      (46 to 65 km/h)

Mark V at  Operational range (4,600 to 12,400 m)
                   Maximum speed     (37 to 74 km/h)

As british destroyers generally have the highest reload of all the tier 6 destroyers with Gallant on 96seconds stock and Icarus on 95seconds stock,   I would suggest making 95 the upgraded speed for icarus, 95 Seconds (still the highest in the tier) and 72kts for Mark IV as its stock torpedo speed  and remove 533mm type VII torpedoes for the Icarus destroyer.

I think this is a fair change and will reflect better game play in the destroyer in its tier with others.

 

[AJTP89]

You are aware that more than one thing goes into balancing a torpedo right? Things like damage, speed, detectability, number, etc. Not to mention the other aspects of the DD that offset the torps. If a DD has long reloading torps it's because it's better in other areas. Look at the whole ship, you can't balance anything based on one stat.

[RipNuN2]

56 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

 

Plus the RN ships get the utility of single launched torps which when used properly are very deadly.

[mofton]

Icarus's top hull torpedoes reload more slowly because she gets upgraded from quad to pentad launchers.

Most torpedoes take about 24s per tube to reload, so a single in 24s, a twin in 48s.... etc. etc. You'd therefore expect the quad in 96s, and the pentad in 120s. Monaghan takes 122s for her pentads.

It's about right, or at least it fits the system. The issue for Icarus is that 2x5 is worse for output than 3x3. There's a bit of 'national flavor' too, the Germans get faster than average for instance.

Icarus is pretty rubbish so an upgrade would be fine by me, but she's not wildly off.

 

The choice of Mk. VII is strange, but really the British were using the Mk. IX by this point, which even in it's original guise would in-game be a 9.6km fish at 56kt, pretty comparable to say Benson. WG probably didn't want that level of torpedo power.

[IfYouSeeKhaos]

3 hours ago, DevilD0g said:

Which is a huge penalty

It's only a penalty if you are forced to take it.

You can upgrade the hull (which gives you all the buffs of the upgraded hull) & then just change back to the stock torps.

[DevilD0g]

what sort of upgrade is that, its stupid.  The Mark VII torps were only on heavy cruisers not destroyers.

Sure no one forces you to take it .... but it doesnt balance correctly the up grade with other upgrades other destroyers have in the same tier, so its a penalty.

When it nearly doubles the reload time of another destroyer in the same tier you cant tell me thats a good thing and a fair thing.

Who wants to stay using a torp that has 3766 less damage points and other destroyers of the same tier. goes 1km less  when they could have an upgrade of less time reload as stateed above in the suggestion

its not rocket science and makes common sense.

[DevilD0g]

On 12/8/2020 at 4:57 PM, mofton said:

Icarus's top hull torpedoes reload more slowly because she gets upgraded from quad to pentad launchers.

Most torpedoes take about 24s per tube to reload, so a single in 24s, a twin in 48s.... etc. etc. You'd therefore expect the quad in 96s, and the pentad in 120s. Monaghan takes 122s for her pentads.

It's about right, or at least it fits the system. The issue for Icarus is that 2x5 is worse for output than 3x3. There's a bit of 'national flavor' too, the Germans get faster than average for instance.

Icarus is pretty rubbish so an upgrade would be fine by me, but she's not wildly off.

 

The choice of Mk. VII is strange, but really the British were using the Mk. IX by this point, which even in it's original guise would in-game be a 9.6km fish at 56kt, pretty comparable to say Benson. WG probably didn't want that level of torpedo power.

Well the Atlanta on tier 7 has  5 tubes and its a cruiser and it reloads in 98 seconds so why cant a destroyer do that.  I really dont see why  you have all this opposition to the change, you say its a rubbish ship but your refusing it to let it  have realistic and similar in game upgrades other ships have.  Mark VII torps are heavy cruiser torps, not DD torps,

just make the stock mark IV and the upgrade Mark V and change the values, its more realistic and more in keeping with in game solutions  as i said in my previous post..  that what it has now.

Wargaming is all ready to buff battleships and premiums as they bring in the cash but not base ships like icarus. that are free for grinding.  My change is a good change  and in keeping with game mechanics.

let them have 120 second reload on tier 7 where the Mark VII torps are there again on the Jervis and thats relevant. (in reality j-k-n class destroyers had Mark IX torpedoes not mark VII)  But on a tier below on tier 6 its not a good game balance, its a penalty

Generally all the uk ships are more penalised than others , low armour, no HE on cruisers, long Torpedo loading times, short smoke times.  Cut the Icarus some slack.