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

Tips to combat T9 and T10 DD's in T8-10 CA's

19 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

0
[NZNVY]
Beta Testers
3 posts
1,204 battles

So I recently came back to WOWS.  And have made my way up the IJN CA line.

Reaching T8 I of course started getting matches with T9 and T10 DD's.  I kept the smaller guns on the Mogami and was able to deal with them quite well.  Well the T9's at least.

 

Now I have the Ibuki.  Which has a much slower rate of fire.  And I find that I am just being decimated by what seems to me as very OP Russian and US DD gunboats.  Whilst dodging torp walls it seems they can fire very accurately while moving like a cat on fire.

When I hit them I find it just doesn't decimate them as it should, or even deter them.  Their extreme range is just brutal and where each shell can hit me for 1000ish damage it even makes it hard to out range them.  In some cases actually impossible as they have the same if not more range than I do.

 

Then if I do manage to land some good hits and turn the table they just need to engage their cloaking devices.  Stop shooting or pop smoke.  Then open fire again from relative safety.

 

So I need some tips on how to deal with these ships whilst still helping the team.  Yesterday I watched a pair of T10 Russian DD's chew through two T9 BB's and myself in the Ibuki at range whilst hardly taking a hit (no torps fired at us).  Easily dodging anything coming at them.  They finally fell way too late to a wolf pack of T9 US DD's who we had been screaming at for help the entire match.

 

Shouldn't a DD that is under full maneuvers have its accuracy severely penalized as it dips and rolls?  It seems like every shot fired follows the same arch with very little dispersion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[NZNVY]
Beta Testers
3 posts
1,204 battles

Sorry yeah I meant CA's.  Been away too long.  Fixed.

Edited by Driftit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
2,327 posts
3,235 battles

you just need to get a hang of the 203s and their slower rate of fire and lower velocity (which is still good).  these guns track faster and will hit harder than the 155s which balance out fewer hits. once you get a feel for them youll do better damage to everything. maybe try to ripple fire so you can account for some evasive maneuvering from targeted DDs. 

 

im on the mogami now and couldnt wait to ditch the 155s. a DD will be hurting after a few hits from the larger guns with wrecked modules, higher HP damage and fires. once you get a feel for them itll get better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,644
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
12,147 posts
9,111 battles

Khabs are very hard to deal with because they are so fast and have a really long range for a DD. You have to lead them a lot to hit them and they have lots of time to dodge the shells. The best way to deal with them is having a CV if that is not an option teamwork with a DD like the gearing that can get close to them with support from a CA. Another thing is that fast shells like the shells on the VMF CA line have an easier time dealing with them as well since the fast shells give less time to evade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,860
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
24,800 posts
3,947 battles

There aren't any CC's in game. CC is Battlecruiser. CA is Heavy Cruiser.

 

BC is battlecruiser.

 

Also Khab is hilariously overpowered and the highest performing destroyer in tier 10. It has been for a long time. When people drew attention to Khab being overpowered compared to the other destroyers, WG's response was to nerf Shimakaze.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
862
[KNTAI]
[KNTAI]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
3,176 posts
7,827 battles

Essentially, you have to force them to pop smoke as often as possible while getting the friendly destroyers over for more permanent spotting and more guns firing at them. Ideally, the CV would be helping here but most games don't have them.

 

Against American destroyers, you need to perform regular zig-zag maneuvers while backing off from them in order to avoid their gunfire. If they are stupid enough to reveal themselves to you, they are pretty easy to hit sub 10km with the IJN CA since they do not have a good top speed (36 kn without speed modifiers).

 

Against Russian destroyers, you really have to spread out your shots to try to whittle them down. Spreading the shots out isn't too big of a deal since the VMF DDs have a pretty large profile. Khabarovsk, the T10, needs to be focused as quickly as possible, as the ship is fully capable of 1v1ing any other destroyer and coming out on top because of the combination of good DPM, high shell velocity, and large health pool.

 

BC is battlecruiser.

 

CC is used in the USN lexicon. I have not found BC being used anywhere else. Feel free to prove otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,380
[NG-NL]
Members
7,182 posts
12,779 battles

Especially important if fighting those DDs is to force them to fight on your terms, including with backup.

 

HE's the ammo of choice because save for a hit thru the whole DD, AP does less damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
11,964 posts
6,273 battles

 

BC is battlecruiser.

 

Also Khab is hilariously overpowered and the highest performing destroyer in tier 10. It has been for a long time. When people drew attention to Khab being overpowered compared to the other destroyers, WG's response was to nerf Shimakaze.

Nope. Lexington would have been classified CC-1 had she been finished as a Battlecruiser 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,860
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
24,800 posts
3,947 battles

CC is used in the USN lexicon. I have not found BC being used anywhere else. Feel free to prove otherwise.

 

 CCBattlecruiser (retired, never used operationally)

 

Also CC creates confusion with CA/CL and draws connections to other cruiser designations.

 

After a bit of research admittedly I can't find any reference to BC anywhere in naval designations so you're technically right, but also wrong since the term was never actually used.

 

BC makes a bit more sense both as an abbreviation (BattleCruiser) but also as a fast-reference designation (See: The above-mentioned confusion with existing cruiser designations).

 

I dunno, maybe I adopted it since it's a common shorthand for the Terran capital ships in Starcraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,000 posts
4,522 battles

Barring all of that. Force your way onto an objective and just sit on it.

 

Destroyers essentially do nothing to smart people advancing on them, nor are they proficient at forcing someone off a position. It can take damn well near half of the match to whittle you down in an RU DD, and possibly never in the other two who are more reliant upon torpedoes.

 

This is doubly so because almost all caps are of open water.

 

DDs are used primarily because currently in this meta vision means guns flying at you, and DDs provide vision best. Once all the guns are gone, who even cares about the vision?

 

Also, do not ever bow on reverse for any extended length of time. By that I mean if you reverse for about 30 seconds you're more than likely going to eat torpedoes. Spreads take time to travel and for the most part guestimate where you will potentially be a point of impact. When you have zero potential because you've been going single digit knots the whole time, a spread can easily cover 80% of all possible places you can be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
862
[KNTAI]
[KNTAI]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
3,176 posts
7,827 battles

 

 

Also CC creates confusion with CA/CL and draws connections to other cruiser designations.

 

After a bit of research admittedly I can't find any reference to BC anywhere in naval designations so you're technically right, but also wrong since the term was never actually used.

 

BC makes a bit more sense both as an abbreviation (BattleCruiser) but also as a fast-reference designation (See: The above-mentioned confusion with existing cruiser designations).

 

I dunno, maybe I adopted it since it's a common shorthand for the Terran capital ships in Starcraft.

 

If we're going on semantics, then there is literally no hull designation for battlecruiser so EVERYONE is wrong. The language in "never used operationally" indicates that CC is likely to be used in reference to battlecruiser in American documentation of the period; the crucial difference is that the USN never fielded any ship under that hull designation, which is where the addendum would be correct.

 

I don't see CC to be any more confusing compared to CV, which stands for Cruiser Voler, not Carrier Vessel or Carrier aViation, but that is just my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,860
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
24,800 posts
3,947 battles

 

If we're going on semantics, then there is literally no hull designation for battlecruiser so EVERYONE is wrong. The language in "never used operationally" indicates that CC is likely to be used in reference to battlecruiser in American documentation of the period; the crucial difference is that the USN never fielded any ship under that hull designation, which is where the addendum would be correct.

 

I don't see CC to be any more confusing compared to CV, which stands for Cruiser Voler, not Carrier Vessel or Carrier aViation (the latter being the most ridiculous), but that is just my opinion.

 

to be fair ship designations are already really heavy on designations starting with C, so BC seems a bit more appealing in that perspective too.

 

But yes, you're correct and I'm not. I did admit this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0
[NZNVY]
Beta Testers
3 posts
1,204 battles

Some good tips.  Thanks guys.  Going to change my tactics.  Make sure I support my teams DD gun boats as much as possible.  I think my issue has been not only fighting some of the best ships in the game.  But also having good players in the those ships working together and having CA backup.  So whilst I am trying to shoot at the DD's I am being engaged by the CA's and BB's.

 

Ripple fire is not something I have been doing for a while now.  But it is a good idea.  Nothing worse than only just missing the DD with a full salvo because of your own bad calculation.  Some hits are better than none.

 

I still think the accuracy of the DD's should be heavily reduced whilst under aggressive maneuvers.  Rolling on a 45 deg angle whilst full rudder at 40knots still firing with the same accuracy as sitting still is a bit of a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,380
[NG-NL]
Members
7,182 posts
12,779 battles

DD guns are generally the weakest in the game, so they need the accuracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,541
[SALVO]
Members
28,159 posts
42,587 battles

 

 

Also CC creates confusion with CA/CL and draws connections to other cruiser designations.

 

After a bit of research admittedly I can't find any reference to BC anywhere in naval designations so you're technically right, but also wrong since the term was never actually used.

 

BC makes a bit more sense both as an abbreviation (BattleCruiser) but also as a fast-reference designation (See: The above-mentioned confusion with existing cruiser designations).

 

I dunno, maybe I adopted it since it's a common shorthand for the Terran capital ships in Starcraft.

 

If we're going on semantics, then there is literally no hull designation for battlecruiser so EVERYONE is wrong. The language in "never used operationally" indicates that CC is likely to be used in reference to battlecruiser in American documentation of the period; the crucial difference is that the USN never fielded any ship under that hull designation, which is where the addendum would be correct.

 

I don't see CC to be any more confusing compared to CV, which stands for Cruiser Voler, not Carrier Vessel or Carrier aViation, but that is just my opinion.

 

 

CV is only confusing to people who are utter noobs on the topic of naval ships.  Anyone with a shred of knowledge about naval vessels knows that CV is for Carriers.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,541
[SALVO]
Members
28,159 posts
42,587 battles

There's definitely some truth to that, guru.  The problem is that some of those those DD's are probably faster than the CA's.  The Russian DD's in particular.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,053
[SYN]
Members
16,027 posts
12,803 battles

add another +5 clicks to what you normally think will hit.

 

also, paint strokes instead of full salvos, unless you catch them in a hard turn.

Share this post


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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×