Isoruku_Yamamoto

Most horrible idea i've seen in about a year

I am not at all interested in signals unless i start to run out of certain vital ones, but i'd sure be in for those ships. However, these are the PT ships and the notes specifically said the ship list for the regular server will be different. Really looking forward to the arsenal though. I disagree with you on having a clan wallet- it would only lead to most clans milking their members such that commanders can get ships. Im a commander myself and i'm not saying i'd always do this, but i would not easily give out resource to other clan members either since i got over 10x the oil collected from the first non-command clan member

Vanilla WOWS adds more and more functionality. As said, the line indicator makes this obsolete IMO, especially in combo with proper reticle (which is IMO definitely not the default one). So i'd say just dont use mods, i prefer using vanilla to its full extent

Please stop giving noobs like this one hints, we like to play against these every once in a while. A Midway and a Hakuryu are balanced in right hands, both can win. If you always lose the advice of "git gud" is actually 100% valid.

Second possibility with respect to team distribution would again be something like 12-12-4, but now with a bit of a twist: - The two normal teams do not know the submarines are in their battle untill detected by sonar, surface spotting, air spotting or the first kill (last is most likely). - In order for this to work effectively, the subs should have a team formed out of 1 or 2 divisions, such that they can cooperate smoothly- highly important for subs. If they would manage to blow up two ships at either side of the team before the battle even starts thats pure hilarious - Since the element of surprise cant be achieved with selecting battle modes, the mode should now not be "subs", but simply random/ subs. Also, each player wanting to enter the battle as a sub should select both a sub and a normal ship, such that he'll end up at both sides of the line up every once in a while.

Heres a crazy idea with respect to the original post on subs: can't we make a team of subs (say 4 or something) just play as trolls in regular random battle? Team 1: Regular 12 Team 2: Regular 12 Team 3: Submarines, 4? The submarines have as their goal to remain hidden & undestroyed and would win if even one survives when the last enemy dies, or when theyve made a certain number of kills/ damage dealt once a team gains points victory. To make them have influence, they'll spot at hard to predict but very accessible spots in the map. Team 1 and 2 should try to take the subs out as well as the other team, although they can win without killing the subs. Note that this actually proposes a 3-team battle, but that the winning conditions for the two normal teams remain virtually the same, whereas the submarine team simply gets an additional chance to win (allowing 2 winners or 2 losers in 1 battle). The only real problem i see with this is that it'd be freaking annoying if you've shot away a battleship for 90% HP and then a sub takes the kill, which makes your team miss out on points. Points could go the same as before: a team losing a ship loses x points for a ship, wheres the team securing the kill gains y points. Depending on ship class. Due to the rare occurance of subs, the amount of points for killing or losing a sub should be significantly higher than that for regular ships. Subs should also have some other mech than caps to gain points, since caps are impossible to take. So i think the best would be to have a base point income which is very low instead? Or maybe even a penalty, to promote agressive sub play haha I'd really love to see subs, but i think they should be very rare and only as a sort of special game mode, that the regular players can also sign up for (random/ coop/ clan/ ranked/ subs)

Im really proposing a rework in the armour model of either all ships or at least destroyers here. This buffer zone would be a magical place with (near) 0 thickness, 0HP, but having an assigned armour thickness (either physically present or merely modelled). When a shell enters the buffer, based on the path it has taken before (considering armour, pen etc) it is determined whether or not a shell should proceed to the next section. If not, the shell simply ceases to exist- as currently already happens with the regular armour model, except you'd introduce an additional armour layer lengthwise in destroyers. If a buffers armour causes the shell to detonate, it will cause 0 damage to the buffer or the ship (thats what the buffer would be for). If it overpenetrates the buffer, it still causes 0 damage, but since the shell is not detonated, it can progress to the next section, where it is likely to detonate (although this might in some cases cause unwanted pens in the second section i guess). So it's more of a filter, where part of the shells that normally make a second overpen now are removed. But hey, it's merely a conceptual idea and i really wouldnt know if it's quite valid to implement the idea in this way

Well but i already basically covered your problem, except i worded it poorly: the idea of this buffer is basically that it is not seen as proper part of the ship in terms of HP. So if the shell decides to arm there, fine, but it would do 0 damage since it is in the buffer zone. Kind of like how a langley has this huge open gap between the hull and the flight deck, with the possibility to let a shell fuse in between the flight deck and the hull. If it does that its not counted as a pen either

This multi hit mechanic is in my opinion a good mechanic, it just isnt when looking at specifically destroyers. So; heres one that we could actually suggest to development: How about we introduce buffer zones for destroyers, such that you can keep the mechanism but make it less OP against DDs? Bow> Buffer> mid section > Buffer > Aft Each buffer having tiny length, but a bit of armour & no HP or something. Not sure on how to implement but i feel like this could work

Hihihi imagine that you'll soon have KM BBs sailing with IFHE just to shred DDs

This entire issue is also discussed on a forum thread "WG fix [edited] BB AP against DDs already". I think the issue here is much more complicated than simply that BB AP is too OP against DDs, as you guys recognise. I proposed there that a potential answer to the problem might lay in better torpedo handling, which could restore the way destroyers were originally meant to play: guns for scaring mostly, bit of fires, while torpedos do the damage. Now I feel it's nearly the other way around, so i think reworking torpedos would be much better than reworking DD armour. DD armour rework = end of DDs as we known them BTW: my mino already melts away DDs, having only pens just would take out all of the fun :S

Heres a thought- and again, im open for critique: Wouldnt the entire solution to this problem simply be a buff to torpedo handling: If that happens, we (DDs) can: - Hit BBs more easily, taking them out of the game faster and or/ scaring them from chasing us - Hit cruisers, which atm is virtually impossible unless they arent paying attention or are laying still - hit destroyers in close combat, making gun fights less often resulting in 1 dead DD and 1 DD at 10% HP. Instead 1DD may get away wiht 50% or more, or both would die, but then the BB AP is still no problem. Currently my main issue in playing DDs really is not that dying, but just that you dont hit torpedos. The torpedo sigma (non-even spread between torps) tends to be horrible, sometimes so bad ships fit in while they lay broadside. Also, torpedos often go under ships hulls when you expect them to hit. so i think solving the torpedo mechanics may actually make this entire discussion quite redundant- but again, i might be completely wrong Proposed handling buff possibilities - Second set aim always at indicator, not shifted (not necessary) - Much higher torpedo sigma, such that the spread between torpedos in a set becomes quite even - spread at the side of a drop becomes smaller, such that the outer 2 torpedos of a set are the most predictable - lines with expected torpedo drop for each individual torpedo displayed in torpedo aim (custom setting), where this is purely indicative since spread can make this deviate - Switching between two launchers should take less time & dropping should occur instant, such that in a panic scenario you can still ditch all torpedos if reloaded & aimed.

Exactly what i was mentioning indeed: I think in the long run it will be incredibly painfull, with the sole two exceptions that it may make CV attacks a bit less painfull and indeed the dreaded BB AP. I feel however like you'll never survive any gunfight anymore, so we'll go back to the old days of the IJN stealthboats hiding everywhere- except our torpedos no longer hit.

Allright, this is basically what devs are currently working on- but it will also mean that we (as DDs) are no longer allowed within secondary range of (KM) BBs, as each hit will deal damage, and destroyer vs destroyer gunfights will be more painfull, not to mention the fact that any inbound cruiser shell is gonna hurt more. Now tbh i don't know what i'd like better :S

Now youve hit gold there- i call this hits "half cits" due to their damage count- although they occur in different scenarios than citadel hits. And these hits are in fact freaking OP against DDs, solving these would really help. IMO; it really depends on the situation and DD you sail in; but for USN and IJN DDs my practice is to try and line up (0-5 deg) with incoming shells (BB shells that is), whereas with USSR and KM DDs i tend to steer at around a 25deg angle, to prevent rear citadels and pens. Of course this doesnt always work, since you may have shells inbound from various directions, but this is what i consider optimal And obviously i still take the occasional hard hit. This is also a valid point: angling may cost you more HP than just taking a broadside, due to overpen vs pen difference. However, if youre abel to, lining up with the shells reduces damage vastly in my experience- unless youre so unlucky you take 5 centerline hits.

Now heres an argument that I'll agree with- thank you very much. I will conform to the idea that regular BB penetrations are quite harsh on DDs- but again, let me put this into perspective: I've recently oneshotted a Minotaur with my Yamato in a single salvo, only 3 hits (citadel hits). BB citadels to cruisers (which can be seen as a normal damage mech) tend to do around 25-35% damage, where DD to cruiser torps do similar damage. A BB to DD pen will only cause around 15-20% of the HP damage, problem being that a DD cannot repair added to the fact that DDs can generally not repair damage, whereas most cruisers can (at high tiers). It would be quite reasonable to say that a BB needs a good number of hits to kill a DD (say, overpens only), but then again: should it take more shells HITS to kill a cruiser or even BB than to kill a DD? This is btw a philosophical question, lets debate, its not rhetorical at all, by god i dont know.

Well as a DD player i tend to be wary of radars : check the MM line up, know where radars are, if they can be in range make sure you can withdraw to cover As said: thats if you withdraw in a poor way: poor being the equivalent of a Yamato going 6km full broadside to a Montana. If you do that, the montana will oneshot you aswell. Guys come on; I'm trying to relativate this, not attack you guys. About your case on torpedos JackGBR; I completely AND utterly couldnt agree more that currently torpedos, especially from destroyers, are highly UNDERPOWERED due to their spread (inconsistent) and the ease with which they can be dodged. Nearly all BBs received improved ruther shifts, but torpedos got easier detected: this should be mitigated indeed

You know what, as a DD player i can in fact confirm that there are plenty of situations where either shell type (both HE and AP in my opinion) from BBs cause exorbitant amounts of damage to DDs. however; the case that i am trying to make here is that it's not all simply AP shells being OP against DDs, i see many cases in my DDs AND BBs where destroyers simply don't angle properly against incoming shells and yeah, thats gonna hurt. Simply that BBs are meant to kill cruisers, not destroyers, doesn't mean they should be allowed to do any damage to destroyers right?

No, because hes quoting an 11.2km radar on the missouri, which for as far as i know doesnt quite exist- and i have the missouri. Please tell me if im wrong so that i can start using said radar. Sure the missouri has radar, but for a proper DD player its easily avoided since the range is only 9.49 and a full stealth missouri is spotted way earlier.

You arent reading well are you now. EVERYTHING depends on the right angle for the BB to shoot at. If you flee in a proper way, no BB will ever be able to hit you for 10k unless hes extremely lucky, even if he aims very well. If you flee poorly, he could hit you even for 20k, or for 8k if he aims poorly.

Great argument there buddy, especially since the Missouri does in fact have an 11.2km radar. WTF.

I'm not a BB whining player, i play approximately even amount of BB and DD, although i consider DD to be more of my specialty. Think before you write: read my explanation. I know my facts. You guys just whine that BB AP is OP simply cause you get hit hard every once in a while- thats the freaking game man. The rock paper scissors argument is also [edited]; a Cruiser may be scissors to the DDs paper; but how about the papers torpedos crashing into those poor scissors then? Should that be removed according to then?

Well this is [edited], simply cause you don't get oneshot while "making no mistakes". Sure, a missouri will oneshot a tier 7-9 USN destroyer at any range between 2 and 15km if you angle perfect for him (most ranges thats broadside) but that means that you are making a vital mistake: being spotted and perfectly lining up for a deadly battleship. IJN and KM battleships don't even pull this nonsense, neither do french for as far as i know. British do, but their AP is different from regular BB AP- making it much less likely to overpen. If you get oneshot by a BB, believe me, you did something wrong AND (lets not forget about that) the battleship did something very, very, very, very much right: he shot with perfect aim, perfect timing, perfect lead, perfect estimation of when you'd be angled right. Look, it has happened to me in DDs and i dont like it either, but i'll admit my mistakes. Furthermore: Even with overpens high tier battleships should easily be able to hit you for over 10k with a well-hit salvo (lets assume 7 hits, 6 overpens and a pen= 10k). So no, i dont agree that you'll get oneshot for no reason at all.

Hurr durr durr its retarded- no its not, AP deleting DDs is fine. Plenty you can do against it in DDs. But, it seems WG actually listens to you whineboys, since it's actually on the Dev blog currently. WHY THOUGH.

We dont have clanwars yet since were too small, but me and the others at DD445 would like to have you. I can send a PM for further detail, or just apply.