HaachamaShipping

I mean, the main reason we got this is because CVs could just stack floods and get absurd results. But instead of trying to fix CVs, we got a global fix and now we are here. As a result, flooding people to death now is basically exclusively the domain of CVs, because guess who can still stack floods without having to wait minutes for torps to be back up.

Yes, "most DDs" being anything that isn't a goddamn Icarus trying to (ab)use its silly 3 km hydro. And German hydro and secondaries on BBs make them good for close range activities. Too bad that close range is something that isn't easily forced and being able to accurately hit stuff from mid to long range is a more versatile strength that overall is appreciated more by most people for a reason. If you are the sole one that has to get suicidally close to get even just an inkling of advantage, that's terrible, as is the fact that even in a perfect 1 v1, a Shinonome can just gun down an Icarus at 3 km if it doesn't smoke up and doesn't eat a torp, because it just has better dpm and Icarus might be agile, but at 3 km it's pointless. Of all T6 DDs I have played, Icarus is the one I liked the least. as said, it has no real strengths, it has a few gimmicks that situationally are useful, but that overall are not making up for the problems this ship does have and trying to apply these strengths can get you killed fast for little gain. I can accept ships that are harder to play, but can pull some real weight reliably. Like, Perth is harder to play than Leander, but if you are good, you can reliably do well in Perth, as the strengths the ship has are just strong. This is more like PEF, where, yes, if I put in a ton of effort, I get decent results, because at the end of the day, there's enough of a skill gap (especially at T6) that I'll likely end up with 50%+ WR even when playing that trash. But I'd never go and argue that this is a reliably competititive ship that can pull it off against players who know what they are doing. For that, I just way too often beat the crap out of them with better ships. As well as my own Icarus, because you know, I still don't feel like throwing my ship away to force results out of that hydro.

Bad CVs are not the problem though, good CVs are. Also, if you negate the CV threat through teamwork, why need disengage smokes when you could otherwise take a better DD with teamwork smokes? Melees it is hard to force except against bad players, because anyone with an idea what they are doing won't just charge an Icarus and Icarus with its crap top speed sure is the worst DD to run down DDs with. Next thing is, with the CV rework, sticking closer to your cruisers is more important than ever, meaning that the typical distance between DDs increased as both sides sit further back. A DD that has only 7 km torps and ballistics that are worse than USN is certainly not the kind of DD that benefits from CV rework. I really don't see how someone can hype this thing based on a CV rework that basically doesn't favour the Icarus in any way, given: the AA is garbage, like most DDs. the ship can turn well, which is nice, but it still is hard to suffice against rockets and especially against dive bombers.It can accelerate fast, which gives it some edge if it was stationary, but that's just not a situation you want to be in when the CV comes. the ship has 40 second smokes, which a CV can actually wait out if they want to, while practically no CV waits out the longer-lasting smokes. Additionally, long smokes allow smoking up cruisers close to the cap, which arguably helps more than just smoking yourself up and taking yourself out for a short period of time. The ship is built for short range fights, which are not encouraged by the meta and to top it off, it cannot force these fights, because neither do the speed help in closing distances, nor can you avoid getting kited to death while your return fire will likely be dodged due to how bad the shell speed is. I know, some people like weird styles, that's indeed a personal choice, but if you want to say this approach of knife-fighting is the best, that's just not true. And unlike high tier RN DDs, Icarus isn't even great in terms of dpm. Same as above. Plus: Sorry, but getting torped as a DD is one of the least of my issues. Maybe because I'm not 3 km from an enemy DD, because in most DDs I don't have a reason to be within 3 km of enemy DDs. If I want hydro DD, I take German DDs. Yes, shorter duration, but longer range and it is on long enough to kill a DD. And I still get a speed boost, decent torp range and gun ballistics. T7+ actually gets dpm. Most DDs at 3 km can leave you pretty much easy picking after the fight, given Icarus dpm isn't outstanding enough for that. The only way to reliably win is if you fight a non-hydro DD in smoke and no support from enemy, but that's quite the niche. If you run into something like USN, IJN or RU/PA T6 DDs, most out-dpm you (basically all except the IJN tech tree ones) and everything can far more reliably hit you than you hitting them if they just turn away and kite.

I guess... I don't care about your 40 second smoke as a CV, I circle above your non-AA ship and that doesn't take 5 minutes before the smoke goes away and I can rocket you down. As for the consumables, no, 3 km hydro is a more situational and overall less useful consumable than speed boost, especially on a DD this slow. The torpedoes also are okish, but that ten torp broadside reloads slowly and the limited range means the moment you get uptiered it's just a pain. I still rather take a Fubuki or Shinonome, which gets a better reload, is more mobile (despite being some of the slowest DDs, but RN top speed is just not good) and will win basically most gun fights against an Icarus if it ever comes down to it.

Icarus can stealth torp, but so far Icarus just managed to turn me off RN DDs as I just cannot see the point of the ship. 7 km torpedoes feel bad, the speed is underwhelming, the guns are okish, but the ballistics are crap. Why play this over Gallant that gets an added kilometre of torp range, Anshan that gets better torp range, better speed, better ballistics, Fubuki or Shinonome? It's not unplayable, but it's utterly boring. Edit: And then there's T-61...

Mino is fine, if you don't try to "open water brawl", which btw is something you can't really do even in Leander, Fiji, Edinburgh except against the few cruisers that don't overmatch you. However, in return, Mino gets insane dpm and if you know how to put it to good use, it melts ships faster than a Worcester. Islands. You make sure no BB has line of fire on you and ambush DDs who don't spot you before being well in your radar range, given Edinburgh concealment is best in tier among cruisers. For firing on BBs, pretend you are a Cleveland, camp some island that hides you and fire over it. If Cleve and Chapa get by with that, so does Edinburgh. Obviously, if you get Ocean, you're pretty much dead, but that map is rare and shouldn't exist.

Go buy and play an Azuma and tell me how damn OP it is. Unless you got 1 million exp you really don't care about, why get Azuma? Like, even if the economy would be on par with Alaska, you don't get credits for getting citadelled. The ship basically has one mode of play and that's long-range HE slinging at BBs and going to mid range once no AP threat remains or running off if your frontline gets overrun. To me, an Ibuki has a more versatile and interesting playstyle than this and I sure don't get myself a supercruiser just to get nailed like a Nep without having the dpm, torps or smoke/radar of a Nep. Like, even if this ship has the economy of an Alaska, Alaska is way more consistent in its result than a cruiser that can't tank BB shells for the heck of it except the odd T7. I had much fun running into an Azuma yesterday playing as Monarch. Outspotted it, fired one salvo, two citadels, it died to some Yamato AP and HE spam before I could reload my 25 second guns. I can only imagine what a great experience that must have been.

If all you rely on is a radar/hydro cruiser as a BB, my Akatsuki could have 7-8 km detection range and I'd likely still nail you. On the other hand, 6.4 km is already brutal enough if you get uptiered, because T8+ usually gets concealment ranging from 5.4-6 km. Go learn how to not be an easy torp target and you'll be fine. Go use WASD, play DDs yourself to gain insight into their play and you will have little issue going to low and mid tier and outplay DDs as most rely on the white indicator.

Played with Azur Lane camo. Still not hearing gun sounds.

Worth pointing out that this also is related to the RL need to do ranging shots, which seasoned BB players typically don't need.

Played Monarch for some matches and I must say, I'm not sure. It doesn't strike me as a particularly strong ship, there are a good few issues, like: range is same as on T7, but for T10 matches can be hampering. speed is the same deal. 28 knots still is closer to decent than 18 odd km range without spotter. HE resistance is a joke. No reinforced plating at all. Torpedo belt is a joke too. turret angles kinda suck. hp pool is more towards the low end. But for all that, you get also a few decent things: 25 s reload on 9 guns. Aww yeah! HE shells that hit like a truck. Fire chance isn't great but where you use them, fire chance doesn't matter much. And 35% isn't in the dumps either. Cruiser-levels of concealment. I'd not call the ship OP or the best T8 BB, but I find it pretty playable. I'd argue the buff this ship needs most is getting the range increased to 20 km at least, though I can see that people will then start HE spamming from even longer range, so I guess 30 knots speed would be more appropriate. Otherwise, feels like an ok T8 BB. I mostly use AP, though HE is a nice option against DDs, 27 mm cruisers and bow-on high tier BBs. And when you derp some DD in the cap from 12 km away for 8-9k hp in a salvo, fire chance really is an afterthought. Only Amagi/Kii can compete with that HE alpha. Usually, I play like 10-15 km from the enemy, depending on the situation, going closer if I'm confident (like, if I have to deal with an Edinburgh) or moving away if I might otherwise get overwhelmed. Because the AP works at range against BBs and really well also against cruisers, I do feel like Monarch is an upgrade over KGV. which would be silly if it wasn't, given KGV basically has the same reload on smaller guns, with less damage, same stats in all other regards, just better fire chance. KGV's AP for BB standards is pretty garbage and only salvaged by the fact you can still fire HE and you get 25 s reload. Monarch gets functional T8 AP on the same spicy reload. While people say the accuracy is not great, it really isn't too terrible. Basically, the most bog standard BB accuracy you can find stats-wise (USN/RN dispersion, 1.8 sigma), which just means that NC with 2.0 sigma is better, IJN has better accuracy at range (incentivising using that concealment) and the Germans and French are both more derpy. Monarch of all my T8 BBs actually has now my highest average damage, which correlates to having the highest dpm, I guess. I'm kinda worried that the new citadel might mean that getting closer becomes vastly more dangerous, which would kinda suck.

Seydlitz. With 15 cm triples as planned. Tosa. Dunno what configuration they go for, but can we get maybe an IJN BB that actually makes sense to spec into secondaries? Any Asashio-class, but with sensible torpedo armament, so I can forget Asashio represents that class in its entirety. Though after how WG seems to handle the premiums I wished for in the past (Asashio, Viribus Unitis), I don't know if I actually want to make wishes.

Actually, shouldn't NC now have more hp, given it gets improved repair party, while others don't? Not saying Azuma isn't a dumpster fire, but do you see WG care?

I actually like bunny, but I don't care too much for the two either. I do use Benson though.

Y NO aLASKA WEEB CAMO ???2!!1 Me dispoint!

Alabama is pretty similar to NC, being a typical BB, so, they kill cruisers. Massachusetts has secondaries. The secondaries pen 27 mm of armour with IfHE. What has 27 mm of armour at T8 and can be reliably hit by secondaries? Cruisers. Can they deal with something other than cruisers? Sure, you can put BBs on fire and do some lulzy damage to T7s, but typically, they will wreck nothing as hard as a cruiser that has no repair party and no armour to withstand the constant barrage. Kinda like Georgia can sure pummel the crap out of other BBs still, just it's specialised against cruisers, because that's kind of what most BBs do. They did Azuma, they will do this.

Free exp/coal/steel/florin/lolinite dump... What role does Azuma fill?

Put it at T8?

Well, some people just like killing cruisers. I personally couldn't care less, I don't have much interest in high tier USN BB premiums, even if they are good. My suggestion was basically aimed at bringing in something that seems not too outlandish, yet can have very brutal (and for targets frustrating) consequences, given Georgia already has intermediate dispersion and with a hard-hitting shell and improved pen angles, it might citadel snipe pretty hard, especially as soon as it has distracted targets. Is it something terribly great? Likely not. Maybe it doesn't even work. It wasn't yet tested (though I know from Hood and Alaska that improved pen angles on large caliber AP can be pretty silly, though these two ships aren't even high pen). But we could also just add a 2.65 sigma to the pen angles, maybe that helps. Georgia has few guns, but can citpen BBs and it likely will not be terrible by BB standard in dealing with DDs, due to the accuracy. It isn't hardcoded into damaging only cruisers with its main weaponry.

Tell that to the Shima that tried to yolo my Yamato and got ctrl+lmb'ed to death!

Look, 457 mm is basically a "F**k cruisers" caliber. I can see the annoyance at getting a cruiser counter, but this ship was only ever going to turn out one way with that gun caliber and to think it'd turn out any other way would be silly. The basic configuration of the ship dictates its role. And cruiser-killing is, kind of, one of the usual BB roles. Also, while perfectly angled BBs still get away, random battles are the kind of messy environment where you hardly ever see a perfect bow-in target, unless they only got you to fight, had time to prepare and are actually competent at the game. That's already three big ifs for your average random battle player.

First off, unless citadels are involved, you need pretty much 17 pens or so to get this damage, which obviously a Hood or Vanguard can't do, because they only have 8 (smaller) guns (so 16 shells in two salvos). However, you also don't see Nelson do 30-32 knots, have any large no-pen zone for HE (like Hood) or reload in 25 seconds (like Vanguard). Meanwhile, you can guess, that if you just show broadside and let yourself get penned by most shells, Ashitaka or Lyon can do more damage. And unlike Nelson, something like Ashitaka, Nagato, Gneisenau or Colorado can actually citadel a Gneisenau through the bow, if they hit the right angle. Also, Nelson is the one BB at T7 that seems most easily citadelled through its giant 25 mm bow. With some RNG a Gneisenau can take out good parts of Nelson's hp even when angled, though in general, the trick to handling that is to not just try run down a Nelson in the open.

How about... improved pen angles? That'd be special needs no great changes on the basic gun stats and it's something "American-flavoured" in the game.

To be fair, I died in less than 20 seconds once from full health. Shima yoloed around a corner, put 15 torps into me. It died afterwards to like the five friendlies that were still around. But yeah, technically it can happen.

Nelson has an extra barrel, but no, it does not add up, given Vanguard has 25 s reload, so in a dpm contest it wins.