HaachamaShipping

Sadly, that is mostly becoming a thing. For T8, I have ships from better days and the few times I play the tier, I take ships I feel comfortable enough in to potentially go vs T10. T8 premiums though... well, it's either gimmick DDs, cruisers with repair party (or Kutuzov) so it doesn't just get vaporised as easily or BBs... where really the only T8 BBs I'd even consider personally are Kii (AA and I bought it on heavy discount) and Massachusetts for playing outside ranked. Tirpitz? Why play a Bismarck that is worse unless you manage to rush the T10s at less than 6 km? Alabama or Gascogne? To me not worth 45 Euro just for being basically the same as the tech tree counterparts. T7 premiums are fun. T6 premiums I'd not recommend to anyone without the disclaimer about MM and mostly just for people who don't have the money for T7. There's basically two T6 premiums I actually play somewhat, which are Graf Spee and Perth. And I usually expect a challenge. Something like Warspite, despite being a good ship, I would find hard to recommend, because the frequent uptiering makes it fragile. T5... Giulio. Oktyabrskaya is at times OP and free. I played T5 a bit the past few days to compare T5 ships for upcoming Ranked. And holy damn, it can be brutal. Very fun being a König getting thrown into a match vs 2 Gneisenaus and 1 Scharnhorst. Or two Independences. You can be unicum, if these people know what they are doing, your death is inevitable and basically a matter of how long it takes them to notice you. So, yeah, I do view the T8 premiums and T5-6 premiums rapidly not being worth the money that WG asks for them. But I do not think that's to be fixed by making premiums that can get uptiered without too much suffering (frequently outperforming tech tree counterparts and/or being straight up OP), but by addressing the matchmaking, because when I queue in a T5, I kind of expect to suffer and can try to still matter by playing my ship better. But newer folks who reach T5 likely just get frustrated by the unexpected hardship. But it's so like WG to have a MM that frustrates most tiers, then offer overtuned premiums for these tiers.

Still careful around Iowa, fearing about that one time...

Even just giving them 1-2 gimmicks would have sufficed for that though. Like, making them fragile, but with smoke. Adding AP only and a repair party... I mean it works, it is more convenient than Perth needing IFHE, but it certainly feels gimmicky and mostly the kind of gimmicky for gimmick's sake. USN CLs are way less weird and still manage to be unique.

The point in what? The ships being gimmicky or RN CAs hopefully not being gimmicky?

Don't get me wrong, I love my Leander, but the line is pretty gimmicky. I'd appreciate if RN CAs were more conventional.

People suggest it not because they think it is bad, but because it basically is a down-tiered but with T9 MM will end in mostly T10 games anyway. And when in T10, you might as well go for the real deal. Or you are like me and feel like saving up for ships that actually seem more novel. Doesn't change the fact though that Musashi, just like Missouri, is pretty much just OP. And frankly, no, they shouldn't be outperforming their tech tree cousins. The reason why people should get them is the interesting experience, not because the ships are OP af. And the credits they can print. If you say Missouri wasn't a consideration for many because of its credit potential and Musashi/Kronshtadt are often viewed as the next best thing now that Missouri is unavailable, well, you might have missed something. One issue I see, is that with how MM goes, T9 premiums get overtuned into T9.5 ones, because WG want to give people ships that feel like they are still competitive in T10 matches which T9s will mostly face. But then they should make it T10 from the start, imo. It's the same crap that netted us Giulio that got all the tools to stay relevant even when faced with the piss poor T5 MM that pits the ship mostly vs T7. If WG wants to offer T9 premiums, it would be great if they gave an incentive to play the tier in general beyond grinding, not to play specific overtuned ships. Doesn't help that a good few ships are basically just prototypes of T10s, which you don't keep for the gameplay experience (e.g. few would argue Roon is bad, yet upon reaching Hindenburg, is there a point? Hoping for the few matches vs T7 or what?). In this regard, ships like Kronshtadt or Alaska offer at least something novel, though they'd need to be balanced.

You still eat heavy pen damage. And the accuracy on the guns is also questionable. The secondaries are interesting, but at T9, actually quite worthless. It's basically a repeat of Bismarck, but with even less chance to see tiers where the 10.5 cm guns will do anything meaningful despite set fires with their poor fire chance. I would argue, Izumo doesn't have the overmatch, but it still has the pen to threaten ships at range and certainly up close (if it doesn't overpen). And it does have the tankiness, being actually more survivable when being shot in the side or cheek than a Yamato or Musashi, as its citadel isn't quite as massive. Also, personal stats are not exactly much of an argument. To a great degree, performance depends on things like playstyle one is comfortable with. Also, Izumo is a downgrade in dpm, it's an upgrade in HE resistance and long range performance. It having lower average damage isn't too out of this world. You do get pretty comparable win rate though.

As if you had to limit cruiser numbers...

Yes, as long as they pass by close enough. PD doesn't care about whom it is aimed at. It counts ammunition that lands (or in case of torps sails by) within a certain distance of your ship (I think 300 m, but don't quote me on the exact number). It even continues counting after you sank...

Yeah, but... ...makes it sound as if you think that's just my statement. I'm just pointing out what is being said, not what I think would be appropriate. Because, let's face it, I can complain all day about IJN DDs having issues staying competitive and it still wouldn't change a thing, because my opinion isn't what decides game balance.

Most players who have an idea of how to play know Shimakaze is garbage. Yet, it is the T10 DD with most games played. Similarly, the rest of the line is very popular, because the idea of just spamming torps from long range and getting devastating strikes that way without risking the ship appeals to a certain demographic. And everytime the matter comes up about improving Shima, it is pointed out, that the ship and its current configurations and stats are wildly popular, so no need to address it. WG openly stated that the 20 km torps might be terrible, but as long as they remained popular, they see no reason to change it. Meanwhile, there are also opposite cases, like for example Grozovoi, which received a buff for the expressed reason that the ship was not popular enough. Not underperforming, just not being played. And feel free to point out how terrible the reasoning is, but it isn't me coming up with this crap. I'm just reiterating what the people in charge tell us.

It's called Shimakaze is too popular. Shimakaze appeals to a player base that is low skill, doesn't know how to handle anything but long range torpedoing and to avoid them growing too powerful and maybe discourage them from playing the ship, it got nerfed into the ground. Random potato being unaware of what stats mean, continues playing the ship, because 15 torps must be good and they lost before anyway. They pley4phun after all. And WG doesn't want to address the fundamental playstyle of Shimakaze being uncompetitive. Also, I saw some folks *edited* argue that you shouldn't change Shimakaze from being garbage due to its playstyle, because if it was closer to the others, diversity might be lost. So, Shima will remain in the dumps. At least it got best concealment at its tier... well, till next patch. Also, I'm not sure if IJN gunboat line is really great first line of DDs, given how radically they differ from normal DDs. If you don't aim for higher than T7, main line isn't bad. Other nations are definitely better for learning proper DDs though.

Just because it is not very intelligent, it is not necessarily a bot.

Few others can do it this fast though. Even if the player is not skilled, the ship is tough and I had to be careful as even the less skilled could get off a good torp drop. The situation was D cap at Estuary, me being in North team, running towards cap, enemy Shchors and Edinburgh behind island, Tirpitz rushing from South into the cap, enemy Kidd spamming HE from range. Whatever of my team had gone to this flank was playing passive, given they feared top tier BB and two spammy cruisers, I guess. When I noticed Tirpitz fired HE, I took the gamble, crossed in front of him, launched one set of torps, of which he ate one, turned around to move away from him (and avoid torps as well as rushing into the cruisers), lighted the Tirpitz with no damecon up with secondaries, before focusing them on Shchors that I also citpenned with main battery (no point at shooting at Tirpitz bow). Shchors went down to secondaries setting the ship ablaze, launched the other set of torps on Tirpitz, it ate two and died. In the end, I finished my turn and steamed towards the North again (using that wonderful speed), passing by my team mates that found their courage finally (I mean, it was 2 ships left out of 4, both on like half health). I was on like 10% hp, but with Edinburgh spamming AP at my angled ship and Kidd not being able to pen me, I was safe and could heal up. If I had done this in any other ship, except maybe Scharnhorst, I'd have been dead. Though, even with Scharnhorst I doubt I could have reliably killed the Shchors to avoid getting HE spammed into my 25 mm stern for the remaining hp. Most of the damage taken were AP pens from Edinburgh and fires (yay 50 mm deck) which meant after two repair party charges I was pretty much back in a condition to fight. Hood might have gotten out alive, but not been able to kill 2 ships in the process. So, while the stunt certainly is not just due to my great skills, it certainly is something only this ship could have pulled among the T7s. Needless to say, this encounter was worth most of my potential damage. and while it cost me a lot of hp, removing the two ships did allow rolling up the flank fast. Other T7s have match impact at range, but Gneisenau basically excels at killing overconfident ships fast.

Turning in front of the enemy is a mistake. Planning ahead and deciding whether you want to kite or bow-in is the proper course of action. If you finish your turn before the enemy is already shooting at you, you can kite or go bow-in, not both. Amagi, post-Izumo buff has actually one downside that makes Izumo not a downgrade: Amagi is 32 mm all over. Izumo is not. Amagi will die to HE spam far faster than Izumo, which itself is surpassed by Yamato then. Amagi also has less pen. The thing with Amagi vs Izumo is, the Izumo is the transition from the roaming Amagi to the more stationary and careful playstyle that will be typical also for Yamato. Izumo should be compared to its tech tree counterparts and it isn't really outperformed by them. Missouri, just like Musashi, are just OP for their tier, Alsace had to be nerfed, Lion is a damage farmer and compared to Iowa and FdG, Izumo's stats don't look bad. Also, once again, it's hard to compare all-time stats when there were recent buffs. I'd also disagree on your idea that 6 gun Izumo is the worst in high tiers, as FdG is worse when it has to play on 4.

With some exceptions. To be fair, the pen at extreme ranges falls off there too and you'd just target superstructures to avoid shatters. AP pen at max range is 34 mm for Daring, which any angled 32 mm plate is likely to shatter. Also a reason why not to take aFT on these ships.

Not after the rework, my dear. Then the autopilot will steer it in any of these islands and be stuck there for the rest of the match. Can't have those CVs kill and cap at the same time.

Well, would've preferred fair and square, to see how much difference the 38 cm guns and 12.8 cm secondaries make. I had like 30k secondary damage in that game, given they just pen almost everything. Got it too and I agree.

No issue. Sticking around would have been suicidal with all the ships closing in. You were close enough for me to get some secondary shots off at you anyway. Sadly we couldn't have a brawling duel though. Also, was that arctic camo?

Alright, got a 14 pt secondary spec (with BoS instead of BFT) and I'm very satisfied with the performance. No, the secondaries are not an "I win" mechanism that makes you invincible (8 km range anyway), but with proper accuracy, they make it very hard for your ship to get rushed. In brawls, they'd even outgun T8 ships, if one gets close enough, though these larger ships typically have a better main battery. Cruisers or DDs pretty much have to be as careful around you as they have to be around a secondary Kurfürst, because with the recent RN DD event and the Icarus and Jervis spam, I had plenty of these ships try to torp rush me with their crappy 7 km torps, just to then get utterly decimated by the 12.8 cm turrets. These things are no joke. Next step is 18 pt for IFHE, so they can pen 32 mm. Two games I played today. Also, do note, a lot of my BB adversaries were Germans, which makes it hard to show off the potency of the ship when matched up against non-brawlers. Not that it prevented me from going up against a Tirpitz, though it was of the special HE spamming kind (which is why I dared pull the maneuver). Gneisenau by far is no worthless ship and while Scharnhorst might be more comfortable and has some advantages, Gneisenau is no less dangerous and at times even more fearsome.

Spotted @Uglesett in the older and inferior Scharnhorst on the enemy team. Hopefully I could prove that Gneisenau is indeed the superior of the two. No, but honestly, what was with your team? Sorry about that.

I cropped the image to avatar size.

Is she rare? Also, @BrigadierRosen, given you asked how we get our avatars and you seem so fond of that image, here. I might have been bored.

No, worst of the worst is Bretagne. The issue is, what's the point of the ship. Like, Kongo vs New York, you could argue Kongo was faster, more hp, better range, but less dpm and less citadel protection (though it had better HE protection, kinda). But then König came along and offered same gun layout, smaller but faster firing guns (no overmatch treshold, so noone cares that they are smaller), an untouchable citadel and armour that basically gives some ok chance to bounce shells off the bow and is resistant to non-IFHE HE and DD HE. Also being faster. New York could at best claim it had 2k more hp and better alpha strike, but who cared when New York got squishies for barbette? and then came Iron Duke and basically gave almost König grade protection with only 100 less AP alpha, if you don't just fire RN HE. Basically holds still true, just that both got a spotter plane. As did König. And then there's Bretagne, which is just straight up garbage, having a bit more random armour plating than New York, still eating random pens, but having 41k hp, which is the least at the tier. Even Giulio has 45k. ID and König have 47k, New York has 49k, Kongo has 54k. It doesn't even get a spotter plane. Bretagne and New York at best perform because they are BBs, so, well, they can nuke cruisers. But what BB can't at T5? Just, every other BB has distinct strengths. These two have none. They are absolutely pointless to play except to get to the next tier where better ships await.

Given most of the line uses 12 cm/45 like Cossack and LWM stated in her review that AP isn't useful at range, as it loses pen fast, I'd guess that's a thing for those with these guns.