Jump to content
Server restart - 20/06/2019 Read more... ×

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Destroyer'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunità Italiana
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Archive
  • Historical Section

Calendars

  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 80 results

  1. eviltanker666

    Shimakaze

    Temat poświęcony okrętowi Shimakaze (japońskiemu niszczycielowi X tieru) Dane: HP: 17900 Główna bateria: 127 mm/50 type3 Szybkostrzelność - 8.6 strzałów/min Czas skrętu o 180 stopni - 25,7 s Max. uszkodzenia pociskiem PP - 2700 Max. uszkodzenia pociskiem OB - 2200 Zasięg ognia - 10 km Wyrzutnie torpedowe: ilość - 3 x 5 610 mm czas przeładowania - 150 s czas skrętu o 180 stopni - 7.2 s Torpeda Type93 'Long Lance' Max. uszkodzenia - 20967 Prędkość torped - 67 węzłów Zasięg torped - 20.0 km Zwrotność: Max. prędkość - 40 węzłów Promień skrętu - 690 m Czas przestawienia steru - 3.9 s Kamuflaż: Wykrywalność z powierzchni - 7.6 km Wykrywalność z powietrza - 4,2 km
  2. Salut à tous les membres qui seront intéressés par ce topic ! Je viens à la recherche de conseils !! Tout est dans le titre : quelle branche de destroyers choisir? En effet, me voilà hésitant. Selon moi, et je me trompe surement, les branches actuelles se résument à ceci : _ Japonais = force de frappe à la torpilles. Ideal contre les gros et lents navires. _ Ricains = qui sont plus axés sur le combat au canon Et viennent les russes et là je suis perdu. Je ne vois pas leur avantage. Quand je les vois en jeu, ils ressemblent aux chips apéritifs qu'on vous donne dans les bars, dans de petites coupelles et qui ne durent pas longtemps. Je ne leur trouve pas de réel point fort. Alors, oui, je ne les ai pas testés. Et c'est pour celà que je viens à la recherche de votre sagesse ! Merci du temps que vous passerez à me répondre !
  3. lordofhavoc

    Kamikaze

    Ich bin durch Zufall bei Warshipstats über diesen Zerstörer gestolpert. http://warshipstats.com/compare/ Weiss jemand etwas näheres über das Schiff? https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze-Klasse_%281922%29
  4. C_H_O_U_X

    Blyskawica

    TVII prémium Polonais Bonne force de frappe avec ses 7 canons de de 120 mm Sans compétence particulière du capitaine, les torpilles sont "moyennes" avec 8km de portée 2 parties avec ce soir et globalement de bonnes impressions avec ce DD
  5. CaptainThunderWalker

    I designed a boat!

    Well, what can I say. I like making fantasy ships. Especially doing things that haven't been done before. Being a fantasy ship, I named it after a fantasy creature - the dryad. It is my second ship - first ship had some annoying issues and probably too much of a superstructure, so I had to abandon it. Strangely, the second ship uses a much smaller hull, and probably only has a third of the displacement. I think it's smaller than anything in World of Warships currently at a length of roughly 72m and a width of 6,66m. Displacement - ehr, it would be a guess, but about 500 tons? A complement of about 80 crewmembers I guess. Superstructure may still be a bit on the large size - it's definately larger than that on the Pre-WW1 destroyers that had a similar size. This time, I also made the weapon models entirely myself, which wasn't exactly easy but a fun puzzle. Now I've mounted them on the model, and the ship looks almost finished (it isn't, lifeboats and screws are absent, and so are the anchor cables, and I'm pretty sure I'm missing something else), I think it's time for a preview! Like I said, I designed the guns myself, only having a few pictures of real guns to look at and to act as examples. I don't think my weapon designs 'work' if you have to build them IRL, but who cares. I don't. Making fantasy weapons I made sure to use calibers that are uncommon in Naval armanament. I also clearly didn't take account of submarines, as I didn't really leave much room for depth charges or other forms of ASW. That is much more visible in the topdown view. Weapons: 2×1 90mm Main Armanament 1×2 and 7×1 14mm AA mounts 1×3 and 3×1 450mm Torpedo tubes (no reloads). What do you guys think about it? Is anything missing that I didn't mention before? Also - are there any design flaws? On a side note, as you see, this ship has a single stern-mounted torpedo tubes. IRL, well... ships just didn't. Why didn't ships IRL have stern mounted torpedo tubes? Is that because ships mostly engaged in broadsides as that was the doctrine of the time? Or because that space was taken up by depth charges usually?
  6. Hello hello, I just posted a replay (.wowsreplay) of a very fun game I had last week in Mahan in the destroyers section, http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/73649-every-second-counts-mahan-replay, but unfortunately I don't know much about video making... I had a few tries with Dxtory, but I think I will be in trouble with the file size as I don't have much space on my current PC. I don't want to lose it the next big patch, and I'll be really grateful for any information (Which is the size of such a file in a good quality ie), or even better maybe someone could be kind enough to capture it for me? Thanks in advance, have a great day
  7. In this game you can choose between a number of ship classes. Naturally the CV is the one who should inflict more damage, then the BS, the CA and finally, the DD. I agree with this as it's supposed to be like that. In the real world, it was not different. The problem is the ridiculous reward system. Why would a CV player earn more XP and Credits than any other? CV players are better than other ship players? How much time will it take for a CV player to reach Tier X?? It's an instant, compared to a DD. Sure i can also play the CV but i don't like it so much, in fact, i don't give a heck about CVs but if i want to earn credits i feel like you are forcing me to play CV or BS... this is weird because CV players don't have to "use" other classes to earn credits xp. Instead of "Nerfing" and "Buffing", something that will never work for obvious reasons, you should use some kind of variable credit system. Imagine this: (i invented the stats): If CURRENT SERVER damage per class is distributed like this: 40% done by CV 30% done by BS 20% done by CA 10% done by DD WG could compensate by giving 10% more credits/xp to BS, 20% more credits/xp to CA and 30% more credits/xp to DD. This should work fine but WG will never do it because it would mean a decrease in doubloons sales. I remember a battle where i played really well, i disrupted an entire fleet, kept it from advancing, capped several times, than i was alone against 4 ships and got the victory. That game was MINE! I earned some flag i don't remember for being the last against 4 ships and win, but for WG my reward for good play was BEING THE LAST. This happens with DDs at different scales all the time. I'm getting bored of the game because of this and that's a shame because when i start to get bored i start to search other stuff to do really fast. Thanks
  8. Capt_Atomsk

    1HP still sailing

    Hiya all, Just wanted to share a experience I had in my minekaze. Was having a fun match on my old laptop (Thats were the crappy graphics come from =p). But in the end I survived the match with 1HP left never seen that happen before. Did anyone have this happen to them?
  9. I vaguely remember this from alt_naval's old site but can't find anything on the details except that it might have been based on the Goteborg class used by Sweden's own navy. Anybody know anything else? Maybe even alt_naval's pic?
  10. LordMaddyzzz

    Random Warship Moments #3

    Episode 3 of Random Warship moments Made possible by LGCHaaansie
  11. https://thearmoredpatrol.com/2016/11/09/wows-graf-spee-stats/ https://thearmoredpatrol.com/2016/11/09/wows-german-dds-revealed/ I'm looking forward to the German DD Line, but I must say I also look very much forward to finally seeing the Graf Spee in the game! What are your thoughts and opinions?
  12. TRNogger

    How to play a Destroyer

    1) Always run for the cap area in the center of the map! Leave the outlying cap areas to the other, slower ships. Who cares that everybody goes there? The off chance you will cap and hold the area for a few seconds is totally worth neglecting the other cap areas and finding yourself in the middle of a Battleship/Cruiser-clash. 2) Fire smoke at the first opportunity! Especially when lots of friendly ships are right behind you. The enemy is probably to far away to see you anyway, but you never can be sure. And your allies in the big, heavily armored, repair-capable long-range battleships also really need to be hidden. Too bad they will lose line of sight, too. 3) Randomly turn no matter where your allies are. You have the smallest, most agile and most vulnerable ship so it is absolutely the other ship's problem to avoid you. Do not forget to sternly tell Battelship captains that they need to learn steering their ships after they rammed and sunk you. 4) Fire torps blindly in the general direction of enemies far away. Your torps may never get there, but just scaring the enemy a little is always worth risking a sunk ally. 5) Use your agility to always stay right between your allies and the enemy. You are the guy with the torpedoes, the other ships don't need to fire their's. Don't forget to blame them when you get accidentally hit by hostile fire aimed for them.
  13. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-32899898 Some great footage of a range of ships (Destroyers and Carrier) from WWII. The link above shows some clips but I will see if they put the full reels on-line. See you at sea
  14. Hi there ! I like ships. I make techtrees of them, historical articles, drawings, and even songs. This time though, I wanted to try something different and make my own premium ship. Therefore, I selected a destroyer today, Split (but you already knew that provided you read the title before clicking, otherwise you clicked on a random topic which is kinda weird, but I won't discuss that matter here because this bracket is strating to get way too wide), and I tryied giving her stats and a gameplay which would make her interesting to buy and to play. I'll be exposing the stats I chose and I'll be awaiting your opinions regarding her, if she'd be OP or too weak, if she'd be interesting to buy, and so on. Anyway, let's start ! Direction : Yugoslavia ! Premium Tier VIII DD Split (Yugoslavia/Pan-Europe) I/ A (very) brief histrocial explanation You probably haven't read my Forgotten Legends article where I talk about her (mainly because they're only available in French for now) but Split isn't the most unknwon DD of Europe and I've seen her mentionned a few time around here, namely in the European Destroyer Tree topic. I'll stay brief here because this isn't an historical article. Split was a Destroyer Leader, alone in her class, from Yugoslavia. The goal was to increase their destroyer force because the others were weaker and older ; therefore, instead of choosing to build several weak destroyers, they opted for a single Destroyer Leader. The comapgny choosen to draw her design was a French one, and based the hull on the French Le Fantasque class ; however, the Yugoslavs had the ship built by Yarrow on their soil, with components from a wide variety of nations (the guns were from Czechoslovakia, the Turbines and the Boilers were British, she was equipped with Sweden Bofors and had a French fire-control system. The thing is, the ship was only 50% completed when the war broke out, and soon enough, Italians had invaded Yugoslavia and seized the ship. The italians decided that they may complete Split (renamed Spalato) with their own equipment, and thus they redisigned her. Although work started, it wasn't finished yet in 1943 when Italy surrendered. Therefore, the still incomplete Spalato was seized by the Germans. The Germans, however, never even tryied to finish her and when they ended up retreated, they scuttled her. In 1950, Yugoslavia was free again and lacked warships. They remembered of the old Split and decided to raise and finish her. After a few contracts were made, they did get the unfinished ship back from the ocean, the United Kingdom provided the engine and boilers, and the USA provided the armament, fire control firectors and so on. Split was finally completed and she remained in service for Yugoslavia until 1980. II/ Why would you buy Split ? Sure, her story is interesting and kinda funny, but unlike Hood, Enterprise, Tirpitz and so on, she doesn't have the excuse of being very well known. So you may wonder, have I overlooked a detail about her that would justify a unique and special gameplay ? More or less. Split's specialty doesn't show in battle, but in the port. I like to call it "Buy one, get two free". Split would have three different configurations : her original Yugoslavian one, which would be torpedo-oriented, the Italian one, which would be a gunboat, and the final American one, a defensive/support one. At any time in the port, you could switch her configuration from one type to another. If you get bored from torpedo actions with Split, switch to Split gunboat and start firing hell on DDs and Cap Points. Offsense gets tiring ? Switch to Defense Split and support your allies, shot down aircrafts lay smokescreens ! Having three gameplay in one premium is a real deal ; besides, she'd be great for doing missions since she can be specialized in several fields, allowing her to be a good choice regardless of the type of mission to accomplish. III/Stats and short Gameplay-type Comments Disclaimer : the stats are meant to be adapted to the game. Therefore, some values may as non-historical, including but not limited to : speed and torpedo speed, firing range, reload times a\ Torpedo-mode Split - Yugoslavian variant Survivability HitPoint 16200 Armor Max 16mm Artillery Main Battery 5*1 (centerline) 14cm/56 Skoda Reload Time 7.2s 180° turn 25s Dispertion 91m HE 140mm HE Max HE damage 2100 Fire Chance 10,00% AP 140mm AP Max AP damage 3500 Firing Range 10.6km Initial AP shell Velocity 880m/s Initial HE shell Velocity 880m/s Torpedo Tubes 2*3 (centerline) 533mm Reload 70s 180° turn 7.2s Torpedo 533mm Maxdamage 16500 Range 9.5km Detectability 1.4km Speed 59kn Anti Air Defense 5* 1 Bofors 40mm DpS 35 Range 3.5km 4*1 ZB vz60 15mm MG DpS 16 Range 1.2km Manoeuverability Max Speed 37kn Turning Circle Radius 540m Rudder Shift Time 4.5s Concealment Sea Base 6.8km When on Fire 9.1km Air Base 3.2km When on Fire 6.2km Consumables Sonar (slot 1) Duration 90s / TorpSpot 2.52km / Ship Spot 3.48km Reloading 180s / Charges : 2 (Lo Yang-like) Smoke (slot 2) Laying 20s / Staying 89s Reloading 228s / Charges : 2 (Generic) Engine Boost (slot 3) Active 120s Reloading 171s / Charges : 2 (Generic) In Yugoslavian torpedo mode, Split possesses heavy 140mm guns, however, their RoF is very low making them impractical in close-range combat, especially against destroyers. Her torpedoes, however, are very powerful for tier VIII : although she only has 6, they have good reload, damage and travel rather far. This version also has the advantage of carrying a sonar (identical to Lo Yang's in termes of stats), increasing her defensive options against DDs. b\ Gunboat-mode Split - Italian variant Survivability HitPoint 16200 Armor Max 16mm Artillery Main Battery 5*1 (centerline) Cannone da 135/45 OTO 1937 Reload Time 5.4s 180° turn 18s Dispertion 96m HE 135mm HE Max HE damage 2000 Fire Chance 8,00% AP 135mm AP Max AP damage 3200 Firing Range 12.3km Initial AP shell Velocity 825m/s Initial HE shell Velocity 825m/s Torpedo Tubes 1*3 (centerline) Si 270/533.4 x 7.2 M Reload 70s 180° turn 7.2s Torpedo 533mm Maxdamage 17600 Range 6.5km Detectability 1.4km Speed 70kn Anti Air Defense 5*1 37mm/54 DpS 27 Range 4.2km 4*2 20mm/65 MG DpS 30 Range 2km Manoeuverability Max Speed 39kn Turning Circle Radius 540m Rudder Shift Time 4.5s Concealment Sea Base 6.8km When on Fire 9.1km Air Base 3.2km When on Fire 6.2km Consummables Smoke (slot 1) Laying 20s / Staying 89s Reloading 228s / Charges : 2 (Generic) Engine Boost (slot 2) Active 120s (Generic) Reloading 171s / Charges : 2 (Generic) In Italian gunboat mode, Split possesses large caliber (135mm) fast firing canons. Along with a way higher rate of fire, they also turn faster, making of her a great DD-chasing ship. Besides, in this mode, Split can reach 39kn. However, everything has a price : she does not have a sonar here, and only has 1*3 torpedo tube. Besides, the torpedoes travel at a shorter range, making them only defensive. c\ Defensive-mode Split - American variant Survivability HitPoint 16200 Armor Max 16mm Artillery Main Battery 4*1 (centerline) 127/38 Mk30 Reload Time 3.0s 180° turn 5.3s Dispertion 98mm HE 127mm HE Mk32 Max HE damage 1800 Fire Chance 5,00% AP 127mm AP Mk38 Max AP damage 2100 Firing Range 11.1km Initial AP shell Velocity 792m/s Initial HE shell Velocity 792m/s Torpedo Tubes 1*5 (centerline) 533mm Reload 139s 180° turn 7.2s Torpedo Mk17 Maxdamage 17900 Range 12km Detectability 1.4km Speed 66kn Anti Air Defense 4*2 40/60 Bofors + 4*1 40/60 Bofors DpS 60 Range 3.5km 4*1 127/38 MK30 DpS 30 Range 5km Manoeuverability Max Speed 33.5kn Turning Circle Radius 540m Rudder Shift Time 4.5s Concealment Sea Base 6.8km When on Fire 9.1km Air Base 3.2km When on Fire 6.2km Consummables Smoke (slot 1) Laying 28s / Staying 124s Reloading 228s / Charges : 2 (Benson-like) Engine Boost (slot 2) Active 120s (Generic) Reloading 171s / Charges : 1 (Generic) Anti-Air (slot 3) Active : 30s Reloading 171s / Charges : 1 (Benson-like) In American Defenser mode, Split only has 4*1 127mm canons. However, they're as powerful as high-tier US DDs ones, turning and shooting very fast. She's also equipped with a single quintuple tube firing powerful but slow US torpedoes at a great range, but taking ages to reload. Her speed falls at barely 33.5kn too, making a good use of the Engine Boost mandatory. Her main strong point lies in consommables and anti-air : her AA capabilities are excellent for a tier VIII DD, and she has an American long-asting smoke along with both the engine boost and an AA consummable. However, these last two only come with 1 charge, making abilities like superintendant and premium consummables import in order not to run out too early. So, how do you find Split ? OP or bad ? Boring or interesting ? Would you think about buying her or would you ignore her ? I'll await you opinions~
  15. Hi all. Have been reading a large number of articles, books and web sites lately about actual performance and capabilities of Destroyers during WW2 and was a bit inspired. I think the wikipedia page on the Battle of Samar sums some parts up quite nicely: First a bit about a number of "Destroyer Escorts" involved. Destroyer Escorts was smaller, slower (usually just about 20 knots), less armed etc ships normally used to escort freight convoys, that is, far weaker and less capable than a full Destroyer This was after coming under fire from Heavy Cruisers of the Japanese side. Then the legendary actions of Commander Ernest E. Evans in the USS Johnston, a Fletcher. There are many more stories like this, this one is found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_off_Samar An interesting article in full. Now, I know the game is what it is, and it's to late for any real changes of game mechanics at this point, but it might not be needed either. From what I've learned, Destroyers where indeed a very real threat to capital ships, and in reality they didn't have the "cloaking device" from the game. Rather, a small ship like a destroyer, with the amount of agility and speed they had was an extremely hard target to hit using the targeting technology of the time. They where also, despite lacking in armor, generally very durable and notoriously hard to finish off. Yes, they often suffered damage which decreased their performance, but outright sinking them wasn't all that easy. This, by the way, goes for many other ships as well: far more ships where put out of action, not being able to fight anymore and needing repairs than outright sunk. Now, what I would like to see is a more detailed system for managing damage. A real ship (or vehicle, or person) doesn't have hit points. Focusing on ships, when they take damage, a couple of things can happen. They can start leaking, and if the leak is greater than the pumping capacity or the pumps are disabled it will start sinking, how fast depending of course of the size and numbers of holes. Systems on the ship may be hit and damaged or destroyed, which seems to be the most common effect of getting hit. It may also, on rare occasions, be penetrated in a sensitive are, a magazine or boiler, which will cause catastrophic damage, generally sinking the ship quickly. The ship may also catch fire, and finally, crew may get killed. A torpedo hit is special, since it does work by sinking the ship, but generally, the hole created is so big that there is no time to react to this, and in the case of smaller ships it may well break the entire structure of the ship. Now, none of these kinds of damage are taking a toll on some ship-wide pool of hit points which, when expended, causes the ship to explode. I believe a mechanic more akin to reality would actually be an improvement for gameplay. AP: AP shells should have a couple of effects. On a penetration it will cause immense damage to the systems located where the shell ended up, the radius of damage correlating to the shell size, which may also cause fires. This will generally knock the system out for the rest of the game, also killing most of the crew manning said system. If a sensitive system like a magazine or boiler room is penetrated this should generally cause catastrophic damage, sinking the ship. This needs to be very difficult to achieve, since these areas are always extremely well protected and also not trivial to hit. An AP shell might also overpenetrate just as today. This should have a small chance of damaging any system in the shells path and also to kill some crew. Damage would not be as catastrophic, and be fixable by the crew. An underwater overpen will cause a small leak. HE: HE Shells exploding on deck will cause damage to nearby systems: the larger the shell, the radius again depending on shell size. It will also kill crew and have a chance to cause fires. Against very light armor, or plunging shells on the deck of light ships a HE shell may penetrate into the hull, causing even more damage then a penetrating AP shell, and risking causing leaks. Torpedos: A torpedo hit is always serious. Some ships, battleships foremost, have torpedo bulges which may save them from catastrophic damage, only causing the ship to need to slow down for the remainder of the battle. In all other cases, if the torpedo isn't a dud, it will cause a very serious leak, which will generally be impossible to fix, or break the structure of the ship, instantly sinking it. Now, this needs to be balanced of course, things to consider are introducing "duds", which was a quite common problem, limiting torpedo supplies, making torpedo bombers dropping much more difficult where the planes need a fairly long straight approach where they are very vulnerable to AA fire and fighters, introducing a risk that a TB under enough fire might botch their drop, causing the torpedo to destruct on water impact, missing widely etc. Torpedo hits needs to be fairly uncommon but extremely dangerous. Bombs from DB's work exactly like HE shells, damage, fire potential and radius based on bomb size. Leaks are tracked on a numerical scale where 0 is no leaks and 100 is sinking rapidly. Pumps at full capacity can stop leaks up to 20-40 on the scale depending on ship, and reduces leaks over that by the same amount: A ship with 25 pump efficiency and 40 leakage has an effective leakage of 15. Water taken on is also tracked, and once it reaches 100 the ship will sink. Water in the ship will slow it down and make it harder to turn. At over 50 water, crew actions will become slower and at 70 crew will start to die. Fires work in a similar way, the amount of fires are tracked from 0-100, where 100 is a raging inferno. A ship has a fire fighting efficiency of 5-20, which is the amount of fires put out in one minute. Fires over 30 slows crew down, over 50 starts to kill crew. Each minute, there is a percentage risk, of modules being damaged or destroyed based on the amount of fires still burning. Modules that are damaged are individually repaired. A ship has a number of repair points which are automatically distributed between all damages. The player can prioritize areas of repair: Weapons, Propulsion and Steering, Sensors etc, haven't thought out all possibilities. While working, the repair efficiency decreases from exhaustion, which is regained if the repair crews gets to rest without fixing anything. Crew number is tracked. Individual crew functions are not however. Instead, every action the ship takes are slowed down by a lack of crew proportionally, including fixing leaks, fighting fires and repairing systems, but also responding to commands (increase or decrease speed, rudder shift), top speed, reloading guns, training guns, AA efficiency, spotting range, the works. Stopping the ship in a hidden location, not doing anything else would let more crew focus on repairs, speeding them up, as long as the ship does nothing. If to many systems are damaged or to many crew are killed the ship is out of action, effectively dead. It will still float in game and can be shot by shells or torpedoes, this has no further impact on the game though, other than that the ship might be used as a shield. If there are to many leaks or fires in relation to the fixing capabilities of the remaining crew the captain will automatically issue an abandon ship, also effectively taking the ship out of action. Now, this is all rough ideas, actual numbers etc would need a lot of tweaking. I think a damage model like this would allow for a much more interesting game though, removing the rather silly concept of hitpoints and instead tracking actual damage to the ships capabilities. It would also fix things like fires from HE shells sinking Battleships: yes, setting fires would cause the Battleship to perform worse, but wouldn't sink it, and it would be unlikely that it caused so many casualties as to putting it out of action in a hurry. It would also allow modelling of things like I talked about earlier, how some ships can be very resilient and hard to sink without any magical cloaks or invulnerabilities. I think it would make the game much more dynamic and interesting. I think generally, the hitpoints paradigm in games is a pretty bad way of managing damage. Same thing goes for tanks for example, maybe even more obviously so: A MBT that is hit is either penetrated, which generally causes damage severe enough to take it out of action or destroy it spectacularly, or it is not penetrated, which will cause very little problems at all, maybe knocking a gyro out of balance disabling the main sight temporarily, knocking out some mirrors, lamps etc. A 25 mm autocannon can shoot at the front of a modern MBT from 1500 meters for as long as it pleases, it won't kill the tank. About the Destroyers in particular, apart from the revamped damage system, they would need to be able to rely even more on maneuverability and smoke to avoid getting hit. I feel that this is what was intended for the US destroyer line, since they can't rely on concealment while firing their guns or using torps, but the game fails to model it correctly, which makes the entire line sub par. Hitting a destroyer needs to be really really hard, and they need to not be knocked out by a few hits, but be able to go on fighting, albeit with reduced capabilities until able to repair. This would be compensated by increasing the detection ranges considerably, removing the feel of a magic aura, making them both more exciting and enjoyable to play, and likely less irritating and frustrating (while at least as dangerous) when facing them. Sorry for the mega-long post, had to much time on my hands I guess. And yea, I know, it's probably to late for major changes like this, one could always hope though, like I said, I think it could potentially settle quite a few problems in the game.
  16. shr84

    DD vs BB is a joke

    in real life a single DD woud get rekt by a BB in a 1v1 fight.In world of warships you be lucky if you barely survive against this jet boats that spam with infinite torpedo ammo. I know this isnt real life but imho this game shoud try to immitate it to some degree.Every ship has its role they say, but DD´s beeing the master race in this game, giving every other ship a nearly impossible task for success if they be played at least basically right. The main problem is the totally over the top speed and manuverability of DD´s.2nd problem are the endless torpedo waves they can send out.In real life a DD had maybie 12 torpedos to reload when it carryed 2x 3 Torp tube launchers.I dont say it shoud be that way but they definitely shoudnt be available endlessly.I think it woud be ok to force people to act with some common sense, not encouraging the torp spamming. i think they had this in mind when they implemented DD´s Its a major flaw in this game, i feel this the most when ever i play destroyers.Its just too easy with little risk whatever you engage.
  17. Well Tuccy you said that lighter designs of DD's and CL's started to appear in the interwar and WW2 period. Here is a good example of a light DD that was built in WWI and served until 1963 which in my opinion is some very long time. The Mărăști class were a group of destroyers built in Italy for the Romanian Navy. The ships fought in both world wars but for different owners and had a complex history. In 1913, the Romanian government ordered a class of four large destroyers from the Pattison yard in Naples, Italy. The four ships were named Vifor, Viscol, Vârtej and Vijelia. The Italian government requisitioned the ships in 1915 upon entering World War I, renaming them Aquila, Falco, Nibbio and Sparviero. These ships were significantly larger than contemporary Italian destroyers and were rated as Esploratori or scout cruisers. The armament comprised three single 6 inch and 4 x 3 inch guns. After the end of the First World War, two of the ships (Sparviero and Nibbio) were re-sold to Romania, arriving in Constanţa in 1920. The other two ships were retained by Italy until sold to the Nationalist faction of Spain in 1937. The six inch guns proved too heavy for the Romanian Navy and were replaced by two twin 120 mm guns in powered turrets and a single 120 mm gun. Both ships were active during the Naval war in the Black Sea in World War II. Chiefly convoying supplies between Romania, the Crimea and the Bosphorus. Măraşeşti sank the Soviet M class submarine M-31 in July 1943. Both ships were surrendered to the Soviets in August 1944 on the Capitulation of Romania and were incorporated into the Black Sea Fleet as the Lovkiy (Ловкий, ex-Mărăşti) and Lyogkiy (Лёгкий, ex-Mărăşeşti) but were returned to Romania in October 1945, served in Naval Forces of Romanian People's Republic under the numbers D12 and D11 and scrapped in the 1960s. Aquila and Falco were sold to the Nationalist Spanish Navy, which, in 1937 only had one destroyer available (Velasco). They were renamed Melilla and Ceuta, and saw heavy service, in spite of their poor condition. To conceal the fact that Italy was selling ships to Franco's side, they were often referred as Velasco-Ceuta and Velasco-Melilla. After the war, they were retained by the Spanish Navy.
  18. PPKinguin

    Fubuki Torp Module

    Do you take the torpedo module upgrade on the Fubuki? Torp range increased by 5km, (to 15). But torp speed decreased by 5 knots. Basically, what do you value more? Range or speed?
  19. Hey Leute, meine erste Compilation. Natürlich Destroyer.
  20. CleverViking

    Hypothetical Norwegian Premium DD

    Hi guys, so there's often a lot of talk about ships people want to bring into the game, usually from their own country and I wanted to join the fun. Me being from Norway does limit the options quite a bit and I don't for a second believe we will ever get a Norwegian ship in the game (but one can dream, right?). My proposal: Sleipner-class destroyer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleipner-class_destroyer Displacement: 735 tons [1] Length: 74.30 m (243.77 ft) Beam: 7.80 m (25.59 ft) Draught: 4.15 m (13.62 ft) Propulsion: 12,500 shp (9,300 kW) De Laval oil fuelled steam turbines Speed: 32 knots (59.26 km/h) Complement: 75 Armament: 3 × 10 cm guns 1 × 40 mm Bofors anti-aircraft gun 2 × 12.7 mm Colt anti-aircraft machine guns 2 × 53.3 cm torpedo tubes 4 × depth charge throwers The main issue I see with this ship is the size and the armament. The size is a bit small in comparison to most other DDs with a length of 75m. However it isn't a massive stretch to DDs like Wakatake or V-25 that both sit at around 85m or Smith at 89m. Displacement is also low at 735 tons compared to 900 ish for Wakatake and V25. The Smith does say 700 tons on "normal" load and 900 on "full" load but I've no idea what this means, I'm assuming the one value actually given is "full" load for Sleipner but I might be wrong. Armament also seems a bit lackluster with 3x 100mm guns and only 2x torpedo tubes (However, one of the ships in the class did have two extra for a total of four). I can't really see it as a torpboat with only 2-4 torps unless it had an amazing reload and I'm not really sure about the guns. Anyone have anything interesting to add like proposed tier for the class and what in-game stats she would have?
  21. Hey guys, so after only having the purchased destroyers Sims and Gremy for a while ive decided to try and level the Destroyer tree aswell on the US tree however looking over the stats im confused to why anyone wanna play them? I keep seing ppl say that IJN DDs are about torp strikes and US DDs are about guns but why on earth do you want to reveal your own position using guns in a game where you wear paper armor compared to the bigger ships? Am i missing something unique information? Its not that i question the dmg the US guns can do on DDs but the contrast to IJN dropping torpedoes out of detection range seems like an open shut case to me. Even if the US destroyers are great at killing IJN destroyers, you give up your position for, what is it 15 seconds? everytime you fire your guns Who wants to do that?
×