Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Destroyers'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • 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


  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL








Found 28 results

  1. Spithas

    So many Tier VII DDs in Ranked

    I guess it must be the xp changes for capping that's drawing a sh*tload of Tier VII DDs in ranked... Almost every fight 3 DDs per side... every other fight 4 DDs per side... And i wouldn't generally complain but the level of play of most of them is so subpar that it totally destroys the gameplay in ranked. Ranked should have a hard cap of 2 dds per side in my opinion. Oh and btw a Tier VII CA doesn't balance out a tier VII BB so please no Tier imbalance for BBs either pls.
  2. Meneleus

    Daring Destroyers

    Today the three Daring Destroyer missions as advertised on the WG site will no longer be available. When I look back on the missions I wonder if it was all worth it. How many of you have completed the missions? Did you lot think it was a worthwhile goal to pursue, if not for the reward then for the satisfaction of completing them? What would you like to see differently, if anything, for further missions and do you have any ideas of your own for future missions? Cheers, M
  3. Bolshev1k


    Hey. I've been playing a lot of USSR destroyers and so far I've reached t4. I think they are fun to play but a serious pain in the [edited]because of low detectability range and unusable torpedoes. My main problem though is that the stats say that the maximum damage I can do on HE is 1500 and on AP is 1800 and, if i'm lucky i only get about 400-500 on both of them. And I aim of the center of the ship too, and my hits mostly land there, so am I doing something wrong? Please help! Maybe I just suck and in that case, how can I improve. Also so far, I've found that there is literally NO advantage to playing with USSR destroyers as opposed to other destroyers. Is that true?
  4. Bonjour à tous, Me voici tout nouveau venu sur Wows et il me semble que je n'arrive pas au bon moment. En effet, mon premier coup de coeur a été le gameplay des DD IJN car l'aspect furtif + gros dégâts avec les torpilles m'a naturellement attiré, ayant toujours préféré les gameplay glasscanon aux bourrins. En lisant de nombreux posts je me suis rendu compte que le Minekaze que je visais n'était plus réellement viable. Je me retrouve donc avec de gros doutes concernant ma progression dans le déblocage de mes navires, hésitant de plus en plus à poursuivre dans la branche des DD IJN. J'aimerais donc avoir des avis objectifs sur l'état actuel des destroyers. J'ai parcouru le forum et peu d'avis sur l'état actuel des DD ont été donnés. J'aimerais donc l'avis de ceux qui jouent au jeu depuis longtemps, suivent son évolution et savent à peu près quels sont les navires qui restent efficaces. Est-ce toujours possible de jouer torpedoboat ou sommes nous condamnés à nous reconvertir dans le gunboat ? Quels sont les destoyers les plus intéressants pour les deux types de gameplay (je ne peux me permettre de tester tous les destroyers du jeu donc si je pouvais avoir quelques pistes pour orienter ma progression ce serait pas mal) ? Si je devais choisir entre le Mutsuki et le Minekaze, lequel me conseilleriez vous ? Je tiens à préciser que je ne cherche pas à jouer les DD les plus op du moment, un navire considéré comme potable me conviendrait, mais je n'ai pas non plus envie de devoir tryhard à en avoir des sueurs froides à chaque partie pour simplement être aussi efficace que d'autres navires qui n'ont pas à fournir autant d'efforts. En vous remerciant d'avance.
  5. Tatoosh

    Minekaze - Torps & Tactics?

    Question: IJN Minekaze DD - are the Type 94 (68 knots/7 kilometer) better to keep than the Type 89 (57 knots/10 kilometer) torpedoes? Speed vs Range? I've been playing the Minekaze for a bit and I simply love it! I started the game with the US Sims and played the US Sampson (Tier II) and Wickes (Tier III) before moving to Cruisers and working up through Omaha and Cleveland. In fact I had a thread moaning about the loss of torpedoes on the Cleveland. I learned to enjoy the ship but I seriously missed the torps even though it had some great buffs in other areas. And I whined about the US destroyers being destroyed so easy. By the time I could get into the 4.5 kilometer range, I was usually toast. More experienced players suggested the IJN tree destroyers, but I wanted to work with the US and try to hone my skills. Well, I don't think my skills improved but once I moved to the IJN and got passed the first Type 42 (no mod) torpedoes things improved. Even just a bit more range on my torpedoes made a world of difference in game play. Oh, I still get killed a lot. But going from 4.5 kilometers to 7 kilometers but now I often get to hurt my opponents in the process. The Question - stated above - should I mount the Type 89 torpedoes in place of the Type 94? The Type 89 has a 10 kilometers range but a slower speed of 57 knots. The Type 94 has the lower 7 kilometer range but a great 68 knot speed. With the turn buff the BB's have, it seems to me that a faster torpedo is a better torpedo! At 10 kilometers - You can fire an hope, but with the faster turn speeds now, mored distance covered slowly really just gives your opponent lots of time to react. I don't expect to survive battles. I like to get in and mix it up. At least at this point. Disrupting enemies, pulling their fire from my allies as I dodge and let lose torpedo barrages until someone nails me is my normal tactic. Sometimes I get whacked quick - either a destroyer gets me or a Cruiser/Battleship gets lucky with their fire. But occasionally I get the rush of holding 3 or 4 ships off, dodging repeated hailstorms of artillery and putting big dents into BB's and CA's if not actually sinking them. When I get into one of those fights, it is fantastic - all adrenaline and reactions - not much time to plan. I see other DD drivers that like to hang out, hide and ambush. Good tactics to be sure, but I like to try and sneak up on an enemy BB that is slugging out with one our big boys and make life miserable for him. And for that the Type 94 torpedo seems ideal. I have the Type 89 researched but not bought and mounted. I kind of doubt it I will bother with them. Tactics & Strategy, I don't see a lot of team play in the game at this point. No squadron or division alliances that pick duties and exploit enemy weaknesses. Do you think that will develop in the game in the future? Or will it be mostly single players with limited cooperation?
  6. So, I have been watching a few videos on this subject and I just wondered what other people thought about this. The possible new secret weapon/aspect WG is creating for 2017? Post Thoughts.
  7. Due to the really bad performance of the KM DDs I decided to stop at T7 as I can't find any reason in continuing the line and I agree with every single point mentioned in this review. Oh, And thanks for the hydro!
  8. BackToTheMud

    The slow death of American Destroyers

    American DD’s have been effectively nerfed since the end of the Beta. The buff to BB and Cruiser turning circles mad it a lot harder to hit them at range with the slow velocity of the US 127 mm guns. Thanks to the introduction of the Soviet, and later German, US DD’s have pretty much lost their role as DD hunters. The increasing amount of radar, and to a lesser degree spotter aircrafts, have made it very difficult to ambush anyone. I’m also guessing that the current changes to the Demolition Expert and Fire Prevention captain skills has probably hit them the worst. Not to mention what Radio Location have made of all DD’s ability to sneak around a flank. The last thing American DD’s had that made them special was their superior ability to stealth fire; and now they don’t even have that. I bought my way into the closed beta with the Sims, and US DD’s has been my favourite class of ships ever since. The combination of scouting, jousting over cap circles, exact maintaining of distance, and precisely timed ambushes is why I have continued playing this game. I play this in in periods, and it’s always the US DD’s that brings me back. But WG have continuously nerfed them by proxy ever since WoWS’s launch in 2015. And of course the game need to evolve with the introduction of new ships, but part of that could reasonably be that only US DD’s can stealth fire. In any case, American Destroyers need some love from Wargaming. //Mud
  9. Raiden79

    An Idea for destroyers and torps

    First off i love destroyers. Some of my best and worst games have been in them. I also like the difference in gameplay between the US and IJN dessies, two different skill sets needed. I also have no issue dodgying torps except from the odd kitakami atm But something i would love to see implemented for both (possibly only past tier 5) is a setting for "Range" So for instance, Upgraded torps on Farragut have 4.5km range and an over 60k speed. Have a separate key mapping to adjust "Range". Pressing this key would increase the torps range to say 5.5km or 6.5km but reduce the speed to 50k or 40k respectively For balance sake you could also increase the "Arming Range" to a minimum of 3.0 and 4.0 so that it would mean extra tactical awareness being needed to ensure you have both the awareness to know where to shoot, the spread to shoot at and the range to shoot at. Whats peeps thoughts?
  10. mininghdyt

    New Soviet Branch

    So, i have The Ognevoi right now and i wanted to know what happens after the update because it gets tier 9?!
  11. The RN L/M-class Destroyers are often mentioned in self-made RN DDs Tech Trees and I personally hope too, that they find their way into the game. Though there seems some confusion, especially regarding the Torpedo armament of the Destroyers. Because of that and to maybe get some more attention to this beautiful ship class, I decided to make a little topic about it. General stats: The L/M-class Destroyers comprises of two classes (L and M) and one subclass of Fla Destroyers. When the L-class was under its way they had production Problems with the 4.7in Mk.XX mount, so it was decided to give half of the L-class Flotilla 4x2 4in Mk.XVI in the Mk.XIX mount, instead of 3x2 4.7in Mk.XI in the Mk.XX mount. This subclass, which I will refer to as 4in Destroyers, consisted of the LANCE (GURKHA II), LARNE, LIVELY and LEGION. The M-class was a repetition of the L-class with the planed 4.7in guns. 4.7in L/M-class DDs: Standard displacement: 1920ts/1950t (flottille leader : 1935ts/1966t) Mission displacement: 2661ts/2703t Length (overall):110.5 m Width: 11.2 m Draught: 3.05 m Performance: 48’000 WPS Speed: 36 kn Armament: 3x2 4.7in Mk.XI in Mk.XX lafet, 1X4 2 pounder pom pom, 2x4 12.7 mm MG (AA got updated trough out the war) Torpedo tubes: 2×4 21-inch torpedo tubes (also look Torpedoes) Crew: 221 Ships: LAFOREY (F), LIGHTNING, LOOKOUT, LOYAL, MILNE (F), MAHRATTA (MARKSMAN), MARTIN, MATCHLESS, METEOR, MUSKETEER, MYRMIDON and MARNE. 4in L-class DDs: Everything the same, except Armament: 4x2 4in Mk.XVI in Mk.XIX lafet, 1X4 2 pounder pom pom, 2x4 12.7 mm MG (AA got updated trough out the war) Ships: LANCE (GURKHA II), LARNE, LIVELY and LEGION Main armament: 4.7in Mk.XI in Mk.XX mount: the Mk.XI was a good gun in a good mount. The fired shell was with 28.12 kg heavier than previous 4.7 in DD guns and so had quit a punch against other ships. It was possible to fire 6-10 rounds per minute (at higher firing arcs there were slight reload problems) and the maximum firing range was at about 19,420 m. I remember to have read somewhere that the X-turret had, at 20 degrees elevation a 360 degrees firing arc, which would mean that it actually could shoot forward over the Britch (don’t know if that’s true tow, or if they would implement it in the game, can the X-turret of the Gearing fire over the Britch, in game?). All in all it was a good gun with a good mount and backed up by good fire control, some consider it to be the best RN DD-gun of the WW2, although the AA roll was limited. 4in Mk.XVI in Mk.XIX mount: a good dual purpose gun with a maximum elevation of 80 degrees, the shell weighted 14 to 17 kg, which was fired at a maximum range of 18‘150 m at a rate of 15-20 rounds per minute. It was definitely the better AA mounting than the 4.7in Mk.XI in Mk.XX mount, and together with the two more guns and faster firing speed considered to have about the same effectiveness against ships. Torpedoes: The 4in Destroyers kept there torpedo Armament trough out the war, but the 4.7in Destroyers had some changes done, which aren’t easy to follow. The Mk. XX mount had only a maximal gun elevation of 50 degrees and slight problems with the reload at high firing arcs, so it was unsatisfactory as AA, because of that it was decided to replace the rear quadruple torpedo launcher of the 4.7in DDs with a single 4in AA gun. The M-class was finished with this changes, but I’m not sure if the L-class first was finished with the 2x4 TT and then refitted with the single 4 in AA gun (if somebody knows more about that, I’m welcome for information’s). What I know is, that late in war they refitted the rear quadruple torpedo launcher and toke the single 4in from board, this was done to most 4.7 in DDs still in service. Although I haven’t found a detailed list, I tried to make one out of the info’s I have. Following 4.7in DDs had 2x4 TT at the end or after the war: MATCHLESS (wiki), MARNE (wiki, AC), MILNE (AC), LOOKOUT (AC), LOYAL (AC), METEOR (AC), and MUSKETEER (AC). (Maybe there were more refitted but these are the one I know of) In Game: I see 3 different hulls for the L/M-class in game: 1. Hull with 4.7 in guns, one quadruple torpedo launcher and the single 4in guns. 2. Hull with 4 in guns, two quadruple torpedo launcher and better close range AA. 3. Hull with 4.7 in guns, two quadruple torpedo launcher without the single 4in gun and better close range AA. I see the L/M-class with the 3.Hull and torpedoes with at least 50kn speed and 10 km range at Tier 8, if the torpedoes are worse I would see her at Tier 7. Conclusion: I’m saving all my free xp only for this ship class and really hope it makes it in the game. The ships aren’t the fastest but still should be quit manoeuvrable, with the 4.7 in guns they would have an accurate and heavy punch and with the 4in guns they would be a threat to all enemy DDs and aircrafts, the 2x4 TT and there torpedoes wouldn’t be the bests but still sufficient to play as torpedo boat. All in All it would be kind of an all-rounder in my eyes, everywhere god or ok, but never amazing or bad. What do you Guys think? P.S.: sorry for my mediocre English P.P.S.: As you can see in the Sources, I wanted to put some pictures in but it seems that I’m to stupid for doing it. Sources: -„A century of the Royal Navy at Malta“ Joseph Bonnici and Michael Cassar (referred as AC) - „Zerstörer im Zweiten Weltkrieg“ M.J.Whitley - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QF_4_inch_Mk_XVI_naval_gun - http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_47-50_mk11.htm - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L_and_M-class_destroyer - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QF_4.7_inch_Mark_XI_gun Pictures: - http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_47-50_mk11.htm - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L_and_M-class_destroyer#/media/File:HMS_Legion.jpg - http://www.naval-history.net/xGM-Chrono-10DD-43M-HMS_Matchless.htm
  12. Ferdinand_98

    Type 93 missing until Kagero

    Hi guys. Recently unlocked Mutsuki, and found that she hasn't got the Type 93 Torpedo. I think that in previous updates, she had them. What happened? Why are they missing in the tech tree until reaching Kagero?
  13. King_Nidge

    Unplayable 4/5 games

    I don't understand how this game is playable? Yes I am new enough and only have to tier 4/5 but I found WoT enjoyable and fun at that stage. WoW is slower and therefore less easy to get into. Games can be over before you get into them, which is hugely frustrating. The game is packed with players who don't know how to use their ship, noticeably more-so than WoT, they just run off or lemming train and the battle is lost in the first 2-3 minutes. So if I am in a Battleship I may not get to engage the enemy for long before the battle is already lost by idiot cruisers and destroyers who just die on their own or carriers who fail to launch fighters in time to protect ships. Also, final gripe, cruisers, OP to the max. Anytime I take on a battleships with a cruiser I generally cripple them or sink them before they can hit me. Is that realistic? That Battleships gets raped by cruisers most of the time? I see it ever game, Cruisers getting the most XP or kills. Battleships which have such a low RoF, while Cruisers can generally maintain constant HE fire keeping a Battleship alight and they also appear to be more accurate even at long range. Does it get any better?
  14. Tatoosh

    Unresponsive Torpedoes

    I was trying to do a daily mission that requires the use of torpedoes. I used my USS Sims Destroyer since it has the most torpedoes. But in two missions the torpedoes refused to engage. I have them displayed in the graphic but hitting my torpedo command key does not highlight the area of targeting as it used to. The second mission out, the torpedoes went through a long loading sequence (countdown timer) for the graphic, then they behaved as the time before, refusing to engage when I pressed the torpedo key, instead the focus going to one of my artillery guns. So I got zero torpedoes launched, maybe 3 artillery shots off since I was fiddle farting around with the torpedo key trying to engage them so I could make some progress on the daily mission. And of course, I got sunk pretty darn quick. So I tried a standard Co-op battle and exactly the same results. Totally incapable of bringing torpedoes to bear, no targeting of them, When I pressed the torpedo command key, the torpedo graphic would go green, but the main screen would zoom to my forward artillery mount, no torpedo targeting spread from the side of the ship. I tried approaching an enemy ship so I was close enough to engage and still nothing. Well, I got sunk of course,but nothing in terms of my torpedoes. Color me totally puzzled! So what gives with the torpedoes?
  15. Hi all, I have one rather simple proposal for better Cruiser utilization vs. Destroyers (i.e. the task which should be primary task for every competent Cruiser captain)! Why not introduce the user directionable Fighter/Scout planes! We already have the mechanics for it (i.e. Carriers can direct their planes) - so only some sort of very simplified interface is needed for this... IMHO, that way players will be able, if their skill is up to that, to successfully detect and engage enemy destroyers... What do you think guys? Leo "Apollo11" P.S. BTW, we have many many games where there are no Carriers but where are lost and lots of Destroyers (on both sides) - this could most certainly help to "level the playing field"!
  16. Sym333

    Duels de DDs

    Non, je ne parle pas de Donjons & Dragons mais bel et bien de ces petites pestes qui sont censées décrocher la victoire pour leur équipe. Au fait, j'ai une question bien spécifique. Vaut-il la peine d'utiliser les obus perforants dans une danse de la mort à courte portée entre deux destroyers? Je sais que les Allemands disposent d'AP à haut potentiel de dégâts contre des HE souffreteuses, mais qu'en est-il des autres nations?
  17. Dear Wargaming, Whilst I appreciate you have tried to create a "fair" solution to your wrecking of the old IJN line to create a "new" "Gunboat" line by giving permanent camouflage to people who already paid for it and by extending same to the replacement ship and moved ship, it is fundamentally flawed to do so. I concede that this is generous and should be a good solution. But it isn't because you have taken one choice a customer has made and turned it into another that they did not make. I paid for permanent camouflage on the Hatsuharu (T7), Fubuki (T8) & Kagero (T9) because I liked those ships. I liked playing them, it made sense to have permanent camouflage given the savings and in the case of the Fubuki & Kagero especially, I appreciated the accelerated XP earning potential for captain training. They have their flaws, but played a certain way they were fun to take out. Again, because this is important: I PAID FOR PERMANENT CAMOUFLAGE ON THESE SHIPS BECAUSE I LIKED THESE SHIPS. NOT THE ONES YOU HAVE REPLACED THEM WITH, THE ONES I HAD. I therefore made a choice to purchase and then part with 9,000 doubloons to buy permanent camouflage for them. My free choice to spend my own money buying in game premium currency to buy an in game purchasable item for my own reasons. You have taken that choice away from me and have not given me anything by giving me, potentially, permanent camouflage on two ships that I dont like or in the case of the Kagero, no benefit at all as I already had permanent camo on the Fubuki and therefore have only received what I paid for (permanent camouflage on a T9 ship) on a ship that is not the one I put it on and not one I would now keep. You have ruined the Kagero and arguably reduced the utility of what was the Fubuki for Ranked battles now you have removed the longer ranged torpedo choices. The Kagero's replacement is a very poor replacement for what was a good ship at a particular game style - you know, that thing you keep harping on about "unique gameplay characteristics". It was completely unique, it had no business closing in with the enemy to use guns. It's job was to stealth cap, spot and when opportunity provided itself, torpedo either to deny an area or to sink shipping. It rewarded thinking, not gung-ho charging. It could turn it's rudder quickly and with the consequent enabling of propulsion boost, could change speed quickly too. Its guns were not great, but 2 guns sets facing aft with decent hitting power and the ability to dodge incoming fire at least gave you a chance of escaping when found. Perfect for the role outlined in the paragraph above. Now it is less stealthy, less maneuverable and less able to defend itself. It is not therefore a ship I would chose to keep, unlike its predecessor which I very much enjoyed, warts and all. The point is, I chose to spend my money buying gold to purchase permanent camouflage for the Hatsuharu, Fubuki and Kagero. You chose to replace those ships with something else entirely. I should therefore get the doubloons back so that I can again make a choice whether to acquire permanent camouflage for the replacement ship or spend it elsewhere. I would therefore urge you to offer your customers the right of choice that they had beforehand and refund the gold value of the permanent camouflage to those that ask for it. I might keep it for the T8 replacement ship, I might not, but I am certain to want to sell everything else as I have no use for them and no desire to play them for fun as the ships I I now have are not fun. In any event, by offering a refund you lose nothing - I dont get the actual money back, just the doubloons - but gain trust from your customers. Arguably I put myself in a worse position because I have permanent camouflage now on 5 ships (T6 - 9 on "old" line, T6 on "gunboat" new line) where before I had it only on 3. But that should be a choice I can make because simply put, given the choice of putting permanent camouflage on the ships you have now put into the game I would not do so with any bar the T8 and even then I am 50/50 about it. That's 9,000 doubloons I'd like back please, or in other words, permanent camouflage on an Iowa and my Shimakaze. As my point about gaining trust infers, refund my in game currency, show me that my choices are respected and I will have the confidence to keep buying permanent camouflage for the ships I want to keep because I like to play them. You might well wreck the ships I choose to put it on in future as you have the Kagero especially, but I am OK with that if I have the choice to take back my doubloons (but not real cash) if you do so. The principle that I have a choice to buy or not to buy has been upheld. Thank you.
  18. purpletrain0000

    What is the best destroyer line for AA?

    Any ideas? I believe it might be the Germans for short range. Post thoughts please.
  19. ABED1984

    Concealment Expert

    So I've finally got the CE perk for my Kamikaze R and I've a small question, When I detect other DDs I spot them at about 5.7 km while my concealment is 5.4 km and their minimum concealment is 6 km, putting in mind that those DDs don't have the CE perk, So Am I missing something?
  20. Angelus_Inferos

    Shimakaze vs Gearing

    Hello everyone, Yes i know there are more topics like this but I can't get a good overvieuw of wich ship pepol do more like. This time.... Shimakaze VS. Gearing. I have both tier 5 DD's. Minekaze and Nicholas. I both like them much but thing are gonna change after that. The torpedoes of the japanese are really good but the guns of amarican ones are so much better. I really dunno wich one to choose cuz gearing has (i think) good torps aswell. Well plz select one of the 2 in the poll. Thanks ;) have a nice day regards Dexcon
  21. rUhavinFun

    Smokescreen Duration

    Hey Capatains, having quite some fun driving the US DDs lately and i started to like using my smokescreen for beating up spotted targets. However i get into trouble quite a lot because its hard to tell when the smokescreen actually starts to vanish. I tried to find out the duration by myself by looking at the game timer which got me killed even more because i was looking at it every 2 seconds or so . I also couldn't find anything about the duration in the forums, so sry. when this is an old question. Jingles once mentioned something about a minute, but it seems a bit longer than that. Can someone help me out and tell me the exact or approximate duration? Cheers, havinFun ^^
  22. jorn175

    Torpedoes too OP?

    Hello everyone, I've having some trouble with torpedoes, I think that they are too unbalanced. I don't know what you guys think about it, please show me what you think about them, but I think that they are too OP, because of several reasons. Reason 1: Torpedo bombers can attack from 2/3 sides and you are guaranteed going back to port, because of the flooding and fire. Reason 2: Destroyers can go full ham and launch torpedoes from less then 10 meters and you are dead... Reason 3: When 2 aircraft carriers are in an division they can work together and wreck you by attacking from almost 6 sides and kill 2 friendlies with one run (I don't think that aircraft carriers are OP, compared to WoT they are much more balanced) Reason 4: You get an indication where to shoot your torpedoes, but you get no indication where you have to shoot with your typical main armament. Reason 5: As an warship you can try steering towards them or away from them, but with some bugs torpedo bombers drop their torpedoes within an guaranteed hit-zone, and you will at least take 1 or 2 hits (And if you steer away from them, the torpedoes are faster then you) And yes torpedoes have an limited range, but that doesn't care with the speed of destroyers, cruisers and airplanes. And when you hit you are devastating an enemy ship with fire, flooding and sometimes even an ammorack... And even when you do no critical damage you will at least do around 9000 dmg, with one torpedo (When 2/3 can hit) And the reload is also too fast, when you used your repair button you have an cooldown of 2:30, but torpedoes reload in 30 seconds (the same reload as the Kawachi, Kongo, Fuso etc. and they only do devestating damage when the shell penetrates, and doesn't do flooding damage) But my conclusion is that torpedoes NEED an nerf...
  23. Hey guys, So what i've noticed time and time again is that people keep firing torpedoes straight into the path of friendly ships that are appearing on their right side, as the friendly ships are hidden behind the map. Now although you can argue that players should pay more attention to the map to avoid this, In the heat of the moment one can overlock this. So what I'd suggest is that as most destroyer captains have their guns selected then switch to Torps when they are needed, perhaps there should be an option within the settings to disable the minimap whilst torpedoes are selected.
  24. OttoZander

    Battleship AP damage to destroyers.

    Am I the only one getting annoyed by this? I remember clearly in the CBT having to load HE to deal with destroyers otherwise your battleship salvos were ineffective. Nowadays, something seems to be out of order, as I constantly see battleships blasting away destroyers, 15,000 salvos are not even a surprise. Yamatos seem to be the only ship in line with the over-pen mechanics, guessing due to its immense gun size. Where did the over-penetration mechanics disappear? Is there any justification for this? What are your arguments for or against this mechanic.
  25. The Emergency War Programme destroyers of the Royal Navy were ordered under the Wartime programmes of 1939-1942. They effectively form a bridge between the last of the Interwar Standards, the G, H & Is, and the Weapon class destroyers that followed them in the 1943 Programme. In in-game terms, that places them at tier VII. However, there are 112 destroyers, in 14 different classes. There is a great deal of variance between the first and last. As only one slot exists in the sub branch for a regular ship, which class(es) will be in that slot is a matter for debate. To help you make an informed decision, data sets for the classes have been provided below Things like rudder shift time, detectability & consumables are part of fine balancing, and thus are not mentioned. O&P: Q&R: S, T, U, V & W: Z & Ca: Ch, Co & Cr: The data shown above is stock. What do you think? Many thanks to Phoenix_jz for the HP & shell damage numbers.