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


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 97 results

  1. With the last update, the model of the special T10 Pan-European Destroyer Smaland was changed. The new model has an launch rail for Saab Rb 08 anti-ship missiles, with two of them clearly loaded. Could this mean that missiles will finaly make it in the game with the Pan-European DDs? What do you think?
  2. Hello everyone! I have posted my suggestions in other topics before, but I think these options should be considered in a separately topic as well. Here are suggestions that Yugoslav destroyers could consider to add to the European technology tree. Royal Yugoslav Navy Dubrovnik Characteristics: Type: Flotilla leader Displacement: 2884 tons (Full) Length: 113,2 m Beam: 10,67 m Draft: 3,58 - 4,1 m Propulsion: 48.000 hp Speed: 40,3 knots Armament: 4x1 Škoda 140mm guns 1x2 Škoda 83,5mm AA guns 2x2 + 2x1 Škoda 40mm AA guns 2x1 Zbrojovka 15mm AA machine guns 2x3 533mm Torpedo Tubes (Mk IX torpedo type) *Ideal Tier 7 destroyer for research. Beograd Characteristics: Class & Type: Beograd-class destroyer Displacement: 1655 tons (Full) Length: 98 m Beam: 9,45 m Draft: 2,7 - 3,2 m Propulsion: 44.000 hp Speed: 39,2 knots Armament: 4x1 Škoda 120mm guns 2x2 Bofors 40mm AA guns 2x1 12 mm AA machine guns 2x3 550mm Torpedo Tubes *Ideal Tier 6 destroyer for research. Split Characteristics: Type: Flotilla leader Displacement: 3048 tons (Full) Length: 120 m Beam: 11,3 m Draft: 3,7 m Propulsion: 55.000 hp Speed: 38 knots Armament: 5x1 Škoda 140mm guns 5x2 Bofors 40mm AA guns 4x1 Zbrojovka 15 mm AA macgine guns 2x3 or 3x2 or 2x2+1x3 533mm Torpedo Tubes *Ideal Tier 8 destroyer for research. Yugoslav Navy R11 Split Characteristics: Type: Large destroyer Displacement: 3048 tons (Full) Length: 120 m Beam: 11,3 m Draft: 3,7 m Propulsion: 50.000 hp Speed: 31,5 knots Armament: 4x1 127mm guns 1x4 + 2x2 + 2x1 Bofors 40mm AA guns 1x5 533mm Torpedo Tubes *Maybe premium Tier 6 or Tier 7 destroyer.
  3. En tant que joueur de CV, j'en ai assez des mensonges répétés par la mafia des DD relatifs à la vulnérabilité de leurs navires OP face à mes petits avions régulièrement envoyés à leur mort sans que personne ne pense aux familles des pilotes. Mais ce qui m'énerve le plus, c'est le refus continu de ces joueurs d'accepter qu'un joueur de DD un tout petit peu compétent peut massacrer tout appareil volant avec une facilité écrasante. Et contrairement aux joueurs de DD en question qui envoient des affirmations sans fondement, basées sur leur "expérience" et leurs prétention, moi, je viens clore le débat une fois pour toutes avec une source de valeur scientifique absolue : Voilà, le débat est clos, et j'accepterai ici les excuses des joueurs de DD dont l'effroyable imposture a été mise à jour. P.S. : si vous n'êtes pas assez compétents pour faire ce qui est montré, faut pas se plaindre et faut apprendre à mieux jouer.
  4. Themistocles_

    IS WOWS A GAME OF CHANCE?

    I start this post thinking about the past years when this game used to be more skill less chance.Now it seems that if you are lucky you will get maybe another descent player in ranked and perhaps 2-3 in random.Think about it.Containers,MM,Ranked,Clan battles(yes even that,bit less but still)
  5. Hello, fellow forumites! About the forthcoming introduction of submarines, there is one aspect in particular that I'd like to adress, namely their effect on destroyer gameplay. As a class that relies to a great extent on stealth and manoeuvrability, the destroyer is extra sensitive, balance-wise, to any change in the stealth meta. I can hardly see how submarines can fail to affect stealth play in a big way. We know, as yet, very little about the details of submarine gameplay, and this is hardly surprising since there is - as yet - very little to know. But from what I've seen in the videos by iChase and others, and read on this forums, I can at least begin to make some educated assumptions. We can assume that submarines will have the highest stealth rating in the game. Even on the surface they will probably be able to out-spot most, or maybe even all, destroyers. Once they go to periscope depth, their stealth advantage becomes even greater, although they lose mobility to compensate. And if push comes to shove, they can submerge fully and - with added mobility - make an expeditious retreat. As for weapons, they have no guns of any kind, but they do have homing torpedoes. In iChase's recent videos of submarine gameplay, the odds seemed to be fairly even in a straight-up duel between a submarine and a destroyer, although I'd guess that a destroyer that manages to avoid getting torpedoed during the initial attack, would probably hold the advantage. But this is in a situation where there are no allies on either side to provide fire support. If the destroyer had to conduct his manoeuvres while under fire from the allies of the submarine, things would be much different. Based on this, I can see the following scenario taking place in a typical scouting or capping contest between a submarine and a destroyer, early on in the battle. A. The submarine (in surface mode) and the destroyer both approach the cap zone. The destroyer is spotted first, and immediately comes under fire from the enemy team. If the destroyer disengages at this point, the submarine will have won the engagement. If the destroyer pushes on, go to B. B. As the two ships close in on each other, the submarine goes to periscope depth and thus remains unspotted. It starts to reverse, and fires homing torpedoes at the destroyer. Meanwhile, the destroyer - which remains spotted and is kept under continuous fire - starts to take some serious damage. If the destroyer disengages at this point, the submarine will have won the engagement. If the destroyer pushes on, go to C. C. The destroyer may take one or more of the submarines torpedoes, in which case it will either sink or be forced to withdraw, or it may dodge them and push on. In the latter case, the destroyer - who is significantly faster than the submarine - swiftly comes close enough to proximity spot his enemy, and opens fire. The submarine takes a few hits, and immediately submerges fully. Since a fully submerged submarine continues to proximity detect ships on the surface (without being proximity spotted in return), the destroyer remains spotted and will probably be sunk by incoming fire before it has time to conduct a depth charge run. When this happens, the submarine will have won the engagement. To sum it all up: If a submarine has even moderate back-up from its allies, I can't see how it could lose this sort of engagement other than through some serious mistake or misplay of its own. Obviously, there are many other parameters to consider in a scenario such as the one described above. A destroyer equipped with hydro, for instance, would presumably have a much greater chance of avoiding the homing torpedoes, and unless submarines are given magical anti-hydro capabilities, it should also be able to use the hydro to locate submarines at greater distances. And the good old "Vigilance" skill may perhaps see a renaissance. But these are all details in a much bigger picture - namely the supplanting of the destroyer as the most stealthy ship class in the game. How will this affect destroyer gameplay, and how will it change the overall balance between ship classes? I have intentionally painted a bleak picture of the future. I am hoping for counter-arguments, showing that the scenario I've envisioned above will not come to pass. I don't claim to be able to predict what will happen. But I know what I don't want to happen, namely to see the destroyer reduced to the role of second-line torpedo spammer. Launching torpedoes from second line is not only a war crime in itself (joking, here), it is also a damn boring way of playing what I personally regard as the most fun, mobile and challenging ship class in the game. And before you say it, no - neither the carrier rework nor such game mechanics as radar and hydro, have yet been able to relegate the destroyer to second line. The game environment has changed more than once since this game's inception, but the gunboat destroyer still is where it has always been - in the middle of the action, fighting at close quarters with the enemy in the glorious grand melêe. I sincerely hope it will remain there. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this matter, captains and gamers all! Cheers! Edited: After putting up this thread, I learned from another poster - courtesy of a link provided by @Cagliostro_chan in post #23 below, thanks a bunch! - that fully submerged submarines will indeed proximity detect surface ships, without being proximity detected by them in return. It follows that the odds are even more heavily stacked against the destroyer, than I reckoned with at first. I have amended paragraph C in my above scenario accordingly.
  6. Captains! Due to the installation of the Update, the server will be unavailable From: Thu. 22 Aug. 07:00 CEST (UTC+2) Until: Thu. 22 Aug. 10:00 CEST (UTC+2) Update size: 1 GB Update 0.8.7 continues the cycle of updates focusing on French destroyers. Take part in the new Stage of the French event: research the French destroyer branch; gather the new collection; and obtain the new unique Commander, Philippe Auboyneau. Aside from the new event Stage, we've prepared some significant changes to gameplay: a new progression system—the Research Bureau; an updated matchmaker; and improved mechanics for the priority AA sector. What's inside? French Destroyers Event: Part 2 Research Bureau Ranked Sprint Game Mechanic Improvements UI Improvements Armory Content Additions and Changes Other Changes and Improvements You can find the whole list on our Portal, or in the newest Dasha video: Action Stations!
  7. _Scarrry_

    Aigle

    Poproszę moderatora o wstawienie w odpowiednie miejsce bo nie ma katalogu francuskie niszczyciele, a mamy pierwszy z nich. Na Shipcomrade recenzja Aigle w skrócie: za - największa pula HP na tier 6, przypominająca tier 7 (ze skilami kapitana prawie 20 000 HP) - najpotężniejsza artyleria na tych tierach - bardzo silne torpedy przeciw: - fatalne kąty zrzutu torped - fatalne prędkości obrotu wież dział - duży, niezbyt zwrotny - słabe camo - dramatycznie słaba plotka, nawet jak na niszczyciel podsumowanie: średniawy mehbote hmm... mi przychodzi do głowy najbardziej chyba pasujące do niego określenie - kanonierka
  8. French destroyers vs Russian destroyers I would like to compare these two nations in this post; please comment about which is better. Speed: French is faster, though Russians still fast. French have improved engine boost. Health: About the same. Guns: Khabarovsk: 4x2 130mm, base reload of 5s, base rotation of 20s/180 degrees, base range of 11.24km, 900m/s Kleber: 4x2 139mm, base reload of 7s, base rotation of 10s/180 degrees, base range of 13.56km 840m/s Kleber has access to main battery reload, as well as improved AP shells, allowing citadels on cruisers at close/medium ranges. Torps: Kleber has 8km torps. Khabarovsk torps only for emergencies. Concealment: Khabarovsk: What concealment? (10km base) Kleber: Useable (7.98km base) Rudder shift/Turning circle: Khabarovsk: 11.1s, 760m Kleber : 4.8s, 740m Question: Which is the best nation to go for? I know that French can cap more easily, though they don't have smoke. Which is better at open-water gunning and wasd-ing? Which playstyle is more interesting? Please let me know your thoughts.
  9. Bonjour tout le monde, Aujourd'hui je me lance dans une nouvelle enquête d'opinion. Celle-ci porte sur les destroyers, et je ferai dans le reste de la semaine / début de semaine prochaine les autres branches (croiseurs et cuirassés). Je pensais au début faire un sondage portant exclusivement sur les destroyers T10 (car le T10 est tant un "Graal' que le tiers le plus amené à jouer en compétitif / semi- compétitif). Mais j'ai réalisé que beaucoup ne possèdent pas forcément tous les destroyers T10, ou tout au moins un nombre suffisant pour répondre de façon objective et représentative. Je choisis donc de commencer à partir du T8. Pourquoi me direz vous ? Parce que : Certaines branches se séparent à partir du T8 (la branche japonaises (dont la méta commence réellement à partir du T8, bien que je suis conscient qu'elle se sépare à partir du T5) et soviétique). On commence à avoir un aperçu de ce sera le T10 dès le T8 (sauf exceptions). Et pour la raison que j'expose au dessus. Je pose donc quatre questions, qui sont à choix multiples (car on peut avoir plusieurs branches préférées et détestées). Par ailleurs, merci de ne pas prendre en compte les destroyers premiums et d'exprimer votre opinion uniquement sur les branches régulières s'il vous plait. Ainsi ne seront pas présentes les nations Polonaise, du Commonwealth et Française. Merci beaucoup pour vos réponses et n'hésitez pas à me faire part de vos avis / de vos remarques en développant le topic Amitiés Doobie le Golden Nota pour la modération : je poste le sujet dans "expérience de jeu" car je considère que le sondage touche plus au ressenti d'une branche vis à vis du gameplay, que du développement de leurs statistiques / performances individuelles. Si jamais cela pose problème vis à vis de la cohérence du forum, n'hésitez pas à me le dire en MP afin que je poste les autres sondages dans la section relative aux navires. Merci à vous
  10. LeSanglierArdennais

    destroyer, où on va ?

    bonjour je viens de faire 2 batailles, avec le minsk et le hsienyang... quel est l'intérêt d'avoir autant de handicap ??? mon minsk est détectable à 6km800 et à une portée de torpille à 3km200... en gros je me fais défoncer avant de voir mon adversaire, et je ne torpille jamais. en plus, l'accélération est banal, et les dégâts des obus aussi, quand ils percent ! mon hsienyang crache de la guimauve et ses torpilles sont en profondeur avec une portée banale... en plus on me voit de loin sans que je repère. Les dégâts des torpilles est ridicule : j'ai fait une salve de torpilles où j'ai fait 8 hit, mais je n'ai pas coulé le BB !!! c'est improbable !!! 8 hit, on DOIT couler le BB, sans discussion possible. heureusement qu'on se fait moins taper par les CV, parce c'était pénible Bref, ce que je veux dire, c'est qu'il faut vraiment avoir l'esprit de combat avec les destroyers, parce que les combats sont trop âpres. il manque d'atout à tous les destroyers. Par exemple, pouvoir étendre un champs de mines en eau profonde, ou que les inconvénients soient compensés par un atout particulier (le hsienyang pourrait avoir des torpilles eau-profonde à très gros dégats, le minsk pourrait avoir des obus AP ou HP à très gros dégâts aussi) il me semble urgent de donner aux destroyers un meilleur gameplay, parce que là, même après une victoire, je n'ai pas de satisfaction
  11. LemonadeWarrior

    High tier German destroyers

    At this moment in World of Warships the balance is pretty on point at the higher tiers, but in my opinion destroyers are in a weird spot, especially the German DDs. See the table below: High tier destroyers Nation Tier Ship name Purpose Conc Gimmicks IJN 9 Yugumo Torpedo 5.5 TBRB IJN 10 Shimakaze Torpedo 5.6 Wall of skill RN 9 Jutland Cap cont/gunship 5.7 Hydro 3km & repair party PAN 9 Chung Mu Cap cont 5.7 Radar USN 9 Fletcher Hybrid 5.8 DF PAN 10 YueYang Cap cont 5.8 Radar USN 10 Gearing Hybrid 5.9 DF IJN 9 Kitakaze Gunship 5.9 TBRB KM 9 Z46 Cap cont 5.9 Hydro 5km RN 10 Daring Cap cont/gunship 6.0 Hydro 3km & repair party SN 10 Grozovoi Hybrid 6.0 DF and repair party KM 10 Z52 Hybrid 6.1 Hydro 6km IJN 10 Harugumo Gunship 6.2 TBRB SN 9 Udaloi Gunship 6.8 DF SN 9 Tashkent Gunship 7.4 Repair party SN 10 Khabarovsk Gunship 7.9 Repair party I am probably a bit off with the purposes I have given to some DDs. The difference between a gunship and cap contester is that a cap contester functions really well against other DDs, where a gunship doesn't. EG: It is impossible for a Harugumo to hunt down a Shimakaze. Z46 Z46 feels a bit forgotten imo. With her current concealment she will encounter ships such as the Kitakaze, Jutland and Daring. Z46 has some really nice reload torpedoes, but her shell damage output is pretty darn low. Jutland can dish out 220,32k HE damage and Kitakaze 242,88k HE damage, where the Z46 can only do 170,1k HE damage per minute. This leaves me wondering, where does the Z46 belong? They used to be darn good cap contesters, but the game has passed that stage. Okay, well they are still really good torpedo boats. Fast reloading torpedoes, which could inflict some sweet flooding damage. Wait, what, flooding damage got nerfed... Now what? EDIT: She never had a 5.6km hydro range, it was 4.7km. My bad. Z52 The hydro of the Z52 stayed pretty steady, it was around 5.94 before, or something like that and it is now 6km. While having superior hydro she also got nerfed by the flooding nerf that was brought into the game lately. Just as the Z46 she used to be a pretty good torpedo boat that could set many floodings. It used to be a reward for the low damage torpedoes. Still really good at lighting up an entire cap when you can hit the rock in the middle of the cap. Doubts I am not really sure about the German DD line. The lack of gun power used to make up for their strong hydro, but with the addition of RN DDs and the IJN gun boat line, and the flooding damage nerf, they feel really weak, especially the Z46. I think the Z46 deserves a 6km hydro as well, and that both ships should receive a buff to their torpedo reload time. Improved torpedo dispersion? In my opinion the Kitakaze, Jutland and Daring should all receive a concealment nerf. Especially the British DDs were really strong before they fixed the concealment mechanic. They definitely need to be looked at when they introduce it as a feature. Your thoughts?
  12. I was bored one day, and decided to follow up on a theory of mine. I've seen many people who only consider how much BFT lowers the reload of their guns when deciding whether or not to take it on their DDs. This leads them to disregard or undervalue BFT on ships with an already low reload time. After doing some maths, I discovered something that seems obvious once explained, but seems to go right over the heads of most people. Counterintuitively, the ships with the lowest base reload time benefit the most from BFT. To explain this, we need to look at BFT differently. Instead of viewing it as a percentage based reload decrease, we should view it as a percentage based rate of fire increase. When you look at it this way, it's quite obvious that the ships with the highest base rate of fire (and therefore lowest base reload) will benefit the most. To help avoid further confusion about this, and to allow you to calculate the usefulness of BFT on a ship yourself, here is a formula for calculating rate of fire increase. To find DPM, simply multiply the answer you get by the shell damage. ((60/(Base Reload*0.9))-(60/Base Reload))*Number of guns For your convenience, here is a list of the rate of fire and DPM increases BFT gives to each of the tier X DDs: Gearing: 13.3 rpm, 24000 HE DPM, 28000 AP DPM Shimakaze: 7.02 rpm, 15087 HE DPM, 15438 AP DPM Harugumo: 22.2 rpm, 26666 HE DPM, AP DPM Z-52: 10 rpm, 15000 HE DPM, 30000 AP DPM Grozovoi: 10 rpm, 18000 HE DPM, 26000 AP DPM Khabarovsk: 10.6 rpm, 20266 HE DPM, 27733 AP DPM Daring: 16 rpm, 27200 HE DPM, 33600 AP DPM Yueyang: 10 rpm: 18000 HE DPM, 21000 AP DPM Rate of Fire is given to two decimal places and is the total increase provided from all guns. DPM is given to the nearest whole number.
  13. The Tier X Pan-Asian destroyer is a strong ship, has good concealment, good rate of fire and the ability to install the consumable "Radar", which can effectively deal with adversaries, a small silhouette which gets less hits when under fire as well as low detection torpedoes which are very effective against cruisers and battleships. Of course, we must not forget about the unique smoke screen that allows you to successfully hide from enemies for much of the battle, as well as to fight more effectively for control points and retreat in the event of an unsuccessful skirmish. All these factors allow the destroyer to significantly influence the outcome of the battle and is statistically superior to its classmates. To address this, we have increased the reload time of the main caliber guns by 1 second (from 3 to 4 seconds) and torpedo tubes by 20 seconds (from 136 to 156 seconds). These changes will minimally affect the unique features of the destroyer, while bringing its statistics to the same level as other destroyers at its Tier. Source:- https://www.facebook.com/wowsdevblog/
  14. Dirty_Dunc

    Bad Destroyer (DD) PLayers

    I'm sick to the back teeth of high tier / Tier 10 destroyers playing badly and throwing games right from the the outset by : 1. Not attempting to cap or going everywhere but the cap circle, even when the enemy is clearly at the other end of the map. 2. All DD's going to one cap and then wondering why the game was lost on points. 3. Asking why Battleshsips and Cruisers dont blindly enter caps at the start of a match to '"support" them. 4. Suiciding at the start of the game leaving the rest of the team to be blindly picked off for the next 15 minutes. This is especially excruiating when there are four or five dd's per side and yours are all dead. 5. Launching torpedoes from behind team mates and then accusing everyone else of 'camping'.
  15. Dirty_Dunc

    Domintaion and Destroyers

    Whilst I realise this is a multiplayer game and it's hard for developers to please everyone, I honestly think there are too many destroyers in the game and too much importance is being placed on their role. My main concern revolves around the continual use of domination mode, both in random and ranked battles. Personally speaking, I am growing increasingly tired of watching an entire squadron of destroyers die within the first 5 minutes of a game, leaving the rest of the team to fight a 'lost cause' for the remaining 15 minutes. I'm absolutely convinced that a great many players don't even know what the objectives of domination mode are , let alone what constitues a winning sceario or even what the points at the top of screen represent. At least in Standard Battles I don't have to be concerned about what areas are being held or not. I think Wargaming are asking too much of random teams when it comes to Domination Mode and I would like to see it made an optional game mode, like Co op or Arms Race.
  16. Salutation camarades capitaines. Si je fais ce petit post aujourd'hui, c'est pour exprimer mon ras le bol des parties avec 4 voir 5 destroyers de chaque côté. Etant joueur de BB, spécialement de Yamato, je sais qu'une partie comme ça, je ne vais rien faire à part naviguer en zig zag et avancer dans des zones déjà scout par mes alliés. Et encore, même dans ce cas, je suis pas à l'abri d'une salve de 15-20 torpilles qui arrive par le flanc.... Bref, tout ça pour dire que les mécaniques de jeu avec le flooding, les dégats massifs des torpilles, le spam HE du DD dans une smoke, etc.... ok ! Mais au moins, il serait bien de limiter à... disons 3 DD maximum de chaque côté sinon la partie devient injouable pour les BB et c'est franchement frustrant. Qu'en pensez-vous si une telle limite était mise en place dans le MM ?
  17. I was talking with @El2aZeR yesterday about the current state of DDs, given the current meta and the ships therein. There is a long-going trend going on regarding destroyers, and the addition of the new British DDs only reinforces this. Starting with the topics concerning radar, a lot of the pro-radar gents seem to be defending radar, because "the stealth of DDs needs a counter". There is a lot wrong with that argument. It is true that DDs have weapons in the form of torps and guns, but also in the form of stealth. (among others) But this stealth gets countered by. - Aircraft carriers. Even more so for IJN DDs, who's importance gets nullified by a decent CV. That for a multitude of reasons CVs don't appear as much as other classes shouldn't matter in this discussion. Also CVs seem to have made a resurgence lately. - For some reason I don't hear this one a lot. DDs stealth gets countered by the enemy DDs. If one of both teams doesn't support their DDs, to blap the enemy DD the moment they get spotted, that is NOT indicative of stealth being a problem, but lack of teamplay and basic understanding of the game. With the matchmaking adjustment a while ago both teams are guaranteed to have equal number of DDs(/"DDs") - Radar. Has been discussed enough lately, I guess. - Hydro. At high tiers reaching beyond the detection range of the stealthiest of DDs and running for a long time. Again, ask El2a how many cruisers don't run defAA but hydro... - Spotting planes and catapult planes mounted on capital ships. As any DD player knows, torps get more succesful the closer you get. - The imho ridiculous idea to give every captain a free "detection skill". Simplest example: if I get detected in a Zao without detecting anything , I know it is time to dodge/activate hydro/launch double fighters. Any decent captain will know the same in any other ship, especially given the ridiculous detection range battleships get. - And, even though this is arguably the "fault" of the DD captain, the RPF skilled. Any captain regardless of the ship that gets RPFed knows what's going on. That is just the number of ships/tools that counter the DDs weapon of stealth. A lot of them counter the mainweapon of DDs, torpedoes, as well. Now we have the introduction of the British DDs. As far as I can see, I think I understand WGs concept of "defensive DDs". They are quite slow, and have a limited range hydro - so they will warn the ships around them of incoming torps, cause that is exactly what was needed. At high tiers they seem to have extremely good guns, and are just another anti-DD DD. Which brings us, after countering DD stealth and countering DD torpedoes, to What counters DDs as such? - CVs. Either by detecting or by just torping them. - Cruisers. AFAIK this is by definition, since they were supposed to be introduced as countering DDs into the game in the original scissors-stone-paper concept. Either by detection by friendly DD, or by hunting them with hydro/rpf/... - Battleship AP. Really, how the hell is this still a thing? Pumping out new premiums every month or so, no problem, but just registering every BB AP hit on a DD as an overpen is too much effort? 10 to 20k blaps are all but rare. - Specific other DDs. The Russian Khaba-line, (high tier) German DDs, high tier panasian DDs with radar (combined with extremely good stealth), Kidd, the new (high tier) British DDs, the "alternative" IJN DDs. While all DDs but a few exceptions have no repair. --- At the same time I have been playing BBs more than usual the last few months. Aren't DDs/DD torps supposed to be my hard counter? They literally countered me once, because my monqueror detonated taking a torp. That's it. I see DDs being blapped by torps, sometimes cruisers. I see cruisers and DDs getting blapped by BB AP. But BBs getting blapped by anything - even if they make a very big mistake? Where, when? Which leads to the underlying reason for this thread. Apparantly a lot of us have become used to the idea that it is ok for some classes to be played hard-mode nonestop, and another one playable from the toilet while reading the newspaper. Or am I not the only one getting annoyed by this? Genuine question. Some concrete suggestions, hoping other people bring some more. - Radar has to be changed in some way. I'd say shorter duration for the US ones, and longer reloads for all. - BB AP on DDs. @MrConway , what the hell is going on on that department, cause after years this might still be meme-worthy, but it ain't funny nomore. - BBs should be able to get citadelled reliably if they mess up, same standard as cruisers - ...
  18. Looks like better Akizuki varients.
  19. Hello everyone! Lately i have seen a lot of destroyers on the high tiers with RPF. I have always thought that concealment expert is a must but lately, i get absolutely recked by RPF. Which do you think is better? My only experience with DDs comes from the slightly OP Fletcher and i am thinking of getting the Gearing and trying out RPF on it. I am used to playing the Fletcher very passively. It used to be a great gunboat/torpedo boat mix but with all the hydro, radars and planes on high tiers i play it mostly as a torpedo boat.
  20. Hi, there is an issue that has been bothering me for quite some time now. When playing DDs it happens that you sit in a cap just to: 1. block it, so the enemy can't cap or 2. contest it until the enemy ship is not blocking the cap anymore so you can secure the cap for your team. If this is just a matter of up to 30 to 60 seconds, you get enough XP with the "captured" or "Assisted in Capture" Ribbon. If the stand-off lasts longer though, every DD player faces a decision: 1. to continue trying to secure the capture point, this leads to a loss of XP for the player because he deals no/less damage while doing this even though he tries to help the team winning and 2. abandoning the objective to go hunting for BBs etc.. This leads to more XP for the player. I was thinking about the Idea of a "Contested" ribbon - which gives the player 30/40/50(or whatever) xp for every 20/30/45 seconds a cap is contested by both sides.
  21. Bon, n'y aurait il pas un souci avec la détection de certaines torpilles, non deepwater! Car elles sont détectées super tardivement pour certaines... Du moins, j'en ai le sentiment... J'ai et eu, shima, yueyang, Z52, yog, Z46, Gearing, Fletch... En gros tous les DD et j'ai l'impression que pour certains, la détection a changé... Pas vous?
  22. With ranked for T10 quickly approaching, was wondering what the general consensus was about the best T10 destroyer for ranked play.
  23. friedeggnchips

    Invisible ships

    This is absurd. less than 5km yet I cannot see the enemy. I later died from 6 torpedoes that came from the magic invisible ship that you can(t) see here. How am I supposed to fight or do anything if I cant see a ship that is shooting and launching torpedoes at me??!! Firstly, no it wasn't torpedo bombers that i missed, it is a destroyer that appeared on my minimap and then disappeared. secondly, this guy was no more than 5km away from me and was also shooting at me, though i still could not detect him. A am in the Iron Duke. Nerf these bloody invisible destroyers, this is getting out of hand.
  24. How come EVERY CRUISER - INLCUDING GERMANS - use Anti-aircraft consumable when they FULLY KNOW that because of Wargamings intelligence when it comes to balance - There are NO CV'S farting around UNLESS YOU PLAY TIER 4-6 ? High level cruisers (7-10) HAVE NO FLIPPING IDEA on how to hydro - YES, SOME cruisers use radar - but WHY THE EFF are noone using hydro and FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF kill those FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF destroyers so our battleships can advance? (PS: Battleships ! STOP FISHING!) Either REMOVE the ANTI-AIR consumable at tier 7-10 or FFFFFFFFFF LEARN TO EFFINGS HYDRO OR HUNT TO FEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE Destroyers !!!!! Also - Carriers - keep up the amazings :) atleast THEY KNOW how to scout and kill stuff.
  25. Hello! I have played this week's operation, the Defence of Naval Station Newport, a couple of times these past few days. And I have started to perceive a new trend, in that more and more destroyers are appearing in the teams. Now, one reason why I'm rather fond of the scenario battles, is that they have given cruisers a much-needed place in the sun. With the possible exception of that operation where you're trying to assist an airlift from a Japanese island base, cruisers are - by far - the most efficient ship class for completing operations. Battleships can be of good use as well, although a team with a majority of battleships will generally do worse than a team with a majority of cruisers. But a team with a majority of destroyers? Don't go there, soldier. It's not a pretty picture. For the longest time, I refrained from playing any destroyer at all in any operation. But then I read a few posts on this forum, which stated that a destroyer could do well in operations under certain circumstances. I tried it, and yes, it can work - but I would like to amend the statement: One destroyer can do well in operations, under certain circumstances. Two or three destroyers? Not so much. Some weeks ago I had a game in Defence of Naval Station Newport, where I played in the Anshan. The rest of the team was composed mainly of Clevelands and one aircraft carrier. So, yeah, it was a five-star win and an easy one at that. You could argue that this team would have won without my destroyer, and you'd be right. But by spotting, kiting and setting fires, in combination with a well-timed endgame torpedo-rush that sent an enemy battleship to the bottom with extreme prejudice, I managed to pull up a rather impressive score on the post-battle result screen. All in all, a very fun game. When I tried for a repeat performance yesterday, I found myself in the company of two other destroyers, two times in a row. In other words, I had two games where roughly half the team was composed of destroyers. Almost needless to say, both battles ended in catastrophic losses. Irrespective of individual player skill, such a team simply has nowhere near the fire power that is needed to complete this operation with any greater level of success. I hesitate to argue for an outright DD cap mechanic - but I do feel that the composition of the team is rather vital to the game experience. Two battles is obviously nowhere near enough to draw any conclusions from, and so I thought I'd put the question up on the forum: Have destroyers become a more common choice in Scenario Battles? If so, how has this impacted on the game experience? Happy Easter to you all!
×