Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'Hakuryuu'.
The search index is currently processing. Current results may not be complete.
Found 1 result
Everyone knows the endless threads about how the Essexes and Midways are far more powerful than the lowly Taihous and Hakuryuus, there's so many of them that even players who are nowhere near T9 and T10 have no doubt read them and probably commented on them (myself included in that), so I did a bit of looking into reasons for this to be the case (beyond the whole differences in aircraft). Something that I came across is how the Japanese 10cm twin mounts are actually terrible AA guns with only 2.25 DPS per barrel against aircraft, which strikes me as odd because historically they were among the best AA artillery of the time because of a high muzzle velocity and good rate of fire. In game, they are notably worse than the US 5"/38 and the IJN 12.7 cm guns, both of which have 3 DPS per barrel with the same range. It means that the Taihou has less long-range AA DPS than the Shoukaku. This also affects the Zao to a lesser degree, but the carriers have far more 10cm guns so they suffer far more from having these weapons. The Midway's and Montana's 5"/54s are also no better than the 5"/38s, which strikes me as being a little odd. If the 10cm twin mounts were to be notably buffed in AA DPS it would help close the gap between IJN and USN carriers, as the IJN carriers carry far more artillery than the USN ones, with the Midway only carrying 18 guns compared to the 24 of the Hakuryuu. Increasing the DPS of both the IJN and USN guns would also bring them more in line with the late/post war AA artillery on the Kutuzov, which manages 7.5 DPS per barrel, if the Hakuryuu's 10cm guns managed the same DPS it would have 180 DPS within a 5km range, enough to seriously threaten even the Midway's aircraft when combined with escorts, while the Taihou would have 120 DPS, again giving it a notable advantage against the Essex, while the Midway would have 135 long range DPS (notably lower than the IJN's 180) and the Montana 150 (giving the Montana a significant AA advantage over the Yamato). It would also make the Akizuki-class destroyers actually useful if they ever plan to add them into the game, as they were dedicated AA destroyers but only having 18 long range DPS with current values would be a waste of space, but with the buffed damage they would have 60 DPS, making them actually useful AA platforms if they also have defensive fire. Alternatively, rather than giving them all the same DPS, the later guns could have different combinations of range and DPS, with the longer range ones having lower DPS and vice-versa, as long as they are overall balanced against each other. TLDR - Buffing the other late/post war AA artillery to bring them in line with the Kutuzov's AA artillery would help top tier balance by generally weakening carriers at T9/T10, buffing the IJN carriers compared to their USN counterparts at those tiers and buffing the Montana compared to the Yamato, with the minor side effect of slightly buffing the Zao's AA suite, effectively fixing the problems that are most complained about in T10 games.