Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'azuma'.



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 11 results

  1. Furius_Marius

    Azuma vs Alaska

    Well, as I understand Azuma is the Japanese counterpart to Alaska. Both Super-cruisers are tier IX, both cost 1M free XP. But only one its a real super-cruiser. Alaska its just amazing and fun. Good guns, good armor, very very difficult to citadel, fast, not bad turning, Good TT, Radar, Hydro. Good AA. Extremely versatile. I love this ship. Azuma, have great guns... terrible TT, extremely extremely squishy, even angled or bow in. Same Speed as Alaska, worst turning, easy to citadel, no radar, Good AA(but seems less effective than Alaska) Both similar concealment. U are huge, if they want to hit u they will hit u. I think its too situational ship. Why i so big gap? U see a lot of Alaskas in battle almost never u see Azumas. I think Azuma don't have bad statistics because very few people play and are mostly very very veterans players. But IMO Alaska have the upper-hand in almost all departments. I don't own Yoshino(seems a better Azuma but a tier higher) but a lot of people told me that Alaska in tier X its a better ship than even Yoshino. Maybe to give at least to Azuma same armour as Yoshino? Whats your opinion? thanks in advance.
  2. Playing my Atago, with her 203mm, I was getting a fair amount of shatters, so free-specced to IFHE which *seemed* to help. Is it really worth mounting IFHE to try and reduce shatters - even though the game blanks it out as a non-recommended CO skill for Atago COs? Or is the game-client right and the break-points for armour-vs-calibre such that the extra IFHE pen is insufficient to penetrate any additional armour schemes in the Tier8 battlegroup, making the extra pen overkill on stuff that it won't shatter on? Same question for Prince Eugen - who I'd prefer to be using to spam AP like a bawss, but don't always get the choice when presented with angled battleships. Going from 33mm to 66mm penetration seems like a significant improvement, and I seem to recall there being lots of ships with armour in the 60-70mm range that would suddenly become squishier to this? I'm assuming the game *is* actually right to discount IFHE on Azuma, as her big (310mm) guns don't seem to be giving me a significant number of shatters at all. Although, as a side question, are the armoured panels on her stern useful? Using her to kite seems feasible (especially given her speed), but if the most armoured part of her is still rubbish then that makes conservatively kiting circumstantially less desirable than just closing the distance.
  3. SamuraiShakaViking

    IJN power creep? .. again

    The IJN is so power creep.. forgotten, ignored again: To make a balanced game, you need balanced nations, as well as ships. Especially as the game evolves dynamically, and 'metas' change. (This neglect ruined wot). We all want future sustainability and survivability for this game. Which entails that it needs to grow and expand, retain it's fun factor, maintain balancing, while also consolidating from regions to globalized worldwide option like other mmo on steam and attracting new playerbase and increasing profitability for r&d and design. The CV rework, the new premiums, especially at tier 9, and recent ranked and clan battles show how veteran ships of the game are neglected, and certain nations given token minor buffs , if any, just to keep up with balanced development and meta memes. Eg the very weak flak on most IJN ships in the now CV dominated games is very evident.. I. Azuma, weakest of all the recent tier 9 battle cruisers.. ijn cruiser flavour is torps. Azuma gets no torps. All other battle cruisers got their nation flavour gimmicks (radar, secondaries, anti air, speed boost, reload boost, etc. Azuma gets no torps, paper armour, and no gimmicks. Why? If azuma was built she would have had torps and radar and 18 inch guns. Ywt, Eg. Georgia even gets a speed boost. Now even Benham, a USA destroyer gets better torps than the ijn... so then Why would anyone buy the azuma as well as or instead of an Alaska or stalingrad or j b??? (a bundle of tier 9s is now in the shop for $300). II. Ibuki is example , it has been so power crept by new tier 9s, it's a joke. Even premiums such as mutsu, kii, kaga (lower tier planes against tier x?) and even icon mikasa are so out of balance with present game. Kii the most expensive tier viii premium , at least gets torps and some flak, .. but still struggles against newer premiums or even tirpitz. III. There are no "brother special captains" for ijn and pan Asia. Why??? Only white males. IV (Is this racial bias, similar to ignoring / sidelining an entire continent, Africa, from this product.). Segregation? V There have been no special ijn arcs or events , even as there is now a second French event arc.. even though the French navy is hardly famous at all... Japan could be the biggest lucrative market for this game, together with pan Asian countries, Korea, Taiwan, india. But if their ships are essentially continuously nerfed and under powered, wg lose the profits and playerbase. Also collaborate more with manga and anime , but include guys anime too. Constructive suggestion: keep all nations balanced, enrich their flavors equally. If u do buff a ship to bring it up to date, with new ships, buff it properly. Since wg claim the game isn't historical simulator, they seem to try make some ships historical, and others op, early 1940s ships against 1945 to 1960 ships. Start a global world wide server, which players can access from different regions including africa to be able to play 24/7/365 (as in some clan wars,) so you have a proper global mmo like any other international mmo on steam. End regional separation when you could have a shared global playerbase. It works well on steam.. Also for collectors and naval players, bring back some legend ships (which may have been op b4, but are now no longer, such as kamikaze variants,) on special offers. Offer the collectors flags, special camps, or event badges etc in the armory.or to absorb "free xp". Why not use already developed operations and campaigns permanently, so that new players , or veterans who missed them, can benefit from hunt for Bismarck, or dunkirk op. Dynamo for example. Why not re use such well developed and designed campaigns, (eg instead of regrinding lines in the NtC?) Space battles and arms race is an awesome game mode. Why not make it available permanently.? Re events, instead of endless new currencies and tokens , make a single currency or token, which players can carry over to future events, if there's nothing they can get, or nothing they want in a particular event. There's so much you wg already have to build on, so much wg has already developed and designed, which can be expanded, that things such as the NYC are so unnecessary and superfluous. Stop the gambling loot crates, especially to skip a new tech tree. It's entirely unfair and discriminatory. Fix matchmaking, especially at tier viii. This also ruined wot. Include your global playerbase in queue ,on a global server option, instead of segregating regions, like any steam mmo. But please give the IJN some TLC and update and modernize the balance of Asia with the dynamics and meta memes of the game. And try remember and embrace the forgotten continent. Africa. They actually do have PCs and consoles, fiber, and 5g is rolling out soon. Several fiber connectivity to the EU including via Cyprus.. same time zone as EU. Why ignore this potential? Make a global worldwide server soon. And grow.
  4. Bigs_Destroyer_of_Worlds

    T9 IJN Azuma

    Hey All, So after checking out a lot of threads and reviews on the IJN Azuma, I decided to pull the trigger and get it. I have to say that despite all the negative press surrounding it, its a rather fun super cruiser to play when it isn't paired up against a 1v1 with a enemy battleship...let alone +2 BBs... Obviously this ship, unlike the Alaska or Kronstadt, cannot tank or bounce enemy battleship shells which seem to be the biggest weakness of it so it requires a long range or "evasion" style of play. I just took Flamu's last captain build as a starting point, but I noticed he didn't have a "revamped" newer released version. That said, I was curious what other Azuma captains are taking for skills and upgrades on this ship?
  5. Hallo zusammen! Ich hätte da mal eine Frage an diejenigen, die sowohl Alaska als auch bereits die Azuma haben. Habe bald (~ 180.000 Free-XP ausstehend) die 1.000.000 Free-XP voll und stehe vor der Frage, welchen der beiden CA ich anpeilen soll? - Sollte der Thread hier falsch/fehl am Platz sein, bitte ich darum zu verschieben/darauf hinzuweisen! - Zu mir bzw. meinen Vorlieben: - Hauptlinie sind/waren bisher die deutschen Kreuzer, gipfelnd in der Hindenburg mit der ich überaus zufrieden bin. - US CL (Cleveland; Seattle erforscht, aber noch nicht gekauft) mit Licht und Schatten, aber ganz spaßig. - sonstige ("relevante") Tech-Tree Fortschritte: KM: BB T7 IJN: BB und CA T5 UDSSR: CA T6 RN: CA T8, BB T6 FRA: BB und CA T6 Dazu ein paar weniger relevante Premiums. - Spielstil: abwartend aber nach Möglichkeit offensiv, gerne auch Mal infight, wenn sich die Gelegenheit ergibt. Alles mehr oder minder mittelmäßig. Die In-Game-Stats sehen Recht ähnlich aus, wobei die Azuma die höhere Zita hat und auch auf Radar verzichten muss. D.h. demnach müsste die Alaska die bessere Wahl sein, sofern ich richtig liege. Kann mir da jemand eine Empfehlung aussprechen bzw. die Unterschiede) Vor- und Nachteile näher bringen? Vielen Dank im vorraus für konstruktive Beiträge und Empfehlungen, The_Judge1893 Edith hat Fehler aufgelegt.
  6. Azuma Tier X Japanese Heavy Cruiser This doesn't appear to have reached the EU just yet, so I thought I should bring it over. ST, Japanese cruiser Azuma, tier X Hit points – 71800. Plating - 25 mm. Main battery - 3x3 310 mm. Firing range - 19.1 km. Maximum HE shell damage – 5100. Chance to cause fire – 27%. Maximum AP shell damage - 8650.... Reload time - 18.0 s. 180 degree turn time - 36.0 s. Maximum dispersion - 196 м. HE initial velocity - 836 m/s. AP initial velocity - 836 m/s. Sigma – 2.0. Maximum speed - 34 kt. Turning circle radius - 920 m. Rudder shift time – 13.9 s. Surface detectability – 15.1 km. Air detectability – 13.4 km. Detectability after firing main guns in smoke – 11.7 km. AA defense: - 12x2 40.0 mm, range - 3.5 km, damage per second - 132. - 18x3 25.0 mm, range - 3.1 km, damage per second - 110. - 8x2 100.0 mm, range - 5.0 km, damage per second - 166. Available consumables: - 1 slot - Damage Control Party - 2 slot - Hydroacoustic Search / Defensive AA fire - 3 slot - Spotting Aircraft - 4 slot - Repair Party All stats are listed without crew and upgrade modifiers but with best available modules. The stats are subject to change during the testing. Quite honestly it just looks like a significantly inferior Stalingrad, especially as she apparently has no special rules for her AP. So compared to the Stalingrad, the Azumaya has: Poorer armor Poorer shell AP krupp Poorer shell AP bounce angles Poorer shell AP fuse time Worse shell velocity, and consequently a longer shell flight time Worse AP shell weight Worse accuracy Worse cruise speed Worse AA No radar suite at all A garbage armor scheme for a ship her size A worse rudder shift period Whilst both being: Large gun, large shell cruisers With the same overmatch threshold The same HE penetration threshold Occupying the same Tier X cruiser slot And in return she gets: A marginally better turning radius Better surface concealment A 4.5% better AP DPM and a 26% better HE DPM
  7. Azuma – Irregular “Big” Cruiser For a few months now, contributors in World of Warships had access to the first Japanese super-sized cruiser: Azuma. She had different versions throughout her test lifetime, she was even tier 10 at one point! Most of them were quite similar though, little armour, accurate guns. How does she size up to the competition? History Azuma was never built as she is in game. In fact, she never went past the design stage. Understandable, considering Japan’s direction in the war. What we see in game here is something referred to as the Design B-65 cruiser, a brainchild of the "Decisive Battle" doctrine that the IJN were so keen on. Some tests were conducted starting 1939, but nothing came of it due to the need of war supplies to build aircraft carriers. There was, however, a protected cruiser built in the 19th century with the same name. She participated in the Russo-Japanese war, and was later instated as a training ship in 1912. In 1941 she was hulked. In-game rundown Azuma is a sizable cruiser. She is not blessed with a lot of HP or armour though. Azuma has all-round 25mm, with the superstructure being 16mm. Her guns are well protected and will take a lot more punishment than the standard IJN cruiser mounts. Her hitpoints clock in at 58350, which is the worst for any “big” cruiser. Her main armament consists of 3 triple 310mm guns. Their 180s turn time is at 36 seconds (worst). These have good AP penetration and amazing HE. Their accuracy is second to none for their size. This is one of the defining features of the Azuma. The AA is the usual, lots of 25mm AA mounts for short range (1.9km) and 5.8km long range 10cm DP mounts. These also serve as secondaries. DPS is at close 519 range, 255 at long range, she has 8 bursts base, dealing 1470 in the splash zone. Azuma is a fast cruiser, going 34kns out of the box. Her rudder shift is expectedly slow: 13,9s, putting her in the middle of all big cruisers at her tier. Base detectability is 14.7km, which can be brought down to 11.9km, which is the best in her class. Air detection in this configuration is 8.7km Consumable Choice Azuma has access to standard cruiser DCP, either Defensive AA or Hydroacoustic (5km ships, 3,5km torpedoes), a Spotting Aircraft, and the Repair Party consumable. Azuma’s Repair Party has a shorter cooldown – 60s as opposed to 80s standard - and she receives an extra charge. This is to boost her survivability in combat due to her lacking armour. Captain Spec I recommend a full survivability spec on Azuma: Skill tier Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 First Pick Expert Loader Last Stand Superintendent Fire Prevention Second Pick Priority Target Basics of Survivability Concealment Expert Third Pick Preventative Maintenance Due to Azuma’s size and lack of armour, I recommend trying to keep this ship alive at all costs. You could of course trade in Last Stand for Expert Marksman or Adrenaline Rush, both a very viable. Superintendent is a must due to her improved Repair Party. Azuma’s combat performance doesn’t really require her to have and specialist skills, therefore it is logical to me to be spending most of these points in a fashion to try to negate her shortcomings. Gameplay and Analysis During my testing I had mixed results in the Azuma. She excels at being top tier (and perhaps meeting ships that actually don’t overmatch her armour), but then again, which ship doesn’t? The problem with a super-sized cruiser is always the fact that you will be a massive target in the eyes of the enemy. And while Kronshtadt and Alaska both have strong armour to counter this, Azuma can only attempt to dodge and stay at distance. Luckily this works well with her improved accuracy. Sadly, when a player comes to the point of having to push, Azuma lacks. She is missing a lot of dynamic that the other two have. It is extremely difficult to disengage with Azuma once you commit and you will be punished quite often for your mistakes. Even more than in a Zao - she feels a lot like a Zao, just with Ibuki armour. AP eats you alive at most angles, and you’ll be surprised how much damage cruisers can do to you where in other ships they’d have bounced. I’ve had games where a CV would sit on me for a match, completely negate my ability to do anything, where I’d find myself wondering why I played this over a Kronshtadt or an Alaska. She works amazing support, but not so much to make game changing plays. Pros: • Guns are accurate and punchy, • HE is strong • Repair Party vastly superior to counterparts Cons: • 25mm makes her very squishy • Big target • Lacks flexibility Conclusion Azuma Proves to be very different from all the other “Freemium Large Cruisers”. She’s not as accessible and easy to get a hang of. If you like a high risk-reward type of gameplay, Azuma is a good pick. I cannot recommend her though, as she way too situational. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy playing challenging ships, but Azuma demands and demands and demands, and when the time of need comes, she doesn’t deliver. Not by much, but just enough to turn me away from her. So if you are considering what you should get, Alaska or Azuma, don’t get the latter as a first pick. If you already have an Alaska, and enjoy the playstyle of Japanese cruisers, then she might be worth a consideration. Have a nice start to the week and see you on the Seas!
  8. "Public Test, changes to Furious, Azuma AA British CV Furious, tier VI Stock bombers changed: Number of bombers in one attacking flight increased from 1 to 2; Plane regain time is lowered from 142 to 96 seconds; Size of the aiming ellipse is increased by 22% Top researchable bombers changed: Count of bombers in one attacking flight increased from 1 to 2; Size of the aiming ellipse is increased by 30% Top researchable torpedo bombers' torpedoes replaced by that of the stock ones: The damage is lowered from 5930 to 5200 The flooding chance is lowered from 51% to 45% Instead of 4 bomber attack runs you can make only 2, but each of them will be more effective and the squadron will spend less time under the AA fire. The size of the aiming ellipse was increased to take into account the addition of the second plane and the increased number of bombs being dropped. The torpedoes of the top torpedo-bombers were replaced as they demonstrated higher efficiency in comparison with other CVs. In addition, such a change compensates the increased bombers' damage. Azuma's AA was updated in 0.8.1, it was tested and we are ready to show you the final state of the ship's AA defense: AA defense short-range: continuous damage per second - 519, hit probability - 83%, action zone 0.1-1.9 km; AA defense long-range: number of explosions in a salvo - 8, damage within an explosion - 1470, continuous damage per second - 260, hit probability - 88%, action zone 1.9-5.8 km; AA sector reinforcement - 25%, sector reinforcement and reinforcement shift time - 10 s. Azuma's AA has high continuous damage in the short ranges and dangerous explosions from the 1.9 km range." https://www.facebook.com/wowsdevblog
  9. "Public Test, changes to Furious, Azuma AA British CV Furious, tier VI Stock bombers changed: Number of bombers in one attacking flight increased from 1 to 2; Plane regain time is lowered from 142 to 96 seconds; Size of the aiming ellipse is increased by 22% Top researchable bombers changed: Count of bombers in one attacking flight increased from 1 to 2; Size of the aiming ellipse is increased by 30% Top researchable torpedo bombers' torpedoes replaced by that of the stock ones: The damage is lowered from 5930 to 5200 The flooding chance is lowered from 51% to 45% Instead of 4 bomber attack runs you can make only 2, but each of them will be more effective and the squadron will spend less time under the AA fire. The size of the aiming ellipse was increased to take into account the addition of the second plane and the increased number of bombs being dropped. The torpedoes of the top torpedo-bombers were replaced as they demonstrated higher efficiency in comparison with other CVs. In addition, such a change compensates the increased bombers' damage. Azuma's AA was updated in 0.8.1, it was tested and we are ready to show you the final state of the ship's AA defense: AA defense short-range: continuous damage per second - 519, hit probability - 83%, action zone 0.1-1.9 km; AA defense long-range: number of explosions in a salvo - 8, damage within an explosion - 1470, continuous damage per second - 260, hit probability - 88%, action zone 1.9-5.8 km; AA sector reinforcement - 25%, sector reinforcement and reinforcement shift time - 10 s. Azuma's AA has high continuous damage in the short ranges and dangerous explosions from the 1.9 km range." https://www.facebook.com/wowsdevblog
  10. Mystery Ship: What Ship is This? This mystery ship in the Arsenal, so I thought I would try to help out with trying to discover what this ghost ship is. Most noticeably to take into consideration is where the directors. I changed the contrast of the ship to make it more identifiable, and increased the size of the image. Wichita Director Comparison Wichita Silhouette Transparent Background Wichita Silhouette White Background Link
  11. Alaska and Azuma has one important thing going for them compared to Stalingrad, Which is concealment. Now with the increased fire duration Stalingrad will suffer two times, From bad concealment and the fire duration. Stalingrad concealment will even get worse with the upcoming changes to the Concealment captain skill which will make things even worse for the ship. Also Kronshtadt is already balance with her inaccurate guns, So why she gets that 60 sec fire duration as well?!! The only reason WG did that IMO is to please the players who doesn't have both ships. I'm not pleased with these adjustments.
×