Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'destoryers'.
Found 3 results
So looking over the WW2 destroyers modeled in WOWS I notice that they don't seem to have any obvious enclosed bridges, just the external navigation bridge. Looking at destroyers for other nations they have obvious enclosed bridges with lots windows, whereas the British destroyers seem to have just a couple of portals where windows would be. So I'm wondering did a lot of British destroyers in WW2 not have enclosed bridges or are they in there just limited to a few portals??
KapteinSabeltann posted a topic in DestroyersSo when the changes to IJN DD three was announced there was promised some kind of compensation for those who are affected by the change. I am VERY curious about this compensation. Right now I have a fully upgraded T8 IJN DD (Fubuki) and have researched the T9 (Kagero) but not bought it. Thats exactly where I expect to be after the change: T8 DD with 14 star captain (Kagero) and unlocked T9 DD Yugumo. So effectively I need the following compensations: Refund for modules on Fubuki (its chainging into T6 so it can't keep it's modules) Gold to retrain and redistribute the T8 captain. It's a T8 captain NOT a T6 captain and the skills chosen reflect that. The Kagero in port free of charge with funds to equip it with all modules The Yugumo researched. Any compensations along the lines of "a week of premium" etc is compeltely unsatisfactory. I have a finished T8 DD with captain and a researched T9 DD now - and thats what I should have after the update. This game costs a fortune to play and I have grinded every single IJN DD wasting time and money to re-grind my way to T9 is NOT acceptable.
KapteinSabeltann posted a topic in DestroyersI have played a lot of games thoughout my 30 odd years as a pc-gamer. I am however new to WG, WoT was not tempting to me as the concept of gold-ammo makes me cringe. I have in recent years - as online gaming have exploded noticed an abomination from several developers: Non-documented changes and in-complete patch notes. WG seems to be fond of these with tweaks to RNG, and a lot of other "behind the scenes modifiers" that never gets documented. However: Before 0.5.1. They said "UNS-DDS" will get better torps with longer range. And something along the lines of "we have listened". My initial reaction was "wow - thats going to be insane" as I was pretty happy with my USN DDs - but I figured this would mean a buff to the fairly lackluster T6 and T7 DDs that offered nothing over the Nicholas. So what did we get? All USN and IJN DDs was hit with a speed nerf... Why? And if it's so little we "shouldn't notice anything" then why don't give it a buff instead? Then for the case of the USN DD's: The Nicholas was sledgehammered - taking a 10knots speed reduction to it's torpedoes and a slight nerf to the ships speed. The Farragut was buffed by the Nicholas nerf. But the Nicholas was not OP... Then there is the "long range torps" - they are horrid, slow reloading crap - Effectively a nerf and are not complimenting the agressive play style of low to mid-tier usn DDs. The Mahan is effectively nerfed with it's new torps; I don't care about it's increased fire-rate. The Mahan was the ship I considered free xp'ing to as the T6 and T7 is just not interesting at all - now I have stopped any work on my USN DD line. The ONLY DD buffed was the Fletcher. Thats it. All USN DDs except the Fletcher was nerfed in the socalled "buff", and all IJN DDs was nerfed too. Thanx a lot... You wan't to buff BBs against DDs - improve the secondaries. And DOCUMENT IT.