Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'torpedoes'.

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 38 results

  1. This is purely for those ships that are in the game as Battle/Heavy Crusiers i.e Kronstadt, Stalingrad, Alaska etc, Not BB Battlecruisers like Graf Spee. Are we gonna see Torpedoes on this ship type at high tier ever or would they be considered Overpowered and this is the reason we don't ?? I love playing my Kronstadt but I cant bring myself to buy the Alaska because I just see it as more of the same and I prefer tankier ships with smaller caliber gun battlecruisers - Stalingrad, Kronstadt. As opposed to heavier guns, lighter armour - Azuma, Alaska. I have the Zao and the Des Moines but if they had a baby I'm sure it would be amazing and likely close to OP and have a huge price tag but I would still buy it and play the heck outta it....
  2. The in-game colorblind settings are not very useful. I can now see who did team damage, but I can't spot enemy torps. Funnily enough friendly torps are easy to see. Does anyone know of a mod that changes the color of torps or torp trails? It's really frustrating if you hear the torp alarm, hear the torp voice message, but can't see the enemy torps that are coming your way.
  3. I think matches should start with the guns and torpedoes fully loaded on all ships and planes fully serviced. On the lower tiers, it's not that much of an issue but on the higher tiers it means that you could arrive at the front lines with 40-60 seconds left on your torpedoes which you won't be able to use even if it could potentially buy an advantage for your team early on. I'm sure everyone here can think of a situation when you start the game with all weapons fully prepared could help the team. This would make sense on a gameplay level, as it offers more possibility. It would make sense on a internal logic level, because ships sailing towards a hostile force would most likely have all their weapons fully loaded and ready to fire at any moment. I think that this is something that should be added to the game.
  4. Hi all, is it me or do BBs, CA,s and pretty much every ship in general feels a bit unbalanced? I meen the ships turning rate makes them at the moment to nimble that they can evade torpedo launches from about anything at almost every range. I have been playing with my Sims and tried the first tier Jap CV and these ships where almost ( in the case of the Sims ) turned useless as even aproaching a BB at 3Km range they can turn and avoid every single torpedo you launch at them. Is this intended at all? I meen i like playing CA's and sometimes BB's as the next player but this agility makes cruisers not needed in many cases to provide air cover and DDs are mostly just there to hunt other DDs or get swated by nimble CAs or to attack CV's. I feel like their turn rate pre patch was a tad more accurate then now as it made the ships classes depend on one another to play properly and now its more of a race to see who sinks who 1v1 or 2v1 and thats it. Anyone else feels the same way?
  5. Some days ago I was responding the wargaming survey. I like the game etc etc... BUT I wrote three hints: 1) improve the torpedoes' pointing system (in my opinion it's too much "arcade"... I have in my mind something similar to Silent Hunter) 2) I think there is something to do regarding the proportions of the ships (i.e. in the game the destroyers length is the same as the battleships) 3) I do not understand why they are releasing contents such the Royal Navy (the biggest and famous fleet), the Kriegsmarine (yes, cruisers are coming, but cruisers only) or the Italian Fleet (the GB opponent in the Mediterranean sea) so slowly. I hate to flame, but I never heard nothing about any impact of the russian fleet in the WWII... nor wikipedia is helping me... yes, on the other hand I understand their market needs.
  6. Kauvana

    Anshan torps

    Greetings, Seeing as I've taken a liking to the Pan-Asian line, and this thing is now on sale for spare change: Did the Anshan get deep water torps with the introduction of the full tech tree, or does it still have "normal" ones from before? Best regards
  7. haha_ufail

    torpedo detection range to short

    no this isnt a torps are OP thread but ever since open beta started topedoes only appear when its to late to dodge them in a battle ship, and its normaly about 6-8 torpedoes and normaly 4-5 is enough to kill most ships, anyone else noticed this?
  8. Eisenengel

    Torpedoes, FF, and consequences

    For my part, friendly fire seems to be a problem on the lower tiers, but it might pick up again at higher tiers. However, I just had a friend ragequit over it. Some guy in a destroyer fired his torpedoes, at a target out of his range. I had to actively evade, my friend got next to sunk first thing in the battle. Now, you can argue back and forth wether my friend was overreacting or not (I'd say he was), but still, there is very little to discourage wildly firing torpedoes other than some embarassment (and potentially costing a victory). Apparently, there is friendly fire penalties in the game, but they do not seem to work for torpedoes. I heard it's disabled because people would sverve into torpedoes on purpose. That sound a bit like a driver saying 'Sir, the pedestrian jumped in front of my car on purpose!'. The potential purpose might be the same, actually - either a poor excuse by the driver, or the pedestrian in question on a bit of an insurance fraud. I do not know to what extent 'insurance fraud' was a problem, but then I think we ought to figure out a way to have the one without the other - or mitigating the other. One way would be the good old stick and carrot: Compensation and fines. Possibly modified so you only can get so much compensation per day, or even remove the carrot entirely, in order to limit any insurance fraud aspects. Another way would be through Information. The algorithm for calculating torpedo prediction could be extended to nearby friendlies, and show up as red arcs on the launch view. This would have a double purpose: it would tell the game that you were overly reckless in case you hit a friendly, and compensation would definitely not be out of place. The con to this is that it would take a bit of extra processing, but it could be handled clientside so it should be manageable. This sort of maths is trivial. Other thoughts?
  9. NO1Z3TR4UMA

    [Question] Omaha crew skill(s)

    Hey Fellow WoW Captains, Let's introduce myself a little bit (yeeeey my first topic on WoW), first i took a long brake from Warships (was playing more tanks and some other games), second after not playing 1 year and half maybe longer or maybe less i thought i would suck when playing again (1 week so far) but actually i had pretty good games on my Omaha so far anyway let' get to the point and explain my question. I've read (most posts were from 2016 or older) that allot of ppl use "Vigilance" skill for the 3th skill for Omaha tier 5 American cruiser. Personal i have a double feeling about that skill coz i rarely use my torpedoes and 25% bigger range its about 1 km more range if i didnt calculated wrong. Most of the time i'm lowest tier, if a tier 6- 7 comes closer i try to keep them on my maximum gun distance so i dont use torpedoes in this situation. When playing this game for 1 week, i used my torpedoes twice i know it's not allot but what do you think i should do? What is your opinion about the 3th skill on Omaha? Pls explain why, vigilance or..... ? Thanks in advance and big love on the forums but destruction in the water! *edit* You can always say what skills your captain have with a small explanation if you want :)
  10. Jessa_Doom

    Scenarios mechanics.

    Hi WG Dev's. What is it with the launching of torpedoes from the bot ships and planes. Torpedoes launched from bot ships seem to be launch from a bow angle of 5-10 degree and players have to be about 45 degree to launch. Torpedoes launched from torp planes ranges seem to be are far longer than a players planes launched torps. I was under the notion that plane drop torps ranges were about 3-4.km as bot drops ranges seem to be 4-6.km plus. Detection of some bot ships seem to be as low as 2-3.km or ghaphics rendering too slow to pick them up to render, and yet i can spot some ships at extreme range without any render issues. And in scenarios bot ships intermittently appear and disappear within the 2-3.km ranges and is happening at low-high graphic settings. This is not at my end as other players have mentioned this show-no show ship issues on the bug reports forum as this is happening throughout the whole game in all battles since recent updates , we all can't have bad graphics
  11. GuderianDK

    Targeting nearest enemy bug

    Hi there, great game and all, not so great since you've nerfed the destroyers though. My problem is with your targeting system, its ok if a battleship or a cruiser doesnt have the right target lit up because you calculate the lead yourself anyway. But for destroyers its a diffrent story, and the number of times I have shouted at the screen because of the dodgy targetingsystem only my neighbours know. Its great that you can target specific ships and all - but when you cycle through all ´visible enemies like 5 - 12 km away ... except the mf big battleship 4 km's away and you have to drop torpes then I get very frustrated as the big ship sails harmlessly by because its impossible to guess speed and direction on the fly for a torpedo. Please please fix this soon - it has been a problem ever since closed beta.
  12. Dear War Gaming (and fans of ENOUGH ALREADY MARK ONE) ENOUGH ALREADY MARK 2 Standard Battles should be the only game type available in random battles. Whilst I enjoy both Domination and Epicentre Modes, they should only be optional by player selection. Let's face it most players just want to sink ships, if a player has chosen to play something different to that of a standard battle, then they would be more inclined to understand that something more is required from them by selecting a different game mode. Something akin to selecting Capture the Flag in a FPS. Surely, if you are reading this, then I guess you've invested enough time to witness the inability of some players to grasp the inportance of capturing A, B or C and understanding what the points displayed at the top of the screen represent ? Wouldn't it be better if the players on your team understood what the objective of the game was, aside from sinking ships ? Wouldn't that be more fun ? I have a major issue with statistics and random games and this ties in with my previous point, I can and have easily inflicted 100000 damage in many domination games and still lost. Players don't understand or just ignore the objectives of the game to achieve as much damage as possible. This results in a situation where teams comprise of players , each with their own individual objectives, which may conflict with that of game mode they are playing! For instance : 'Stat Boosting' Earning in game achievements. Shoot the nearest 'Red Thing' 'Seal Clubbing' (Guilty!) God forbid ! ............... Play the actual game mode. Don't you think two CV's, 5 dd's and a multitude of torpedo laden cruisers per random game is enough ? In my humble opinion, there are way too many many torpedo laden ships. I've seen to many players trying to torpedo a ship with only 10 hp remaining for 5 minutes straight, when a single HE shell would do the job in an instance. I understand perfectly that firing guns could give your position away, by increasing the range of your visibility, but there are instances when guns are a better choice. Besides, while it's nice to get a torpedo hit, nothing beats deleting a ship with big guns and multiple 'citadels' and for me as Battleship player. At low tiers where most ships are of World War 1 vintage, with little or no anti aircraft capability, what chance do you stand against one or two good CV players? Of course there are strong exceptions, the Texas at Tier 5 for instance, but even so, I still feel that something is wrong and needs fixing. I will be honest, I feel carrier play is broken, especially in random games and it is jeopardising the 'team play' that War Gaming seems to be so keen on promoting. As far as I can tell, most carrier players will concentrate their efforts on destroying one anothers fighters in order to protect their own planes, so they can rack up as much damage as they can later in the game. Whilst this is taking place, any ship unfortunate to be attacked by enemy bombers has no air support other than his and his team mates guns and at tier 4 or 5 this is not a fun experience. To counter both these points, I would suggest that there should only be one Carrier per side in games below tier 6, I think it would make for smoother gameplay and a less frustrating experience for all. Make 'Dynamic Aiming' standard by default , this ties into my point regarding there being too many torpedoes. The majority of new players wont know this exists, but it is available in the options menu and allows a player to see the time it takes for your a shell to reach its target dependant as to where you aim, with a targetting scale based around a target travelling at 30 knots. Whilst standard sights maybe be adequate in a Destroyer or Cruiser, you will certainly see a great improvement when firing battleship guns using this mode. I find some Divisions annoying, they become a law unto themselves. Come on! How many times have you witnessed that 'minor miracle of consensus' at the start of a random game!!! A plan of action has been established, everyone is in agreement .... and then behold and witness that suicidal division doing the exact opposite, without even having the decency to share their aims with the rest of the team. A minor gripe, but there we are. The reporting system needs fixing. The number of times I have been told to 'STFU' and banned for desperately 'pinging' the map to notify my team that our base is being 'capped' is beyond a joke. The fact that a single destroyer, that after sinking both CV's has gotten bored, has nothing better to do than cap, after going unoticed by said team just reinforces my first point in this post. Call me what you like, but I am not trying or looking to 'Troll' and I believe that these points are both relevant and valid, Enough Already ..... :)))))))) Dirty Dunc ... See you soon ................
  13. ABED1984

    Pan Asian DDs and Cruisers

    Are we gonna get a list of the Cruisers that are immune to "Deep Water" torpedoes? I think not all Cruisers will get sunk from these torps.
  14. latest update: 02/08/18 This is a summary of attributes of all torpedoes in World of Warships. In case something is missing or wrong, please let me know. :) Explanation Chances of flooding base - base value without any reductions Chances of flooding Bism - exemplary value if Bismarck/Tirpitz is hit on its torpedo defence system Reaction time - time between torpedoes being spotted and hitting the target TASM1 - Target Acquisition System Modification 1 Vigi - Vigilance, commander skill Torpedo Acceleration - commander skill For further information please check the end of this post. Commonwealth France Germany Italy Japan Pan-Asia Poland U.S.A. U.S.S.R. United Kingdom Chances of flooding Reaction time Changes
  15. In WoW all the torpedo bombers release their load simultaneously in line abreast creating a perfect spread. They barely line up on the target and flit about like starlings. This is virtually impossible and highly unlikely under combat conditions with dense anti aircraft fire. While ship launched torpedoes are fired in salvo and form a spread because they emanate from the same firing point at the same time, a gaggle of turbulence afflicted aircraft at low level are not a single launching platform and could not synchronize their launch to create the perfect spread that WoW provides. Brave torpedo bomber pilots of the inter-war and WWII period were individually aiming their loads to score a hit, not form a spread. Also their chance of flying an entire flight abreast would have been unlikely in the extreme. They would come in line astern and each would do the best he could to score with his torpedo. The overall effect at best would be a long staggered line of torpedoes dropped in sequence as the pilots made their individual runs. Consequently it was much harder to hit targets , especially zig zagging ones. The root of my disappointment with this game is that air launched torpedoes are unrealistically lethal. I know experienced players will jump in and say how they manage to avoid them, even the massed unified salvo spreads that the game produces, but this is far too unrealistic and virtually makes a torpedo bomber squadron some sort of flying torpedo boat, which they were not. Conversely the effects of aerial bombing are nowhere as realistically lethal as they should be. The US Navy in the Pacific in WWII had far more success sinking ships with bombs than with torpedoes and the death rate with torpedo plane pilots was horrifically high from anti aircraft fire and fighter interception. WoW belittles their heroism by making aerial torpedoes almost unstoppable and their impossibly configured synchronized launch is more cartoon than combat. Cannot the developers consider rewriting the code for the torpedo aircraft to provide some realism? Rant over. Sorry!
  16. OK, so there are all these threads about Torpedoes being OP created by Battleship players and every time I'm searching for a game in the St. Louis I see 80% Battleships in the que or something like that. My solution for this is to change the tech tree. Right now the tech tree towards Battleships looks like this: T1 Cruiser -> T2 Cruiser -> T3 Cruiser -> T3 Battleship I suggest this is changed to something like this: T1 Cruiser -> T2 Cruiser -> T2 Destroyer -> T3 Cruiser -> T3 Battleship The reasoning for this is simple. From a financial point of view, Wargaming will want as many people as possible to pay money for this game, whether it's premium ships or premium account days or other stuff in the shop. In order to maximize the revenue, they have to entice people to keep playing and not quit in disgust departing with a "Torpedoes are OP" thread in the forums. By forcing these battleship players to play at least one tier of Destroyers before getting their beloved Battleship should greatly increase their understanding of game mechanics regarding torpedoes. How can you then claim torpedoes are OP if you were having such a hard time getting hits with your own torpedoes?
  17. OldChieftain

    Kitakami wallows like a pig

    This ship is totally unusable and worthless to the point selling it should constitute theft. Here's why... 1. range. It gets spotted a full 1k before it can even launch it's torp spread. it has anemic guns to compensate for the number of torps and they barely reach beyond surface detection. 2. maneuverability. This is the biggest flaw with this pig. It can't turn, so no ability to evade fire as you try and get to a useful torp range (or even max range ffs). once you do manage to get in range can you turn to get the torps into their firing arc? No. 3. fragility. this glass cannon explodes long before it can turn to fire it's torps and as it can't turn no zig zagging for any hope of dodging under 11km (cruiser on cruiser it shouldn't be destroyed in 2 salvoes which most cruisers can fire before you turn to fire torps). 4. concealment. none to speak of really. I understand it isn't a DD, but the game mechanics make it unusable without the ability to get into firing range with it's primary armament, torpedoes. with the number of planes in a game TB, DB, Fighters, Scouts. you can only rarely sneak through islands or bergs to get a salvo off. Far too rarely to make it viable. How to fix this? It needs a faster rudder shift (recommend 8 seconds), smaller turning circle, and a 10.5 percent drop in surface detectability. So until this is tweaked I recommend avoiding this plague ship.
  18. I 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.
  19. I'm not a noob player or a weekend warrior, I'm a 30+ guy who likes to play games and been playing WoT since beta with over 25k+ games and I have been in WoWs since alpha. Now that you know I'm not some kid that is crying over some broken toy, I want to get something of my chest. Playing a CV is actually much harder then people think. You have to fight other CVs fighters, watch for clusters of cruisers and be aware of DDs coming from behind you. Also a good CV player will scout actively for the team and light up retreating DDs for the team. All this while managing to do some damage to the other team and not get sniped and killed from the other CV. The only other class that comes close to being as hard to play is a DD except I think manually dropping bombs and torps is much harder then launching waves of torps and hoping for a hit. So now what do I get for grinding my way to tier 8 CV. Nothing. Almost untouchable BBs unless they are alone and without anyone around. I lose all my planes and I am a seasoned CV player and know how to approach a target my torps eather fan out from all the AA or the planes just get massacred. Now with 0.5.3 this is going to get even worse and I get it, people dont like to die from a well placed torp bomber attack. But I guess they dont mind the slow death of a thousand torps from a shima or kagero. Because thats whats 0.5.3 is going to bring. tier 9-10 games with shimas and kageros and fletchers and gearings vs bunch of other ships trying to hunt them down in their CA and BBs and the game will be decided whose side has more DDs or better DD players. Because I'm telling you right now there wont be a carrier there to scout them or help kill them. And all the Yamatos will be bow on and going in reverse. Look as I said before I'm not some guy who got his favorite toy taken away. I actually play other classes more then carriers but I liked them in game. It made the game feel better and more diverse. But now its just sad. Let me know what you think. And please keep the CV is the arty of WoT to some other post cause thats some ignorant talk.
  20. So the Mahan's Mk 15 mod. 0 has a reload speed of 87 seconds. So why is it that when the Benson recieve these they have have a reload-speed of 109 seconds? On a more modern destroyer. Meanwhile the Bensons upgraded Mk15 mod. 3 torps are IDENTICAL to the Fletchers Mk15 mod. 3 starting torps. I get differences for balancing purposes but this one I don't understand. Why is the Benson denied the same Mk 15 mod. 0? They are workable torps but with a speed of 55 knots hardly overpowered. I really don't see why a reload speed of 109 seconds are necessary. Unlike some other destroyers these torps offer NOTHING compared to the alternative that still isn't that good. Usually the deal with torps in this game is that higher tiers get longer range and damage at the cost of reload-speed, While same torps on different ships perform identical. Look at IJN DD-line: Type 90 mod. 1 (Hatsu, Fubu) Identical - I can't help but think this is an oversight or an error thats never been corrected...
  21. belly120

    Is torp Spam to stronk?

    Ok so is the sudden surge in every monkey and his uncle having access to torpedoes having a negative impact. I for one have found that guns seem less useful, if you're aiming and firing you will inevitably be left vulnerable but with insanely short detection ranges of 1km and the sheer volume that can now be spammed by both teams, its not such a game of naval warfare as a game of endlessly dodge the huge tides of long range torps. i have no issue with torps, they are important to naval warfare but please can we reign in the scale and volume and range. just recently i've generally encountered multiple waves of 8 to 10 torps from ranges of 10km which in the larger ships become almost impossible to dodge as the numbers being fired by multiple ships and from so far out mean often the first, some second wave are just dodge only to finished off by a final wave. in that time gunnery is not an option. i don't want to play a torp dodging simulator, frankly that is the dullest game ever, i'd quite like a naval warfare game lol so wait for the Cool Aid pumped sweaty try hard torp trolls to rage at the horror of loosing their super OP dream weapons lol PS i'm not a BB player, although i'd like to be, they are slow and dull, cruisers at lower tiers are great but these higher tiers just seem real fubar. had matches last night, 4 to 5 BB, 2 carrier, 2 destroyers and the remainder cruisers. it was cluster f**k city. the game was decided by tides of torps from sea and air while shells from distant BB's missed everything before they succumbed to the TORP TIDE!!!! can we find the nerf hammer please, detection range is the key. yeah you can have long range torps but i want 3 to 4km warning. i still have to dodge all 30 of them so its hardly unfair lol
  22. lord_yggdrasill

    Just another IJN DD rant

    It has been a while now since the IJN DDs got their split and I thought it would be a good time to talk about my fellings about them in a pretty lengthy post. After having played them all pre and post split, I want to present my opinion on what their flaws are and why I still think that they need to be buffed. First of all let's look at some statistics. If you check the winrates and average experience of all DDs from T6 to T10 you will find an IJN DD at the bottom. So it's not just one or two ships underperforming, it's an entire line of ships. However there are some exceptions: the T6 Shinonome (premium; reward for advanced players with high tier ships -> understandibly outperforms everything at T6) and the destroyers of the new subbranch. I wont talk much about Akizuki because she plays completely different to all other IJN DDs (very gun focused; big, slow and sluggish). The two Ships leading up to the Akizuki are interesting though. The Hatsuharu is performing ok at T6 and better than Fubuki. But the most outstanding ship is the Shiratsuyu at T7 which is currently the best (statisticaly speaking) DD for its tier. One reason for this is probably the fact that the line spit is still too recent and mostly dedicated players with some experience in IJN DDs are currently grinding towards the Akizuki. This however does not explain the huge difference between Akatsuki and Shiratsuyu at Tier 7 (we are speaking of a 6% difference in winrate and about 50% more experience and damage for Shiratsuyu). Looking a bit more into the stats of these two Ships you can get a bit confused. Akatsuki is the same in terms of her gun and torpedo performence while having one extra gun, 4 knots higher top speed and an extra torpedo tube with a more favourable launcher setup (3x3 vs 2x4) therefore having a 25% better reload speed on those tubes. Ignoring some very minor differences in HP and range the only things Shiratsuyu has going for her are a bit better maneuverability and massively better concealment. In addition to this Shiratsuyu has the torpedo reload booster consumable on a seperate slot which reduces the torpedo reload to 5 seconds once every 6 minutes (4 with premium). Her output of torpedoes over 10 minutes even with using the consumable is lower than Akatsukis. In practice and my personal experience these two advantages of Shiratsuyu are crucial to her success. The concealment advantage over any other ship at T7 is huge (we are talking about nearly a kilometer here) so you can dictate a combat with another destroyer by engaging only in favourable fights and sneak up an your main target (enemy BBs) very easily. The second advantage is your torpedo reload booster. If this consumable is ready you basicly have a 4x4 torpedo setup (yes, this is one more torpedo than a Shimakaze) and you can freely engage multible targets at once. Need to lay a big torpedo wall for area denial? No problem. Fire your torps at two or even three different targets in different directions? No problem. Steaming around a corner into the face of an enemy BB and your torps are still on a 40 second cooldown? Just press one button and you are good to go. Remember however that this will not give you an insane output of torps. The real advantage of this consumable is flexibility. So keep these two important advantages in mind for later: concealment and torpedo flexibility. Secondly, I will take a look and directly compaire two high tier DDs to understand the flaws of especially T8 to T10 where I feel IJN DDs are struggeling the most right now. The destroyers that come to mind are the Yuugumo and the USS Fletscher at tier 9. Covering the basics first, Fletcher has the egde in HP, speed and maneuverability while Yuugumo has better concealment. All of these values are however not too different and you could say they are pretty on par. Looking at the guns you immediately see a massive advantage for the Fletcher: 50% more rounds per minute and astronomicly better turret traverse and much more range. HE and AP performence are similar with the Yuugumo having better fire chance and better shell arcs. Overall however the Fletcher just outclasses the Yuugumo in a direct gun duel with much more dpm and even against other ship types Fletcher outperforms Yuugumo in gun capability. And that is not a problem at all. The role of USN DDs is fighting over caps in close quarters combat with other DDs and their toolkit is perfect for this task (stealthy, maneuverable, insane dpm and turret traverse). They can also aid their team with long lasting smokes and long range fire support. The real problem arises if you look at the torpedoes: Speed and range are nearly identical. The Yuugumo torps deal about 10% more damage, but the Fletcher beats the Yuugumo in reload (only a few seconds) while having more torps (2x5 vs 2x4) and one realy important stat: torpedo detectability (1.4km vs 1.7km). I would argue that dealing 10% more damage per torpedo is realy not a big deal at all and gets already accounted for by reloading a bit faster and having more torps to fire. Which leaves the detectibility as the one factor that puts Fletchers torpedo armament above the Yuugumos. But I hear you saying: "Fletcher is one of the best DDs in the game, of course it's overall better than a Yuugumo". Yes, I agree with that. But the fact remains that a USN DD is beating the IJNs speciality. And it's not only the Fletcher. Look at the Z-46, which has massively less damage on its torps (14400 vs 20967), but also reloads his tubes 22 seconds (ca. 20%) faster than Yuugumo while having the same speed and range. The detectability difference is the same as with the Fletcher. So overall you are looking at pretty compairable torpedo armaments while Z-46 still has 50% more shells per minute. And german DDs don't have a good reputation at the moment. We can take this as an example of what the high tier IJN DDs are suffering from. On lower tiers IJN have the best torpedo armament by far. While the USN DDs have kind of crappy range and speed, the Russians have their suicide torpedoes and the Germans are looking pretty good, the IJN DDs already have the capacility to stealth torp with relative ease and good speed. Going up to the higher tiers however, the other nations close the cap in terms of torpedo performence and are overall mostly on par or only a little behind the Japanese. On the other hand the cap in gun performence is still the same. To summerize what we need to keep in mind: lack of speciality at higher tiers and the detectability issue. The Split of the line itself brought some "interesting" changes as well. IJN DDs got better rate of fire while loosing their big alpha damage and fire chance on their HE ammunition. Overall these changes pretty much compensated each other and resulted in only small nerfs or buffs. At least on paper. The higher alpha damage was an advantage when taking shots of opportunity or at getting the jump on an enemy DD undetected. It was some kind of national flavor that got lost with the changes. Overall however by moving some ships down in tier WG mostly replaced ships with better ones. The Akatsuki and Shiratsuyu are definitivly improvements over the old Hastuharu and the same can be said about the Yuugumo replacing the Kagerou. Nevertheless when looking at the current statistics of the new ships we dont see any improvements over the old ones. They are mostly performing on a similar level as before. We can try to explain this by looking and the game in general: There are so much things that have changed over the last year, most of which made the life of destroyers harder. Let me try to explain to anyone who was not part of the closed beta what I mean with that. The Shimakaze for exaple was just a godlike ship. Sailing around the map undetected with the best speed of any ship at the time while launching waves of 15 torpedoes with 20 km range and good concealment on them was hilarious. You would regularly get games with over 100k damage and nobody on the enemy team ever saw you once. It was super easy and totally op and nobody with any sanity wants this back in the game. WG did the right thing and nerfed the Shimakaze. But with the game developing more and more, the Shima and every other IJN DD in the game got slowly but surely indirectly nerfed. Back in the day only aircraft and ships themseves were spotting your torps. Nowadays there is hydro on any number of ships especially since the introduction of the Kriegsmarine and since the captain skills got changed there are much more aircraft floating around. But not only is torpedo play increasingly difficult, your ship itself is in more danger of being sunk. Russian cruisers brought radar in the game and their destroyers are lightning fast with massive firepower. Last but not least RPF made it into the game and while not gamebreaking, it made destroyer life harder. So the meta changed so much that DDs got a harder time staying alive and torpedoes where made less of threat. But IJN DDs did not change and are in a bad state for some time now. Before I state some possible changes that I would suggest to improve the state of IJN DDs, I have some final thoughts. First of all I still like IJN DDs. The torpedo focused playstyle is enjoying for me because it involves so much predicting to be done. Where will all the ships around me be in a minute when my torps are reloaded? Were should I go to be save from enemies but still habe a good ambush position? I understand that WoWs is an arcade game, but why on earth is radar going through islands? I also get that balance is more important than historical facts, but the Japanese used oxygen in their torpedoes because that ensured better range, speed and decetability than the usual torpedo has. Why is every IJN torpedo in the game more visible than any other torpedo? Which bringst me to the final point of my rant: suggestions for improvement of IJN DDs: We learned by looking at different things what makes IJN DDs strong: A good concealment advantage over other DDs and a flexible torpedo armament that outperformes any other nation. They suffer however in exactly that regard by having too large detection ranges on their torpedoes and the fact, that high tier IJN DDs dont excell in their role that much. Shimakazes get outspottet by Fletchers and Gearings (same camo), Yuugumo has not the best torps at T9, etc. Therefore some possible ways to adress these issues are: reduce the detectability of all IJN torpedoes to the same level of other nations make their torpedoes faster than other nations or longer range (high tier; last one is not good for the game) improve their concealment on the ships themself to give them the edge they need over other DDs improve their gun performence by giving them back their old shells and/or better turret traverse (not my prefered approach) give all IJN DDs access to the reload booster consumable in a seperate slot (with rebalancing it, not just a 5 second reload, that would be op; more in the lines of cutting the reload in half once every 5 minutes or so) It just needs one of these things (NOT ALL) to give the IJN DDs back their pride as the pinackle of torpedo ninjas. Thanks for listening to my overly lengthy rant about IJN DDs. Feel free to discuss in a well-mannered fashion.
  23. Dirty_Dunc


    Dear war gaming, 1. Standard and domination game modes must be selective before enetering a random game!!! At least then whoever your team mates are will know and have chosen a game type to play and lose in !!!!!!!!!!!!!! 2. 2 cv's, 5 dd's and torpedo laden cruisers per random game .. Enough .. Too many torpedo laden ships .. Players dont even bother firing guns and just spam torpedoes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (2.5 one cv and 3 dd's per side is enough !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) (2.6 make dynamic aiming standard ..................... Enough of the guess work for new players .... Get them used to aiming guns rather than spamming torps) 4. Divisions must share there plans with the rest of the team 5. Stats over gamemode !!!!!!!!! Stop rewarding damage only and bad play ... What is the point of capping or defence ? If the only thing in a players profile that counts is damage done that prevents you from being called a edited or edited? (5.5 is it any wonder that cv's and dd's are favoured by new players and bb's are been shot to pieces ?) 6. Players know how to report before they know how to play the game .... Enough !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 7.2 around the corner ffs .. Enough already !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Fix what is broken !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!