My thoughts on the new German DDs, and why I personally don't like them

[XDMeloniXD]

It is common knowledge already that people already kinda dislike where the new German DDs are going, with their characteristics already seeming quite lackluster. And while people like calling out suspected "German-anti bias" from Wargamings part, I do not believe that that is the reason of their seeming lacklusterness (this time atleast).

 

WARNING: I won't portray Wargaming as the spawn of satan that wants our money in this post, I quite frankly just want to understand this concept, share what I figured out with all of you and explain why I believe that this will not work.

 

What is their purpose?

 

Pulled straight from the DovBleg; these are the defining features of what Wargaming wants these ships to be;

• Accurate 150 mm guns
• Powerful AP shells with good damage, penetration capability, and improved ricochet angles. HE shells, on the contrary, deal moderate damage per minute. 
• Availability of the Hydroaccoustic Search and, starting from Tier VIII, the Defensive AA Fire consumable. However, the new destroyers do not have a Smoke Generator.
• Great armor for the class.
• Torpedoes with good reload time and decent speed, but average damage and range.*

 

*(We, at this point in time, have already seen that the torpedoes have been nerfed, now only boasting ranges of 7-7.5 km for the tiers 7-9.)

 

Currently it looks like Wargaming are trying to create AP-gun based miniature cruisers with a semi-slow reload. If I try to see positives in this, I can say that I like that WG are trying to create something new, different and interesting. It also seems like they are trying to add more ships that do not focus on HE-spamming, by giving them mildly slow reloads and good AP, it is a valiant effort to balance out the HE-spammy meta. The torpedo nerf is kinda justified? Maybe? Considering that they may want them to play more like cruisers, perhaps that also means that the gameplay should not be torpedo dependant. And they may perhaps, hopefully buff the guns in the future. Now, here is the bad part, making destroyers into miniature cruisers is a horrid idea!

 

 

Why making cruiser-like destroyers is a bad idea.

 

There are a fair few reasons why I find it to be a bad idea, but the first and biggest issue is within the destroyer role;

 

Destroyers are SUPER important in this game, they lead the charge, scout, set smokescreens, torp and capture bases. If you have ever watched a WOWS replay commentator, they often say that getting rid of the enemy DD is one of the most important objectives, and that the team with most DDs alive is more likely to win (or if only one team has one DD left). Well if we imagine a scenario ingame; no CVs, only one destroyer per team, you have an Elbing and the enemy has a Shimakaze, that would be a major handicap to your team.

 

Now, you may argue that we already have cruiser-like destroyers in the form of Kléber, Khabarovsk and Halland (in a sense that it does not carry the smokescreen consumable), how come they still manage to survive in the meta? Well, they all excel in different features, that compensate for other destroyer characteristics. You have bad camo? Compensate with crazy speed and maneuverability like Kléber and Khabarofsk. Don't have smoke to hide from aircraft? Compensate with amazing AA- characteristics like Halland. You can't wander into a cap due to your detectibility? Use your amazing guns or dummy-quick torps to decimate the enemy DD.

 

The Elbing line won't have any of these, Torps will have short range, they are not viable, your detectability range is inadequate compared to other DDs and you are a huge target.  Your AA is meh, your guns are not scary against enemy DDs like the Klébers guns. And you are not as fast or maneuverable as the Khabarovsk. You just don't have anything marvelous to compensate for your lacking all-around characteristics.

 

A combination of meh characteristics and an inability to accomplish your role as a destroyer will not just handicap you; the player, but also your team.

 

 

Of course, this is fixable, you can buff them, maybe give them amazing gunpower and European AA-firepower. Maybe matching these up against cruisers, or creating a new class for these is the right way to go. There are many options, but also many wrong answers.

 

What do you all think of this? Do you agree? Am I wrong? Do you want to add something? What suggestions do you have to buff or balance these?

 

[1MajorKoenig]

23 minutes ago, XDMeloniXD said:

your guns are not scary against enemy DDs like the Klébers guns.

In essence WG needs to make the guns pretty good to compensate for lack of agility and concealment. 
 

I think such concept can work but it needs very good guns and a decent survivability against DD. 
 

Regarding your example of only one DD - this is always an issue considering the very different specializations already present. But less DDs means more cruisers and other ships - essentially you can still work around that. 

[principat121]

40 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

I think such concept can work but it needs very good guns and a decent survivability against DD. 

They have good guns, but survivability against DD is not as important as the survivability against CA/CL and sniping BB. A clumsy destroyer suddenly spotted and in the focus of three, four crusiers/battleships is toast. No heal, no smoke and not the agility to avoid incoming fire make these DD practically useless.

[xe_N_on]

Historical accurate, because German "Flottentorpedoboote" we're not very good and had various design problems. 

[SodaBubbles]

I think this analysis is pretty much what people are thinking. Good job. 

I doubt it is anti-German bias on WG's part -- you only have to consider T-61, Mainz, Scharnhorst, and Pommern, all popular and fun ships, to see that the devs have no such bias.

 

IMHO the developers have shoved themselves into a corner. The devs are thus struggling with giving DDs more hitting power while making them less HE spammy, the recent commander skills rework, an almost total train wreck, nevertheless did offer reduced HE fire chance captain skill, which shows that the devs realize HE spam is reducing game playability and are thinking about solutions. 

 

The problem is that the game is flooded with CVs which means that DDs are constantly spotted and constantly attacked. Radar is also constantly present. No ship can be powerful enough to hit back at radar cruisers, agile enough to dodge incoming fire, AA enough to make CVs think twice, yet mount excellent torps and/or guns. It would be too OP.

 

There is no way out of this box. Any DD that is not Halland is going to seem meh in the current meta -- the problem is thus not the German DDs, but the meta itself. What WG really needs to do is to reduce radar and CV spotting so that DDs can carry out their proper functions of spotting and capping. But I don't see that happening....

[1MajorKoenig]

17 minutes ago, xe_N_on said:

Historical accurate, because German "Flottentorpedoboote" we're not very good and had various design problems. 

These are no „Flottentorpedoboote“ (which were for the most part very good - except the later ones such as the FTBs 1939 (which we have in game as T-22) but “Spähkreuzers” which are essentially oversized ocean-going destroyers.

[Hirohito]

The problem with this line is that they don't seem to counter anything and thus have no particular role that needs filling.
Cruisers can angle and neuter this boat.
DDs can generally outspot this boat, and those that don't seem to have a superior gun advantage with monstrous HE, better ballistics and superior speed to dodge returning fire. They can also angle like cruiser to neuter the AP dpm.

BBs are not gonna struggle with these, as the torps are too short-ranged/anemic, while AP vs BBs runs out of steam pretty quick once the vulnerable parts are saturated.
CVs face no smoke, no real AA and poor detection circles, making these a prime target to drop from the get go.

French DDs seem like the DD line that closest fill the role of these boats, but since they can rely on HE and ridiculous speed they actually pose a real threat on the battlefield.

[dCK_Ad_Hominem]

High alpha low dpm guns do not work on dds. Period. Especially not on one struggling to dodge or disengage. I recon a harugumo or even gearing knowing what its doing will be able to easily chew through this one. Despite the huge hp pool. And in terms of armor:

 

Remember when bb ap would arm on all dds? Yeah, fun times. Any 12+ gun bb will love seeing one of those pop up within 10km. And to add insult to injury, said bb will be able to feel completely save due to t6 torps. 

 

No. Thanks. 

[XDMeloniXD]

25 minutes ago, SodaBubbles said:

you only have to consider T-61, Mainz, Scharnhorst, and Pommern, all popular and fun ships, to see that the devs have no such bias.

Since German ships are so popular, maybe the so called "German anti-bias" is a way of balancing out so that not everyone plays german ships? Crazy theory lol

[_HomTanks_]

55 minutes ago, xe_N_on said:

 "Flottentorpedoboote"

 

I had to...

 

 

[1MajorKoenig]

1 hour ago, Execute0rder66 said:

 

I had to...

 

 

“Oberbezirkspostmeister”

[Khaba_Gandalf]

Did anyone else checked the armor layout yet? 

 

Elbing has the standard bow, stern and superstructure values and a central section of 25mm. 

 

Which means that the only light cruisers that get issues with that armor using HE are Colbert and Smol. Anything else termed a light cruiser in the t8-10 mm either has 30mm + (150-155) pen, fires ap only (UK CL) or has access to SAP (austin). 

 

How this will lead to Elbing hunting light cruisers successfuly baffles me. And even Colbert and Smol can simply use AP if Elbing gives enough broadside to bring all its turrets into play. In which case 25mm means enough armor value that the fusing threshold is reached for 127-130mm guns. 

[xe_N_on]

Vor 3 Stunden, 1MajorKoenig sagte:

These are no „Flottentorpedoboote“ (which were for the most part very good - except the later ones such as the FTBs 1939 (which we have in game as T-22) but “Spähkreuzers” which are essentially oversized ocean-going destroyers.

Drachnifel disagrees on Flottentorpedoboote beeing good, at least until 1940

 

from 58:00

 

At least the Z-31 is a 1936A, which had -in contrast to the 1936 - stability problems again, because of the 150 mm guns being too heavy.

 

The Gustav Julius Maerker is apparently  a 1937 -J design, which failed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_1937J_destroyer) "The design specifications were eventually shown to be unworkable"

 

The Felix Schultz is apparently a 1938A, which again was not realized and was later further develop into Spähkreuzer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_World_War_II_destroyers#Zerstörer_1938A/Ac)

 

The Elbing seem to be based on the design "Spähkreuer 38", but was never build. Only the Spähkreuzer 40 design was started beeing build but never completed (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spähkreuzer)

[Itwastuesday]

I'm excited for them, because it's something new, but the point about the importance of DD is a good one. It's already really annoying to have Khaba as one of your few destroyers because it just spells doom on your flank. 

[1MajorKoenig]

20 minutes ago, xe_N_on said:

Drachnifel disagrees on Flottentorpedoboote beeing good, at least until 1940

 

from 58:00

 

The story of German Torpedoboats is a quite mixed and partially troubled one. For a long time the focus was on small vessels with the sole purpose of torping big ships in daring large scale attacks. For the most part these ships ended up relatively small - sometimes to a degree that they ended up not Sea worthy enough (eg Torpedoboat 1911 - called “Lans-Krüppel“ which was supposed to indicate that these boats were just bad in any sorts of sea). 
 

That said - German Torpedoboats got bigger after Jutland towards the end of WW1 as the small boats lacked the versatility of the British destroyers and were inferior in gunnery duels.

 

After the war the Germans built 12 follow ups to the Torpedoboat design of 1916 (mob type) which became the TB 1923/24.
 

These were quite capable boats for their small size but still a bit too specialized in torpedo attacks which became more and more unlikely given the changed strategic situation. Most navies needed multi-purpose workhorses and these ships lacked a bit versatility.

 

Some of the following torpedo boat designs tried to stay below the restrictions of the arms treaties of the time by not exceeding 600 tons which is obviously too small for a torpedo boat or destroyer. 
 

The Torpedoboats in the 1930s were maybe not stellar - agree on that part and the FTB39 / T-22 Type - although a reasonable design - was underpowered and a bit light on the artillery. But that was partially because the power plant was initially intended for a smaller unit 

[bobtherterrible]

Well

Gaede has the best ship horn in the game.

Hands down.

[xe_N_on]

Vor 40 Minuten, 1MajorKoenig sagte:

The story of German Torpedoboats is a quite mixed and partially troubled one. For a long time the focus was on small vessels with the sole purpose of torping big ships in daring large scale attacks. For the most part these ships ended up relatively small - sometimes to a degree that they ended up not Sea worthy enough (eg Torpedoboat 1911 - called “Lans-Krüppel“ which was supposed to indicate that these boats were just bad in any sorts of sea). 
 

That said - German Torpedoboats got bigger after Jutland towards the end of WW1 as the small boats lacked the versatility of the British destroyers and were inferior in gunnery duels.

 

After the war the Germans built 12 follow ups to the Torpedoboat design of 1916 (mob type) which became the TB 1923/24.
 

These were quite capable boats for their small size but still a bit too specialized in torpedo attacks which became more and more unlikely given the changed strategic situation. Most navies needed multi-purpose workhorses and these ships lacked a bit versatility.

 

Some of the following torpedo boat designs tried to stay below the restrictions of the arms treaties of the time by not exceeding 600 tons which is obviously too small for a torpedo boat or destroyer. 
 

The Torpedoboats in the 1930s were maybe not stellar - agree on that part and the FTB39 / T-22 Type - although a reasonable design - was underpowered and a bit light on the artillery. But that was partially because the power plant was initially intended for a smaller unit 

 

In both wars Germany never could reach an advanced naval fleet like Great Britain. The German Kaiser Wilhelm II. was in fact dedicated to get a fleet that can match the British one, but never reach that goal, at least not in absolute numbers. That the German WW1 fleet survived the Battle of Jutland was IMHO sheer luck - or bad luck for the British fleet.

 

Later on German naval forces were not really a thing and quite unsuccessful (Yeah, OK Bismarck sunk the hood, again by sheer luck, but sunk not much later). With the most famous German ships, Graf Spee and the Bismark, someone might come to the conclusion that most German war ships were sunk by their own captains to prevent being salvaged then by enemy gunfire.

 

Only thing that the German navy got slightly right were their submarines, but after the ability to decrypt the enigma code they were somewhat useless and were hunted down. And of course it is IMHO a war crime to sink civil ships even if they might being used as troop transport

 

Fun fact: Until now, Germany keeps building good submarines, but apparently debatable surface ships (reference to F125 Baden-Wuertenberg-Klasse). The 212a is one of the best and stealthiest diesel-electric submarines utilizing fuel cells,  optiized to operate near the cost in shallow waters - and quite an export hit as Type 214. The F125 is a overpriced 750 M € costly prison ship optimized to hunt down small pirate speed boats ... with a 127 mm autocannon ... but since it has negligible missile defense it can be shot from the shore with a quite cheap anti-ship missile any neat pirate can buy on the black market and mount on his Toyota Hilux.

 

PS: At least the German Goverment don't spend 4,4 B $ for the F125, as the US did for their prestige project Zumwalt-Class ...

[RossijskijAxisFlot]

21 minuti fa, xe_N_on ha scritto:

 

In both wars Germany never could reach an advanced naval fleet like Great Britain. The German Kaiser Wilhelm II. was in fact dedicated to get a fleet that can match the British one, but never reach that goal, at least not in absolute numbers. That the German WW1 fleet survived the Battle of Jutland was IMHO sheer luck - or bad luck for the British fleet.

 

Later on German naval forces were not really a thing and quite unsuccessful (Yeah, OK Bismarck sunk the hood, again by sheer luck, but sunk not much later). With the most famous German ships, Graf Spee and the Bismark, someone might come to the conclusion that most German war ships were sunk by their own captains to prevent being salvaged then by enemy gunfire.

 

Only thing that the German navy got slightly right were their submarines, but after the ability to decrypt the enigma code they were somewhat useless and were hunted down. And of course it is IMHO a war crime to sink civil ships even if they might being used as troop transport

 

Fun fact: Until now, Germany keeps building good submarines, but apparently debatable surface ships (reference to F125 Baden-Wuertenberg-Klasse). The 212a is one of the best and stealthiest diesel-electric submarines utilizing fuel cells,  optiized to operate near the cost in shallow waters - and quite an export hit as Type 214

Are you british ? 

[xe_N_on]

Vor 1 Minute, KommodorevonKlein sagte:

Are you british ? 

 

No, I'm in fact German. ;-)

[RossijskijAxisFlot]

Proprio ora, xe_N_on ha scritto:

 

No, I'm in fact German. ;-)

well, you're a bit too harsh with the navy of your country history wise in my opinion. Surely on Jutland (and I'm italian) 

[xe_N_on]

Gerade eben, KommodorevonKlein sagte:

well, you're a bit too harsh with the navy of your country history wise in my opinion. Surely on Jutland (and I'm italian) 

 

I'm being realistic ;-) The British could have beaten the German fleet at Jutland though the losses (especially on human lives) on both side would have been high. However, the Germans fled and the British didn't pursued them.

 

 

[Ashardalon_Dragnipur]

question, is its AP going to do full damage to DDs?

or is the usual DD protection vs AP going to apply to them too making them completely useless in the DDvDD that is the most important part of a DDs job

no stealth to spot and get help from their team and no damage to do it themselves 

the idea of a anti cruiser DD is just another slap in the face of the rockpaperscissors idea so even less balance in the game 

[ThePolishDJ]

Cytat

question, is its AP going to do full damage to DDs?

Hopefully. Otherwise, I don't see myself actually grinding that DD line at least for now.

[Verblonde]

6 hours ago, XDMeloniXD said:

What do you all think of this?

I'm starting to think we may have a problem with DDs that is not entirely un-adjacent to that with cruisers and supercruisers i.e. we seem to have two main general types of DD: sneaky and non-sneaky (for want of better expressions), with things like Khaba and the French in the latter category, soon to be joined by the new Germans.

 

The 'sneaky' type I would define in terms of being able to do the traditional DD jobs, whereas the 'non-sneaky' ones are anything where that sort of thing will likely get you killed, and you spend your time at longer range, with the left mouse button glued down.

 

Clearly, there isn't a clear line that cuts off where one category starts and the other begins; quite apart from anything else, how much you build for stealth could change quite a lot of ships' categories.

 

Anyway, the point is that which category you have on your side, and on your opponents' side, will have a dramatic impact on how the game plays out if only because of the significant differences in vision control. So, do we need two sub-classes (as it were) of DDs; one for the sneaky ones, and one for the non-sneaky ones, in a similar manner to how some have proposed giving supercruisers their own MM class? I would say probably not (keeping it simple may well be a virtue here), but the idea does illustrate why many (including me, at this stage, although I hope I'm wrong) are not really stoked about these new DDs as they stand - why pick one, when there are several alternatives that can 'DD' far better (and when 'DDing' is usually so crucial to your team's success)?

[1MajorKoenig]

1 hour ago, xe_N_on said:

That the German WW1 fleet survived the Battle of Jutland was IMHO sheer luck - or bad luck for the British fleet.

What a complete bull 

 

The German Strategy was to lure out parts of the Grand Fleet and destroy pieces of it to achieve parity in numbers. The RN had about twice as many ships at the time.

 

When the whole grand fleet showed up at Jutland it came as a surprise. Regardless of that obvious disadvantage the High Seas Fleet pulled off a tactical victory and disengaged when the odds got worse - superbly executed by the way. The direct duels went mostly in favour of the German ships. 
 

The downside of the battle was that the tactical victory wasn’t significant enough to break the blockade and to end the starving in the continent. 
 

But I stop the OT now