Imaginary Patch Notes

[Userext]

I always thought the Gearing was known for its fastest firing guns in the game, while yet a 15km tighter spread is better then 20km torps the shimakaze is still very good its torps deal more damage.

 

Shimakaze's torpedoes are worse than gearing if we would talk about effectiveness. It's torps deal more damage but you have to reload them in 2.5 min and your torpedoes at tier 10 has 12 seconds reaction time while gearing has 9 seconds reaction time. REaction time is important. A ship can minimse the torpedo taken from shimakaze to 1 or even 0 but they cant do that against gearing's torpedoes

 

Gearing is known for being the best DD in game. It is kinda upsetting to see how they developed that part of the game. And before we get into average stat talk kagero has same torpedo damage dealing ability as gearing and yet kagero can do 42k average damage while gearing has 45k average damage. That mostly is because USNDD captains arent used to IJNDD strategy. Even though gearing has really powerfull guns and same damage dealing torpedoes(per full drop) gearing only makes 3k more damage than kagero which i think it shows how unexperienced gearing captains are with their torpedoes

[Ascender]

I disagree with you buffing gearing. If you didnt know gearing's torpedoes are more usefull than shimakaze's. Shimakaze is supposed to be a torpedo boat kind of ship and it fails doing that

 

The idea I have with the gearing is that there is little going for it if you compare apples to apples and put the Fletcher straight alongside it. Compared to the Fletcher the Gearing has: 2.300 more hitpoints, 0.6 knots lower top speed, 200 meter worse sea and 300 meter worse air detectability ratings, 1.8 kilometers less maximum range on it's guns, 80 meters bigger turning circle, 0.3 seconds worse rudder shift time, just shy of double the Fletcher's HE DPM, less damage per torpedo, the same number of torpedo tubes, 37% less torpedo DPM, 6km more range on the torpedoes and finally 9 degrees per second slower turret rotation times. The way I see this is that...  EVERYTHING on the Gearing is worse than the Fletcher and what you gain for it is a very high HE DPM value the usefulness of which is questionable due to a shortening of its range. Again, from hear-say I've heard that the Gearing is quite prone to losing turrets in critical hits, if that happens 33% of your firepower is gone per turret lost, on the Fletcher a lost turret represents only 20%. All things combined I feel that the Gearing ought to maintain at least the DPM value (sustained damage output) of the Fletcher in terms of torpedoes. It will still be significantly far behind the Shimakaze (especially if the Shimakaze takes the 15km range torps with more damage) having about 18.4% less torpedo DPM than the Shimakaze (on less tubes so less hit probability per volley but more volleys). Personally I would just read it as "Shimakaze ought to have a bit higher rate of fire on its 20km torps" but I don't quite want to go there yet as the remainder of the stats, top speed and turning performance in particular, are very much in the Shimakaze's favour.

 

To my knowledge reaction times from torpedoes are based off a torpedo's speed, in the case of the Gearing and Shimakaze the top speeds are practically identical so they should not differ greatly.

 

The thing that gnaws on me is how the Gearing is a significant torpedo downgrade from the Fletcher. As a means of dealing damage, particularly against battleships, sustained torpedo damage is very important, more so than the burst damage that comes out of a single torpedo, as a DD is unlikely to kill a BB in one or even two torpedo attacks, especially if the BB is attentive to the danger. The gun performance is great but on small caliber guns with short range and more likely than not bad trajectory making them hard to apply consistently. I'm already finding that this is the case on tier 7, where if I lay down a smoke within a reasonable distance to a ship, before being spotted, he can quite easily drive out of range of me in a number of volleys taking minimal damage. Leaving the smoke to fire is not an option as you will be seen and you will be shot at due to the low ranges, and your own hit probability suffers greatly from the trajectory.

 

I will accept there is a point of argument on the Gearing but honestly only people who own and play the Gearing itself can truly shed some light on this issue. And I would appreciate it to anyone reading to do so

[Userext]

To my knowledge reaction times from torpedoes are based off a torpedo's speed, in the case of the Gearing and Shimakaze the top speeds are practically identical so they should not differ greatly.

 

The thing that gnaws on me is how the Gearing is a significant torpedo downgrade from the Fletcher. As a means of dealing damage, particularly against battleships, sustained torpedo damage is very important, more so than the burst damage that comes out of a single torpedo, as a DD is unlikely to kill a BB in one or even two torpedo attacks, especially if the BB is attentive to the danger.

 

Gearing has longer range torpedoes if you limit that to 9.2km then it would be ok but still improving the reload time at higher tiers is not a good idea. With 0.65 gearing will have 92 seconds of reload on her tubes and module+captain skill gives %25 less torpedo reload time which would make this thing reload in 69 seconds. That is really a lot and is not what WG is aiming for. They dont want you to spam your torpedoes at high tiers. For example shimakaze pays 1k credit per torpedo.

 

 

Gearing is much more capable of doing damage to battleships. that 9 second reaction time means her torpedoes will have a higher hit ratio than shimakaze. Again kagero and gearing has pretty much the same damage dealing ability with torpedoes right now. But when we look at their EU server average stats kagero does 42k damage while gearing does 45k damage. This table tells me that gearing captains arent using their torpedo effectively. 

[Ascender]

So by your stats how is that Fletcher performing? Because that's the one where I'm very interested in as it has very high damage torpedo damage output compared to other american destroyers.

[Userext]

So by your stats how is that Fletcher performing? Because that's the one where I'm very interested in as it has very high damage torpedo damage output compared to other american destroyers.

 

Fletcher is doing 40.9k average damage, benson 26k, mahan 20k

[McCracken666]

Still needs to include more fixing to the close torpedo drops from CV's, its still to easy for them

[Ascender]

Still needs to include more fixing to the close torpedo drops from CV's, its still to easy for them

 

It is my personal belief that as the effectiveness of fighters scales up in the higher tiers, fighter setups will automatically be more effective, more rewarding and thus more popular. Planes need to be effective against Planes, the fact that fighters are not (and never have been at least on tier 10) means that there is little incentive to get more of them since they achieve little. Only afterwards can it be determined if any changes to strike planes are still needed. On the old Taiho with a 3-2-2 setup I found myself highly effective against strike builds of any carriers, not only being able to survive myself (rather important) but also being able to cover other ships in the fleet. In my time it averaged 38 plane kills per game with an all-time peak of 101 aircraft shot down during a single game. Even if it is insufficient to straight-up make enemy carriers run out of planes it does present a serious roadblock to their ability to strike at ships in the fleet. (Taking into account games without carrier opposition it is not unreasonable to think I shot down 60-75% of an enemy carrier's complement of aircraft on average, usually resulting in him running out of fighters and torpedo bombers as those are the focus targets)

 

@Userext hm, really? I would think the Benson would perform far better than the Mahan, it is capable of stealth torping, SIGNIFICANTLY faster and it has better stealth and more torpedo DPM to boot!, the fact that it only performs moderately better than the Mahan dissapoints me (not in the Benson, but rather in the people who play it). Anyways, I'll concede that Gearing to you, it does make sense. I would still like to increase the rate of fire of the torpedoes at least slightly (mostly so the torpedo performance would at least be somewhat equal with the Benson, which has 87k DPM (fletcher 114.2, Gearing 71.6). Anyways, that's more or less nitpicking at details with changes of 15k DPM at these tiers. Seeing as we got into such a big discussion on the Gearing, any comments on the other ideas? =)

[Userext]

 

It is my personal belief that as the effectiveness of fighters scales up in the higher tiers, fighter setups will automatically be more effective, more rewarding and thus more popular. Planes need to be effective against Planes, the fact that fighters are not (and never have been at least on tier 10) means that there is little incentive to get more of them since they achieve little. Only afterwards can it be determined if any changes to strike planes are still needed. On the old Taiho with a 3-2-2 setup I found myself highly effective against strike builds of any carriers, not only being able to survive myself (rather important) but also being able to cover other ships in the fleet. In my time it averaged 38 plane kills per game with an all-time peak of 101 aircraft shot down during a single game. Even if it is insufficient to straight-up make enemy carriers run out of planes it does present a serious roadblock to their ability to strike at ships in the fleet. (Taking into account games without carrier opposition it is not unreasonable to think I shot down 60-75% of an enemy carrier's complement of aircraft on average, usually resulting in him running out of fighters and torpedo bombers as those are the focus targets)

 

@Userext hm, really? I would think the Benson would perform far better than the Mahan, it is capable of stealth torping, SIGNIFICANTLY faster and it has better stealth and more torpedo DPM to boot!, the fact that it only performs moderately better than the Mahan dissapoints me (not in the Benson, but rather in the people who play it). Anyways, I'll concede that Gearing to you, it does make sense. I would still like to increase the rate of fire of the torpedoes at least slightly (mostly so the torpedo performance would at least be somewhat equal with the Benson, which has 87k DPM (fletcher 114.2, Gearing 71.6). Anyways, that's more or less nitpicking at details with changes of 15k DPM at these tiers. Seeing as we got into such a big discussion on the Gearing, any comments on the other ideas? =)

 

You would think that but USNDD captains dont understand how to use torpedoes. If you are one of them sorry but at average USNDD captains suck at using torpedoes. Which also explains why gearing has such low average damage. As i repeated before kagero has overall same torpedo damage but there is only 3k daamge diffrence. If gearing captains werent using their gun i would understand but 45k is too low for a ship with really good guns and really good torpedoes. 

 

I cant really comment on other changes that dont have a thing to do with DDs. But i must say that you are overstimating the reload times on torpedoes. A shimakaze can get her reload to 112 seconds(1min52 seconds) but maps are big enough for you to make a turn to the same spot and fire them again.

[Mangrey]

Still needs to include more fixing to the close torpedo drops from CV's, its still to easy for them

 

balls ....

 

.... sorry ... but i cant stand that whine any more ....

 

Uber post tho keepe me coming :=) would be nice if some would make a link to this post on the RU Dev forum 

 

mang

[Ascender]

I cant really comment on other changes that dont have a thing to do with DDs. But i must say that you are overstimating the reload times on torpedoes. A shimakaze can get her reload to 112 seconds(1min52 seconds) but maps are big enough for you to make a turn to the same spot and fire them again.

 

I do not view myself as one of these captains. I enjoyed IJN DDs greatly until the Mutsuki, which was tolerable, and quit on the Hatsuharu. My Clemson, Nicholas and Farragut all have similar damage per battles with the Mahan dropping off quite a lot, I can think of many reasons for this but I believe the primary one is that the torpedo performance of the Mahan is simply not enough to compensate for the extra tier. Gun performance between the Mahan and Farragut is identical. Also the Mahan is significantly slower and has reasonably worse stealth than the Farragut, all little bits add up but the difference of one tier is the real kicker when you have to basically work with the exact same tools. The Benson gains the ability to stealth torp and is the fastest destroyer in the American line, which should make even the kamikaze-style of torpedo-ing more viable in my opinion. But we'll see when I actually get there, I do not quite wish to lose the credits on the Benson quite yet right now as I have other plans for them ;)

 

The torpedo DPM story I base fully on how well the Minekaze performs compared to the Mutsuki. Really both these ships are quite similar with the major difference being the number of torpedoes the Minekaze can put into the water compared to the Mutsuki. Torpedo DPM is important, very important, because if it wasn't then the Minekaze would never have been perceived as OP. Ofcourse other stats are very important as well, like speed and range, but in the end the number of torpedoes you can put into the water directly influences the performance of a Destroyer, especially a Japanese destroyer. On other ships I felt it is a similar story, damage takes time to apply, and time is limited due to rounds ending sooner or later but damage is limited only by a person's accuracy and the physical rate at which he can fire, everything else is RNG. Anyway, that's from a quite theoretical standpoint, but the Minekaze is a shining beacon of why torpedo DPM is very significant, even if the difference is between 10 seconds on 2 minutes, those 10 seconds are significant. I deliberately keep modules out of this mostly because they are a flat upgrade, and will increase DPM proportionally equally regardless of which destroyer it is, how many torpedo tubes he has, how fast his torpedoes go etc, the DPM is the value to which it is applied, though you are right this should perhaps carry some more weight in my thought process. I will still stand by on the changes of the other DDs as I listed them for sake of relative performance.

 

Sorry if these posts are a bit long sometimes but I'm kind of thinking aloud and theorizing as I go. Enjoy doing that though you can never create too much insight on a subject!

[Userext]

Torpedo DPM is not important at all if your torpedoes arent accurate due to enemy being able to have enough reaction time. The DPM isnt part that cripples mutsuki its the reaction time. 12 seconds reaction time on tier 6 DD is just simply too much.

[Hesp]

 

Nor torp range is important. You can not hit anything at 10km how the hell do 15 or 20km? WG really plays his own game?

The torps are ridiculously slow and detectable from Tokyo, as if that were not enough planes can also detect torps and shall be permanently marked.

My disappointment was great to discover that the DD's are useless and therefore 25% of the game.

 

[Kenliero]

I would also change Ranger 0/1/3 to 1/1/2 version. Otherwise people will keep using Ranger 1/1/1 stock deck, which is the same as Independence, tier below. Lexington runs 2/1/1 so this 1/1/2 would fall perfectly between those 2, and would put it close to same level with Hiryu.

[Flavio1997]

I would also change Ranger 0/1/3 to 1/1/2 version. Otherwise people will keep using Ranger 1/1/1 stock deck, which is the same as Independence, tier below. Lexington runs 2/1/1 so this 1/1/2 would fall perfectly between those 2, and would put it close to same level with Hiryu.

I completely  agree with you, it's  super frustrating  now, is the only ship that i sold ragequitting before i had unlocked the lexy