Royal Navy Tech Tree Proposal

[FionnMacC]

Leaked Gallant data here > https://sea-group.org/?p=2872&lang=en

 

No surprises apart from the 8% fire chance on main guns and 10km Mk IX torpedoes (TA hype!) Trolled by SEA, they're just 8km ones. Concealment will be 5.97km with CE.

 

Torpedo comparison.

 

Destroyer	Torpedo	Torpedo Range (km)	Speed (knots)	Time to Target (s)	Time in water (s)	Reaction time (s)	Alpha damage	DPM	DPM + skill
Hatsuharu	Type 8 mod 2 (TA)	8	64	37.1	48	9.0	97,602	77,054	85,616
Shinonome	Type 8 mod 1	8	63	40.3	49	9.7	131,400	108,000	120,000
Hatsuharu	Type 8 mod 2	10	59	40.3	65	9.7	97,602	77,054	85,616
Galant	Mk IX	8	61	40.6	50	8.2	123,464	77,165	85,739
Ernst Gaede	G7 Stienbutt	8	65	41.9	47	7.7	109,600	73,067	81,185
Anshan	53-51	8	60	42.3	51	7.7	86,400	65,620	72,911
Fubuki	Type 8 mod 2	10	59	43.0	65	9.7	146,403	115,581	128,424

 

The only downside is rubbish launch angles (slightly better than Shinonome) but hopefully great manoeuvrability makes up for it.

 

Gun comparison.

 

Destroyer	HE DPM	Accuracy adjusted	Fires per minute	Fires per minute (DE)
Fubuki	13,500	5,535	0.8	1.1
Hatsuharu	14,400	5,904	0.8	1.2
Ernst Gaede 150mm	17,600	7,392	1.4	1.7
Ernst Gaede 127mm	17,647	6,706	1.0	1.5
Shinonome	18,000	7,380	1.0	1.5
Gallant	20,400	7,344	1.4	1.9
Gnevny	22,800	9,576	1.4	1.9
Farragut C	27,000	8,910	1.1	1.7
Farragut B	33,750	11,138	1.4	2.2

 

 

AP pen.

 

	5km	10km
Leningrad 130mm	119mm	74mm
Okhotnik 130mm	86mm	46mm
Akizuki 100mm	90mm	41mm
Gallant 120mm	90mm	35mm
Maass 128mm	80mm	41mm

 

Good at close range but falls off quite a bit.

 

Gallant should be fun, if a bit average. Spam those torpedoes and set some fires.

YOU must be reading the dev's e-mail again... or you're very good at estimating what they'll do with each ship!

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/79751-hms-gallant/page__st__40__pid__1812452#entry1812452

 

 

Destroyer	Torpedo	Torpedo Range (km)	Speed (knots)	Time to Target (s)	Time in water (s)	Reaction time (s)	Vigilance (s)	Sonar + Vigilance (s)	Alpha damage	DPM	DPM + skill
Gallant	Mk IX	8	61	38.3*	50	8.2	10.2	22.1	123,464	77,165	85,739

 

Destroyer	Base HE DPM	Accuracy adjusted DPM	Fires per minute	DE
Gallant (4 x 12 RPM)	20,400	7,344	1.0	1.6

Highlighted are the only ones that differ from the preview stats ATM, hopefully these will survive testing to be confirmed on the released version.

Looks good to me, we'll have to wait to see what her manoeuvrability (rudder shift & turning circle) is like. I can barely wait for the full regular branch.

 

 

<snip> Well, looks like Gallant 8km are the torps and no option. Firing arcs as you suspected are pretty atrocious, but as creamgravy says at least she can wiggle. It's somewhat of a shame on the torps overall, the 10km models could get TA and challenge Gaede's torps for speed. As it is they're servicable in everything but reload really, just not that special compared to the Japanese. I am going to think about which captain to put on her, I don't think I have anyone with LS, EM and TAE, my skippers for Belfast/Warspite and Minotaur don't quite fit. Training a new one to 10 pts... eh, well there are some new flags... maybe it'll come in a $100 bundle with a high-points captain at least!

<snip>

 

Thanks for the comparisons, I wonder if there's something I don't know about fire chance or if the USN 5in/38 is just nerfed because 'reasons' then again plenty of fire chance makes no sense (German 105 vs 150mm secondaries spring to mind).

 

She looks ok as a torpedo boat, it's just the reload which isn't too happy. Shino and Fubu are throwing a lot more fish in a given period. I don't think she's unbalanced on the torp quality - concealment - torp reload triangle necessarily, just not very optimal. If she got the 10km fish I'd probably run torp acceleration.

 

Gun wise is better than anticipated, though interesting that the manual traverse mounts (historic traverse speed ??) get the same number as the powered twins at 10'/s. That could mean the JKN/Tribals get a better than 10'/s number if I were to speculate wildly.

 

Gun arcs remain pretty questionable, and I'm not sure that using the hit ratio is a good way to demonstrate it. USN DD like to sit in smoke and shoot up battleships at close range, with IJN DD you can crucially hit other DD at >6km range.

 

 

It's catching, in my experience any big copy/paste work can seem to set it off somehow.

It looks like the RN Destroyers are being set as Jack of All Trades - the best generalists. So they'll be competent without being spectacular as both torpedo boats & gunboats, which is how it appears from the preview stats - IF WG don't nerf these stats for the regular T6 DD. It looks like I was wrong about the T8 torps, & the RN is also breaking (just) the rule about Destroyer torps being better than Cruiser's - these are Leander's (nerfed) Mk IX upgrades, which I would have said were minimum Tier 6 anyway. I hope this won't mean that Glowworm (if WG make her a Premium) will get the Mk VII 6km... I'm also wondering exactly what's been boosted to make Gallant worthy of being a Premium ship (although they can hardly do worse than the Campbeltown unless it's the Hunt-class...)

 

The forum monster seems to be a fault with the auto-save when writing a post - take too long & you'd better copy>paste into Notepad or somewhere BEFORE posting. Or the Kraken will eat your carefully-worded message. 

 

Edit: preview/ST Gallant's torpedo reload is 24 secs/torpedo (96 secs) & she currently has IJN smoke (81 secs). Her base rudder shift is listed as 3.9 secs (2.9secs on sea-group, which seems unlikely), her turning circle is 540km. Oh dear... that's better manoeuvrability than Farragut & makes her the 2nd most agile DD at T6; hell, it's not that much worse than Mutsuki & Minekaze at T5! Her only AAA seem to be the 2x4 0.5" MG's, but apparently she also keeps the RNCL single-launch torps too; let's hope Gallant makes it through ST like this! 

My only concern is that she only comes with standard consumables; DC Party, Smoke & Engine Boost. Which leaves her in a condition I'd expect of the T6 regular DD when it's released, so what makes her a premium? Early release? 

[EUmofton]

Looks good to me, we'll have to wait to see what her manoeuvrability (rudder shift & turning circle) is like. I can barely wait for the full regular branch.

 

SEA have 540m/2.9s, but TDB which has what looks like GM3D screen shots has 540m/3.92s. I agree TDB is more likely correct.

 

 

I think Jacks-of-All is probably valid, IMO with more of a torpedo boat bent. In gunnery I see them as behind the USN and RU for sure, not sure vs. KM, about IJN level. In torpedoes they're a hybrid of IJN/KM at the moment. At high tiers we'll have to see on torps because the Mk. IX** doesn't cut it any more.

 

Glowworm would be unplayable with 6km torps, not enough gun power and rushing with 61kt torps isn't a bold plan, it's foolhardy. I think they'll do something else, as it is she'll get a ~120s reload, which will be pretty bad and boring compared to say Shinonome's 73s to throw out 9 torps to 10. Suddenly 10 torps at T6 doesn't look anything like good.

 

I don't think they need much in the way of gimmicks, there's still room between Hatsu-Fubu-Shino at T6 even without a consumable gimmick and the RN can do the same.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[FionnMacC]

 

SEA have 540m/2.9s, but TDB which has what looks like GM3D screen shots has 540m/3.92s. I agree TDB is more likely correct.

 

 

I think Jacks-of-All is probably valid, IMO with more of a torpedo boat bent. In gunnery I see them as behind the USN and RU for sure, not sure vs. KM, about IJN level. In torpedoes they're a hybrid of IJN/KM at the moment. At high tiers we'll have to see on torps because the Mk. IX** doesn't cut it any more.

 

Glowworm would be unplayable with 6km torps, not enough gun power and rushing with 61kt torps isn't a bold plan, it's foolhardy. I think they'll do something else, as it is she'll get a ~120s reload, which will be pretty bad and boring compared to say Shinonome's 73s to throw out 9 torps to 10. Suddenly 10 torps at T6 doesn't look anything like good.

 

I don't think they need much in the way of gimmicks, there's still room between Hatsu-Fubu-Shino at T6 even without a consumable gimmick and the RN can do the same.

IMO they look like actual GP ships, even with the reduced MV & damage per shell they come out ahead of the IJN DD's - better reload & traverse means they retain their ability to dodge pretty hard while keeping their guns on target more often. The torps are behind IJN/KM, but not THAT much either. 

Giving Glowworm the Mk VII would be a serious disadvantage, I agree. But in the hands of a 10 point or greater Captain, with Camo & CE, the detection would be low enough to remain undetected while launching even at that range. I'd still prefer the Mk IX myself also, as you said the reload will be disadvantage enough & probably lead to salvos of 5 - or more single launch spreads. 

[EUmofton]

Glowworm with 6km torps would be horrendous, a 0.1km margin is almost impossible to exploit, not particularly great torps (Farraguts would be better while keeping better guns) just bad.

 

I don't know on the guns, USN DD can struggle mightily with IJN at >7km range, Gallant loses in traverse and ROF to them (Gallant 48 RPM, Farragut 75) so will not be able to spam as well, and definitely won't be much of a threat to the USN boat, without the USN's volume of fire and traverse advantage Gallant doesn't look so great as an IJN-DD hunter.

 

Overall Shinonome's 40 RPM with superior arcs and damage, while only slightly behind on traverse looks solid as a gunboat compared to this.

 

 

[FionnMacC]

Glowworm with 6km torps would be horrendous, a 0.1km margin is almost impossible to exploit, not particularly great torps (Farraguts would be better while keeping better guns) just bad.

 

I don't know on the guns, USN DD can struggle mightily with IJN at >7km range, Gallant loses in traverse and ROF to them (Gallant 48 RPM, Farragut 75) so will not be able to spam as well, and definitely won't be much of a threat to the USN boat, without the USN's volume of fire and traverse advantage Gallant doesn't look so great as an IJN-DD hunter.

 

Overall Shinonome's 40 RPM with superior arcs and damage, while only slightly behind on traverse looks solid as a gunboat compared to this.

 

I can't realistically see Glowworm being stuck with the Type VII, having the IX identical with Gallant is more likely especially as a second premium.

Glowworm/Gallant (assuming they're both identical bar the torpedo launchers) have an agility advantage over Shinonome as well as better HE DPM. Yes, Shinonome's firing arcs are better as is her per shell damage; they HAVE to be, her traverse is only 6 degrees/second & her reload is 6.7 seconds - both inferior to her sister ship (Fubuki), her gunnery advantage is having the 3x2 127mm that the Fubukis should have. And Gallant has a slight speed advantage plus the concealment advantage.

Shinonome is a seal-clubber's ship, given to players that complete a Tier 8 campaign; how many of them are around at the moment? Their numbers will grow over time, but we seem to have many more players that don't stray over Tier 7 than those with three or more ships at Tier 8. I'd say that Gallant & Shinonome look fairly equal gun-wise, but Shinonome is ahead on torpedoes with the faster reloading 3x3 launchers.  

[Trainspite]

 

I think we're pretty much in agreement on that, maybe some quibbling over the details (AP vs HE). I definitely can't see her at T4, she's a 4.5 implemented very badly.

 

 

Well, looks like Gallant 8km are the torps and no option. Firing arcs as you suspected are pretty atrocious, but as creamgravy says at least she can wiggle. It's somewhat of a shame on the torps overall, the 10km models could get TA and challenge Gaede's torps for speed. As it is they're servicable in everything but reload really, just not that special compared to the Japanese. I am going to think about which captain to put on her, I don't think I have anyone with LS, EM and TAE, my skippers for Belfast/Warspite and Minotaur don't quite fit. Training a new one to 10 pts... eh, well there are some new flags... maybe it'll come in a $100 bundle with a high-points captain at least!

 

I'm looking for an excuse to save my money on Hood and the bundle (though NA hasn't announced release, pricing etc) is the final straw. Maybe if I have a beer in June and it's down to ship only, or if I'm really struggling with the campaign - not that it's too attractive anyway as they forgot to include most of the hunting ships in the game!

 

Oh my gosh, I'd forgotten that on top of my list of complaints T-22 has that awful smoke (for no reason) and the gun bloom for the months before everyone got hammered. 15km detection when firing 4in pop guns, hardly safe, sane and consensual... T-22 should really be your best T5, it's the one you've played most recently and with the most experience. My T5's mostly follow that pattern, with the glaring exception of T-22, but for my cruisers my performance was Omaha-Furutaka-Koni-Emille with Omaha being my first ever T5, and Emille played after 4,000 games.

 

 

 

Yeah, I should stop saying that and actually get on with writing up a proposal of detailed stats or so. I'm a little interested to see what Emerald could do with IFHE, since I dug my Omaha out of retirement today and put IFHE on the captain, promptly racking up a respectable score by peppering 2 Hood's & a Kongo. 

 

Welp, Gallant do as Gallant does. (Yeah, someone now has the ship and has to keep schtum on it).

 

Well, since I slated Hood as a regular, I am just going to be stubborn and not buy her regardless. Even if she was a thoroughly decent ship in the end and puts those that wanted her at tier 6 to shame. Knowing that Hood is only a premium over a regular to make some money annoys me, given it is at the expense of the much beloved RN BC tree. I have seen people complete the collection part of the campaign minus Hood already, and it seems relatively easy to progress along, though I am not too enthused by getting a free Bismarck. Regular ships are not that much of a reward pour moi.

 

Nah, I have played Okhotnik since then, and the new IJN DDs were only a month or two beforehand. So while I would expect some improvement over the older ships, the fact that she is first chimes something for me. My stats do display the same patterns with Omaha vs Bertin, given I had 65k average with Bertin (12s) compared to Omaha lounging around at 46k with Konigsberg. Furutaka is more recent with 48k. Kirov is even more recent, but hated, and stays at 38k because I am not too keen on cruisers that don't turn that well.

 

(although they can hardly do worse than the Campbeltown unless it's the Hunt-class...)

 

 

 

Nah, Hunt class would be better. Those rapid firing 4" can really do a number on targets, which is why I rate ships armed with them fairly highly, like me wishing for Manxman at tier 4 with a speed boost. 

 

 

[creamgravy]

I'm also wondering exactly what's been boosted to make Gallant worthy of being a Premium ship

 

Hopefully it's just a normal version of the tech tree ship, a bit like Kamikaze to (pre nerf) Minekaze. Fun little destroyers are always good value and sell well. I'm sure many would want to buy, win or grind Acasta, Electra, Hasty etc for their collection.

 

To balance Glowworm at tier 6 you could give her 7.5km Mk IV (or IV*) Campbeltown torps, fair but fun (105s reload) Save the more powerful but short range Mk VII for 5 gun leaders.

 

Welp, Gallant do as Gallant does

 

Have fun 

 

[Trainspite]

I did an update thing. Mostly reshuffling the DDs, though they could still need a bit of work. The DD AA line merges into the regular DD line at tier 9 for simplicity. And I finally put updated premium ship lists in. 

 

There is a mistake, Legion & Gurkha should be split, and the former moved to tier 8, while the latter is a premium L/M class at tier 7 as opposed to Lightning at tier 8. 

[EUmofton]

I did an update thing. Mostly reshuffling the DDs, though they could still need a bit of work. The DD AA line merges into the regular DD line at tier 9 for simplicity. And I finally put updated premium ship lists in. 

 

There is a mistake, Legion & Gurkha should be split, and the former moved to tier 8, while the latter is a premium L/M class at tier 7 as opposed to Lightning at tier 8. 

 

Kelly at 8, but Jervis at 7 too?

 

I'd like to see a 4x 2 4in Legion at T8, an interesting contrast to Akizuki. Why do you want a premium LM at both T7 (Gurkha was 4in too) and T8 (Legion) LM's with 4in's though?

[FionnMacC]

Welp, Gallant do as Gallant does. (Yeah, someone now has the ship and has to keep schtum on it). 

 

Well, since I slated Hood as a regular, I am just going to be stubborn and not buy her regardless. Even if she was a thoroughly decent ship in the end and puts those that wanted her at tier 6 to shame. Knowing that Hood is only a premium over a regular to make some money annoys me, given it is at the expense of the much beloved RN BC tree. I have seen people complete the collection part of the campaign minus Hood already, and it seems relatively easy to progress along, though I am not too enthused by getting a free Bismarck. Regular ships are not that much of a reward pour moi.

 

Nah, Hunt class would be better. Those rapid firing 4" can really do a number on targets, which is why I rate ships armed with them fairly highly, like me wishing for Manxman at tier 4 with a speed boost. 

 

Damn NDA's... have fun with Gallant, shame you can't drop hints about how she's playing/developing! ​

I'm conflicted over a Hood-representative Admiral class at T7 - including the very-overdue final refit - versus the F3... Being a greedy sod, I'd prefer to have both! :p
You might enjoy the 2/3xQF4" MkXVI, I'd be more concerned over the lack of torps & the 27kts maximum speed even at T3!  

 

I did an update thing. Mostly reshuffling the DDs, though they could still need a bit of work. The DD AA line merges into the regular DD line at tier 9 for simplicity. And I finally put updated premium ship lists in. 

 

There is a mistake, Legion & Gurkha should be split, and the former moved to tier 8, while the latter is a premium L/M class at tier 7 as opposed to Lightning at tier 8. 

I'll be honest, the differences between the DD branches in the "Final" (2092) & "Primary" (2018) trees are don't make a lot of sense to me; in the Leader sub-branch, Tay (V Leader) vanishing from the T8 to be replaced by Lightning (an increase in torpedo armament, but a drop in gun power)? Amazon moved from the main branch to the AA sub-branch, to be replaced by Venomous (similar armament, but a drop in speed/manouverability)? And Battleaxe similarly moved to the AA sub-branch, to be replaced by Jervis - which is being up-tiered with uprated... um... something - & Scorpion as the new T7, so an improvement there over T6 Electra only in HP & slightly better AA? 
These don't feel like good trades... Why not just have Ambuscade replace Amazon at T5, slot Lightning into T8 regular (where she makes a good contrast with Battleaxe), leave Tay as T8 Leader & Jervis as T7 regular? Your choice, of course...

 

EUmofton, on 27 May 2017 - 05:15 AM, said:

 

Kelly at 8, but Jervis at 7 too?

 

I'd like to see a 4x 2 4in Legion at T8, an interesting contrast to Akizuki. Why do you want a premium LM at both T7 (Gurkha was 4in too) and T8 (Legion) LM's with 4in's though?

 Yeah, that one confused me as well. Legion OR Gurkha as a T8 Premium, okay - that would be a contrast to both Akizuki AND Battleaxe. But why both T7 AND T8?

And why Jervis at T7 (where she looks a better fit) & Kelly at T8? It could be that someone just has a grudge against her Captain... 

[Trainspite]

Not today forum monster, not today...

 

 

Kelly at 8, but Jervis at 7 too?

 

I'd like to see a 4x 2 4in Legion at T8, an interesting contrast to Akizuki. Why do you want a premium LM at both T7 (Gurkha was 4in too) and T8 (Legion) LM's with 4in's though?

 

That is me being indecisive. Trying to work out what would be better in the short or long term. I was considering kicking the Weapon out and moving Jervis up to that tier, where I think she will do better, but I left the smaller /cut back tree with the Jervis at tier 7 since I am still not entirely convinced myself as to what is best. Kelly is just a premium JKN, selecting a member of the class for premium duty. Javelin was my other choice. 

 

Apologies on that one about Gurkha. I was going to say Tribal and not L/M, and my brain was in absentia. 

 

Andy_Foulds, on 27 May 2017 - 11:04 AM, said:

Damn NDA's... have fun with Gallant, shame you can't drop hints about how she's playing/developing! ​

I'm conflicted over a Hood-representative Admiral class at T7 - including the very-overdue final refit - versus the F3... Being a greedy sod, I'd prefer to have both! :p
You might enjoy the 2/3xQF4" MkXVI, I'd be more concerned over the lack of torps & the 27kts maximum speed even at T3!  

 

I'll be honest, the differences between the DD branches in the "Final" (2092) & "Primary" (2018) trees are don't make a lot of sense to me; in the Leader sub-branch, Tay (V Leader) vanishing from the T8 to be replaced by Lightning (an increase in torpedo armament, but a drop in gun power)? Amazon moved from the main branch to the AA sub-branch, to be replaced by Venomous (similar armament, but a drop in speed/manouverability)? And Battleaxe similarly moved to the AA sub-branch, to be replaced by Jervis - which is being up-tiered with uprated... um... something - & Scorpion as the new T7, so an improvement there over T6 Electra only in HP & slightly better AA? 
These don't feel like good trades... Why not just have Ambuscade replace Amazon at T5, slot Lightning into T8 regular (where she makes a good contrast with Battleaxe), leave Tay as T8 Leader & Jervis as T7 regular? Your choice, of course...

 

 Yeah, that one confused me as well. Legion OR Gurkha as a T8 Premium, okay - that would be a contrast to both Akizuki AND Battleaxe. But why both T7 AND T8? 
And why Jervis at T7 (where she looks a better fit) & Kelly at T8? It could be that someone just has a grudge against her Captain... 

 

 

Well, perks of being a Supertester. The CCs will probably give an impression soon enough, though none of them usually compare to my opinion of ships. 

 

Well, the Admiral could be T7 regular (to my disgust), T7 premium (Why Hood), or T8 premium (dubious decision is dubious) at this point. I was thinking of switching the Anson & Prince of Wales tiers, but I am not sold on the Admiral being a tier 8 quite yet. 

 

Nah, Black Swan is OP with it's silly reload, so a faster and bigger ship is obviously tier 3. Stronk logic.

 

Well, that is the choice between a ship that existed and would not be represented in the tech tree, but is not really a DL, against a DL that fits but did not exist. Switching Amazon across to the AA line is to toss a bone to the line that seems to have the comparatively 'weaker' ships. I'm not too keen on the JKN at tier 7, and would prefer them to be at tier 8. 10x 10km single fire torpedoes, 6 guns and I would presume a 360 traverse on the rear mount all work in the favour. And as a plus, I have Gallant. If that means anything. I'll let you find out.

 

Scorpion would be a natural upgrade over Electra. Namely soft stat improvements, better torpedoes, better gun stats etc. - I see no reason she should not be tier 7. 

 

Ambuscade is a bit too similar to Amazon for my liking, and moving the mod V/W down to tier 4 is not appetising for me either. I also don't like the idea of having JKN & LM at separate tiers in a tech tree. 

 

And don't worry. I think I managed to confuse myself anyway. And I have nothing against the captain, I'll have you know! 

 

 

[creamgravy]

moving the mod V/W down to tier 4 is not appetising for me either

 

The S class with two extra 18" tubes on the side seems perfect for tier 4, the 18" Mark VI torps just need the same speed/range setting as the 21" Mk II, they'll do about 8500 damage (mr3awsome will have better info) 

 

Torpedo destroyers.

Tier	Name	Class	Guns	DPM	Torpedoes	Notes
2	Laforey	Laforey-class	3 x 4" QF Mk VI	7,337	4 x 21" Mk II
3	Radstock	Admiralty R-class	3 x 4" QF Mk VI	7,337	4 x 21" Mk IV
4	Seafire	S-class	3 x 4" QF Mk VI	7,337	4 x 21" Mk IV, 2 x 18" Mk VI	Adds one 18" tube on each side.
5	Verity	Admiralty Mod W-class	4 x 4.7" BL Mk I	5,667	6 x 21" Mk IV or V?

I want Ambuscade and Amazon as historic premiums for a Yarrow vs Thornycroft event. (yeah, yeah I know it'll never happen...) and don't forget all those awesome premiums like Worchester, so many interesting ships.... 

 

Destroyer leaders.

Tier	Name	Class	Guns	DPM	Torpedoes	Notes
2	Marksman	Marksman-class	3 (4) x 4" QF Mk VI	7,337	4 x 21" Mk I	Can only use 3 guns at once, like Wickes
3	Parker	Parker-class	4 x 4" QF Mk VI	9,783	4 x 21" Mk I	The first to get superfiring front mounts.
4	Valkyrie	Admiralty V-class	4 x 4" QF Mk V	11,250	4 x 21" Mk II	Adds superfiring rear mounts, Mk V guns.
5	Scott	Admiralty type leader	5 x 4.7" BL Mk II	7,083	6 x 21" Mk II?	A bit like going from Izyaslav to Podvoisky

 

Premium leaders (excluding V/W and Thornycroft/Yarrow specials)

2	Swift	Prototype	3 (4) x 4" BL Mk VIII	4,500	2 x 18" Mark VI	Historic premium
3	Faulknor	Faulknor-class	3-4 (6) x 4" QF Mk VI	9,783	4 x 21" Mk I	Interesting design
3	Talisman	Talisman-class	4 (5) x 4" QF Mk VI	9,783	4 x 21" Mk I	Compact compared to Parker/Faulknor

 

Guns compared to the others.

 

Tier 2 - 5	Tier	Guns	Reload (s)	HE Alpha	Fire chance (%)	Hit rate (%)	HE broadside	HE DPM	Fires per minute	DE
Nicholas	5	4	4	1800	5	50%	1,800	13,500	1.2	1.7
Valkyrie	4	4	4	1500	6	50%	1,500	11,250	1.5	2.1
Izyaslav	4	5	5	1500	7	50%	1,875	11,250	1.8	2.3
Parker	3	4	4.6	1500	6	50%	1,500	9,783	1.3	1.8
Clemson	4	6	7	1500	6	50%	2,250	9,643	1.3	1.8
G-101/V-170	4	4	4	1200	5	50%	1,200	9,000	1.3	1.8
Podvoisky	5	5	9.2	1900	8	50%	2,375	7,745	1.0	1.3
Marksman	2	3	4.6	1500	6	50%	1,125	7,337	1.0	1.3
Scott	5	5	9	1700	8	50%	2,125	7,083	1.1	1.3
V-25	2	3	4	1200	5	50%	900	6,750	1.0	1.3
Storozhevoi/Derzki	2	3	5	1500	7	50%	1,125	6,750	1.1	1.4
Wickes	3	3	7	1500	6	50%	1,125	4,821	0.7	0.9
Mutsuki	5	2	5.5	1700	7	50%	850	4,636	0.6	0.8
Swift	2	3	7.5	1500	6	50%	1,125	4,500	0.6	0.8
Isokaze	4	4	12	1700	7	50%	1,700	4,250	0.6	0.8
Umikaze	2	3	10	1700	7	50%	1,275	3,825	0.5	0.7
Campbeltown	3	2	7	1500	6	50%	750	3,214	0.4	0.6

 

The 4" QF Mk VI should be very similar to the German 105mm but with better HE.

Mk V guns are very good for tier 4, they're similar to the ones found on Clemson and Izy (and Black Swan)

A premium mod V like HMAS Vampire will make a cracking hybrid.

Scott and Swift BL guns might need a reload buff but Verity should be fine in the torp line.

 

 

 

[mr3awsome]

The S class with two extra 18" tubes on the side seems perfect for tier 4, the 18" Mark VI torps just need the same speed/range setting as the 21" Mk II, they'll do about 8500 damage (mr3awsome will have better info) 

The torpedo tubes are fixed on the Thornycroft ships and not fitted on the Admiralty ships. 

As the 18" torpedoes are cold fired, their stats are somewhat dismal. 

As in 47 knots to 1.8km or 43.75 knots to 2.75km 

All whilst carrying a warhead half the size of the 21" Mk II (200lb vice 400lb) 

Which is the same as Sampson's stock torpedoes, so 5,900 damage. 

Those also have a 900m range bonus, but they are still unlikely to be much help except against targets of opportunity. 

 

EDIT: Naturally its the Russian torpedo that is buffed the most 

[creamgravy]

How about the 18" Mk VII*? I don't own Friedman's destroyer book but wiki says they're traversed on HMS Seafire (P Mk.I launcher?) You'd have rubbish launch arcs compared to V-170 but it would be a fun ship to play. (Give both 21" and 18" torps 55 knots and 7km range etc) 

 

The S-Class would be like a Campbeltown at tier 4 with the Mk V, powerful but maybe a bit underwhelming for the masses.

 

	Tier	Torpedo type	Range (km)	Speed (Knots)	Surface detection (km)	Damage	Number	Reload (s)
Laforey	2	21" Mk II (127 kg)	5	51	1	7,500	4	38
Laforey	2	21" Mk II (181kg) Caledon	6	53	1.1	10,000	4	41
Swift/Tribal	2	18" Mark VII* (145kg)	6.5	51	1	8,500	2	20
Marksman	2	21" Mk I (102 kg)	2	70	1.4	6,900	4	38
Campbeltown	3	21" Mk IV (234kg)	7.5	57	1.2	11,966	3 (6)	63
Radstock	3	21" Mk II* (234kg)	7.5	53	1.1	11,966	4	42
Seafire	4	21" Mk IV + Mk VII*	7	55	1.2	11,966	5 (6)	42
Seafire	4	21" Mk V (234kg)	6 - 7.5	59	1.2	11,966	4	42
Verity	5	21" Mk V (234kg)	6 - 7.5	59	1.2	11,966	6	71
Verity	5	21" Mk VII (336kg)	6 - 7.5	59	1.2	15,733	6	79

 

 

Note: Many are old estimations, WG have set the speed of Mk II torpedoes to 53 knots instead of 51 etc.

 

Tier 4 stealth torp boat comparison.

 

	Tier	Torpedo type	Range (km)	Speed (Knots)	Surface detection (km)	Damage	Number	Reload (s)	Ship Concealment (km)	Time to Target (s)	Time in water (s)	Alpha	DPM	Reaction time (s)	Sonar (s)
Seafire	4	Mk V	6 - 7.5	59	1.2	11,966	4	42	~5.2	36.4	39.0	43,078	61,539	7.8	16.4
Isokaze	4	Type 6	7	57	1.2	10,833	6	42	5.3	39.3	47.1	58,498	83,569	8.1	16.9
V-170	4	G7	7	54	1	10,600	6	38	5.8	44.8	49.7	57,240	90,379	7.1	17.9

[mr3awsome]

How about the 18" Mk VII*? I don't own Friedman's destroyer book but wiki says they're traversed on HMS Seafire (P Mk.I launcher?) You'd have rubbish launch arcs compared to V-170 but it would be a fun ship to play. (Give both 21" and 18" torps 55 knots and 7km range etc) 

 

The S-Class would be like a Campbeltown at tier 4 with the Mk V, powerful but maybe a bit underwhelming for the masses.

18" Mk VII* has 7025 damage at 60.5knots to 2.7km or 49 knots to 6km. However thats being warm fired. 

I seem to have mistaken the torpedo tubes being removed soon after the war for them not being fitted at all 

However, it does seem that they may have a fixed firing angle of 90°, being rotated inboard when not being used. 

 

I don't believe that the S class can fit the Mk V torpedo. Indeed they were only issued to the W class destroyers, the Scotts, Shakespeares, Danaes, Emeralds, Renowns, Eagle and Hood.

[EUmofton]

However, it does seem that they may have a fixed firing angle of 90°, being rotated inboard when not being used. 

 

I've seen the same said for at least the Interwars, an account of Narvik has the H's firing fixed to either beam, just choosing which side in advance.

 

That is me being indecisive. Trying to work out what would be better in the short or long term. I was considering kicking the Weapon out and moving Jervis up to that tier, where I think she will do better, but I left the smaller /cut back tree with the Jervis at tier 7 since I am still not entirely convinced myself as to what is best. Kelly is just a premium JKN, selecting a member of the class for premium duty. Javelin was my other choice. 

 

No need to apologize. I like JKN at 8, but 7-8 has the big shift of Concealment Mod slot/not so it somewhat self balances. I do think that the sudden step does disadvantage T7's to a great degree, especially when it took 15pts for CE and T8 was likely to get it rather than T7.

 

 

Gosh you guys know a lot about WWI RN DD!

[mr3awsome]

I've seen the same said for at least the Interwars, an account of Narvik has the H's firing fixed to either beam, just choosing which side in advance.

Said diagram also had the firing angles of the other (Centreline) tubes (25° each side of the parallel of the beam, 50° total). 

[FionnMacC]

Well, the cat's out of the bag now thanks to Asia. So, ignoring the Radar controversy, what do we think of Conqueror for the RN Tier 10 battleship? L2 base with a Lion-style makeover (Lion could have taken design elements from L3 anyway), so 4x2 BL18" MkII guns? Why L2 & not L3 - because she'd equal Yamato? 

I think she looks good, but I don't see why we couldn't have had a modernised L3 (as suggested in the Tech Tree) if you're going to use the 1920's studies. 

I'm also hoping that KGV will be rebalanced for T8, because otherwise it should be Vanguard as Nelson just doesn't fit without a fantasy engine/armour upgrade. Still, a long way to go considering these aren't even in ST yet; I'm hoping Gallant & the DD branch will make it to release first. 

[creamgravy]

BB stat dump > https://sea-group.org/?lang=en

 

KGV is tier 8 and has 2 gun choices (nice troll WG)

[Comodoro_Allande]

BB stat dump > https://sea-group.org/?lang=en

 

KGV is tier 8 and has 2 gun choices (nice troll WG)

 

The Lion has also 2 gun choices and can choose between spotter plane, fighter and hydro. Only one with radar is the tier X

[creamgravy]

They seem all over the shop and SEA have fooled me many times. 

 

Here's some interesting stats.

 

AA Bofor guns.
Mk IV Hazemeyer = 22.7 DPS (seems a bit high)
Mk VII = 8.5 DPS (about right)

 

DP guns (AA)
134mm/50 Mk I = 8.1 DPS @ 4.5km (worst DP mounts in the game?) 
134mm/50 RP10 Mk I = 8.5 DPS @ 5.2km (second worst DP mounts in the game)

 

DP guns (Surface)

Both 1900 HE alpha, 8% fire chance, 6.67s reload. 5-6km range (no BB secondary build)

 

On the plus side here's Dido compared to Perth and Belfast.

 

 

Name	Tier	Guns	Reload (s)	HE Alpha	Fire chance (%)	Hit rate (%)	HE Salvo	HE DPM	Fires per minute	DE	IFHE	IFHE + DE
Perth	6	8	7.5	2100	9	50%	4,200	16,800	2.1	2.6	1.4	1.9
Bellona	6	8	6.67	1900	8	50%	3,800	17,091	2.1	2.6	1.3	1.8
Dido	7	10	6.67	1900	8	50%	4,750	21,364	2.4	3.0	1.5	2.1
Belfast	7	12	7.5	2100	9	50%	6,300	25,200	2.9	3.5	1.9	2.6

 

Looks good to me.

 

[FionnMacC]

BB stat dump > https://sea-group.org/?lang=en

 

KGV is tier 8 and has 2 gun choices (nice troll WG)

Well, despite the possibility of trolling from SEA group, let's hope these reflect the final Tier placements, although I'm hoping WG will switch L2 to L3 for Conqueror before final Super & Public testing. Interesting that KGV has the BL15" MkII's in a 2/4/4, the original plans for those guns were 3/3/3; it's still an anachronistic upgrade if it goes through. I also find myself wishing they'd apply the RNCL's Repair Party stats throughout the line if Conqueror is indicative of the HP values through the branch, 

 

They seem all over the shop and SEA have fooled me many times. 

 

Here's some interesting stats.

 

AA Bofor guns.
Mk IV Hazemeyer = 22.7 DPS (seems a bit high)
Mk VII = 8.5 DPS (about right)

 

DP guns (AA)
134mm/50 Mk I = 8.1 DPS @ 4.5km (worst DP mounts in the game?) 
134mm/50 RP10 Mk I = 8.5 DPS @ 5.2km (second worst DP mounts in the game)

 

DP guns (Surface)

Both 1900 HE alpha, 8% fire chance, 6.67s reload. 5-6km range (no BB secondary build)

 

On the plus side here's Dido compared to Perth and Belfast.

 

 

Name	Tier	Guns	Reload (s)	HE Alpha	Fire chance (%)	Hit rate (%)	HE Salvo	HE DPM	Fires per minute	DE	IFHE	IFHE + DE
Perth	6	8	7.5	2100	9	50%	4,200	16,800	2.1	2.6	1.4	1.9
Bellona	6	8	6.67	1900	8	50%	3,800	17,091	2.1	2.6	1.3	1.8
Dido	7	10	6.67	1900	8	50%	4,750	21,364	2.4	3.0	1.5	2.1
Belfast	7	12	7.5	2100	9	50%	6,300	25,200	2.9	3.5	1.9	2.6

 

Looks good to me.

 

Looks good to me too, I'll take the fleet! 

[EUmofton]

On the plus side here's Dido compared to Perth and Belfast.

 

I don't understand your table, HE salvo is per turret? Then DPM is turret/minute?

 

Looks honestly terrible to me, slight advantages in HE DPM but giving up hugely in shell flight time and penetration compared to the 6in guns out there. 9 RPM was worst case for a Dido IMO, puts her firepower at about Konigsberg at T5. T7 Dido? 171,000 HE DPM - not good.

 

Atlanta's a gimmick and she gets 302,400 HE DPM (12 RPM x 14 broadside guns x 1,800). That's needed to overcome Pensacola (4 RPM x 10 broadside guns x 2,800) 112,000.

 

8.125 DPS for the 5.25in also makes them less than potent AA threats - Belfast has 71 DPS from her 4in vs. 41.25 DPS from the Dido (5 turret). Cleveland's got double that at 90 DPS. Oh and the 5.25in as-is only gets 4.5km vs. 5km range on the US 5in.

 

Bad firepower, bad AA as far as I can see.

 

 

This SEA stuff must be nonsense, too much of it is absolutely all over the place.

[creamgravy]

HE salvo is per turret? 

 

Have you ever done 6k with one Belfast turret? Games would only last a few minutes if ships could pump out that type of damage 

 

HE Salvo = Average broadside damage with 100% shells hitting the target (Belfast ambushes a Mahan at close range with hydro. Mahan can expect a 6k volley, ouch!)

HE DPM = Average damage per minute with a 50% hit rate. (Belfast sitting in smoke spamming HE at a Nagato 12km away. Nagato should expect to loose 25k HP and deal with 2-3 fires. Toasty)

 

Average damage is calculated with...

100% plate/armour penetration. A bit unrealistic as a few shells will always hit heavy armour, AA modules etc, but it's good enough agasint targets you generally want to shoot HE at (DDs, 'all or nothing' BBs etc)

25% compartment threshold modifier. The average threshold changes between ship classes and is typically closer to 21% but 25% is good enough. (Undamaged compartment = x0.33, 1st threshold = x0.165, full saturation threshold = 0)

 

Tier 6 DD gun comparison/Gallant mini review.

TLDR:

Gallant should be able to take on IJN and KM DDs at close range fairly successfully, trade with RU DDs if you've got a HP advantage but stop firing/run from Farragut unless you can finish them off.

 

 

 

Tier 6 destroyers	Tier	Guns	Reload (s)	HE Alpha	Fire chance (%)	Hit rate (%)	HE Salvo	HE DPM	Fires per minute	DE	IFHE	IFHE + DE
Farragut B	6	5	4	1800	5	50%	2,250	16,875	1.4	1.9	0.5	1.1
Farragut C	6	4	4	1800	5	50%	1,800	13,500	1.1	1.5	0.4	0.9
G-class Leader	6	5	5	1700	8	50%	2,125	12,750	1.7	2.2	1.1	1.5
Gnevny	6	4	5	1900	8	50%	1,900	11,400	1.4	1.7	0.9	1.2
Anshan	6	4	5	1900	7	50%	1,900	11,400	1.2	1.6	0.7	1.0
Gallant	6	4	5	1700	8	50%	1,700	10,200	1.4	1.7	0.9	1.2
Shinonome	6	6	9	1800	8	50%	2,700	9,000	1.2	1.5	0.7	1.0
Ernst Gaede 127mm	6	4	5.1	1500	8	50%	1,500	8,824	1.4	1.7	0.9	1.2
Ernst Gaede 150mm	6	4	7.5	2200	12	50%	2,200	8,800	1.4	1.6	1.0	1.3
Hatsuharu	6	4	7.5	1800	8	50%	1,800	7,200	0.9	1.2	0.6	0.8
Fubuki	6	4	8	1800	8	50%	1,800	6,750	0.9	1.1	0.5	0.8

 

 

Gallant Captain skills	HE DPM	Fires per minute
Stock	10,200	1.4
BFT	11,333	1.6
DE	10,200	1.7
BFT + DE	11,333	1.9

 

AFT isn't worth it.

BFT and DE are questionable.

 

Torpedoes.

 

Tier 6	Tier	Torpedo type	Range (km)	Speed (Knots)	Surface detection (km)	Damage	Number	Reload (s)	Ship Concealment (km)	Time to Target (s)	Time in water (s)	Reaction time (s)	Sonar (s)	Alpha	DPM
Hatsuharu	6	Type 8 mod 2 (TA)	8	64	1.5	16,267	6	76	5.8	37.7	47.9	9.0	16.9	87,842	69,349
Fubuki	6	Type 8 mod 2 (TA)	8	64	1.5	16,267	9	76	6.1	39.5	47.9	9.0	16.9	131,763	104,023
Shinonome	6	Type 8 mod 1	8	63	1.6	14,600	9	73	6.1	40.1	48.7	9.7	17.2	118,260	97,200
Gallant	6	Mk IX	8	61	1.3	15,433	8	96	6.0	40.6	50.2	8.2	17.7	111,118	69,449
Hatsuharu	6	Type 8 mod 2	10	59	1.5	16,267	6	76	5.8	40.9	64.9	9.7	18.3	87,842	69,349
Ernst Gaede	6	G7 Stienbutt	8	65	1.3	13,700	8	90	6.6	41.9	47.2	7.7	16.6	98,640	65,760
Anshan	6	53-51	8	60	1.2	14,400	6	79	6.1	42.1	51.1	7.7	18.0	77,760	59,058
Fubuki	6	Type 8 mod 2	10	59	1.5	16,267	9	76	6.1	42.9	64.9	9.7	18.3	131,763	104,023

 

Gallant has OK DPM but a rock solid alpha strike. Torpedoes will take 40 seconds to reach your target from comfortable range, so you'll still need a bit of guesswork for stealth torping. (It's no Kamikaze at 33s)

 

Here's a few recommended builds.

 

Ranked - Scout.

http://shipcomrade.com/captcalc/0100000000000011010000010000001119

 

Random - Torpedo.

http://shipcomrade.com/captcalc/0100000000000011011000000000001119

 

Random - HE harasser.

http://shipcomrade.com/captcalc/1100000000000011010010100000000119

 

Random/ranked - Joint Leander captain (Leander is arguably the best tier 6 DD!)

http://shipcomrade.com/captcalc/1000000000000011000001010000001119

 

[mr3awsome]

Looking at destroyers (extended version), are Acasta, Matchless and Venomous competitive enough against Laforey, Radstock and Amazon?

Indeed, are the Thorncroft specials different enough to warrant a separate regular slots in terms of gameplay without resorting to gimmicks?