World of Warships

[Temjin]

So, apparently the supertesters have been begging for the higher tiers Russian destroyers to be nerfed to something reasonable before they're released. They have excellent range on their guns and good damage, and are excellent at setting ships on fire while the opposing ships can't even see them. Really high top speeds also mean they can get out of trouble quickly and are really hard to catch.

Nerfs are unlikely though, since they're supposed to be released next week.

[Eternal_Freedom]

But you know, she was ton for ton probably the worst battleship of WW2 so what do we expect.

The usual trope I've read is that is caused because the German designers had to base the design on the Mackensen's due to not being able to design in proper for ~20yrs due to Versaille. How true is that? How much weight could be saved with a proper DP secondary battery (say of 4.5"-5") and an AoN armour scheme?

I can't comment on the armour scheme (though I do know from Sea Skimmer's older posts that it was fairly shit) but it's not a good sign when Bismarck had pretty much identical main and secondary batteries to a 1915-vintage Queen Elizabeth class but on 14,000 tonnes greater displacement. Sure, she was six knots faster, but that's an awful lot of weight to add for such an increase. Especially since, as Skimmer noted, the Iowas were only slightly heavier at full load, but had more and heavier guns and was about two knots faster still IIRC. That hardly points to an effective or efficient design.

[Borgholio]

If Bismarck had a proper dual-purpose secondary battery like American BBs did, it's quite possible she would not have been torpedoed in the rudder by Ark Royal. That right there would have changed everything.

[Thanas]

Bismarck was basically designed to have armour against a Jutland-style slugfest, while also being required to be a commerce raider, capable of going from full ahead to full reverse in a ridiculously short period while also having the speed of a battlecruiser. The result was not very good.

[Nephtys]

If anything, WoWS shows how horrifically overmatched the USN was against... well. Anything.

Despite game-stats, nearly all Japanese battleships are WW1 vintage, their destroyers are rubbishboats, and cruisers are produced in tiny classes of 2 or 3. While Americans use triple digit production of highly advanced destroyers, and double digits of multiple highly advanced cruiser classes.

Also, as an aside, holy crap the Murmansk is absurd! 19km max firing range for a tier 5 cruiser (skills, spotterplane)... that also is more nimble than the Omaha, and has fewer but superior torps?

Any idea when the Brits are planned? After full Russian and Jerry lines?

[Typhonis 1]

If Bismarck had a proper dual-purpose secondary battery like American BBs did, it's quite possible she would not have been torpedoed in the rudder by Ark Royal. That right there would have changed everything.

Didn't Bismark have a three propeller system thus couldn't steer with her propellers in an emergency?

[montypython]

The Ersatz Yorck would have been a better base to build the Bismarck on rather than the Bayern class if commerce raiding had been the main focus to begin with.

[Typhonis 1]

Does it have anything like the Graf Spee and her sister ships?

[Thanas]

The Ersatz Yorck would have been a better base to build the Bismarck on rather than the Bayern class if commerce raiding had been the main focus to begin with.

But Bismarck wasn't based on the Bayern class....she is much closer to Mackensen and Ersatz Yorck instead of Bayern.

Despite game-stats, nearly all Japanese battleships are WW1 vintage, their destroyers are rubbishboats, and cruisers are produced in tiny classes of 2 or 3. While Americans use triple digit production of highly advanced destroyers, and double digits of multiple highly advanced cruiser classes.

The above statement is a bit rubbish, what with the extensive modifications the ships had and Japanese destroyers were quite advanced.

[montypython]

The Ersatz Yorck would have been a better base to build the Bismarck on rather than the Bayern class if commerce raiding had been the main focus to begin with.

But Bismarck wasn't based on the Bayern class....she is much closer to Mackensen and Ersatz Yorck instead of Bayern.

But that being the case though, why would the Kriegsmarine use 3 shafts instead of 4 as the battlecruisers did and what the L20 was planned to use? 4 shafts would have allowed for a less stressed propulsion setup and allow for more redundancy in case of battle damage.

[Thanas]

Probably has something to do with this issue

[Borgholio]

Didn't Bismark have a three propeller system thus couldn't steer with her propellers in an emergency?

They COULD, but during sea trials they found the propeller-only steering was pretty poor. It worked...but just barely. In this case, with one screw knocked out and one rudder jammed hard over...there was no chance. The crew wanted to use explosives to blow off the damaged rudder. That would have allowed Bismarck to limp into port just ahead of the British fleet. But Lutjens vetoed the idea.

[Covenant]

I'm clawing my way up to the Cleveland despite every mission being a loss unless I carry the whole thing myself. I either lose or get top rank in this thing, with zero fiddling around in the center. I really like the Omaha but I'm finding the matchups post-fix to be really unfavorable for some reason. Maybe I'm no longer getting a lot of soft targets (or allies who are more appealing to shoot at) or something, but it is gruesomely more difficult to showboat in this thing, and I really need to play cautiously. Which is fine, if a little frustrating, as I'm only about three good wins away from the Cleveland, and yet I keep getting chumped or short-shafted in one frustrating way or another.

Or I hold back, which is damned hard to do, and do well, but at the cost of a lot of my patience budget.

[Nephtys]

The Omaha is an amazing ship. My personal favorite. It's incredibly agile, and is really a 'super destroyer'. Fast, great forward firepower. Good range. You do have to carry, yes. But competition does get much tougher at that level. Just worry about wiping out destroyers for the first 5 minutes, then do whatever reactive responding you need until the game is over.
Also, AP firing Omaha can defeat any cruiser it faces 1 on 1 with barely any damage if you attack on the approach.

Cleveland is wonderful too, but expect a major shift in playstyle once you get it.

[Covenant]

Interesting. I'm just in a rush to get up to the tier where you finally become the kind of asset you're supposed to have been. Battleships advance pretty slow, so the grind is even more painful, but the cruisers are a lot of fun. If destroyers weren't obsolete past T5 then those would be my favorites, as those torpedoes are a blast. Carriers are great, really easy to use, rather relaxing as well. Cruisers are the ones that seem to be the most responsive, and have the biggest window of usefulness (at least so far) but yes, the Omaha is great.

It'll be sad to see the close-range torpedoes go.

[Skywalker_T-65]

I'm still using the Murmansk while I grind BBs myself. I've almost sworn off the US Cruisers because I'd feel like a hypocrite using the Cleveland though (can not stand those things).

On the other hand, Kongo is a blast. It's going to feel very odd going back to (relatively) slow ships with the Fuso. At least it's still marginally faster than the Standards though.

[Elheru Aran]

Here I was thinking they *had* come out with the Russian ships. Apparently not. Bah to you people.

[Skywalker_T-65]

Nope, haven't got either the Russians or Germans yet. Though I'm looking more towards the latter myself, since I don't play DD's.

[Thanas]

I'm still using the Murmansk while I grind BBs myself. I've almost sworn off the US Cruisers because I'd feel like a hypocrite using the Cleveland though (can not stand those things).

On the other hand, Kongo is a blast. It's going to feel very odd going back to (relatively) slow ships with the Fuso. At least it's still marginally faster than the Standards though.

fuso doesn't feel slow though because she is very nimble.

[Borgholio]

Finally got into the New Mexico. What a difference compared to the dreadnoughts. Having triple turrets makes it less of a worry to present a full-on broadside to get good hits, the shells are far more accurate and get more citadels than before. My first match with the New Mex gave me 50+ hits and three citadels (one double citadel hit and a single on another ship). I love it.

Also, got my first look at the Tirpitz in game. They are armored like beasts. Very hard to break...gotta batter them down with constant fire.

[Nephtys]

Myogi is way less bad than people say. Yes, it looks like a civil-war era ironclad. Yes, it's only got 6 guns in 3 turrets, 2 of which are backwards facing.

...But it's a battleship with light cruiser speed, more range than an ICBM at that tier, huge secondaries, insane penetration and pinpoint accuracy.

Just drive at the enemy at a 30 degree offset and snipe them on the approach. If they close range, you simply peel away and dictate an unfavorable range game. If they break off, you re-pursue and so-forth. Managed to get a great winning game with some 80 hits, and 5 citadels from this thing with only 6 guns...

It's sole weakness of that long battlecruiser hull naturally, is torpedos. But if this is any indication, Kongo will be nuts.

[Skywalker_T-65]

I enjoyed the Myogi- once upgraded -myself. Prefer the Kongo now that I've got it, but the Myogi was far from horrible.

[Thanas]

Myogi is way less bad than people say. Yes, it looks like a civil-war era ironclad. Yes, it's only got 6 guns in 3 turrets, 2 of which are backwards facing.

...But it's a battleship with light cruiser speed, more range than an ICBM at that tier, huge secondaries, insane penetration and pinpoint accuracy.

Just drive at the enemy at a 30 degree offset and snipe them on the approach. If they close range, you simply peel away and dictate an unfavorable range game. If they break off, you re-pursue and so-forth. Managed to get a great winning game with some 80 hits, and 5 citadels from this thing with only 6 guns...

It's sole weakness of that long battlecruiser hull naturally, is torpedos. But if this is any indication, Kongo will be nuts.

Kongo is much better. For one, you can get the fire control upgrade which provides (in comparison to the Myogi) 25% better accuracy. Then she got more guns, is more agile and has a much better armor scheme. The Myogi is pound for pound better than the Wyoming (all Japanese BBs are better until Tier VIII than their US counterparts). But my main problem was that I played her before the match fixing update, which meant I had to engage Fusos and New Mexicos in it.


********************
And honestly, torpedoes are much less a weakness for the Japanese than for the US battleships. Despite having less AA. Why?

Well, for one, their hulls are very narrow. If somebody fires torps at a wide spread at you, you can manage to drive through them without getting hit. Even with narrow spreads I usually manage to dodge all but one or 2. (Unless the CV drops them at below 2km range).

Second, they have insane rudder shift times. At max speed they only take as long as the US (or even less) BBs, despite going full speed. With the rudder upgrade, for example, my Nagato has a rudder shift time of 9.7 seconds. Yes, you read that right.

Third, their secondaries are much better than the US ones. Now, they only do ~1k damage or so if you are lucky. But any DD or damaged cruiser will think twice about driving into close range to torp you. Heck, today I had a 5k hp Myoko attempting to sneak up on me (behind an island). I didn't even notice it as I was engaged with a colorado. Suddenly I heard "enemy cruiser destroyed".

Thus, I don't really fear DDs in my Japanese BBs.

[Covenant]

So what are, in reality, the ships with the greatest longevity? Aside from collecting XP on an Elite T5 for fun that is. Presumably the carriers, battleships and cruisers are all good, but it seems like BB's suffer a bit from economy. Do the T10 cruisers end up being good?

[Thanas]

So what are, in reality, the ships with the greatest longevity? Aside from collecting XP on an Elite T5 for fun that is. Presumably the carriers, battleships and cruisers are all good, but it seems like BB's suffer a bit from economy. Do the T10 cruisers end up being good?

No, shit economy and very few players play high level cruisers anyway, so you got to engage BBs. Besides, not much point IMO. Cruiser highest advantages are Rate of fire and speed. Well, the speed advantage basically disappears here as you encounter Iowa, Amagi and Tirpitz, all who do 31+ knots. Or you encounter fun secondaries like the Yamatos, who can range up to 13km. So you better be a good long range sniper, at which point you might just as well play a BB.

Some CA players have great success with staying just outside detection rates and then sniping, or going in close for torps in Island maps. But that is about it IMO. Mostly cruisers beyond Tier VIII are just juicy things for the Iowas and Yamatos to pop at will.

The ships that make the most credits are:
- Clevelands (still OP as shit).
- Essex or Midway (same)
- low level destroyers at Tier IV. (because they are dirt cheap and you can play a lot of them as you mostly don't survive for 20 minutes, but 2 ten minutes games make a lot more profit than a 20min BB game). Maybe also the Minekaze here.
- Premium ships (Murmansk being the ultimate seal clubber, Warspite and Tirpitz both having potential to do lots of damage thus make lots of money).


As for me, the most fun I had was sailing an Iowa and the entire Japanese BB line. The US line is horrendously bad until you get to the NC. Then it becomes good for two ships, until the Montana makes you question why you ever chose that line. Such a shit ship.

EDIT: Can't speak much for the other lines. Don't play cruisers or CVs really and my DDs are only there to earn credits.