Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'izumo'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - Asia Language Based Communities
    • English Speaking Community
    • 繁體中文討論區
    • 日本語コミュニティ
    • 한국어 커뮤니티
  • Mod Section
    • Player Modifications
  • External testing groups
    • Supertest Academy
    • Supertest
    • Clantest

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL






Drag Interests

Found 11 results

  1. WOWS内の出雲の艦橋は、これまで多くのプレイヤーから「現実味がない」「ダサい」「キモい」「〇〇〇」と通報されまくっていましたが、一向に見た目バフが訪れる気配がありません。 WG自身も出雲をどのように変更するのがベストか分かっていないのかもしれません。 「日本軍らしく、現実味のある、Tier9らしい威容がある」そんな戦艦とはいったいどのような艦形なのか・・・・ 多くの方が求めているにも関わらず、その姿は明確に示されたことはありませんでした。出雲を具体的にどのようにすればベストなのか? 今回はそのベストと思われる出雲をご紹介させて頂きます。 (詳細は、Abrams1991氏のtwitterにてご確認ください。https://twitter.com/Abrams335?s=17 ) まずは以下の写真をご覧下さい。 twitter上でAbrams1991氏が公開した出雲です。 艦橋は、現在の出雲型の少し前のめりな艦橋の意匠を残して大改装されてます。 戦闘に必須な司令塔も追加され、戦闘部署や居住性が大改善されており、かなり現実的な戦艦らしい艦橋です。 対空砲についても改善されています。現在の出雲のは主砲の爆風や煙突からの遮熱をほとんど考慮せず対空砲が配置されていますが、この出雲では対空砲配置も現実的な配置になっています。 対空砲と連動する指揮装置も現実的な箇所に配置されており、かなりリアリティがあります。 大和型との比較です。出雲が同系列の戦艦であることが分かる違和感のないデザインです。 非常に日本軍らしさを感じる艦形です。 このように「日本軍らしさ」と「大和に通ずる道の最終段階」であることが感じられるデザインにするべきだと考えます。 WOWSに実装されている出雲はかなり奇抜で、非現実的です。 現在の出雲では、多少バフされたとはいえ見た目の悪さから未だ不人気な戦艦です。とても武蔵と同格の戦艦には見えません。 しかし、大改装して現実的かつ威容のある戦艦になれば人気艦となることは間違いありません。 このように艦橋、及び周辺の構造物を一新する大改装案を、「出雲D船体」として提案します。 戦中写真のごとく加工された一枚の写真。大和と出雲が並ぶ姿は、頼もしいの一言です。 出雲の艦橋変更を望む多くのプレイヤーが待っているのはこういった光景だと思います。架空艦であっても、歴史的背景を感じられるようにすべきです。 もし出雲がこのようになれば、多くのWOWSプレイヤーの悲願が達成されるとともに、新たに日本戦艦ツリーに興味を示したプレイヤーがフリー経験値を多く使用するため、WGは収益を得ることができます。 まさに一隻二鳥。もはや出雲型を大改装しない理由がありません! D船体追加について、皆さんはどのように思われますでしょうか?ご意見を頂けると幸いです。 最後になりましたが、素晴らしい力作の画像使用許可をくださったAbrams1991氏に感謝いたします。 この出雲の詳細は、Abrams1991氏のtwitterにてご確認ください。https://twitter.com/Abrams335?s=17
  2. Hi Captains, l'm currently in the bronze rank 1 stage qualifying for Sliver for several days now. There would be times when things go well and others that doesn't go well such as this. I'm more of a cruiser/battleship player and leaning towards IJN ships (my first tech tree line when l started playing this game in 2018). For Silver T8/9 ships, my favourite is Izumo - its heavy, has good armor protection, able to pack quite a punch with its AP rounds in a well place shot, good secondaries and overall performance (tho some might disagree). l am quite experienced with Izumo with a level 17 captain in command. Just to show you how well Izumo can perform in a normal random battle in the hands of an experienced player, a snapshot is provided below. Lately in qualifying, l have been constantly losing and wining stars, which makes it hard to complete qualification. After reading numerous forums, chats, advice and even Flamu's ships recommendations on Youtube, l starting to notice a pattern as to why l lose a ranked match + my hard earned star. This the problem - overpowered teams in matchup progress. My team - Izumo (me), Lion, Jean Bart, FDG + cruisers and dds DONT stand a chance against the other team - Jean Bart, 2 x Musashis, Sov. Soyuz + cruisers and dds. -> You can imagine how that is going to turn out already :< Breakdown: - Jean Bart - good BB with good armor, bow tanking, etc. - Musashi - T9 of Yamato, big guns, lots of hp - able to deliver huge amounts of damage per shot. - Sov. Soyuz - good armor on all sides, hard to cause significant damage to superstructure and sides with BB AP rounds. Despite a tough fight put up by my team, we lost. I straight away knew it was going to be a defeat while in matchup before the game started. l'm someone who believes in fair play and an equal playing field - but in this case it is not right. It might as well be as one sided team win. Now l don't blame the player who chooses to take their best ship into battle but unbalanced team matchups is what causes loses and falling down in ranks. You might say...why not take georgia, musashi or some other premium well performing ship? Well l don't have only of those, that was because l didn't have enough resources to acquire them before they were removed from the game. The only T8/9 premium ships l have is Lenin and Agir along with a handful of cruisers and BBs from the usual tech trees of Japan and US. The only trustworthy ship l have is Izumo, the other is Iowa (just bought recently and still training the captain and skills, not suitable for ranked yet). If anyone is going through the same frustration with T8/9 ranked matchups, comment and share your experiences below.
  3. Izumo: Playstyle? Guns? FXP? I am getting very inconsistent hits, overpens, and bounces more
  4. twitter上でAbrams1991氏が公開したものです。非常にカッコイイので、ご本人に了承を得てご紹介させて頂きます。 日本海軍Tier9戦艦、出雲のアレンジ版です。 船体は大和をベースに大改造し、ほぼフルスクラッチされています。 艦橋は後の大和に繋がる系譜を感じられるよう、現在の出雲の艦橋デザインをベースにほぼフルスクラッチされています。出雲型の少し前のめりな艦橋の意匠が残されているのがお分かり頂けますでしょうか? 戦闘に必須な司令塔も追加されています。戦闘部署や居住性が大改善されており、かなり現実的な戦艦らしい艦橋です。 現在の出雲の対空砲配置は、主砲の爆風や煙突からの遮熱をほとんど考慮されておらず、かなり大雑把なものとなっていましたが、この出雲改では対空砲配置も見直されています。対空砲と連動する指揮装置も現実的な箇所に配置されており、かなりリアリティがあります。 日本海軍が建造したことが肌で感じられる素晴らしいデザインです! 詳細はご本人のTwitterをご確認ください。 https://twitter.com/Abrams335?s=17 紹介を承諾してくださったAbrams1991さんに感謝致します。
  5. This ship , despite its generous HP pool and good guns attract too much attention. I cant play any match decently when whenever i pop up the whole enemy team try to shoot me back. I dont know why , but this thing attract too many pyromaniacs trying to burn it. Here i was being careful keeping combat to 17km to avoid attraction and the whole enemy team setting me ablaze. EVERY SINGLE DAMN SHIPS try to fire on me. Looking at the minimap , sure a flank shooting me is nothing new , when i see the minimap , suprise suprise the BB on the other flank also try to shoot me even when i am trying to disengage and clearly above 23km+ away from them The IJN playstyle of static long range firepower just dont work anymore , atleast for me. It isnt fun being the meatshield even though there are a lot of allies that are much more dangerous. Being the meatshield every single game is too tiresome for me. Is there anything to fix this , Izumo isnt exactly great at any fight other than long range platform that get drooled by a lot of DPM farmers
  6. (The following is a copy of my post from Reddit, slightly formatted for the forums) Long post ahead, you have been warned. First, we need to understand the difference between a paper ship and a paper ship. Some ships in the game are purely fantasy ships, i.e: their design is completely fabricated by Wargaming. Such examples are the Roon, Hindenburg, the Henri IV and the Zao. Alright, maybe Zao have a bit of historical background, as the IJN had actually planned to lay down a new generation of heavy cruisers, however, no such plans for the class survived the war and the current Zao in-game closely follows that of a fan-design on a Japanese Warship Magazine. Then there are the ones that have historical designs but some parts have been altered by Wargaming. Examples in-game included the Hakuryu-she have the dimensions of the G-14 Project but have G-15 (kai-Taihou) project features, the Großer Kurfürst (the H-class designs all had 4 twin mounted turrets in a A-B X-Y layout not the triple turret it had in-game, and the upgraded Friedrich der Große with 420mm guns (H-39 class were not to have 420mm guns). Then there are designs which haven’t been altered (except for things like AA armament, torpedo belt and whatnot-these things are for balancing the ship into a specific tier) but are in various stages of design, some near finished, some not, some are purely design studies. Examples are the Izumo, the Nicolas, the Phoenix, and some French/Russian/British cruisers and destroyers. And then there are the designs that existed, finalised and are either ready to be built/laid down but cancelled for whatever reason. Examples in game are the Ibuki, Montana, Amagi, De Grasse, the Friedrich der Große with stock guns, some Russian/British cruisers/destroyers. One thing that differs finalised designs and designs in various stages of development is that, with finalised designs, you have accurate drawing of the said ship, many times you have wooden mock up models, and everything is finalised-including how the external appearance will look like when constructed. But with designs in various stages of development, the actual external appearance of the said ship are not ever finalized. There are rough indication of the positions of guns and funnels and superstructures and other stuff but they are not to be treated as if this is how they are going to look like if built. Wargaming have done a fantastic job on modelling paper ships. The Roon and the Hindenburg, though completely fictional, resembles many signature details of Admiral Hipper (the Bridge/conning tower shape, the seaplane facility aft of the funnel, the location of the fore and aft range finders, the Friedrich der Große and Großer Kurfürst have similar shapes of the Bismarck as well. The high tier french cruisers shares the look of the Dunkerque and the Richelieu, with the hexagonal bridge and the spikes (I don’t know what to call them) and the funnel that is swept backwards and in some ships integrated with the aft superstructure much like the Richelieu class. The Russian cruisers of Moskva and Donski all had their fair share of the Russian cruisers’ oddly high bridge and large superstructure profile. The Hakuryu looks just like an enlarged Taihou and the Zao’s superstructure and mast are not much of a departure from the Mogami class. The Myogi’s bridge also resembled that of the Modernised Kongo class. (Note that the in-game Kongo actually uses the real-life Hiei’s bridge. Hiei is the only Kongo class that have a completely different bridge than the other Kongo’s) The Conqueror, Lion and the Monarch all resembles the Vanguard/KGV/modernised QE class’s sturdy bridge look, the secondary placement and the seaplane facility located between the two smoke stacks. I think you all get the idea, WG is not bad at modeling fictional warship superstructures at all. They can, and they does closely examine built ship’s appearances and applied it to paper ships but with a slight modernisation effort. Such as the addition of FC radars and whatnot. And then there’s Izumo. Man, I never knew the Japanese opted for a minimalistic appearance for their battleships! WG’s excuse for the Izumo is that, as that’s how it looked like in the design drawing, that’s how they modelled it because that’s the official design. Is it really? Apart from ships, such as the Montana, Ibuki and the Amagi, they are been built when cancelled and the appearance is firmly decided in official drawings and plans. And Montana and Amagi even have mock up models built. The Izumo is far from been a finished design. It is one of the sub-designs of the J-series of the Yamato’s preliminary designs. It only went as far as a design study. There is a reason why only the J-series of the Yamato designs have 410mm guns as opposed to other designs which have 460mm guns. This is because it is a design study based around the fact that if it possible to for a battleship that can be built and maintained using existing dry docks and other facilities. The gun of course is downscaled to 410mm and the armour is downscaled as well. It is a design study, and it is not even close to finalised, that’s why the drawing should never be used as the basis of the Izumo’s appearance. This is the design the Phoenix in-game is based upon, WG, why didn’t you copy the appearance? https://i.imgur.com/Q7CSuBD.jpg Would you call this the Farragut? https://i.imgur.com/LkjDrZh.jpg If not, then why is this the in-game Izumo that we see? (Please note: I was unable to find the exact drawing for A140-J2 which Izumo is based upon, but this is the other design with all turrets forward.) https://i.imgur.com/Df63RPA.png But you get the idea, the drawing is far from a complete, finalised drawing. Check this design drawing for Moskva: https://i.imgur.com/xI497na.jpg How about this wooden mock-up of Montana at New York Navy Yard? https://i.imgur.com/qS1u1NG.png The reason these ships’ in-game model closely resembling their actual drawings is that they are basically finalised and that’s how they are going to look like had they being completed. The Izumo is not. I hope this will end the debate on the historical accuracy of Izumo’s in-game model. Now I wish to talk about how Wargaming could fix the model. Failure No.1 The placement of fire control director with the rangefinder. Let’s start with the bridge, https://i.imgur.com/dY9XTjq.jpg Note the part in red (Main fire control director) and the blue (forward rangefinder) For all modernised IJN battleships, there are three distinct placement styles of fire control director with the rangefinder. The Kongo class and the Fuso class https://imgur.com/a/E58YX Note that Fuso’s bridge is on top, the bottom one is actually the in-game Myogi. However, as I mentioned above, the in-game Myogi actually resembles the real life Kongo. While the in-game Kongo resembles the real life Hiei. The FC director is located forward of the rangefinder and they rotate individually. The Nagato Class https://i.imgur.com/0FHmdF7.jpg The FC director sits at the top while the rangefinder is located a couple of levels down. They rotate individually and the rangefinder actually rotates around a rail, (it’s hard to see the rail in my screenshot) And there is the Hiei-Yamato style:https://imgur.com/a/2thbR Top is Hiei (again, that’s the Kongo in-game, which is modelled after the real-life Hiei), and Yamato on the bottom. Note that they have FC director sits directly on top of the rangefinder and they rotate together. Coming back to the Izumo, why did you realise? https://i.imgur.com/dY9XTjq.jpg It have the Nagato style layout. Which completely makes no sense whatsoever. As you will see next. The reason why Hiei have a different superstructure than her sisters is that, she was a training ship demilitarised under the treaty. And she was the last ship to be modernised and refit into service. All the Kongo class received a second refit between 1934-1936. Except, Hiei’s modernisation began at 1937. She was used as an experiment platform to test out some of the features that would have been used later on the Yamato class. One of these are her bridge shape including her FC director and rangefinder layout. That is why they look so similar. I don’t think it would take a genius to figure out that had Izumo been built, she would have the same style as Yamato. Unfortunately not, she retained the layout of the Nagato class. Failure No.2 The bridge shape Now let’s move onto the bridge itself. As we can see from my screenshot before, the Hiei and Yamato’s bridge are very similar, not only did they lose the ‘pagoda’ look common to other battleships, it looks much more compact and the shape are swept backwards. There are other features which are similar, including the AA platform (where all the binoculars are) situated directly below the rangefinder, the different platform levels, the location of AA directors and so on. That should be what Izumo looks like. Failure No.3 and No.4 combined: the lack of superstructure and the placement of secondaries. Moving on, Izumo’s mid section. https://i.imgur.com/uryG4VU.jpg 404 superstructure not found. Ehh, what on earth? How would there be barely any built up? Even in its Hull C (did not have the credits to buy Izumo back so I borrowed a youtube thumbnail) https://i.imgur.com/1Yc2mmo.jpg There are no superstructure. There should be plenty of superstructure around the smoke stack and between the Bridge and the aft bridge. This is yamato on trails:https://i.imgur.com/iVFU2wd.jpg Yamato’s refits only came with the addition of AA guns and secondaries, there are always plenty of superstructure. Why don’t Izumo have them? All nation’s new generation battleships comes with superstructure. You don’t just waste empty places a ship, you can have places for AA ammo storage, addition of AA directors, more AA guns etc. Oh yeah, AA guns, this is where WG have shown themselves to be lazy, use the C-hull Izumo again:https://i.imgur.com/bbimvIc.jpg Ah, fluent use of Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V, truly a masterpiece indeed. Looking back at every nations’ new generation battleships: (Yamato, Missouri, Tirpitz, KGV) https://imgur.com/a/h286D Note how the secondaries AA guns are all S P A C E D A P A R T (and on different levels) There are very good reasons why every nation have this layout, not only does it make all guns spread apart and firing blasts won’t affect other guns and their crews, this also gives every gun much more firing angles and they can cover multiple enemy plane approaches from different heights and different angles. And even if a bomb hit as not all of them are crammed together the damage will be smaller. You can see, not only should Izumo have much more superstructure, she would certainly have AA guns on different levels as opposed to the in-game C hull where they line up closely with each other. On top of that, check the A hull-https://i.imgur.com/uryG4VU.jpg And C-hull again-https://i.imgur.com/bbimvIc.jpg No addition of AA directors at all….whew lads...what can I say… Failure No.5 Lack of local rangefinders on main turrets Even though they are all located forward, there must be local range finders for turrets. See this IJN Tone picture for example: http://i.imgur.com/7hcEJbg.jpg In-game? Not present.https://i.imgur.com/bbimvIc.jpg Of course, not all turrets should have it. Turret A situated at the forward and in heavy seas the local rangefinder is nigh impossible to use. Turret C may have transverse problem if it have them. But how about turret B? High enough, and nothing to block it, it only makes sense for there to be local rangefinders, starting from A-hull. Overall, my take on the Izumo’s model: (NOTE: I rushed these with MS paint, I may redrawn these, for now they are for rough illustrative purpose only) Overall appearance regardless of which hull: Picture 1: It should have Yamato/Hiei style bridge, local rangefinder to be installed on B turret. Picture 2: More superstructure surrounding the smokestack where I coloured in red, and the funnel should be extended to avoid interference with operation on these levels. Next, AA placements according to which hull the player is using, I tried to resemble Yamato’s historical AA refits. But without any change in actual in-game characteristics. Hull A: Izumo as she was completed, red is 15.5cm, green is 12.7cm and blue is 25mm triple AA. Note that 12.7cm is built on the superstructure, much like how Yamato is when it was completed, they are NOT on deck level. Hull B: Again, red is 15.5cm, green is 12.7cm and blue is 25mm triple AA. The in game hull B have single mounted 25mm AA, i replaced them all with triple mount 25mm. Number of barrels stays the same as in-game (AA DPS stay the same). The placements of the 25mm are very similar to the Yamato before Letye Gulf. Also more Type 95 AA directors need to be installed along with the AA. Hull C: Again, red is 15.5cm, green is 12.7cm and blue is 25mm triple AA. The number of 12.7cm increased and so two 15.5cm are removed to save weight. I replaced all the single 25mm with triple mounts but kept the barrel count the same again so DPS is same as in-game. Placements of 25mm kind of resembles that of Yamato before final mission. Stern has two 25mm AA. added 4 more near the seaplane facility. Where the 15.5cm are were plated over add two 25mm on top. three 25mm AA added on the edges on both side. B turret gets two 25mm on top. Again, more Type 95 AA directors need to be installed along with the AA. Feedbacks are more than welcome, if you have any suggestions that I may have overlooked, please feel free to tell me in the comments.
  7. I've had Izumo for a while now and I am starting to wonder just why WG put her in the game, she is by far the worst ship in the upper tiers of the game, not to mention she has worse concealment than Yamato. Her only purpose seems to be as target practice for Zao's, Baltimore's and Moskva's. I'm curious why the Tier IX IJN BB wasn't the 'Number 13' prototype. I know there are plenty of threads on this already but I find it strange that they put such a useless ship at Tier IX when the other nations Tier IX BB's are far more superior in every aspect.
  8. A glorious day it was for me sailing the Iowa when I had to defend base A from 2 Izumo.After a long time and didnt do any contribution for the team due to misplaced position,I charged forward into base A hoping I will at least take down 1 enemy ship with me and both he and I were prepared to die!However,I barely survived the ram with less than 5% HP remaining (thanks to the die-hard flag) and I narrowly avoided getting killed by the 2nd Izumo whom I later rammed into him and we both died. The ramming sequences
  9. Subete_Yoi

    Japanese Armoured Cruiser Iwate

    Japanese Armoured Cruiser 磐手 Iwate Specifications: Class/Type: Izumo Class Armoured Cruiser Displacement: 9423 tonsLength: 132 meters Breadth: 20 meters No of shafts: 2 Engine: 24 Belleville boiler engines Power: 14500 h.p. Top speed: 20.7 knots (38km/h) Armament: 2 - Twin 203mm/45 Type 41 14 - QF 6 inch/40 naval guns12 - QF 12 pounder 12 cwt naval guns 8 -QF 2.5 pounder Yamauchi guns 4 - 457mm Torpedo Tubes Armour: Belt: 178mm Bulkheads: 127mm Barrettes: 152mm Turrets: 160mm Casemates: 51mm - 152mm Deck: 63mm Conning tower: 76mm - 356mm Info: Fate:Sunk 24th July 1945 Scrapped Late 1946 After reading back, I can already sense that there are tons of mistakes that I might not noticed. So dear historians and warships experts, do tell if there's any inaccuracy or something to add or point out. Don't want to spread the wrong info in the historical section now, would we?
  10. Ok, so I seen this many places, but I just cannot understand how to handle this ship... I read through many battleship guides, aim guide, and have a decent understanding on all the game mechanics. I mean it's accuracy is poor/troll, turn sluggish, and huge surface deck area... It's AAs aren't impressive if you get match up with tier IX/X aircraft carriers (which I do 80% of the games). Sluggish and huge hull with 'meh' AAs means you are vulnerable to all air-drop attacks. And again, since I got matched in Tier IX/X, Yamato, Shimakaze, and both nations' carrier are common, which means sky is full of flies and sea is full of torpedoes. Considering the above Cons, how can I improve my survivability in this hell? *I have Hull (B) and upgraded Gun firing control. I really I wish I was doing something wrong so I can improve, else it will be a long and painful grind toward Yamato... Feel free to give any advice, Thx and have a Merry Christmas!
  11. Subete_Yoi

    Japanese Armoured Cruiser Izumo

    Japanese Armoured Cruiser 出雲 Izumo (Not to be confused with JS Izumo) Rip in peace little dear Specifications: Class/Type: Izumo Class Armoured Cruiser Displacement: 9906 tonsLength: 132.28 meters Breadth: 20.94 meters No of shafts: 2 Engine: 24 VTE Belleville boilers Power: 14500 h.p. Top speed: 20.75 knots (38.43km/h) Armament: 4 - 203mm/45 Type 41 14 - QF 6 inch/40 naval guns 12 - QF 12-pounder 12 cwt naval guns 8 - 3-pounder Hotchkiss naval guns 4 - 450 mm torpedo tubes Armour: Main Belt: 88-175mm Upper Belt: 125mm Deck: 67mm Turret: 150mm Casemate: 150mm Conning Tower: 356mm Info: Fate: Sunk 24 July 1945 Scrapped 1947 After reading back, I can already sense that there are tons of mistakes that I might not noticed. So dear historians and warships experts, do tell if there's any inaccuracy or something to add or point out. Don't want to spread the wrong info in the historical section now, would we?