Search the Community

USN 2nd CV line I am thinking to give this tech tree the following features: Average to subpar AA and secondary armament Bad armor but high speed and good concealment for the carrier itself High performance for each plane (High speed and HP, good damage output per plane) slow recast time and small numbers of reserves average number of planes per attack but small squadrons Attack aircraft-The planes launch a small number of strong rockets (Similar to tiny tims on Lexington/Midway) Torpedo bombers-Average torpedo performance but heavy payload per plane (Similar to TBs on Saipan or FDR but with a smaller squad and faster interval) Dive Bombers-Uses AP bombs. The bombs have low damage and low penetration but drops a lot of them. Dispersion/accuracy will be the same as the original USN CV line. (Thinking of something like Enterprise bombers) Tier IV USS Bogue Tier VI USS Independence Tier VIII USS Wright (Saipan Class) OR USS Yorktown Tier X USS Essex For the planes: ( In the order of Attacker, TB, DB) T4- F3F, TBD Devastator, SB2U Vindicator T6- F4F, TBD Devastator, SBD Dauntless (Stock) - F6F, TBF Avenger, SB2C Helldiver (Upgraded) T8- F4U, TBF Avenger, SB2C Helldiver (Stock) - F8F, AD-1 Skyraider, AD-1 Skyraider (Upgraded) T10- F8F, BTD Destroyer, BTD Destroyer (Stock) - TB2C Skypirate, TB2C Skypirate, TB2C Skypirate (Upgraded) IJN 2nd CV line Characteristics: Average AA and secondary armament Decent armor, speed and concealment for the carrier itself, and gets an armored deck from T8 (If we choose Shinano) High speed but low HP, average speed and damage output per plane Large Squad, lot of reserves, fast recast Does NOT carry attack aircraft TBs- Fast torpedoes dealing decent damage but with a long fuse activation distance. Drops a large number of them due to large squad (They will be similar to Kaga) DBs- Uses HE bombs that have high alpha damage and fire rate but drops a small number of them, unlike the original USN CV line. Its dispersion and accuracy will be same as AP bombers on the original IJN CV line (Thinking of something like E.Lowenhardt but less accurate) Tier IV Zuiho Tier VI Hiryu Tier VIII Shinano OR Akagi Tier X Taiho For the planes:(in the order of TB, DB) T4- B4Y Type 96, D1A Type 94 T6- B4Y, D1A (Stock) - B5N2 Type 97, D3A Type 99 (Upgraded) T8- B5N2, D3A (Stock) - B6N Tenzan, D4Y Suisei (Upgraded) T10- B7A Ryusei, B7A Ryusei (Stock) - C6N Saiun, A7M2 Reppu (Upgraded) I suggest this tree as most of them are very famous and I really want them to be added or to come back to the game. I will not write about the history of these ships and planes as most are in game now or before the CV rework apart from Shinano, Akagi, Wright and Yorktown. USS Wright was a Saipan class light aircraft carrier (CVL-49). It entered service February 1947. It was reclassified into a aircraft transport (AVT-7, in 1959) and to a command ship (CC-2, in 1963). It was stricken from the navy list December 1977 and was sold as scrap. Displacement 14,500 tons Length 208 m Beam 23.4 m Draft 8.5 m Speed 33 knots (61 km/h; 38 mph) Armament 40 × Bofors 40 mm guns Aircraft carried 42 aircraft USS Yorktown (CV-5) was the lead ship of Yorktown class (Hornet and Enterprise is already in game). It was launched April 1936 and it fought WW2. She participated in the battle of the coral sea. She's planes managed to strike Shokaku and deal severe damage to it with USS Lexington, but Yorktown also took heavy damage and was returned to Hawaii. Then she got repaired extremely fast and she played an important part in sinking 3 Japanese carries in the battle of Midway. However, Yorktown got sunk right after by IJN Hiryu's counterattack. IJN Akagi was the lead ship of the Akagi class (Kaga is in game). It was originally built as a Amagi class battlecruiser (In game) but it was converted. It was the flagship of the famous 1st air fleet also known as Daiiichi-Koku-Sentai. She took part in the attack of Pearl harbour and battle of Midway, where she was heavily damaged by USS Enterprise based dive bombers. Then she was scuttled by Japanese destroyers to prevent her from falling into enemy hands. Shinano was originally built as the 3rd ship of the famous Yamato class, but it was converted to an aircraft carrier. It was launched in October 1944 and was one of the largest CVs built in WW2. However it gets sunk right after its introduction struck by 4 torpedoes from an American submarine USS Archerfish at the 29th of November same year. I placed it in tier VIII because Taiho can carry much more planes (Shinano: 47 Taiho:65) and has better AA armament. Displacement 65,800 t Length 265.8 m Beam 36.3 m Draught 10.3 m Speed 28 knots Armament 8 × twin 12.7 cm (5 in) dual-purpose guns 35 × triple 2.5 cm (1 in) AA guns 12 × 28-barrel 12 cm (4.7 in) AA rocket launchers Aircraft carried 47

G'day Folks, The last one for 2020; Iowa... So how did I find her? What did I think? See the video but in a word... Enjoyable or maybe Reliable... Monty will be 2021, not sure if a week or two or three... Will largely depend on when my son decides to be born (any day now... ... ... the wait continues). Let me know what you think, in here, YouTube and/or Reddit, all the love is appreciated if you have time. Hope everyone has a great New Years and hopefully we end up solving this pandemic issue...

G'day Folks, So the North Carolina... ... in 2020... How does she fair? Here goes! As usual any YouTube or Reddit loves would be greatly appreciated! I'm trying to get Iowa and Montana smashed out before my son's birth (anytime from now)... Wish me luck!

G'day Folks, Colorado review is live... Sooooooo she's slow, but do her guns make up for it? I answer that question in the video. I didn't mind playing her too much but BBs are BBs... As usual reddit/youtube loves are appreciated and happy to discuss anything in the review on any platform... If you think I'm wrong, tell me - I'm happy for different opinions! Next up is North Carolina, we know she plays differently to Colorado and we know she was good at one point, but what about now with all the premiums... ... Has she been eclipsed?

G'day folks, New York BLUF is here... I expected New York to be a poor mans anything and to have been power crept into oblivion... The results were... ... ... interesting. Like/Comment/Share around but far more importantly what do you think, did you enjoy watching it?

G'day Folks, So I just managed to complete the courageous collection and thus picked up Oklahoma... I will not be making a BLUF video on her anytime soon but I thought everyone should know: PSA - play almost any other Tier 5 BB instead of Oklahoma. Let me explain why and what's going on with references to New York and Texas to understand, I'll link my BLUFs at the bottom if you need to know about them. Oklahoma is like the child of an A-hull New York and an A-hull New Mexico. No on looking at her, I thought 'ok so she's an A-hull New Mexico with less guns and poor reload at T5.' Nope... She's worse. So one of the biggest issues with A-hull New York is that she has the old-school USN shells and these seriously lack penetration and reliability (both in HE and AP). When you upgrade to B-hull New York you also get upgraded AP and HE shells. The AP in particular starts maintaining good penetration values at most ranges. A-hull New Mexico has these improved shells as standard, because plainly the old-school shells are so bad they perform REALLY poorly even at T5, imagine trying to hit a Bismarck with them? To top this off, Oklahoma has an abysmal 40s reload. If her shells were actually good, this is less of an issue. The reason for this is while her DPM is low, her alpha-strike is pretty good and most of playing a BB is hitting with alpha-strike. But when you combine this poor DPM with really bad shell characteristics, it makes the low DPM exponentially worse. This is because you are more likely to shatter/bounce more of the shells, reducing the potential damage per salvo. I haven't done a direct comparison to other nations BBs but it's basically redundant. Apart from a minor upper belt increase to 25mm and an impressive turtleback, she still has the 19mm everywhere that New York suffers from. And this 19mm is the crucial point, every BB shell in the game overmatches it, meaning citadels through the bow and stern and full pens in all sorts of other places. Oklahoma tries to trade everything else for being 'tanky' and having respectable AA, she fails at this and is basically a walking XP pinata with unreliable guns. Don't get me wrong, as with any Tier 5 BB, anyone with decent skills will still get results but I would rate every other BB at Tier 5 ahead of her. Having extra 'citadel protection' does not make you tanky when you are still covered in 19mm plating. Almost all gun HE will pen 19mm (120s+) and every BB sized gun in the game will overmatch you with AP (272 mm +) Whereas Texas trades some gun power (in DPM and range) for better turret angles on 3rd turret and better AA; she still has the modern shells which means her guns will still perform. I'm really sorry, I wanted to like Oklahoma, hell if I can make Kansas work, surely I can make Oklahoma work? Yes but she doesn't have an overwhelming broadside weight at tier to compensate for her poor shell characteristics (whereas Kansas does). New York and Texas for reference...

Shimakaze is way better than Gearing. After struggling for a few games trying to make Gearing work in ranked, I switched over to Shimakaze ... and everything became 50 times easier. Gearing is too slow for Arm Race. It has stealth, but the gun DPM, AA, and USN smoke are not useful assets when there are almost no CVs to be found, and RADAR is prevalent. Shima, meanwhile, is the perfect center of the Venn diagram circles of stealth, alpha, and mobility. I'm not the only one to figure this out of course, it's pretty much 100% Shima in the team rosters. This is just a heads up: there is a reason everyone is playing Shima in ranked, and not just because its the most popular TX DD in the game.

US Torpedoboat destroyer line speculation! More lines are coming, mostly German 'cause I'm a wehraboo. NOTE: It’s actually a strange matter of how these classes aren’t in the current line. It’s like they intentionally did this to signal a line split or something. I mean… it’s strange, at least to me. All current US DDs from T6 in the current line have dual-purpose guns. All of them have just 2 sets of torpedo tubes, very uniformly so (except Mahan, but still). It just feels strange. I have high hopes for this line. My philosophy when speculating split lines is making sure one line is different than the other. For example, this line has some characteristic design differences that at least 80% guarantee they are different from the current US DD line, like focusing more on their torpedo power. THE LINE: VII: Bagley Gridley VIII: Benham IX: Porter X: Somers THE SHIPS BAGLEY-CLASS HP estimation: 10.700 (Hull A), 13.500 (Hull B) Primary armament: 4x1 127 mm dual-purpose (DP) guns in a AB-XY layout Torpedoes: 4x4 533 mm torpedo tubes (2 each side) Speed: 37 knots Consumables: standard T7 US DD consumable set. GRIDLEY-CLASS HP estimation: 10.600 (Hull A), 13.400 (Hull B) Primary armament: 4x1 127 mm dual-purpose (DP) guns in a AB-XY layout Torpedoes: 4x4 533 mm torpedo tubes (2 each side) Speed: 38.5 knots Consumables: standard T7 US DD consumable set. BENHAM-CLASS HP estimation: 10.900-12.000 (Hull A), 13.500 (Hull B) Primary armament: 4x1 127 mm dual-purpose (DP) guns in a AB-XY layout Torpedoes: 4x4 533 mm torpedo tubes (2 each side) Speed: 38 knots Consumables: standard T8 US DD consumable set. PORTER-CLASS HP estimation: 11.800 (Hull A), 15.400 (Hull B) Primary armament: 4x2 127 mm single-purpose (SP) guns in a AB-XY layout Torpedoes: 2x4 533 mm torpedo tubes (centerline) with spare for reload Speed: 37 knots Consumables: standard T9 US DD consumable set, with TRB in the same slot as Smoke Generator, same as some IJN DDs (Akatsuki, Kagero, Yugumo and Shiratsuyu). TRB is the same as Monaghan (or 20s instead of 30s). SOMERS-CLASS HP estimation: 11.700 (Hull A), 15.900 (Hull B) Primary armament: 4x2 127 mm SP guns Torpedoes: 3x4 533 mm torpedo tubes Speed: 38 knots Consumables: Damage Control, Smoke Generator, Engine Boost. Characteristics of the line: + Glass cannons for many roles and playstyles: sitting in smoke gun blazing or speed boosting while spamming walls of skills. + Have low HP pool on average due to being built pre-war or early in the war. + Torpedoes: mainly short-ranged as expected on US DDs. But there are a lot of them on one broadside, which is why I have the idea to come up with this line in the first place. Later tiers will have better torps (see the table below). + Porter and Somers’ SP guns have the same rate of fire as their DP counterparts, but no AA because they are SP. + Generally faster than the main line at 37 knots minimum. + Poor AA on Porter and Somers as their main guns are single, not dual-purpose. + Roles: ambusher, potential DD hunter (Porter and Somers) but low health so cautious DD hunters. Torpedoes they carry: Comparing historical torps with in-game torps In-game torps: Torpedo Ship(s) Speed (knots) Range (km) Damage Reload/torp (second) Mark 11 Farragut A 56 5.5 11,733 22 Mark 12 Farragut B Mahan A 64 6.4 11,733 22 Mark 15 Mod. 0 Mahan B Benson A 55 9.2 11,600 21.75 Mark 15 Mod. 3 Benson B Fletcher A Sims Kidd 55 9.2 16,633 24.4 Mark 16 Mod. 1 Fletcher B Gearing A 66 10.5 19,033 21.2 Mark 17 Gearing B 66 16.5 17,900 27.2 Bliss Leavitt Mk7 mod. 2B Sims 49 9.2 8,500 18 Mark 29 Black 43 (lol) 13.7 21,600 19.2 My speculation for the torpedoes that would be used by the ships as follow. Historically they used Mark 11, 12 and 15 torpedoes: Bagley and Gridley: Mark 12, then Mark 15 Mod. 0. Benham: Mark 15 Mod. 0 and Mod. 3. Porter: Mark 15 Mod. 3 and Mark 16 Mod. 1. Possibly also Mark 17, but that's just purely insane. Somers: Mark 15 Mod. 3 and Mark 16 Mod. 1. Premiums of the line: DD-360 PHELPS (PORTER-CLASS) 1944 HP estimation: 15.400 Primary armament: 2x2 and 1x1 dual-purpose guns. 1 twin turret in the front, the rest in the back. Torpedoes: 2x4 533 mm torpedo tubes (centerline), either Mark 15 Mod. 0 or Mark 15 Mod 3. Whether she had spare torps for reload is unknown to me. Speed: 37 knots Consumables: Damage Control, Smoke Generator, Engine Boost/Defensive AA Fire, Torpedo Reload Booster (maybe). Opinions: solid T8 premium, a good contender to Benson and Fletcher in most aspects. Same TRB as Porter. DD-395 DAVIS (SOMERS-CLASS) HP estimation: 15.900 Primary armament: 2x2 and 1x1 dual-purpose guns. 1 twin turret in the front, the rest in the back. Torpedoes: 2x4 533 mm torpedo tubes, using Mark 15 Mod. 3 and Mark 16 Mod. 1 torpedoes. Speed: 38 knots Consumables: Damage Control, Smoke Generator, Engine Boost/Defensive AA Fire. Opinions: I’d place this at T9. Having 1 torpedo mount less than tech tree Somers hampers this ship’s overall power, but there is also USS Kidd at T8. If WG want, they can gimmick this ship up. DD-396 JOUETT (SOMERS-CLASS) HP estimation: 15.900 Primary armament: 4x2 single-purpose guns. Torpedoes: 3x3 533 mm torpedo tubes, using Mark 15 Mod. 3 and Mark 16 Mod. 1 torpedoes. Speed: 38 knots Consumables: Damage Control, Smoke Generator, Engine Boost. Opinions: I’d place this at T9. Simply a downtiered Somers with less torpedo tubes. A notable mention: ROBERT H. SMITH-CLASS Minelayer Destroyer HP estimation: about 18.000 Primary armament: 3x2 127 mm DP guns in a AB-X layout, like Gearing. Torpedoes: a big, fat NONE. Speed: 34 knots Consumables: Damage Control, Smoke Generator/Hydro, Engine Boost/Defensive AA Fire. Opinions: tier indefinable. Basically Sumner-class (in-game Yueyang) without any torpedo, basically most of her firepower gone. Big, tier 9-material HP pool with a possible Hydro consumable that may become a torpedo-sweeper. As is, a T7 Premium. If some gimmicks are added (1/4 HE pen, improved US AP, Main Battery Reload Booster, Repair Party), she could be T8/9.

'Cause I'm ready for the split. T8? Bring it! Seriously tho, I can kinda see the thinking behind it. Cleveland looks and feels like a much more modern and powerful ship than the rest of her T6 counterparts, what with the 4x3 turrets, high ROF, and cheese-shredder AA...

With the USN Cruiser Line Split, everyone has been talking about the new cruisers. But I am confused on how players who have a Des Moines in their port be recompensed when the line splits, what will I receive if I have a Des Moines in my port?

If you've ever glanced at the USN BB line you already know that Wyoming, New York, New Mexico, and Colorado share several common traits: good armor, good guns, fast rudder shift (after upgrades), and very slow top speed. If you've played the ships, you already know that they alternate up the line between "shotgun" (Wyoming, New Mex.) and "rifle" (New York, Colorado): the shotgun ships have lots of guns, but with a smaller caliber and higher dispersion, the rifle boats fewer barrels, but with a larger caliber, higher accuracy, and greater range. While you might have the impression that New Mexico should play like an upgraded Wyoming, in my experience this did not work out well. In this post I will try to muddle through why this is, and what might instead be the right way to approach New Mexico. My thoughts on this is a Work In Progress. Insight no. 1. The ship may not be so different, but the T5-8 games New Mexico will see are very different from the T3-5 battles faced by Wyoming. Consider that both ships have nearly the same gun range. On the small maps Wyoming typically sees, and being able to outrange most most-tier cruisers, the "hang back and just shoot" playstyle approach shared by New York and Colorado is workable. Not so for New Mexico. Just about every ship you face outside of DDs can shoot at you before you can shoot at them. Many cruisers can easily burn you to a crisp before you can even return fire. "hang back and just shoot" does not work. Insight no. 2. If you examine the details closely you'll see that New Mexico has significantly better AA than any of the other three battleships, better than Colorado even. Colorado has very strong short range AA, but N. Mex. has far better ranged AA. So unlike the others in the family where you are basically building for survival and gun range by default, running a full AA build with New Mexico has some merit ... if, and this is a big if, CV games are common enough to make it viable. Insight no. 3. Despite claims I've read that N. Mex has the highest velocity 14" guns in game (is this still true?) the long reload and high dispersion are cause for significant grief. No, they are not really much worse than Wyoming, it's just that the consequences of failing to hit the target is more severe in mid tier games. Much less likely to see a second chance. Those are the "issues" with N. Mex as I see them. I find I'm agonizing over which captain skills to take - AA or survival - and which mods to equip (again AA or range/survival). It's like whichever you equip, you'll need the exact opposite in game: get torped by planes if you run fireproof, get burnt down if you run AA. Currently I've settled all-in for AA, relying on flags and consumables to try and keep fires under control. In a four CV game 15-20 plane kills is doable, and more importantly they'll have a hard time touching you. Still wondering if AA mod or plotting room mod is the way to go though. As for the guns, I find I do well when the enemy comes to me, poorly otherwise.The results are extremely RNG, but I can live with that if the target is pushing our flank. One way or the other I hardly ever get close enough to make use of my secondaries. No fun brawls. Either I'm dead first or the enemy is. I feel I'm definitely not quite "there yet" with getting the best out of New Mexico's guns. If there's a trick I haven't found it yet. The problem in a nutshell boils down to this: New Mexico pairs guns that need close range with a hull that lacks the speed to either engage and disengage freely. Knowing this is the issue and knowing what to do about it are two different things unfortunately. current N. Mex build: main armaments 1, damage control mod 1, AA mod, and rudder shift spotter aircraft, expert marksman, basic firing training, advanced firing training

Started playing WOWS like 6 or 7 months ago. And Don't know what happens when there is a line split. So, I have a Pensacola and a Cleveland. My question regarding this is what will I have after the line split update? Please keep it as simple as possible. I really don't understand the concept of line split. Still learning things.

Original poll here: https://goo.gl/forms/nWul0miRH0kPyMgC3 Disclaimer The following results are the results of a player-run poll distributed among the NA forums, Asia forums, and r/worldofwarships. The results are not endorsed by any other party except for myself, including Wargaming, Reddit, or any of the developers. As this was a player run poll, I open up my results to any analysis that any players, developers, and/or outside observers would like to make. These results are not guaranteed to influence Wargaming in any way. I am also not an AP Stats student. If you spot an incorrect assumption, please show mercy. Thank you. In addition, I received a lot of flak for this poll for multiple reasons. I tried to keep the poll simple, which explains why people felt it was too basic. Next time around, I'll be covering more complex topics, so I have more freedom to make the poll more complex. In addition, the poll itself can be taken multiple times. This is not a mistake; rather I am attempting to protect the identities of those taking the poll. If I made the poll a one answer only poll, people would be forced to sign into their Google accounts to take the poll. The poll results on the Google form are open, which means that anyone who would respond would open their email up to the public. A side note, before we begin: I do not play USN BBs. I'm pretty much a DD guy myself; as such, please do not scream "[edited]noobtard" when I display the poll. I made this poll because two guys I know disagree on this issue. Introduction and Methodology The following results were compiled from the poll above, which ran from 29-11-17 to 02-12-17. There were 240 people who took the poll. Results were compiled into an Excel spreadsheet and analyzed. An asterisk (*) indicates that I lumped similar responses together. For example, if one response was that they didn't care, and another response was that it didn't really matter, I would lump both together. In addition, all of the "other" responses are marked as "Other" in the pie charts. Data Results Analysis Combining the first two questions, we can see that the majority of those who answered are USN players and BB players. This means that we will be receiving results from people who play USN ships and those who play other BBs against them. On our third question, there is a general consensus that USN BBs are not weak objectively speaking. I say general consensus, but I really mean an overwhelming majority. This trend continues throughout the poll, with around 80% of the population believing USN BBs are fine each question. I really can't analyze this battery of questions very much, as there isn't much to analyze. The last multiple choice question asks whether USN BBs are powercreeped. This seems to leave the population split, with about 40% of the population believing USN BBs are not powercreeped, 46% believing that USN BBs are slightly powercreeped, and 14% of the population believing that USN BBs are extremely powercreeped. These results to this question are very curious, as even though 80% of the population believes that USN BBs are not weak, 60% of the population surveyed believe that the USN BBs are powercreeped to at least some degree. At least some of those who believe that USN BBs are not weak also believe that USN BBs have been powercreeped, although I cannot say just how many for sure. In short, even though much of the population believes USN BBs aren't weak, some of that population also believes USN BBs have been powercreeped to some degree. Finally, the open response. I will be covering this in my different analyses from now on. Picking a few quotes, we can see the many different views of the population. "Nothing. Git Gud." This sentiment is echoed many times in many different responses. Although on the surface it is a blatant jab at the OP, we can analyze this to mean that USN BBs are relatively high skill. "Raise Citadel." Surprisingly, many people also believe that the USN citadel lowering was a bit too much. However, this is often times the only nerf that is mentioned, leading me to believe that only the citadel should be raised again in order to rebalance the USN BB line. "Speed buffs." USN BBs are well-known for their slow speed. It is no surprise that a much-asked buff is to the speed. It would not be unreasonable, certainly, and it should probably be done. "Add STS Plating, imprive [sic] gun handling at long/mid range, improve pennetration [sic] of 16 inch Mk 8 Super Heavy Shell" The most specific response in the poll. It covered a lot of ground while still keeping it concise and easy to understand. This was the most detailed buff request. In addition, we can break it down further. STS plating is special plating used on USN BBs, known for being a slight improvement over other steel plates because of its ductility. I do believe that USN BBs do not have special armor modeled; thus the author wishes for better armor when compared to contemporaries. Improving gun handling at mid and long ranges is also another issue raised by the author. While USN BBs are not supposed to be snipers, the author wishes for them to at least gain a little bit more accuracy. Buffing accuracy could prove problematic, however, as it could enable DD sniping with BBs. Still, I am sure the author has experienced very bad USN BB accuracy firsthand, and I do not wish to discredit his/her experiences. "buff the whining factor so i get more salt to feed on" Purely shiptosting by an anonymous user. Lightened up my day a little. Conclusions USN BBs are seen as well balanced, if a bit strong, by most. Although an appreciable amount of people believe that USN BBs have been slightly powercreeped, most people do believe that USN BBs are not a dumpster fire. As is, I rest my case. Feel free to use this data to support your own internet arguments, draw conclusions, or use this as data to buff USN BBs. Thank you for reading this long and hard poll result.

Hello, I'm back with another poll. This time, it's about the contentious subject of the USN BB. I will do an analysis after results have been collected, as usual. Link is here: https://goo.gl/forms/t6IJRUJN2Nys3Pq13

So I got a RDF captain in my Cleveland, and I'm still trying to get used to it. Any advice and tips on using it? I'm trying to use it to sniff out sneaky little dds prowling near me.

so new additions to the Pan-Asian Tech Tree. From China, Thailand, Indonesia, Taiwan and South Korea Fu Shun (China) destroyer. The Anshan-class destroyers were the People's Liberation Army Navy's (PLAN) first destroyers. They were ex-Soviet Gnevny-class destroyers purchased in the 1950s. The Chinese later added HY-2 anti-ship missiles and removed some of the torpedo tubes, and redesignated as Type 6607. Pra Huang (Thailand) HMS Radiant was a Royal Navy and Royal Thai Navy R-class destroyer constructed and then operational in the First World War.She was renamed Phra Ruang. It is believed that in order to finance her acquisition King Rama VI and other senior figures donated personally to the finance fund, making this the first publication donation of money to procure a warship in Thailand Gadja Mada (Indonesia) Four ships of the Royal Navy have borne the name HMS Nonpareil, from the French meaning 'without equal': HMS Nonpareil was a 56-gun galleon, launched in 1556 as the 44-gun HMS Philip and Mary. She was rebuilt in 1584 and renamed Nonpareil. She was again rebuilt in 1603 and renamed Nonsuch. She was sold in 1645. HMS Nonpareil was a 14-gun schooner captured from the Americans in 1807. She was damaged in a storm in 1812 and sold the following year. HMS Nonpareil was an Admiralty M class destroyer launched in 1916 and sold in 1921. HMS Nonpareil was an N-class destroyer launched in 1941. She was transferred to the Royal Netherlands Navy in 1942 and renamed Tjerk Hiddes. She was transferred to Indonesia in 1951 and renamed Gadjah Mada. She was broken up in 1961. The destroyer HNLMS Tjerk Hiddes was a British built, Dutch warship of World War II. She was laid down on 22 May 1940 as a British N-class destroyer, HMS Nonpareil, but on 27 May 1942, she was transferred to the Royal Dutch Navy. The ship was commissioned in 1942[1][3] as HNMLS Tjerk Hiddes, named after the 17th-century Dutch admiral, Tjerk Hiddes de Vries. Much of her war service was with the Royal Navy and the United States Navy in the Indian Ocean and Australia. Following the war, the destroyer was sold to Indonesia and renamed KRI Gadjah Mada. She was scrapped in 1957. Shen Yang,(Taiwan or Republic of China Navy, ROCS) Namikaze (波風 Wave Wind) was the second ship of the Nokaze sub-class, an improvement to the Minekaze-class 1st class destroyers built for the Imperial Japanese Navy following World War I. Advanced for their time, these ships served as first-line destroyers through the 1930s, but were considered obsolescent by the start of the Pacific War. Following the war, the ship was transferred to the Republic of China as a prize of war and renamed Shen Yang. Hsien Yang, Reclassified DD-456 on 15 January 1955, she decommissioned 28 July 1955 and was transferred the same day to the Republic of China to serve as RCS Hsien Yang (DD-16). After she ran aground c. 1969, her ROCN name and ROCN pennant number were reassigned to the former USS Macomb, which was acquired in 1970. USS Rodman (DD-456/DMS-21), a Gleaves-class destroyer, is the first ship of the United States Navy to be named for Admiral Hugh Rodman. Rodman was laid down on 16 December 1940 by the Federal Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co., Kearny, New Jersey and launched on 26 September 1941; sponsored by Mrs. Albert K. Stebbins, Jr., grandniece of Admiral Rodman. The destroyer was commissioned on 27 January 1942, Commander William Giers Michelet in command Hsiang Yang, USS Brush (DD-745), an Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer, is the only ship of the United States Navy to be named for Charles Brush, an American inventor and philanthropist. Brush (DD-745) was launched on 28 December 1943 by Bethlehem Steel Co., Staten Island, New York; sponsored by Miss Virginia Perkins, great-granddaughter of Charles Brush; and commissioned on 17 April 1944, Commander J. E. Edwards in command. Brush was decommissioned and stricken from the register on 27 October 1969. She was subsequently sold to Taiwan 9 December 1969 and renamed Hsiang Yang, which was later stricken in 1984 and transferred to Naval Weapons School and then broken up for scrap. Brush received five battle stars for World War II service and four battle stars for her Korean operations. Long Jiang, Jian Wei, Cheng An (Taiwan) The Shimushu-class escort ships (占守型海防艦 Shimushu-gata kaibōkan) were a quartet of ships built for the Imperial Japanese Navy just prior to World War II. Background and description The Japanese called these ships Kaibōkan, "ocean defense ships", (Kai = sea, ocean, Bo = defense, Kan = ship), to denote a multi-purpose vessel. They were initially intended for patrol and fishery protection, minesweeping and as convoy escorts. The ships measured 77.72 meters (255 ft 0 in) overall, with a beam of 9.1 meters (29 ft 10 in) and a draft of 3.05 meters (10 ft 0 in).[1] They displaced 870 metric tons (860 long tons) at standard load and 1,040 metric tons (1,020 long tons) at deep load. The ships had two diesel engines, each driving one propeller shaft, which was rated at a total of 4,200 brake horsepower (3,100 kW) for a speed of 19.7 knots (36.5 km/h; 22.7 mph). The ships had a range of 8,000 nautical miles (15,000 km; 9,200 mi) at a speed of 16 knots (30 km/h; 18 mph) Chung Mu (South Korea)ROKS (DD-91). USS Erben (DD-631), a Fletcher-class destroyer, was a ship of the United States Navy named for Rear Admiral Henry Erben (1832–1909). Erben (DD-631) was launched 21 March 1943 by Bath Iron Works Corp., Bath, Maine; sponsored by Mrs. C. B. G. Gaillard, daughter of Rear Admiral Erben; and commissioned 28 May 1943, Commander J. H. Nevins, Jr., in command. Erben was transferred to South Korea 16 May 1963, where she was renamed ROKS Chung Mu (DD-91). In 1979, the Republic of Korea Navy changed her Hull Number to 911. Since 1983, she served as a stationary training vessel. The ex-Erben is reported to have been broken up

Hello everyone. I have been following this game for 2 years now. But only managed to get my hands on it very recently. And First up I love this game. It's a blast. At present I have only hit tier 4 with my Kaiser. So putting the brief intro aside, I am have always been interested in Aircraft Carriers, from the time I have seen Flammu, Aerron and many others putting up videos about it. My basic question would around what line should I choose between USN and IJN. But I am sure this is answered several times and I have gathered IJN CVs to be superior due to their Torpedo Bombers and more Squadrons. So, my question would to be whether there are any reasons to actually invest on US Cvs. As I have gathered they are good for AS builds but they don't seem to be that rewarding. If there is any reason why I should try an invest on the carrier line, how on earth should I play it. Really want to know feedbacks from people who play them and been with them in a game and those that actually got bested by US CVs. Just want to start with an unbiased opinion on the US line, if it is possible.

With the Indroduction of the new British cruiser line, whats the strongest cruiser line to proceed down?

As of this update what is the best Carrier line?

Battleship Development Upgrades and More!!

​We all have seen Steven Seagal became obtainable captain in WoWs already. ​Why not introduce real captain in history of naval warfare as an obtainable captain via set of mission or something else? ​This would be nice to see them in action again. I understand this will be controversial about legitimacy in touching these name. Let's pour some idea about some of most famous captains of each navy. Which one we want to see them in action? Why these captain should/shouldn't be touched and reason behind it. I can't fill all of them, these are some of them that I could recall about. So you can tell me to add it up if you wish I hope WG may consider this as a viable options to game contents. Cheers

The other day I asked about the best Cruiser line in the game and it got me thinking about the best battleship line. I've heard that the Montana is the worst of the 3 tier 10s.

Hello ! Like the title states, was wondering what kind of commander skills build are available for USN DD? Thanks! arcticavengerz

i'm currently still enjoying my Iowa with 130k exp and wondering if montana worth it? for what i've been reading montana is like tier 9.5 battleship and having trouble against a yamato, is this true? or wg has buff montana penetration?

so i recently played 2 random battles with my lexington after weeks of absence. i noticed something frustrating, with AA rating of 81(one of the best), and using Anti-aircraft consumables, in the first game i only take down 3 of 8 shokaku's torpedo bombers that striked me. and the second, i only take down 5 of 12 lexington's dive bombers. what happened? before i upgraded the hull (with aa rating about 60s) i always wiped out almost every planes with consumables used. is there any solid explanation for this phenomenon, or it's just a bug bundled in the new update?.