In my opinion it’s the Litchfield, it’s armaments is othing special but with a long reload and not a lot of damage,. It has no AA, and slow velocity. I only use it cause I’m going for the 4.7 US DDs, but I only have killed one destroyer with it, a Frunze, and a few pt boats.
Yep - well it’s reserve so ya gets what ya pays for!
there is a good reason why it got hidden :)
but from tt ones, litchfield is surely the worst one
6 Likes
For surface action sure it’s worse but it gets better AA over the Lichfield sole 3" gun, Sooo you could technically put them together in the worst category dur to being polar opposites (Still both are better than one Rank V Frigate combined).
This was originally a long reply to the last guy but realised it would be better as a single comment afterwards.
You could say the worst destroyer by game classification is the Aquila even though it’s a cruiser as the three 6" guns are lacking along with the four 3" & two forward facing torpedoes.
There’s also the Ayanami class Destroyer which tbh is pretty nasty at 4.0 but the light 3" guns are like needles doing lacklustre damage an the shell cost means it makes zero SL due to sitting in a worse economical TT along with the repair, But the reason it can be deemed bad is the devs decision to call it a frigate meaning any ship can melt it with AI LAA fire ( late war Type 1934/Type1936 are scary).
Still I think imo the semi worst destroyer can be said to be the USS Phelps DD-360 at 5.0 a late war post redesigned Port class destroyer since you can basically find the same armament (5"/38) as low as 4.0 just one less cannon & less torpedoes as seen by the 4.0 Impetuoso class, Five cannons at 5.0 seems iffy as you can find six of them at 4.7 with the Allen M. Sumner & Gearing classes an your non late war sisters keep eight of them at the same BR, LAA wise your fore 40 mm quad cannot depress low enough for headon engagements in cqc.
But tbh the worst one is the Soldati class destroyer RN Aviere which basically like the sisters but missing the fifth cannon along with a lack of LAA from the later sisters, It doesn’t help it was a lacklustre event ship as well.
Ayanami and other japanese 127mm benefitted heavily from he rework and I find them enjoyable to play.
Aquilla is bit underrated. It can punch pretty hard with those cannons and front facing torps give it an offensive tactic that is not usually expected.
I can agree on phelps tho, it is a forgotten ship tbh.
Apologies I should’ve typed it further into classes, I didn’t mean the Fubuki class destroyer Ayanami (1929) but the last ship named Ayanami the Ayanami class Destroyer JDS Ayanami DD-103 (both are 4.0 an I often see both in matches & at the top of the scoreboard).
• It’s powerful but the weaker DM/ wrong classification along with its horrible economics in my eyes sees it not great long term Woah +100k sl, checks message box an sees -47k to ammunition & -20k for repairs.
Yes the Aquila is a good ship for Italy & it makes me wish other nations had small early cruisers at this BR, Plus the fore firing torpedoes weren’t uncommon for the time period especially noticeable on the Torpedo Boats & Torpedo Boat Destroyers along with mainline destroyers of the first world war.
• It rather sucks the recent BR changes butchered it’s ability to be used in a 3.3 lineup with the Gabbiano class corvettes which also have bow facing torpedoes.
Also yeah the Phelps is definitely forgotten but at least there’s a few threads asking for its reduction along with a few people asking for the BR drop on the BR change posts Even through they never ever bloody listen to us except for when a dreadnought goes down in BR…
1 Like
No, I should be sorry since you specified it was 3in ayanami and I didnt pay attention to that:) I agree with jds ayanami guns being weak.
Italian and French starter destroyers.
Turbine and Aquila aren’t bad starters, Italy has issues with destroyers, but mainly with Soldati class being too high in BR considering their fragility and low RoF. Postwar Italian destroyers equipped with American cannons are very good, others are mediocre.
1 Like
Nah, turbine is arse. Low number and terrible firerate main guns, low range torps and ammo that sits high in the water.
The only advantages is her getting AP on her main guns, not that this helps much in a bracket of nothing but destroyers. HE-TF AA I guess is a plus. Albeit double edged sword.
Only useful in uptiered battles where some advanced destroyers have more vulnerable ammo above waterline, but it’s a very situational ammo.
Like, Turbine isn’t the worst reserve ship but it’s definitely not great.
I personally think Litchfield is one of the better reserve ships.
I agree.
I vote for HMS Churchill… it’s BR is lower than the reserve/starter destroyer of HMS Vega …
I did a Warbond box of the talisman for Rank 1/2 Bluewater… and it got given to Churchill… :/
Edit: I hadn’t seen Friðsælt’s post… I also didn’t know it had been hidden now (but obvious why it was)
It should be 3.0 along with HMS Montgomery.
Idk 120/45 are only Italian cannons for which I prefer HE shells, because they have a rather heavy explosive mass, plus Turbine fights mostly not very armored enemies. Ballistics and RoF suck though.
AP for Turbine would have been useful…
If it fought anything armored enough to warrant it. The only one I can think of is the K2 but Leviathans gutted it in terms of survivability.