World of Warships: USS Johnston - New T9 Destroyer

[@Aerroon]

"Having mistaken Johnston for a cruiser, Yamato fired armour-piercing ammunition from her main guns, which over penetrated Johnston's unarmored hull without exploding. Still, the damage resulted in numerous casualties as Yamato's 6.1-inch (155 mm) shells mostly landed upon her superstructure."

[@Aerroon]

The burst fire adds about 15-20% to DPM. This took a lot longer to make than I initially expected. I am quite unsatisfied with my performance in the ship and I couldn't entirely put my thumb on whether it was the ship or myself.

[@Apollyon-er4ut]

WG version of the Johnston is such a SAD rendition compared to the historical hero she was, and the absence of Capt. Evans compounds it. It's needed a heal (like Kidd) or better DPM.

[@Aerroon]

Maybe the problem IS the lack of captain Evans? Maybe if we had the correct captain the ship would be too strong?

[@billwalker9509]

@@Apollyon-er4ut considering it had its engines shot out from under it and in a rain squall they were able to get power back to the front turrets and one of the engines, the least they could have done was giving it a heal.

[@landochabod7]

SAP is kind of a massive deal against cruisers and some BBs (French, British...), if you don't have the improved HE pen of German DDs. Sure, this thing doesn't have the ballistics, nor the DPM, of a F. Sherman, but she's still going to be much more effective, against something like a Roon or a Seattle or a Lion, than your run-of-the-mill Fletcher. Also, yes, the fact you don't have to shoot all the time is nice. That's my problem with the Tiger '59: the DPM is nice enough, but it just takes all your concentration to aim every few seconds.

[@Aerroon]

Sure, but you slap IFHE onto a Kitakaze and you have the same pen as this with SAP. But cruisers usually have 30mm of armor, so Kitakaze doesn't even need that.

[@TheBigGiant_SpaceChiken]

As a DD main, I´ve been looking forward to the Johnston coming into the game. But as I see it right now, it´s not a hard pass, but ¨lets hope they buff it pass.¨ I would be more inclined to get it if it had the torp reload of a Fletcher or a Gearing. The problem is that the gimmick isn´t all that great and the nerf to the torpedos is too severe for said gimmick IMO. It seems to me like they didn´t want the Johnston to match the SAP performance of the Forrest Sherman and the torp performance of the Gearing at Tier 9. End result, like you well said in the video, they made a ¨meh¨ DD.

[@wen87n]

As a premium ship, it's safer to make it mediocre and then buff it later if necessary. If they make it too strong, they then have no choice but to remove it from the store and put it in Santa crates.

[@TheBigGiant_SpaceChiken]

@@wen87n That´s a good point. Better play it safe and not make it too strong from the start. I just hope they do start buffing it soon. Most reviews I have seen for it say the same thing. That it´s ok, but not that good.

[@Norbrookc]

@@TheBigGiant_SpaceChiken WG has had a bad habit in the past of introducing a legendary historical ship as a premium and making it overpowered and then yanking it or nerfing it to the point that players later on wonder why it was considered a big deal. It's one of the reasons I had mixed feelings about it coming to the game. On one hand, it's the Johnston, a truly legendary destroyer. On the other hand, if it lived up to its legend in game, people would be screaming "OP!" or would be "meh, another ordinary ship."

[@TheBigGiant_SpaceChiken]

@@Norbrookc I agree that it´s hard to balance a new ship. Specially one as important as the Johnston. That´s the main problem I think. People have been wanting this boat in game forever and now that it´s here, people expected or wanted it to be great because of it´s historical significance.

[@bella_ciao4608]

They should’ve made it a Tier 10. We have fletchers at T9 and T8, may as well put a really good one at T10.

[@Aerroon]

Would've been cool with some extra power!

[@billwalker9509]

@@bella_ciao4608 they'd have to add a heal or hydro then

[@billwalker9509]

You can build the torpedo reload down to 130 seconds.

[@Aerroon]

Sure, but imagine where you can get on something like the Fletcher when you start with 70 seconds less.

[@anthonyware4033]

Burst fire works when you hit your target, I have the same issue at times lol

[@Aerroon]

True. The shells don't help with that.

[@joedanker3267]

How WG could NOT give Johnston a zombie heal and a powerful repair is beyond me. Those are as historically accurate as mechanics can get, it's a no-brainer. Johnston should have been balanced around those charateristics. Total miss by WG.

[@carl5381]

it's American and not Russian. What did you expect?

[@IntelCorei-KProcessor-go2to]

Love your videos, but I heavily disagree with this one Aerroon. Concealment, speed, maneuverability, smoke, SAP, burst fire. These areas are where Johnston is undisputedly superior to Kitakaze/Akizuki. Johnston does 38kt/560m/2.99s, whereas Kitakaze does 36kt/730m/4.64s (and Akizuki does much worse). Johnston gets US smoke and 300m better concealment. These are not technical differences, they are extremely noticeable in gameplay... I don't have Johnston, but I have other Fletcher's, and I don't get how one drives Fletcher, and then drive Kita/Aki, and then conclude "yeah they're about equally nimble". Burst-fire is good because you get to front-load all the alpha damage for all the reasons already stated and more. It also makes the enemy DD panic which is an intangible advantage. The downside is you lose a lot of DPM doing this... except, Johnston burst fire is designed in such a way that it doesn't have this weakness. So there is exactly 0 reason why normal fire would be superior, DPM equalized. And it is true, that you can spec into IFHE on Kita/Aki to make your HE into essentially better SAP. But that's not free. Nevermind the fact that you slash your fire chance doing this, that's 3 point you can't spend elsewhere. Considering DDs are arguably the most point-heavy class in the game, and that Kita/Aki are TT ships so you can't move commanders freely, its a heavy cost to pay. Choosing IFHE also means you either give up FB or BFT, and suddenly Johnston edges out as the superior fire-starter... ALL of these stats aside... Akizuki and Kitakaze are, by consensus, two of the best destroyers at their respective tiers. I think you'll agree to that. Wanting every new release to be equal or better than the best current thing is an attitude that leads to powercreep. We're all guilty of this: Demanding the next thing to be shiny, but is bitter when they outshine the old thing. Its a smart mindset financially, but detrimental to your enjoyment and the health of the game.

[@Aerroon]

I'm glad somebody disagrees! Maybe it is a skill/playstyle problem on my end, but I just don't see how I could make Johnston work effectively. The problem is that Johnston just doesn't fit a role. It's not a torpedo destroyer because of the long torpedo reload and it's going to get dumpstered by most gunboats she runs into. Burst fire is cool and all, but the shells on US DDs are so floaty that you can't hit DDs at the ranges they will actually engage you. The burst isn't bursty enough. It takes you 2.4 seconds to fire a burst. Other DDs will get to fire two salvos back at you in the time. I think Johnston would've been a pretty interesting DD back in the day when we basically only had the US, Japanese, and German DDs, but now I don't think so. It doesn't help that as T9 you're often taken into T10 and T11 battles, where ships like Gearing will just outperform you with guns.

[@IntelCorei-KProcessor-go2to]

@@Aerroon I think you have valid complaints about the ballistic performance of these shells. The issue with US destroyers is that they all sport the same artillery armament - 5in/38 guns found on every single US DD from tier 5 to 10 (Sherman being the sole exception). The same awful ballistic gets exponentially more noticeable as you move up the tiers due to the faster speeds of ships and increased engagement distance. Johnston is a same-tier off-shoot of Fletcher- Wargaming may have hesitated to modify the ballistic for the sake of consistency and for relative balance to Fletcher (nevermind the times they have violated both these rules) I had hoped Wargaming would give Johnston the San Diego treatment - her 5in/38 magically gets better shell arc - but they chose not to do this as shown. If this was done I think you would've enjoyed the ship significantly more.

[@Aerroon]

@@IntelCorei-KProcessor-go2to Yeah. It would've been nice. Sandy is pretty cool.

[@tronellefsen5519]

Nice video Aerroon. So when will this ship be available?

[@Aerroon]

Thanks. I'm not sure when it will be available, but it will be sold in the shop as part of a bundle and as naked.

[@ahtong1014]

The ship is not a Powerful. But, what makes her into a Powerful ship was her captain and crews!

[@Aerroon]

Very true!

[@crapmalls]

Not quite Jumbo huh?

[@Aerroon]

Not quite.

[@Kilo3Cav19K]

Im sorry, but lets talk about that Angle on Bow modification for the Enemy Ship versus your Angle On Bow. showing Penetration Chance in a colored percentage value. That MOD should be fucking illegal.

[@Aerroon]

It's not penetration chance, it's chance to ricochet. I think it's a great mod and should be part of the base game.

[@Kilo3Cav19K]

@@Aerroon I think that it still Offers Extra Information that shouldnt be apart of the game, because it makes shit unfair. As of right now since its NOT part of the base game; it should be a PP Slap for using it. because it offers Data and Information not provided to other players. Only you. its Unfair advantage. Its scummy until its implemented in the base game, but lets be real. WG isnt going to do that because they care more about shelling out Premiums and Tier 12 ships and not giving a shit about Quality of Life for their dwindling player base. but I digress; that mod should NOT be allowed unless its provided to each player. it gives you extra information unavailable to others which is the definition of a 3rd party cheat.

[@Kilo3Cav19K]

@@Aerroon And by the way "Its not penetration Chance, its chance to ricochet" which MIGHT as well be Chance to Penetrate, because If you dont Pen you Ricochet or you Shatter... Theres no in-between.

[@Aerroon]

The information IS available in the game by just looking at the ship. It just takes a lot more effort to recognize those angles than it does to look at the number. It's like if they didn't tell you how much damage you did numerically but just showed the enemy's HP bar going down. Yeah, it makes it easier, but the information already exists. Also, ricochets are only related to overmatch. Not penetrating only comes after you already don't ricochet.

[@Juliet1106Tango]

First

[@Aerroon]

Second!!