Deamon93

Every heavy cruiser looks meh in comparison, like every light cruiser will look meh when the British Minotaur-class with ten 6" guns firing 20 rpm each shows up(the class was canceled after WWII and the gun was later used on Tiger).

Neat. Where have you found this? In any case i wonder why they have divided the primary armament(since all the turrets are the same) and the secondary armament(since alle the 150 mm mounts were the same). It's nice the fact that the mixed 105 mm mounts is present although i wonder how the difference will be represented ingame. Moreover some stats are strange(like the negative chance of starting a fire for AP shells) Bismarck has been present in the folders for quite some time so it's plausible she'll come soon(just like Aurora and Warspite before her).

I'm at New Orleans and i don't have problems with her, i don't know Baltimore but she got recently buffed

No it isn't new . Looking at the folders is a good thing, WG puts some "Easter eggs" in the folders sometimes . Most likely we'll see Bismarck sometime soon, although i'm not 100% sure(but since she's been in the folders for some time it's plausible).

Here is the Q&A topic taken from the Archor report of this Monday so who missed that may read. Have a nice day! Deamon93

You're welcome! Those are the questions which got answered, there may have been more questions. Anchor report goes on for only a hour and the Q&A part is relatively small so they can't answer to a lot of questions

You're welcome! HMS Vanguard as tier X is a bit excessive. Her guns were the old and trust worthy 15"/42, as armed as Warspite. She may stay at tier VIII, IX at best. The guns on Nelson were bad. In terms of firepower KGV was superior, after the guns/turrets got fixed

HMS Hood was built before the treaties(started in 1916 and completed in 1920 with the Washington Treaty signed in 1922).

There will be class balance eventually, still it should be relatively difficult for a cruiser to prevail against a BB on a 1 vs 1. Besides before this patch cruisers were stronger overall due to a higher DPM. What makes the game "unbalanced" is primarily the fact that battleships can tank a lot of shells without getting damaged now, if you mitigate that effect cruiser become stronger without actually buffing them. Yet again Zao was pretty much a Japanised DM originally and she was changed because she was massively OP. Suspension of disbelief can go far but not that far. Anyway as said above WG will balance them, give them time.

I considered hard capping BBs for starters(1/3 of the team max or something like that, i'll do the maths on it). Having mostly BBs on either side is kind of bad but i assume mostly related to the new line plus the fact that they can bounce a lot of shells. Still i'm sure WG will notice this from the stats and react accordingly.

Why should this topic be unnecessary? As it stands the US line doesn't grant any possible new content as far as cruisers are concerned, isn't this a good enough reason? This game is arcade, true, but if you place historical values magically you make JP cruisers worth it and not utterly garbage. Besides i haven't said "nerf Cleveland" because that's just retarded(she's already nerfed). I just said, multiple times, to move her up in a more suitable place without the nerfs. Des Moine is impossible to save since balancing her is pretty much impossible: either you buff to unrealistic levels other ships(and/or fictionally build them) or you remove her and place something which doesn't set a standard too high, making sure that WG won't create unrealistic counterparts. Still i'm thinking about ways to balance BBs but it will take time to develop the concept. Don't you think that making a cruiser able to sink a BB on her own is a bit excessive? Some time ago cruisers were monsters and BBs were hardly played: in this patch is the opposite because armor is there. I agree cruisers should be able to still do damage to BBs but not massive amounts. DDs are weak because avoiding torpedoes became a joke, i can't say about CVs because i don't play with them(i know that the US ones are a joke now though) and cruisers are now less useful than before. It takes some fine tuning, especially after the massive amount of content added into the game in 0.3.1. The number of BBs per side is also a problem but i think WG will address it, as said above. There are many ways to balance things.

Well i live in Turin so i have to travel for a while to reach La Spezia, that's why i haven't been there. I guess i'll stop by again when i can find a day off.

I went there but the second floor was closed .

Not yet, i assume i have to go to La Spezia and hope to find something useful. It would take some time since i'm busy lately

The topic is complex as it is already, throwing many more things into the mix would make the whole discussion a bit confusing. Anyway i'm playing cruisers as well and i don't see them weak. In terms of firepower they are weaker than a BB so in a 1 vs 1 they suffer a lot but in groups and/or in support of friendly BBs they work just fine. What doesn't make sense? Why do you say that moving up and buffing Cleveland is making her rubbish? In my opinion she should get 8 rpm stock(the same of Brooklyn) and 10 rpm(her original RoF) when upgraded but she has to be at tier VIII to compensate, otherwise she would roflstomped Aoba(which is already buffed compared to historical). Cruisers can be strong against BBs but they need to be in group and/or you need to play smart. If you buff cruisers so the ship alone can compete for you is bad. Technically they are more complex than that. Compared to the Japanese cruisers the CAs have(considering historical values): -One less gun for most of them(only Pensacola has an equal amount of guns) -The RoF is the same(around 4 rpm) -The weight of the shell is inferior in all cases(excluding the super heavy shells) -The amount of bursting charge is inferior in AP while superior in HE -The armament layout in the US cruisers is overall better -They have better protection in most cases The statistics of the guns are taken from navweaps.com So, as you can see, it's more complicated than "US cruisers are stronger in terms of guns". They are stronger in some aspects while weaker in others and this without considering the torpedoes. The torpedoes are a nice addition to the JP cruisers but let's just consider guns alone for the moment since the torpedoes do give problems(since they don't have the ones they had historically and even then they can't dish out damage consistently). That's why i don't want DM since there's no other ship which can match her. Still regarding making Zao stronger it's an option to buff the damage of AP shells for all JP cruisers compared to the US ones plus giving her the original torpedoes. If that doesn't suffice we can think of something else. Buffing her stats would work right now but it can't work forever with more ships getting added into the game. Destroyers =/= cruisers. The JP cruisers have bad firing arcs, are larger, are slower and aren't as maneuverable. With only 8 km range you have to close in to at least 5/6 km to make sure you can hit something(if you fire from maximum range the target may well exit the radius without risking anything) That's complicated to achieve with a heavy cruiser.

I don't want to nerf Cleveland. What i want is to move her up and give her the historical RoF and AA. In any case, as said multiple time, the discussion is focused on cruisers only, BBs will require balance. In any case let's focus on one aspect, shall we?

So you think it's fine avoiding all but one torpedo from pretty much point blank range. The only way to torp something is to do that when the BB player is distracted/unaware of the torpedoes, otherwise it's pretty much impossible(i play with DDs as well). Anyway the changes on the US lines are dictated by the fact that without such changes is pointless to make a cruiser line for the coming nations. Besides i agree the JP cruisers need their Type 93s back making the torpedoes a bit more viable than they are now. At that time she was OP as hell. With the proper modifications you were able to shoot without being spotted. Besides if you put a similar design to Zao in the US line you make her more viable since they would have similar firepower(4x3 8" guns in both cases) but the US counterpart will be more protected and Zao would have the torpedoes to compensate.

Swapping Cleveland and Pensacola would mess up the fine even further since it won't solve all the issues of Cleveland(since there would be just one tier to fit every CL developed between Omaha and Cleveland) plus it would create issues with Pensacola(now that she finally has her historical counterpart at her side at tier VII, although WG forgot to remove the buffs). Des Moine doesn't have to compete with battleships because if every class has to be buffed to match BBs then they can just remove them and keep BBs only. Besides every cruiser in a 1 vs 1 situation against a BB is doomed and has to be that way, otherwise why bothering with BBs? Fuso is OP but we are talking about cruiser vs cruiser here, leave Fuso aside. Fuso is so OP that she makes Nagato look silly. Both have the same syndrome. I haven't noticed that though when i played with her. Besides with protection coming to play she already got an edge over her peers at lower tiers since, compared to them, she is better protected. Besides if you want to be picky New Orleans and Baltimore should have exactly the same DPM since they have exactly the same RoF(historically). Pensacola should have a higher DPM thanks to the one additional gun but compared to her is made of paper so in a 1 vs 1 the winner is easy to pick. Cleveland should have a higher potential DPM but to penetrate Baltimore would be more difficult so in a 1 vs 1 from mid/long range Baltimore would have the edge. Torpedoes are situational while guns aren't. The range on cruisers is quite low(8 km) and the fire arcs are crazy bad hence you can't rely on them to dish out damage consistently. Some days ago i avoided torpedo salvoes from two Mogamis while playing on my Amagi without getting hit once, i just paid attention to them and saw them throwing them. BBs aren't that balanced either so they will need some love as well. As example i pretty much avoided a torpedo volley from 3 km in Wyoming(got hit by a single torp), isn't that a bit excessive in your opinion? Besides Japan already had a DM of their own(Senjo/Zao as originally implemented), she didn't survive. BBs have to be balanced a bit, that's a fact and buffing cruisers to match them isn't exactly ideal either.

Baltimore wasn't underpowered. If you compared her to Ibuki she was fine, compared to Des Moine was hopelessly outclassed. That's not surprising though when there's a 150% increase in firepower while the rest is pretty much the same. The citadel on DM is a gamey balancing effect, just like castrating Cleveland. Regarding torpedoes you need to be closer than 8 km to make them work and an experienced player can see the exact moment when you fire torpedoes and avoid them istantly. Torpedoes are a nice thing but they don't level the field when there's a huge disparity in terms of raw firepower. Cleveland would be just moved and brought closer to her historical self, is that bad? Besides i'm well aware it won't happen anytime soon that's why i said this Still it's a different case compared to the KV-1S. The KV-1S made possible making other HT lines, Cleveland doesn't. You can't make a CL line ever with her at tier VI immediately above Omaha because most CL developed by most of the nations involved will get stuck between tier V and tier VI. Considering some nations have to rely on CLs to make up for the line you just deny them a class because it would be pointless to work on cruisers if the US line stays as it is. Moving and buffing Cleveland to tier VIII isn't exactly making her a BB food. Regarding DM getting replaced she would just be easier for all the high tier cruisers, hence "buffing" Zao(and to some extent Ibuki) indirectly. In any case personally i find more critical the rework on the US line as far as priority is concerned since it has to be massively modified to grant a future to other lines(and to make the IJN line more viable). Buffing Japanese cruisers would be a temporary solution at best.

From Bl4ckh0g which is ROed at the moment: So this is about the possible replacements of the Des Moines and the Cleveland in slightly greater detail. The reason why we need these ships is already said by Deamon so I'm going to assume everyone knows that. First off, We have the Cleveland. Possible replacement: Oakland subclass from the Atlanta class light cruisers. The Oakland group is the second half of the Atlanta class and It features some changes to the original design. The two aft side turrets were removed and the AA suite got better. The Atlanta class featured 16 x 5"/38 guns in 8 turrets and an AA consisting of 16 x 1.1" and 6 x 20 mm Oerlikon guns. The Oakland had 12 x 5"/38 guns in 6 turrets and featured an AA suite consisting of 8 x 40 mm Bofors and 16 x 20 mm Oerlikon guns. (this could be used as stock/upgraded hull) ( There is an other possible way as well, which would put the Atlanta in tier 6 and her place as a premium would be taken by the Juneau class( 12 x 5"/38 with better AA and without torpedo tubes)) [ http://www.the-bluep...ght-cruiser.gif ] [ ] Why is the Oakland a better tier 6 than the Cleveland? The reason is simple. While the Oakland was launched in 1942, her overall firepower is not that great to justify a higher tier spot. The Atlanta is a tier 7 premium, we know that the ship is capable of fighting in tier 7 as a premium, thus We can safely assume that the Oakland would be suitable as a tier 6, because of her reduced firepower. Another reason is that the Oakland can be balanced much more easily than the Cleveland. She does not have super-heavy AP shells and heavy cruiser like protection, and her guns RoF can vary between 12-22 RPM. The 5"/38 guns have enough punching power to being able to handle light cruiser armor such as the Aoba's, while still not being as strong to completely invalidate her armor protection in long range as the Cleveland's 6"/47 guns do. The torpedo tubes are more useful in tier 6 battles as well, than they are in tier 7. Overall the Oakland subclass would be sufficient for tier 6, They would excel in DD hunting as a CL should and they could take on ships like the Aoba from less than 6,7 km, So the Aoba can enjoy her armor protection from greater distances. This change would also invalidate the Aoba's over-buffed state compared to her real life performance (5,5 RoF) Next up is the Des Moines. the Monster. As Deamon said this ship screws up the tier 9 and 10 balance of all nations and She. has. to. go.(or seriously nerfed/re-balanced) There are 3 possible replacements for her. The first two is a linked to the development of the Des Moines class. These are the "Super-Baltimore" designs. Both ships feature a main armament consisting of 12 x 8" guns and feature a heavier armor protection than the Baltimore(I'm guessing Zao level) The first of these designs are the biggest one. The Scheme CA-C [ http://shipscribe.com/styles/S-511/images/s-file/s511-29.jpg ] This ship's standard displacement is 20,000 tons, Her length is 770 ft ( 234 m), her beam is 77 ft (23 m) This ship is capable of 35 knots speed. The overall problem with this design is the size of the ship. This ship is way bigger than a North Carolina class battleship and her turning circle is going to be big. Her speed is also considerably faster than the Zao's. Next one is the Scheme CA-B [ http://shipscribe.com/styles/S-511/images/s-file/s511-25.jpg ] This ship's standard displacement is 17,000 tons and She is the smallest one of the three. The ship is 690 ft long ( 210 m ) and her beam is 77 ft ( 23 m) meaning she would have the tightest turn radius among these designs, She would also have a tighter turn radius than the Baltimore. The ship's speed is 33 knots. The final one is a preliminary design about the Alaska class large cruisers. It is quite similar with the CA-B design. This one is called the Scheme 4-A design. [ http://shipscribe.com/styles/S-511/images/s-file/s511-16.jpg ] The ship features a secondary armament of 6 x 2 5"/38 guns. Her standard displacement is 17,500 tons. The ship is 710 ft ( 216 m) long and her beam is 74,5 ft ( 22,7 m ) This would mean the ship has similar turning characteristics than the Baltimore. The ship is capable of 33 knots speed. There is an interesting feature about this one design. That is the fact that theoretically you could change the main armament to 6 x 12"/50 guns in 3 turrets. Making her more of a battlecruiser than a normal cruiser. Certainly an interesting thought to play with. Now all three of these ships would have around the same secondary armament and probably quite similar AA and protection. You could possibly change the secondaries to the 5"/54 and maybe add the 3" AAA guns on the Des Moines as well. Overall these ships would fit better in the tier 10 spot because of their similarities of the already existing Zao, and the fact that whey would not screw up all the other nations tier 10 cruisers. These ships would possibly have better AA and better survivability than the Zao while the Zao would have torpedoes. Their firepower would be quite similar as well. Assuming Wg would make these changes the USN cruiser tree would look like this from tier 6: Oakland->Pensacola->New Orleans-> Baltimore->Super-Baltimore/Alaska design study \->Brooklyn---->Cleveland---->Worcester-/ Now, Some USN fans might not like these changes since two of the most over overpowered ships in the game would no longer be overpowered(or existing), but I think that quite a number of IJN lovers would gladly welcome these changes as this would make their ship more appealing and suitable(Aoba and Zao) Sources: http://shipscribe.com/styles/S-511/albums/s511-cr.htm

That nerf would be too excessive just to make her fit at that tier. Besides that nerf would just solve the immediate problem of Cleveland being strong at tier VI but there would be other problems like over nerfing a ship to make her fit, making the fact that she is misplaced even more evident. Still i think it's fine as it is.

They would have a different role though, just like Atlanta. Still it's just an idea of mine, it may or may not happened. Yeah Pensacola isn't forgiving but if you use her properly she is quite rewarding. It makes sense since she has reasonably good guns but her protection is garbage.

In theory the CL line could go up to tier IX with Worchester(or at least i assume that tier for her). Anyway i agree, would be nice to have CLs up to the higher tiers instead of CAs alone. The Juneau was an improvement of the Atlanta-class so i hardly see her a tier lower with all the upgrades. Still as far as i know the US could make a line of cruisers armed with 5" guns ending up at the high tiers with the 5"/54(the gun Montana has as secondary armament). Still my knowledge on those designs is limited, i know that they exist.

As she is right now she isn't that OP, the problem is that to make her feel balanced WG nerfed her and buffed Aoba compared to historical stats. The changes are noticeable and, while they can work for now, they can't work forever when more and more cruiser lines get added.