Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
HMS_Kilinowski

USS Buffalo guide

30 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[THESO]
Players
1,267 posts
16,507 battles

With USS Buffalo becoming the new Tier 9 cruiser for the USN-CA-branch, I wanted to start collecting impressions and recommendations how to equip and play her.

I don't have anything to say so I ask some inital questions:

 

How should players equip their Buffalo? Do we need rudder shift or range or concealment or will the turrets struggle to keep up while kiting?

What captain skills are mandatory, nice to have or useless?

What playstyle will work and where does Buffalo suck?

In what order should the modules be upgraded?

 

I know all these questions will be answered in the Wiki. But the Wiki sometimes is not telling the full story and I rather hear some insights from you.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
1,267 posts
16,507 battles

Thank you for the link. That voice sounds a bit Flamu-ish. Ah, I see, it is Flamu. For all readers, they outfitting part of the video starts at 16:08.

His build makes a lot of sense to me, especially as you don't use BFT but SI and DE. It is also viable for Des Moines, if Buffalo is not the player's destination. It weakens your AA capabilities a bit. But then again with AFT, CV players will be aware of your AA before getting in the kill zone and rather avoid you.

 

Still does not mean Flamu must have the final word, so please feel free to share your experiences and thoughts on equipping Buffalo playstyle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BUSHI]
Players
352 posts
3,883 battles

Just 1 game so far, but the awkward gun reload makes me go for the reload module. The range 15.6km is limiting since you can't always park to islands. Need more games under my belt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[STARS]
[STARS]
Beta Tester
156 posts
16,878 battles

I try to play it like the old Baltimore. Thus close to caps and in range of the reds.

I use the reload module, because if I am firing at long range targets I am not supporting my team with my def. AA or radar. 

But the downside is that you will have hard time getting all four turrets on target. It is not as nimble as the new Cleveland at tier 8, which allows you to kite and spam HE at longer ranges.

 

The consumables I use are:

- def. AA. Even if there aren't cv's around, it still handy to shoot down scoutplanes. And therefore maximizing your stealth.

- Radar, this is a no brainer. Especially nice if you that module dropped from a supercontainer, surveillance radar modification 1 (it gives you an action time of 49sec. and 120secs reload, of course with the premium version)

 

I did just one battle with the Buffalo and I equipped it with a John Doe 13pts. captain (yeah yeah I know, he was participating in the mothball fleet) . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-I-N-]
Weekend Tester
14,424 posts
6,548 battles

Hey guys :Smile_honoring:

 

After playing 3 matches in the Buffalo I have some issues with her HC-AP. In the Des Moines I punish any CL/CA or BB that gives any broadside to me. In the Buffalo there is something different.

 

During my first match I had a Minotaur passing at 11Km and trying to torp me. I was able to shot 3 full boradsides and in the end I had 22k damage and only 1 citadel. Many shots scattered and half of them were Overpens. In the Des Moines I would have deleted the Minotaur within 3 or 4 salvos.

After that I played Des Moines and had no issues.

 

Yesterday I played 2 matches and it was the same thing- broadside BBs are relatively save against my upper belt/superstructure shots (I have to load HE to do consistant damage) and cruisers won´t be punished as I expect it in the same way as with Des Moines!

 

I guess there is something wrong with the normalization or perhaps the penetration of the HC-AP rounds. At the moment the Buffalo AP behave like the US 4600 AP with a bit more alpha damage.

 

Did anybody notice something similar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NUKED]
Players
472 posts
12,878 battles
On 27.5.2018 at 12:28 AM, HMS_Kilinowski said:

With USS Buffalo becoming the new Tier 9 cruiser for the USN-CA-branch, I wanted to start collecting impressions and recommendations how to equip and play her.

 

I understand your request but for something like this WG has some peasants aka CC. ;) Hard truth, sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
1,267 posts
16,507 battles
On 31.5.2018 at 2:07 PM, CuddlyPanda said:

Just 1 game so far, but the awkward gun reload makes me go for the reload module.

I took the reload mod, too. Not so much due to annoyance with reload, but the guns seem to keep up with my rudder, so I can afford the longer turret traverse.

5 hours ago, Walther_K_Nehring said:

Did anybody notice something similar?

Can't say, I did. Got a nice and tight spread so far and even without the aiming system mod.

In general I read something that dispersion is higher for "misses". Maybe WG wanted beginners to get at least some hits, even when their aiming was off. That does not mean you are a beginner or your aiming is off. I think it depends on your aiming being close to the "aimbot". So maybe if you take hard turns into consideration or otherwise anticipate your opponents movement, the server thinks your salvo is not on target and gives you the wider spread, actually punishing you for correctly predicting your opponents moves. Just a theory, tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-I-N-]
Weekend Tester
14,424 posts
6,548 battles

My mainproblem is the underperforming AP not the aim. My hit percentage on Buffalo is 37% so far. Hits on a Minotaur´s belt at 10-11Km should be citadels or overpens (in case the pen is too much) and no scatters! That´s the point. There is a feeling difference between the Des Moines AP and the Buffalo AP.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,842 posts
4,806 battles
18 minutes ago, Walther_K_Nehring said:

My mainproblem is the underperforming AP not the aim. My hit percentage on Buffalo is 37% so far. Hits on a Minotaur´s belt at 10-11Km should be citadels or overpens (in case the pen is too much) and no scatters! That´s the point. There is a feeling difference between the Des Moines AP and the Buffalo AP.

 

There's no difference in theory, I call observation bias or fluke circumstances. I only took Buffalo out a couple of times but AP felt like the US AP should.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
1,267 posts
16,507 battles
11 minutes ago, Walther_K_Nehring said:

My mainproblem is the underperforming AP not the aim. My hit percentage on Buffalo is 37% so far. Hits on a Minotaur´s belt at 10-11Km should be citadels or overpens (in case the pen is too much) and no scatters! That´s the point. There is a feeling difference between the Des Moines AP and the Buffalo AP.

I don't have Des Moines, so I cannot compare both. Have you tried to replicate your observations in the training room? Just put a few stationary Minotaurs on a small map in standard mode and see how the Buffalo's AP hits and then try the same approach, same angles same distance with the Des Moines. If there is an obvious difference you will not only confirm it, but also be able to isolate it to certain conditions that you cannot be aware while in a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-I-N-]
Weekend Tester
14,424 posts
6,548 battles
10 hours ago, HMS_Kilinowski said:

I don't have Des Moines, so I cannot compare both. Have you tried to replicate your observations in the training room? Just put a few stationary Minotaurs on a small map in standard mode and see how the Buffalo's AP hits and then try the same approach, same angles same distance with the Des Moines. If there is an obvious difference you will not only confirm it, but also be able to isolate it to certain conditions that you cannot be aware while in a game.

 

Should be the best I can do. Anything else is speculation. :Smile_sceptic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BATES]
Alpha Tester
3,077 posts
12,078 battles

Is this meant to be a heavy cruiser? I am being citadelled constantly from the front and rear by long ranged shots. The Buffallo seems to be extremely squishy

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,139 posts
11,239 battles
8 hours ago, Shaka_D said:

Is this meant to be a heavy cruiser? I am being citadelled constantly from the front and rear by long ranged shots. The Buffallo seems to be extremely squishy

 

It is squishy and does get citadelled constantly. It's defo not a Des. 

 

But I love those heavy hitting guns and typical US cruiser versatility.   I love it overall and my go to tier 9 cruiser, but it has faults and range is another one of them. 

Edited by Redcap375

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BUSHI]
Players
352 posts
3,883 battles
On 6/4/2018 at 7:36 PM, HMS_Kilinowski said:

I took the reload mod, too. Not so much due to annoyance with reload, but the guns seem to keep up with my rudder, so I can afford the longer turret traverse.

Guns do behave even with the longer turret traverse, but something about this ships is not clicking for me. Maybe because I played her during patch day (and post patch +1), so the teams were less than stellar. I have given the Buffalo a bit of a break. In the spoiler are my tier 9 CA/CL stats. The Buffalo is in line with my damage output, but that WR man... Made almost no progress to the Des. 

Spoiler

T9.thumb.PNG.fc7383f40a3bb8adcad862579ed30ba5.PNG

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,842 posts
4,806 battles
1 hour ago, Redcap375 said:

 

It is squishy and does get citadelled constantly. It's defo not a Des. 

 

Were you not looking at what I was tanking last night? :Smile_teethhappy:

 

I think Buffalo is as tanky as Baltimore (old or new, I don't think that changed). The issue is the temptation to use all guns. That's why I run rudder shift, so that I can swing around fast enough to use the rear guns then angle to safety before the return fire comes in. She does eat a lot of damage even at angles where the rear guns can't fire, but bow in she's as tanky as you expect. Shouldn't be taking bow citadels except from Yamato obviously.

 

But the damage... Oh wow!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DDGR]
Players
38 posts
7,682 battles

after some 10 games or so, i simply love this ship!

Compared to my last tier IX cl Neptune (which i sold due to frustration of being deleted too soon and too often), this ship is tanky and playable as hell. Have done over 200k damage yesterday in one random, something i rarely accomplished in any other ship.

 

guns are really awesome and if you are careful with positioning/flanking and use of your radar you can wreak havoc on any enemy ship in your range - bbs, cruisers or dds. Nobody is safe.

 

This ship is a refreshment for me after Neptune disappointment, but the lessons learned from Neptune are very useful with this ship as well if you play it well (not as long range HE spammer.

for that purpose  I have full low detection build and reload mod for guns 

 

btw i have doubted this ship vs the Roon which i intended to buy instead but after i gave 3 citaleds to one in a single salvo (and we all know how KM ships are hard to citadel), i beleive the decision to go for Buffalo was the right one. It certainly feels that way....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
1,267 posts
16,507 battles
12 hours ago, CuddlyPanda said:

Guns do behave even with the longer turret traverse, but something about this ships is not clicking for me. Maybe because I played her during patch day (and post patch +1), so the teams were less than stellar. I have given the Buffalo a bit of a break. In the spoiler are my tier 9 CA/CL stats. The Buffalo is in line with my damage output, but that WR man... Made almost no progress to the Des. 

  Hide contents

T9.thumb.PNG.fc7383f40a3bb8adcad862579ed30ba5.PNG

 

 

I would say, patch day has an enormous influence on WR for one. And if I look at your stats, it does not look hopeless. Buffalo is a support ship. I'd say it performs good, when the team performs. If you use your consumables wisely and coordinate with your team, your team should do some damage. And then you are a decent CA, you can spam HE at BBs, fire AP at the occasional broadside cruiser, while you can bow tank enough to not be seen as easy prey. The rest depends on the situation. You can play a little further back, where dispersion and shell flying time favour you, or you can go into caps and defend them with radar or flank weakened ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
1,267 posts
16,507 battles

Had some games in Buffalo yesterday. It is still stock and I am struggling to keep up in T10. How could it possibly be competitive with 14.1 km stock range and 15.6 km upgraded? From what I experienced, Buffalo's flaw is the mix of flat trajectories, slow rudder shift and a large turning circle. She has problems to dodge salvos as the pre-split T7-Pensacola and T8-New Orleans did so well. When you are kiting away you want to give a small profile to shoot at. So your tactics depend on your ship being able to bait a salvo, make a quick zig-zag and put your ship on a parallel course, maybe 100m to the side of your original course, so ideally the entire salvo misses. Even with the hull-upgrade and steering gears mod 2 you got 9s rudder shift and 900m turning circle, which is too sluggish to perform an effective dodge within the usual 10-12s of flying time. It is even hard to use islands to cover your turns, as the turning radius is so large that your ship is still giving broaside as you leave the cover of the island.

So don't be caught in the open. But then again the trajecory is so flat, that you have a hard time finding flat islands to hide behind. And even if you do, you attend the "annual meeting of cruisers hiding behind islands and all going for the same one, colliding with and blocking each other and providing a nice torp magnet".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,842 posts
4,806 battles

I basically took one look at this ship and knew it was going to be one where I'd be stacking rudder shift modules. With 5.5s rudder the agility is manageable. She's tanky enough that you don't need to full dodge all salvos, just take any hits on the belt when angled. Thing is, it plays more like a shorter ranged IJN cruiser than a typical USN one. You don't stop, you don't hide behind islands and creep back and forth, you stay full speed and you wiggle, all guns, fire, angle in (or away if kiting), repeat. You plan your approaches, exits and ambushes around islands but you move fluidly between these points. It's not harder work than old Baltimore was, just without the lazy solution of bow tanking. 12km concealment is workable as this is basically your ideal engagement range anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DDGR]
Players
38 posts
7,682 battles

did anyway try the long range / full rudder shift build?

I am running the full concealment / rate of fire mod build and are having some decent success on mid/short range engagements. curious how it would work at long ranges

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,842 posts
4,806 battles
7 hours ago, Muki321 said:

did anyway try the long range / full rudder shift build?

I am running the full concealment / rate of fire mod build and are having some decent success on mid/short range engagements. curious how it would work at long ranges

 

I run reload rudder shift, I don't feel the need to extend the range. I don't think I would hit anything at the extended range either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
1,267 posts
16,507 battles

I also went with the concealment/rof-build.

 

A rudder shift/long range build might work in terms of survival. I got this idea in my head, that if you kite at long range and don't increase dispersion on enemy shells, you might effectively dodge a rather tight salvo, whereas you will often be hit by an outlier in medium distance. But that is pure theory.

 

Practically I see the dodgy long range build in conflict with the role of the Buffalo. As a radar cruiser you cannot stay in the back row. You have to help your team contesting caps. So you need to get close to DDs. Without concealment they see you coming long before you get into radar range. Now what happens is not that the DD flees cause he feels threatened, but he calls in help and marks you as a target and you are focussed down. In mid tiers the priority is on eliminating DDs when you see them. In higher tiers they want to remove the radar cruisers first to give some freedom of action to their DDs, so radar cruisers are an inviting target. And without concealment you will be spotted by some DD and get AP salvos from all over the map and many different angles.

 

So I think the chance to at least sneak near to radar range for that DD that keeps your entire team spotted and put him down quickly, gives your team the tactical advantage and allows you to disengage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DDGR]
Players
38 posts
7,682 battles

any recommendations for captain build?

I have taken PT, EM, SI and CE

have 2 points left and not sure where to put them in. Maybe Adrenaline rush would make sense....don't want to build up an AA platform

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×