Jump to content
Server Maintenance - January 18, 6:00 CET (5:00 UTC) Read more... ×
Server Maintenance - January 18, 6:00 CET (5:00 UTC) Read more... ×
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
MrEvasion

Stalingrad is a Minotaur NERF!

119 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[OM]
Players
27 posts
2,558 battles
Minotaur is an excelent ship for spotting if Radar is used, like I do in rankend, and already highly situational since it can shoot only AP and cant really play on open water if there are BBs ore CAs that have crossfires. The problem however is the Stalingrad (Alaska and Kronshtadt as well but not that hard).
 
The Stalingrad is able to overmatch the Minotaurs 16mm armour and is able to citadel it from every angle. In the current saison of ranked games I am already facing a matchmaking with an average of 3 BBs per team and now there is also a Stalingrad in quite a lot of games which makes 4 BBs from the view of a Minotaur player.
But the Stalingrad is even worse than BBs since it has a 11,7km radar (10km Minotaur torps are unlikely to hit if Stalingrad does not push), far better dispersion of shells (compared to BBs) and a much better shell velocity (also compared to BBs).
 
In conclusion: The Stalingrad is there on TOP of the whole lot of BBs, gets low damage by Minotaur AP-guns if angled a little, can get hardly hitten by torps and can outright delete the Minotaur from every direction.
 
In my opinion the Minotaur is not longer a good ship for ranked or competitive in general with Stalingrad around. So i would like an armour upgrade to 22mm (edited). That way BBs can still do the same DMG to Minotaur and only the new 300mm gun-CAs can´t devastate an angled Minotaur.
 
 
Maybe i am missing something, so pls tell me your opinions regarding this matter!
  • Cool 5
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JR-IT]
Alpha Tester
656 posts
6,676 battles

don't worry, stalingrad is finetm , as 99% of the people who own them will tell you, the fact that is the ship that alone can counter any other ship in the game is a little useless detail

  • Cool 9
  • Funny 8
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
132 posts
5,878 battles

Minotaur was never a viable option for competitive gameplay do to her lack of armor/huge citadel and the radar situation in general. That Stalingrad is to strong, especially in gamemodes like ranked is the opinion of many people so far (idk if its true, i dont have the statistics). but buffing a single ship because a relatively small population of ships is around and power creep the other t10s isnt really the solution. it would be far better to nerf Stalingrad if she is overperforming. 

lg Maggie

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-FF-]
Players
609 posts
5,414 battles

Stalingrad is way too strong.

Look at the Poseidon cup last weekend.

Top teams were using an average of 3 to 4 Stalingrad per match. Ridiculous.

And to the people saying it has weaknesses and so on... then why are you using that ship in ranked battles then, if you think it's not the best.

Stop that BS and nerf that ship already.

Limiting clan battles to 1 BB per side but seeing top teams adding 4 Stalingrads to that BB is pure non sense. It is even worse when you realize players who own that ship are all good players, that makes the ship even more horrible for opposition, as they for example never do the mistake to show broadside unless you create yourself a crossfire situation.

That ship must take the nerf hammer, and quickly please.

  • Cool 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OM]
Players
27 posts
2,558 battles
Vor 12 Minuten, Flavio1997 sagte:

don't worry, stalingrad is finetm , as 99% of the people who own them will tell you, the fact that is the ship that alone can counter any other ship in the game is a little useless Detail

Other CAs still have theoption to angle and bounce those Shells. And there are also Alaska and Kronshtadt that should be able to do the same.

Vor 12 Minuten, PaxMaggie sagte:

Minotaur was never a viable option for competitive gameplay do to her lack of armor/huge citadel and the radar situation in general. That Stalingrad is to strong, especially in gamemodes like ranked is the opinion of many people so far (idk if its true, i dont have the statistics). but buffing a single ship because a relatively small population of ships is around and power creep the other t10s isnt really the solution. it would be far better to nerf Stalingrad if she is overperforming. 

lg Maggie

Minotaur is a very good option for competitive gameplay, since it can:

-has an big early on impact if you can radar the enemie DD before getting into his safe Position inside caps

-provide the spotting needed for focusfire especially on DDs

-defend caps with radar and torps

-beat a lot of CAs in 1vs 1 if they try to rush

The improvement from 16mm to 19mm of armour should only affect Henry, Stalingrad, Alaska and Kronshtadt.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
3,853 posts
5,006 battles
21 minutes ago, PaxMaggie said:

Minotaur was never a viable option for competitive gameplay do to her lack of armor/huge citadel and the radar situation in general. That Stalingrad is to strong, especially in gamemodes like ranked is the opinion of many people so far (idk if its true, i dont have the statistics). but buffing a single ship because a relatively small population of ships is around and power creep the other t10s isnt really the solution. it would be far better to nerf Stalingrad if she is overperforming. 

lg Maggie

I'd say, for CB ok, but for Ranked... Ranked is basically Random with 7v7 and a bit more incentive for people to not just "pley for phun". But overall, it's barely above random in "competitiveness".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-FF-]
Players
609 posts
5,414 battles

Problem is not minotaur overmatch.

Problem is the cumulative effect of big hp pool, radar, defAA, strong armor, ridiculous sigma, heavy alpha, improved pen angles...

Stalingrad needs an overall nerf. The ship has too many strengths.

At least Kron has bad accuracy, and Alaska armor scheme is not that good for now.

 

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JR-IT]
Alpha Tester
656 posts
6,676 battles
8 minutes ago, elblancogringo said:

Problem is not minotaur overmatch.

Problem is the cumulative effect of big hp pool, radar, defAA, strong armor, ridiculous sigma, heavy alpha, improved pen angles...

Stalingrad needs an overall nerf. The ship has too many strengths.

At least Kron has bad accuracy, and Alaska armor scheme is not that good for now.

 

you forgot the better arming times, that coupled with rail guns, sigma and overmatch makes the stalingrad the single best ship at deleting dd of the game

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
11 posts
7,095 battles

I don't think Minotaur was highly regarded by general public for ranked, but I did see some good plays last season.
Here's the thing tho: I understand that Stalingrad might be a direct counter but hey, that's the game.
Meta changes, counters come up and at some point you just have to play different ships.

Sadly our fav ships can't stay good forever T^T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
11 posts
7,095 battles
2 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Stalingrad is pretty much a nerf to everything.

image.png.a5a28110899997bec369e280f34070de.png

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,316 posts
5,751 battles
40 minutes ago, Tenshi said:

Here's the thing tho: I understand that Stalingrad might be a direct counter but hey, that's the game.
Meta changes, counters come up and at some point you just have to play different ships.

 

In a nutshell: thats the business model we are caught in. But to a degree you have an option: Dont play high tiers. I stopped and the game is much better now.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,203 posts
8,871 battles
3 hours ago, Flavio1997 said:

the fact that is the ship that alone can counter any other ship in the game is a little useless detail

 

If you had it, you would know that it is helpless against most angled targets (especially Des Moines will eat you alive) and very vulnerable if it gets too close before late game. 

 

1 hour ago, El2aZeR said:

Stalingrad is pretty much a nerf to everything.

 

And I bet you are nerfing it with Midway AP bombs whenever you can. 

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
7,382 posts
13,789 battles
8 minutes ago, __Helmut_Kohl__ said:

And I bet you are nerfing it with Midway AP bombs whenever you can. 

 

Nah, AA kills everything before it can drop with or without DFAA.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JR-IT]
Alpha Tester
656 posts
6,676 battles
2 hours ago, __Helmut_Kohl__ said:

 

If you had it, you would know that it is helpless against most angled targets (especially Des Moines will eat you alive) and very vulnerable if it gets too close before late game. 

 

ahahahah yes, the DM, yes.....NOPE, just NOPE, i have done 100 ranked games in dm in the last 5 days, in 2 of them i found myself in an 1vs 1 against a stalingrad, at a distance between 9 and 11 kms from them, both bows in both with the same % of hps. Both time the encounter has been ( once it was a PARAZ the other a WGP2W):

1st  stalingrad salvo ( ap): 7-10k of damge

2nd stalingrad salvo (ap): turret jammed, 3-5k damage , i repair the turret

3rd salvo (ap): turred jammed again, 5k salvo

4th(ap): turret destroyed and the other turred jammed 7k salvo

dead because my super uber duper dpm just literally melted away.

 

1vs 1, my montana bow in ( angled at 15-20° from him) at 8 kms, both almost full hp

t0 (seconds): 1st of his he salvo: 7-8k of damage and a fire, mine (ap) does  11k

t15: 2nd stalingrad salvo: 9k and a second fire, i repair ( meanwhile the fire of before did another 5 k)

t30: my 2nd salvo: 13k, his  he salvo does 8-9k ( no fire because my 28seconds dcp is still active)

i have already lost 30k, he lost 24....there is just a little problem:

t45: secs he fire again, 7 k salvo and fire, this is gonna stick (middle section, so 13k of free damage for him)

t60:i fire (still ap): 9k salvo, he fires: 2nd fire ( aft) but "only 4k salvo of he) ( but the other fire is another 13K)

so i lost 67k, he lost 33

i heal, he heal back

repeat this stuff for another 45-60 seconds:

i'm dead, he has appyly runned away with 25k of health left.

 

so, you say dds? ok: my gearing in tears of the desert:

got radared by a yueyang: he is 15kms away, i'm broadside to him:

1st salvo: 7k of damage

2nd salvo: i run away to try to save me, with speed boost: 12k of damage

and i'm happily left with 500hp ( killed by yueyang)

 

yeah....so much counterplay

i'm gonna end just with this thought:

everyone and their dog said that buffing the moskva armour to 50mm was retarded, and made that ship way more powerfull

stalingrad overpower the moskva on every single point ( so much so that there is a post of 5+ pages ON THIS SAME PAGE of this forum that says that stalingrad made moskva obsolete)

the same people that said that moskva is obsolete defend the stalingrad

logic 101 missing here i see

 

edit: my dm is a dpm focussed DM, so i run the reload mod, not the range one. SO i have a 12% dpm advantage over a normal dm

 

 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,203 posts
8,871 battles
5 hours ago, Flavio1997 said:

ahahahah yes, the DM, yes.....NOPE, just NOPE, i have done 100 ranked games in dm in the last 5 days, in 2 of them i found myself in an 1vs 1 against a stalingrad, at a distance between 9 and 11 kms from them, both bows in both with the same % of hps. Both time the encounter has been ( once it was a PARAZ the other a WGP2W):

1st  stalingrad salvo ( ap): 7-10k of damge

2nd stalingrad salvo (ap): turret jammed, 3-5k damage , i repair the turret

3rd salvo (ap): turred jammed again, 5k salvo

4th(ap): turret destroyed and the other turred jammed 7k salvo

dead because my super uber duper dpm just literally melted away.

 

1vs 1, my montana bow in ( angled at 15-20° from him) at 8 kms, both almost full hp

t0 (seconds): 1st of his he salvo: 7-8k of damage and a fire, mine (ap) does  11k

t15: 2nd stalingrad salvo: 9k and a second fire, i repair ( meanwhile the fire of before did another 5 k)

t30: my 2nd salvo: 13k, his  he salvo does 8-9k ( no fire because my 28seconds dcp is still active)

i have already lost 30k, he lost 24....there is just a little problem:

t45: secs he fire again, 7 k salvo and fire, this is gonna stick (middle section, so 13k of free damage for him)

t60:i fire (still ap): 9k salvo, he fires: 2nd fire ( aft) but "only 4k salvo of he) ( but the other fire is another 13K)

so i lost 67k, he lost 33

i heal, he heal back

repeat this stuff for another 45-60 seconds:

i'm dead, he has appyly runned away with 25k of health left.

 

so, you say dds? ok: my gearing in tears of the desert:

got radared by a yueyang: he is 15kms away, i'm broadside to him:

1st salvo: 7k of damage

2nd salvo: i run away to try to save me, with speed boost: 12k of damage

and i'm happily left with 500hp ( killed by yueyang)

 

yeah....so much counterplay

i'm gonna end just with this thought:

everyone and their dog said that buffing the moskva armour to 50mm was retarded, and made that ship way more powerfull

stalingrad overpower the moskva on every single point ( so much so that there is a post of 5+ pages ON THIS SAME PAGE of this forum that says that stalingrad made moskva obsolete)

the same people that said that moskva is obsolete defend the stalingrad

logic 101 missing here i see

 

edit: my dm is a dpm focussed DM, so i run the reload mod, not the range one. SO i have a 12% dpm advantage over a normal dm

 

Maybe you are not protecting your turrets with MAM1 and probably even PM in your DM? 

 

Because I had no chance 1v1 against a good DM. I even tried to kill his frontal guns, but it simply didn't work because of the slow reload. 

 

I switched from Stalingrad to Yamato in Ranked btw.

You can keep believing that Stalin is capable of everything, but to me it is simply a bigger Moskva that trades ROF and accuracy for better penetration and better AP angles. The weaknesses still remain and are even heightened. 

 

Fun fact: people were also calling Kronshtadt OP. Until they got a chance to play it themselves - then they got quiet... 

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SICK]
Weekend Tester
4,678 posts
9,234 battles
19 minutes ago, __Helmut_Kohl__ said:

Fun fact: people were also calling Kronshtadt OP. Until they got a chance to play it themselves - then they got quiet... 

 

Kronshtadt U.S.S.R. 165 787 57.01 % 0.82 69 315

Seattle U.S.A. 202 546 52.96 % 0.65 51 260 1 485 1.86 1.23

Saint-Louis France 641 833 51.76 % 0.66 57 338 1 420 1.28 1.26

 

 

 

PS: I'm giving up on the forum's auto content editing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MJK]
Players
208 posts
7,239 battles
9 hours ago, elblancogringo said:

Problem is not minotaur overmatch.

Problem is the cumulative effect of big hp pool, radar, defAA, strong armor, ridiculous sigma, heavy alpha, improved pen angles...

Stalingrad needs an overall nerf. The ship has too many strengths.

At least Kron has bad accuracy, and Alaska armor scheme is not that good for now.

 

Can they even nerf a premium?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,203 posts
8,871 battles
10 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

 

Kronshtadt U.S.S.R. 165 787 57.01 % 0.82 69 315

Seattle U.S.A. 202 546 52.96 % 0.65 51 260 1 485 1.86 1.23

Saint-Louis France 641 833 51.76 % 0.66 57 338 1 420 1.28 1.26

 

 

 

PS: I'm giving up on the forum's auto content editing.

 

Screenshot_20180906-080927_Chrome.jpg

 

The stats seem to be a bit better yes, but did you honestly play Kronshtadt and think that it is OP like some kind of Belfast? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,203 posts
8,871 battles
9 hours ago, elblancogringo said:

Stalingrad needs an overall nerf. The ship has too many strengths.

At least Kron has bad accuracy, and Alaska armor scheme is not that good for now.

 

Interesting how you are immediately defending the ship that you will have access to yourself. 

 

What if I told you that Alaska is also more capable of real cruiser-play, while

 

-the shells are a bit slower, but they are more accurate,

-they can shoot over islands and they will dive down straight into the citadel.

-Also the AP angles on Alaska are even better. 

 

And Alaska is a T9 ship, not TX. 

Still you seem to see no problem there...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SICK]
Weekend Tester
4,678 posts
9,234 battles
30 minutes ago, __Helmut_Kohl__ said:

 

Screenshot_20180906-080927_Chrome.jpg

 

The stats seem to be a bit better yes, but did you honestly play Kronshtadt and think that it is OP like some kind of Belfast? 

 

"the numbers from thousands of people seem to show that she's overperforming, but does she feel OP to you personally?" 

Really? 

 

Kron is overlooked because its Chad older brother the Stalingrad barged in to the game, and has been the center of conversation ever since. 

 

By the way, something doesn't have to be Belfast or Kamikaze levels of OP in order to be unbalanced. 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,203 posts
8,871 battles
14 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

"the numbers from thousands of people seem to show that she's overperforming, but does she feel OP to you personally?" 

Really? 

 

Kron is overlooked because its Chad older brother the Stalingrad barged in to the game, and has been the center of conversation ever since. 

 

By the way, something doesn't have to be Belfast or Kamikaze levels of OP in order to be unbalanced. 

 

Maybe it is not clear enough here, that there is a difference between a ship that is overperforming and a ship that is just OP. 

Overall, there is a large range of performance over all tiers - many ships are better than others, but only a few are really "OP". 

 

I never questioned that Stalin and Kron are good ships. They simply don't feel straight up "OP" to me. I only ever had that feeling with Belfast, Graf Zeppelin and maybe Kamikaze myself (not that sure about the last one, as it just profits from inexperienced BBs at low tiers).

I am open to your personal experience though, if you want to share it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×