Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Leo_Apollo11

"April WhiteMouse" posted her early "Alaska" thoughts...

62 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
3,398 posts
9,943 battles

Hi all,

 

"April White Mouse" @LittleWhiteMouse posted her early "Alaska" thoughts...

 

http://shipcomrade.com/?p=1438

 

Quote

I don’t always have time to write one of these, but this is going to serve as a quick preview of the upcoming tier 9 American “Large Cruiser” Alaska.  Seriously, America, you’re cute with how desperate you are to differentiate yourself from your roots.  You can call it a “Battlecruiser” without bending knee to the throne.  No one will think less of you.  Wargaming was very kind to provide me with a preview of version of this ship and she is subject to change.

 

Alaska is highly anticipated.  I have quickly fallen in love with her early game play.  I cannot stress this enough:  The initial test iteration of USS Alaska is perfect.

 

It took less than three games to reach this conclusion (though playing more only further confirmed it).  Somehow Wargaming had stumbled upon the perfect balance of PROs and CONs that made this ship so appealing in my eyes.  Unlike the brainless gunnery of the Soviet Kronshtadt and Stalingrad battlecruisers, Alaska’s weapons reward careful aim and target selection.  She cannot spam AP shells willy-nilly and hoover up 150,000+ damage.  You have to pick your targets.  What’s more you have to pick the correct ammunition and even then you have to aim carefully.

 

Tick all of these boxes and Alaska will treat you right.  The amount of damage she can stack is amazing and what’s more, it feels right and earned.  Use and abuse her autobounce bonuses and aim at the right parts of ships to unlock your prize.  Know what ships you can bounce off your 27mm bow and which ones you have to bait into your angled belt.  Pick and choose the right consumables to match your play style.  Know the moment when you have to transition from a second line gunship to leading the charge to provide cover for your allies.

 

This does mean there’s a bit of a skill wall.  Like I said, this isn’t a CTRL + ALT + WIN ship.  Alaska isn’t like Belfast, Graf Zeppelin or Fujin.  She doesn’t immediately force her opponents to play differently because she ended up on the enemy roster.  Her current build encourages a light touch, a flexible play style and rewards it in spades.

 

It’s not the end of the world if Wargaming does buff (or significantly change) Alaska.  It will be a shame, though.  Buffing Alaska will only further the influx of powercreep.  It will be taking a new and novel vessel and make it into something gaudy.  Alaska, performance wise, will become the meta-defining, must-have, flavour of the month.  You know the sort — baked in with the imperative of “What are you waiting for?  LIMITED TIME ONLY!”  Buy more doubloons to preemptively convert into free-XP to get her as soon as you can so you too can be ahead of the curve!

 

Ugh.

 

Alaska has so much going for it right now.  Like Duke of York before her, it’s quite likely that she’s going to pay for a more “accessible” redesign with everything that has made me love her at this early stage.  It’s a shame that the community may lose access to one of the most interesting premiums so far to come across my desk this year.  This is admittedly one of the risks of playtesting pre-release vessels.  It’s too easy to fall in love.  It’s too easy to be discouraged when you see something changed that was once worth getting excited over.

 

We’ll see what the future brings.

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

  • Cool 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Beta Tester, Players
1,734 posts
4,875 battles

Good, thank you for this. the more reviews, the better :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TSCC]
Players
1,684 posts
19,117 battles

Well every CC that I'm watching consider Alaska a good ship, only difference is that some of them thinks that she require some little tweaks while other think that she is perfect in the current state. Hope that WG will release her soon for either FXP or Coal or both (as Musashi).

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
161 posts
1,549 battles
18 minutes ago, thiextar said:

So wargaming managed to balance something? Great 

Well she's a real, or was a real USN ship. Of cause she is balanced :cat_cool:

But I digress she looks beautiful and fine ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BONI]
Players
1,230 posts
10,900 battles

I honestly don't see how Kron is ''brainless'' while Alaska will be this unicum-friendly ship that rewards expert aim.  It's not like Kron has the magic AP and Alaska doesn't, it's the opposite. Kron's 305mm does very poorly vs. angled cruisers ('cept UK), let alone BBs. Sounds like Alaska will have an easier time with those, and it's a passive bonus. Which likely means less ammo-switching for Alaska. Load AP at match start. Angled or unangled cruiser? Stick to AP. Unangled BB? AP but aim for upper plate. Angled BB? Switch to HE. Or is there more to it?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,188 posts
3,836 battles
1 hour ago, fumtu said:

Well every CC that I'm watching consider Alaska a good ship, 

Exept Flamu. He is not to happy about this ship. Mostly because of bad ruddershift and poor concealment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Beta Tester, Players
1,734 posts
4,875 battles
30 minutes ago, MoveZig said:

I honestly don't see how Kron is ''brainless'' while Alaska will be this unicum-friendly ship that rewards expert aim.  It's not like Kron has the magic AP and Alaska doesn't, it's the opposite. Kron's 305mm does very poorly vs. angled cruisers ('cept UK), let alone BBs. Sounds like Alaska will have an easier time with those, and it's a passive bonus. Which likely means less ammo-switching for Alaska. Load AP at match start. Angled or unangled cruiser? Stick to AP. Unangled BB? AP but aim for upper plate. Angled BB? Switch to HE. Or is there more to it?

Well, look at the penetration values themselves, friendo. The penetration angles are better, but if you need to go through some plating, Kron is the ship to go to.
image.thumb.png.bba2c6884fd66685bceabbd7ede11cef.png

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
1,635 posts
3,742 battles
3 minutes ago, Hades_warrior said:

Exept Flamu. He is not to happy about this ship. Mostly because of bad ruddershift and poor concealment.

I gotta say, I see his point with that, the ship could do with some better rudder shift at the least. Considering the awful traverse angles 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Beta Tester, Players
1,734 posts
4,875 battles

Personally I think I would much rather spend the Free XP on Kronshtad. Which doesn't mean the Alaska is bad. The Kron is just far superior.

Do any of you guy consider Alaska generally superior to Kron btw?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
1,635 posts
3,742 battles
2 minutes ago, Blixies said:

Personally I think I would much rather spend the Free XP on Kronshtad. Which doesn't mean the Alaska is bad. The Kron is just far superior.

Do any of you guy consider Alaska generally superior to Kron btw?

Well, if it was superior to kron, it would be super op, and keep the power creep going. 

 

If it was equal to kron it would be op. 

 

Better to let the mistake die in the past than to keep feeding it(powercreep) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,316 posts
2,517 battles
9 minutes ago, Hades_warrior said:

Exept Flamu. He is not to happy about this ship. Mostly because of bad ruddershift and poor concealment.

As I understood Flamu from that video, he doesn't think the ship is "bad", as such - only boring.

Although that in itself may be reason to consider her bad, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
5,469 posts
9,939 battles

If Alaska turns out to be dog crap and redundant (I can't see that), I will just use all that fxp to unlock multiple t10s, so it's win-win.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,829 posts
16,673 battles
27 minutes ago, Blixies said:

Well, look at the penetration values themselves, friendo. The penetration angles are better, but if you need to go through some plating, Kron is the ship to go to.
image.thumb.png.bba2c6884fd66685bceabbd7ede11cef.png

in my book thats a plus for the alaska
 

cause its not fun shooting at a desmo @10km and overpenning the citadel in a kron 
its insane pen is  a double edged sword which forces you to play at certain ranges or realy hit ships at a verry specific angle

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Beta Tester, Players
1,734 posts
4,875 battles
12 minutes ago, Gojuadorai said:

in my book thats a plus for the alaska
 

cause its not fun shooting at a desmo @10km and overpenning the citadel in a kron 
its insane pen is  a double edged sword which forces you to play at certain ranges or realy hit ships at a verry specific angle

 

Well, here are pen values of Missouri:
image.png.2d57020c9474775068fecdeea981fe7e.png

I have no problem penetrating (and not over-penetrating) citadel of any cruiser,, DM included.

Are you sure that's the actual issue here? They all have the same fuse time too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BS4]
Players
140 posts
7,966 battles
24 minutes ago, Blixies said:

Do any of you guy consider Alaska generally superior to Kron btw?

 In pure 1v1 fight? Or in randoms?

 

They have similar mobility and (currently) same concealment.

With her faster shells Kron can play it safe at long range where 152mm IFHE doesn't work that well, she also has the raw HP values to tank over and normal pens

On the otherhand, Alaska has better auto-bounce angles, 27mm plating, 36mm deck, it's citadel sits below waterline and it has superior AA, and 30s burn time vs Krons 45s

34 minutes ago, Blixies said:

image.thumb.png.bba2c6884fd66685bceabbd7ede11cef.png

^regarding this:

 

Already posted this in Alaska Vs Kronshtadt

 

Now, as this post seems to have attracted quite a lot browsers, I'm asking this again:

Could anyone say where's this difference in penetration values comes from?

 

-is it just Fitting tool and Navweaps using different data?

-some game mechanic affecting pen?

-or what?

image.thumb.png.b248218b285834c4054770af28acf6a2.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
5,469 posts
9,939 battles
2 minutes ago, Blixies said:

I have no problem penetrating (and not over-penetrating) citadel of any cruiser,, DM included.
Are you sure that's the actual issue here? They all have the same fuse time too.

I had those moments with KS. Think about shell trajectory and the implications. At closer ranges KS's shells barely arc and will have trouble finding the citadel.

Her guns are still great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UTW]
Weekend Tester, In AlfaTesters
8,523 posts
6,992 battles
2 minutes ago, Blixies said:

Well, here are pen values of Missouri:
image.png.2d57020c9474775068fecdeea981fe7e.png

I have no problem penetrating (and not over-penetrating) citadel of any cruiser,, DM included.

Are you sure that's the actual issue here? They all have the same fuse time too.

Not the same balistic at all. Kron is a laser gun, it's sometimes very hard to shot at underwater citadel with it. I'll take Montana gun over Kron gun any time if it's about shooting a broadside Hindenburg.

Broadside IJN, USSR or US are food for Kron however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Beta Tester, Players
1,734 posts
4,875 battles
2 minutes ago, aboomination said:

I had those moments with KS. Think about shell trajectory and the implications. At closer ranges KS's shells barely arc and will have trouble finding the citadel.

Her guns are still great.

Doesn't count as overpenning the citadel though.
Still your argument is perfectly valid and applicable.

 

2 minutes ago, ShinGetsu said:

Not the same balistic at all. Kron is a laser gun, it's sometimes very hard to shot at underwater citadel with it.

Very true, I can imagine this is an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,247 posts
6,356 battles
1 hour ago, Hyperion84 said:

Well she's a real, or was a real USN ship. Of cause she is balanced :cat_cool:

But I digress she looks beautiful and fine ;)

Being real doesn't mean much. Belfast still is a real ship, open for visits as a museum.

59 minutes ago, Hades_warrior said:

Exept Flamu. He is not to happy about this ship. Mostly because of bad ruddershift and poor concealment.

Tbf, Flamu addresses points where you could make QoL improvements without breaking the ship. It's not like Stalingrad where the ship gets Moskva armour model and insane guns. Being able to dodge better helps most of all against BBs and it doesn't make the ship less prone to get hit for massive damage if you adjust for its maneuverability, same as with regular CAs.

47 minutes ago, Procrastes said:

As I understood Flamu from that video, he doesn't think the ship is "bad", as such - only boring.

Although that in itself may be reason to consider her bad, of course.

Flamu considered Musashi OP but boring and yet people find it enjoyable. Flamu considered Hood underwhelming because of the lackluster guns and tanking alone being not very exciting, but the ship is decent and balanced and some (like me) find it fun. Boring is subjective and I'd not say a ship is bad because it feels "boring". 

 

39 minutes ago, Gojuadorai said:

in my book thats a plus for the alaska
 

cause its not fun shooting at a desmo @10km and overpenning the citadel in a kron 
its insane pen is  a double edged sword which forces you to play at certain ranges or realy hit ships at a verry specific angle

 

I don't have Kronshtadt, but looking at these numbers brings back the memories of Dunkerque, "blessed" with best pen at the tier of paper armour cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,829 posts
16,673 battles
1 hour ago, Blixies said:

Well, here are pen values of Missouri:
image.png.2d57020c9474775068fecdeea981fe7e.png

I have no problem penetrating (and not over-penetrating) citadel of any cruiser,, DM included.

Are you sure that's the actual issue here? They all have the same fuse time too.

 

i simplifyed the issue

 

since the real issue is the Pen +Shell speed making it overpen 
(you pen both side and the shell does not detonate in the ship)
a shorter fuse OR worse pen would both get rid of the problem
 

and yes im a good shoot so im sure that its the issue 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Beta Tester, Players
1,734 posts
4,875 battles
2 minutes ago, Gojuadorai said:

and yes im a good shoot so im sure that its the issue 

You are modest as well.
And handsome I would bet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,528 posts
5,580 battles
3 hours ago, fumtu said:

Well every CC that I'm watching consider Alaska a good ship, only difference is that some of them thinks that she require some little tweaks while other think that she is perfect in the current state. Hope that WG will release her soon for either FXP or Coal or both (as Musashi).

 

To be honest I dont believe all these CCs and their reviews of these premium ships, it seems that any new shiney that is gonna be released as a premium always receives a good review.

 

To me this shows bias on the side of WG, because by promoting WG content thats bad in any good light is kudos points for the CC.

 

Which in turn pumps up the opinion of the crowd (us) to think its a really good ship and then everyone wants to buy it.

 

LWM is a typical example of a WG bias CC.

 

I base my opinions of any ship on the review of real players and I think real players with no connection to WG should be selected at random to sample and review the ship. That way the report will be more honest.

 

Dont believe what you read in the papers, that saying holds weight in all aspects of life not just the media.

 

for e.g. Stalingrad received really great reviews from all CCs, but watching that ship in-game and other players reviewing it showed me that its just a hyped up ship which gives you no real advantage in-game. So much so I consider the Des Moines or Minotaur more of an anti-bb adversary in the Cruiser space than the Stalingrad any-day.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,829 posts
16,673 battles
27 minutes ago, Blixies said:

And handsome I would bet.

 

my wife agrees

  • Funny 3
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×