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

ST, CVs, Georgia, Monarch, Conqueror

45 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[WG-EU]
WG Staff, Alpha Tester
3,645 posts
1,126 battles

WG_WoWS_SPb_Screenshots_0_8_2_1920x1080px_Conqueror.jpgWG_WoWS_SPb_Screenshots_0_8_2_1920x1080px_Georgia.jpgWG_WoWS_SPb_Screenshots_0_8_2_1920x1080px_Monarch.jpg

 

 

 

Please note that the information in the Development Blog is preliminary.

 

Several improvements for the CV class:

  • Deck's interface improved for better understanding of mechanics;
  • Altitudes for planes returning to the aircraft changed: now attacking flights will need to get to a lower altitude than the squadrons returning via the "F" button. This will improve the survivability of flights which can't escape the AA fire after the attack. But the "F"-spam tactic will still result in noticeable losses if performed in the AA zone.

 

American battleship Georgia, tier IX

Hit points – 74100. Plating - 32 mm.
Main battery - 3x2 457 mm. Firing range - 21.0 km.
Maximum HE shell damage – 6450. Chance to cause fire – 43%. Maximum AP shell damage - 15750.
Reload time - 30.0 s. 180 degree turn time - 45.0 s. Maximum dispersion - 270 м.
HE initial velocity - 800 m/s. AP initial velocity - 732 m/s. Sigma – 2.00.
Secondary Armament:
10x2 127.0 mm, range - 6.0 km.
Maximum HE shell damage – 1800. Chance to cause fire – 5%. HE initial velocity - 792 m/s

 

AA defense:
40x1 20.0 mm.
10x2 127.0 mm.
16x4 40.0 mm.
AA defense short-range: continuous damage per second - 652, hit probability - 68 %, action zone 0.1-1.5 km;
AA defense mid-range: number of explosions in a salvo - 11, damage within an explosion - 980, continuous damage per second - 564, hit probability - 73 %, action zone 1.5-3.5 km;
AA defense long-range: number of explosions in a salvo - 8, damage within an explosion - 1540, continuous damage per second - 260, hit probability - 73 %, action zone 3.5-5.8 km;
AA sector reinforcement - 25%, sector reinforcement and reinforcement shift time - 12 s.

Maximum speed - 33 kt. Turning circle radius - 890 m. Rudder shift time – 16.5 s. Surface detectability – 16.9 km. Air detectability – 14.1 km. Detectability after firing main guns in smoke – 18.0 km.

 

Available consumables:
1 slot - Damage Control Party
2 slot - Repair Party
3 slot - Fighter/Spotting Aircraft

 

All stats are listed without crew and upgrade modifiers but with best available modules. The stats are subject to change during the testing.

 

Test versions of the ships Monarch and Conqueror will be added.

 

Both ships have very low citadel and this results in huge difficulty hitting it. Test ships will have their citadels placed higher. But the restoration of the casemate (non-citadel) damage increased from 60% to 75%. Also parameters of "Repair Party" were changed:

  • Healing increased from 0.5%/s to 0.6%/s for Monarch_T;
  • Consumable cooldown lowered from 180 s to 120 s.

 

So, these ships can be better punished for positioning mistakes, but their commanders now have improved HP regeneration.

 

Please, pay attention that these are test changes and they don't apply to the basic ships. If testing shows that such balancing is efficient, it may later be applied to the basic versions of the ships.

Edited by Sehales
  • Cool 4
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
7,713 posts
9,928 battles

Iowa class with the 18"/47 Mk.A ... I don't see what she brings to the table. More damage per shell, better fire chance and 0.1 sigma improvement, but at the expense of 33% shells in the air and only overmatch bonus is 30mm plating on cruisers as opposed to the 16" on the Iowa/Missouri.

 

Next obvious question would be: free XP or coal? I wouldn't presume yet another steel ship with the N-DD already on the way, nevermind with how these characteristics are looking for now.

 

 

 

As for Monarch and Conqueror, yay citadels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
402 posts
11,208 battles

Ummm... Guys.... I think you mixed up your UK BBs. The strong ones are at tier 7 and 9, definitively not on tier 8. :Smile_unsure:

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,333 posts
7,745 battles
1 minute ago, quickr said:

Ummm... Guys.... I think you mixed up your UK BBs. The strong ones are at tier 7 and 9, definitively not on tier 8. :Smile_unsure:

Concept of "speed bump" and "free exp sink" are familiar to you?:Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAILS]
Players
121 posts
13,272 battles

Question: how historical is that 457 mm Iowa-thing. Were there actually plans for something like this? Also, looks really weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
7,713 posts
9,928 battles
14 minutes ago, BruceRKF said:

Question: how historical is that 457 mm Iowa-thing. Were there actually plans for something like this? Also, looks really weird.

Was real and tested for a while on two seperate occasions. First prior to the London Naval treaty post WW1, later in updated form after Imperial Japan not signing the Second London Naval treaty.

 

If you want to read up a bit yourself, looky here.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAILS]
Players
121 posts
13,272 battles
2 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

Was real and tested for a while on two seperate occasions. First after the London Naval treaty post WW1, later in updated form after Imperial Japan not signing the Second London Naval treaty.

Thanks. Good thing she is not a complete paper design then, but I still don't see the appeal at all.

I also feel that we are getting quite an overload of coal/free xp/steel ships recently/soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
4,313 posts
5,395 battles

Oh hey, USN gets a wannabe-Musashi. Basically 457 Conq if you take away one more turret, because people love playing 457 Conq...

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
[SCRUB]
Beta Tester
2,425 posts
6,285 battles
25 minutes ago, quickr said:

Ummm... Guys.... I think you mixed up your UK BBs. The strong ones are at tier 7 and 9, definitively not on tier 8. :Smile_unsure:

I'll have finished her before this ever becomes a real thing, but yea, I have not found her to be a ship that requires any kind of nerf...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
4,313 posts
5,395 battles
56 minutes ago, Sehales said:

AA defense:
40x1 20.0 mm.
10x2 127.0 mm.
16x4 40.0 mm.
AA defense short-range: continuous damage per second - 533, hit probability - 68 %, action zone 0.1-1.5 km;
AA defense mid-range: number of explosions in a salvo - 11, damage within an explosion - 385, continuous damage per second - 385, hit probability - 73 %, action zone 1.5-3.5 km;
AA defense long-range: number of explosions in a salvo - 8, damage within an explosion - 144, continuous damage per second - 144, hit probability - 73 %, action zone 3.5-5.8 km;
AA sector reinforcement - 50 %, sector reinforcement and reinforcement shift time - 5 s.

Are those AA values correct? Especially sector values and explosions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAILS]
Players
121 posts
13,272 battles
4 minutes ago, Seiranko said:

Are those AA values correct? Especially sector values and explosions.

Seems to be, someone else already noticed on that. Makes no sense, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
4,313 posts
5,395 battles
Just now, BruceRKF said:

Seems to be, someone else already noticed on that. Makes no sense, imo.

That's why I quoted Sehales to ask for confirmation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weekend Tester
874 posts
4,687 battles

Can we please stop with this c*** of every tier 9+ BB having 457mm guns? 

Oh no but its ok because we said there will not be a bigger caliber then Yamatos 460mm.

Cool can we not anymore, thanks...

#H44and510mm

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,212 posts
7,642 battles
1 hour ago, Aotearas said:

Iowa class with the 18"/47 Mk.A ... I don't see what she brings to the table.

Doesn't look like an Iowa, though. Much more North Carolina, judging by the superstructure design. Tier VIII BB hull with 18" guns?  Not sure about the name, either. Surely she should be Kansas to go with Wichita?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHEN]
Players, Moderator
1,043 posts
9,684 battles

Why the new T9 premium US Ship have a 457mm guns with lower shell AP velocity do more damage than a Yamato (14800) ?

 

It's a real project ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
8 posts
7,688 battles

I think it is a South Dakota (1939) hull.

Look at the sidearmour. It's similar to the Alabamas and Massachusetts one (both S. Dakota classes).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
4,313 posts
5,395 battles
1 hour ago, Srle_Vigilante said:

Can we please stop with this c*** of every tier 9+ BB having 457mm guns? 

Oh no but its ok because we said there will not be a bigger caliber then Yamatos 460mm.

Cool can we not anymore, thanks...

#H44and510mm

Likely not. The 457 mm caliber (aka 18 inch) is a caliber people planned for historically and the only reason Yamato got 460 is because the Japanese went towards more metric calibers (thus also 41 cm instead of 40.6 cm). We'll likely keep seeing this caliber at times, such as here, or also if they ever make an IJN premium based on the BB Nr.13 project, which was the original 20s era 18 inch design of the IJN.

 

If you however argue we should get guns bigger than 46 cm...I cannot imagine a ship that would be more garbage to play than Kurfürst with 4x2 51 cm guns.

1 minute ago, HipSGuinness said:

Why the new T9 premium US Ship have a 457mm guns with lower shell AP velocity do more damage than a Yamato (14800) ?

 

It's a real project ?

Because the shells are heavier, thus they are slower, but retain more energy at range, as well as cause a bit more damage on impact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
7,713 posts
9,928 battles
41 minutes ago, invicta2012 said:

Doesn't look like an Iowa, though. Much more North Carolina, judging by the superstructure design. Tier VIII BB hull with 18" guns?  Not sure about the name, either. Surely she should be Kansas to go with Wichita?

2 minutes ago, Lupin_sansei said:

I think it is a South Dakota hull.

Look at the sidearmour. It's similar to the Alabamas and Massachusetts one (both S. Dakota classes).

 

Still does 33 knots which is considerably faster than anything the non-Iowa class battleships could do. WG probably just found a couple new sekrit documents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FAILS]
Players
121 posts
13,272 battles
10 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

 

Still does 33 knots which is considerably faster than anything the non-Iowa class battleships could do. WG probably just found a couple new sekrit documents.

So the hull is possibly a fantasy-mix by WG between some high tier US BBs. Doesn't really increase the appeal of the ship...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
849 posts
6,744 battles

I love my US BBs but I really can't see the point in this one. Surely at high tier overmatch is the most important thing, what's the point of guns that size otherwise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TEA]
Players
954 posts
4,253 battles
6 minutes ago, Mr_Tayto said:

I love my US BBs but I really can't see the point in this one. Surely at high tier overmatch is the most important thing, what's the point of guns that size otherwise?

some like it bigger!?

 

They say size is not everything but in WGs case its clearly suffering from little man syndrome.

 

Russia and the USA just have to match Japan in gun caliber, no nation can have bigger guns than WG home country.

 

I wouldnt be surprised if the researchers at WG soon discover long lost blueprints for a Russian Naval 500mm Gun in the Red Archives.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[T-N-T]
Players
2,144 posts
10,210 battles

It's kinda nice they're testing the Monarch/Conqueror changes before applying them to those ships. Monarch's proposed citadel still appears just below the waterline, so maybe, just maybe, giving it a better, fast reloading heal (Vanguard-like) could be a net buff. Which would be nice.

 

Georgia is getting weirder by the minute. Weird AA. Weird short hull (I'll take you up on your word and assume it is SoDak's one) that somehow reaches Iowa's 33 knots. And 6 guns, huge, and probably quite accurate, but still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
7,713 posts
9,928 battles
3 minutes ago, Toivia said:

It's kinda nice they're testing the Monarch/Conqueror changes before applying them to those ships.

Funny how they can't seem to do that with CV balance changes, eh?

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×