Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
DFens_666

Ohio vs Thunderer... Balancing out the window?

56 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
8,766 posts

Just been thinking about this lately, since both ships are currently being played by CCs/STs and you can see them play them on Twitch and YT.

The 457s Conqueror never had special dispersion, despite having only 4x2 guns. Now, Ohio is coming and it gets BC dispersion because... Georgia has it?

 

I think a comparision between those 2 ships is fair, as they have exactly the same gun setup

 

Ohio vs Thunderer

96300 HP > 82900 HP

26s reload > 30 sec reload (26,4 with Reload mod)

230m max dispersion > 275~m max dispersion *

1,9 Sigma < 2,0 Sigma

15750 AP > 14900 AP

6450 HE < 8200 HE **

Waterline Citadel > Above water Citadel

Faster Repair Party CD / Slightly better Repair Party (0,6%) and 33% Citadel repair damage

28 kts < 29,5 kts

18,6 sec rudder shift < 10,4 sec Rudder shift

17,29m Concealment < 15,19km Concealment

 

- Ohio has better AP penetration till ~7,5km after that Thunderer has slightly more (505mm to 462mm at 20km)

* Thunderers max Dispersion is 300mm at maxrange, which is more than Ohios range, if we compare the Dispersion at Ohios maxrange, it should be ~275 for Thunderer. Ontop of that, Ohio has access to US BB Plotting room mod 2. Thunderer can take Reload mod, which will get it almost to the same level as Ohios base reload.

** Who cares?

 

So... where is the logic right here?

In the important areas, Ohio is VASTLY superior compared to Thunderer.

  • More Health and better protected Citadel (i.e. harder to reach) and 38mm Deck + upper belt, makes it more resistent against HE spam and Yamasushi AP.
  • Better reload with much better Dispersion and more AP damage.
  • Thunderer is more maneuvrable while having better Concealment. And i assume better AA because DefAA, which is situational.

 

Did i miss something? Or is Thunderer just garbage compared to Ohio? Or we can say, once again WG just "balances" their ships based on other ships (Thunderer based on Conqueror, Ohio based on Georgia), which doesnt make any sense whatsoever.

From what ive seen, Ohio is clearly the one which is in need of a nerf. But having 2 ships in testing which are very similiar, while one is just better in literally every way says a lot imo.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DREAD]
Players
9,231 posts
6,465 battles

Both are terrible ideas and should be scrapped 

 

Why not make something interesting? Such as a 1920s Ohio (South Dakota Class) with 4x3 406mm? Or a G3 Battlecruiser?

  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MORIA]
Players
7,200 posts
33,719 battles
1 minute ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Both are terrible ideas and should be scrapped 

 

Why not make something interesting? Such as a 1920s Ohio (South Dakota Class) with 4x3 406mm? Or a G3 Battlecruiser?

As a Georgia owner, Ohio will be good for me. 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DREAD]
Players
9,231 posts
6,465 battles
7 minutes ago, MacArthur92 said:

As a Georgia owner, Ohio will be good for me. 

 

 

I am sure they will do fine game play wise but I am not a fan of fantasy :etc_swear: which only serves the purpose to grab some easy T9 money.

 

How about Hiryu...? :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MORIA]
Players
7,200 posts
33,719 battles
2 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

 

I am sure they will do fine game play wise but I am not a fan of fantasy :etc_swear: which only serves the purpose to grab some easy T9 money.

 

How about Hiryu...? :Smile_trollface:

Hiryu? Will be CV alternative line. No one knows when. 

 

I don't pay so much at historical stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,766 posts
23 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Both are terrible ideas and should be scrapped

 

I dont really mind so much, as long as its balanced. But clearly we are at a point, where it becomes more and more retarded.

Benham, RU BBs, Ohio, Smolensk, Colbert, (Somers maybe too?)... cancer for the game.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
5,861 posts
10,266 battles
20 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

grab some easy T9 money.

Both are T10 though .... so .... Ohio ... my guess is she'll be either a second T10 (like Slava was rumored to be next to Kremlin) and Thunderer .... well good question. First T10 Premium for sale?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,766 posts
1 minute ago, Allied_Winter said:

Both are T10 though .... so .... Ohio ... my guess is she'll be either a second T10 (like Slava was rumored to be next to Kremlin) and Thunderer .... well good question. First T10 Premium for sale?

 

Ohio is supposed to be obtainable through the NTC along with Colbert.

And i guess, Thunderer might be 2nd TX silver ship like Kremlin/Slava... but who knows about that one.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PARAZ]
Beta Tester
13,184 posts
18,931 battles
47 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Just been thinking about this lately

 

Well, there is your problem camrade.

Apply generous amount of vodka to fix.

:Smile_trollface:

  • Funny 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
6,427 posts
245 battles
22 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Ohio is supposed to be obtainable through the NTC along with Colbert.

And i guess, Thunderer might be 2nd TX silver ship like Kremlin/Slava... but who knows about that one.

if thats the case the whole NTC thing seems to give ships that have god adv's if they continue down this trend.

 

i mean i thought the whole point of making the thunderer was to make the 457's usable?

 

or maybe give it a unique caliber like 440mm's with 12 barrels for shiz and giggles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,109 posts
18,662 battles
Vor 2 Stunden, DFens_666 sagte:

Ohio is supposed to be obtainable through the NTC along with Colbert.

In other words, even though @Crysantos made a big show of player participation and started this whole forum thread about creative ideas and suggestions for the NTC, all that WG can think of as reward is still OP ships.

 

They just have no vision whatsoever.

  • Cool 7
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-YR-]
Players
589 posts

I wonder when the IFHE nerf will hit the game.

Perhaps we will get free of some HE spammers. Or at least they will be less successfull..

:Smile-_tongue:

PS I would wait to buy Colbert or Smolensk.:Smile_hiding:

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
2,355 posts
5,728 battles

So wargaming "giving up" on selling ship buffs through the ntc was bs and lies.

 

They are just planning to do it indirectly by selling op ships instead.... Time to start the second wave of the revolution soon?

  • Cool 9
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WGP2W]
Beta Tester
1,214 posts
6,187 battles
5 minutes ago, thiextar said:

So wargaming "giving up" on selling ship buffs through the ntc was bs and lies.

 

They are just planning to do it indirectly by selling op ships instead.... Time to start the second wave of the revolution soon?

I want to act suprised but I can’t. 

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,735 posts
6,990 battles

Welp, guess the posibility of a 4x3 460mm "super" yamato are lookong good :Smile_veryhappy:

 

 

 

Or mabe this thing, tier 20, the IJN WTF. 

139196-be287713d7efa893489f3fcb8c0c1936.jpg.c5e6f385617a40965e95ce7959346856.jpg

Looks balanced to me :Smile_trollface:

Edited by Major_Damage225
  • Cool 3
  • Funny 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LADA]
Players
493 posts
7,725 battles

Balance out the window? 

 

That particular ship sailed long ago, has since sunk, settled on the seabed and is currently rotting away awaiting the thermal death of the universe.

 

Consider this for a brief terrifying moment. The person or person(s) responsible for the rework are still alive and kicking - waiting for another chance to do their thing. 

 

(Ohio doesn't look too powerful to be honest. It's more that the Thunderer is a bit crap.)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,468 posts
8,290 battles

The issue is that Ohio is based on Georgia which arguably is slightly overtuned and scrapes the border of OP, just that it is in good company among T9 freemium BBs. Thunderer meanwhile is a worse Conqueror, combining the inferior gun option with a weaker repair party. While I'd consider Ohio certainly passable, with only the dispersion being worth tweaking at best (towards normal BB dispersion), Thunderer needs improvements. Taking a Conqueror, giving it the worse gun option and then a Vanguard heal instead of Conkek heal is silly. Vanguard is ok at T8, because it competes with Monarch, which has Warspite heal (and had normal heal when Vanguard came out), but vs superheal, you basically only benefit from better cit restoration, which only matters if you get citadelled to crap.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BOBS2]
[BOBS2]
Players
529 posts
16,216 battles
4 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

And i assume better AA because DefAA, which is situational. 

 

Debatable, as given how bad Thunderer's short and long range AA is compared with Ohio's the effects of the consumable still leave her short.

  • Short range Thunderer has 138, which Defensive AA would double to 276... less than Ohio's 652. 
  • Mid-range Thunderer has similar power to Ohio, 815 continuous vs 807 and 14 explosions@980 vs 12@1190, so Defensive AA would give a good advantage for Thunderer over Ohio (and give Thunderer better AA, as long as that lasts, than my AA spec Minotaur). Though Ohio does have 500m longer range on her mid-range aura so that would make up some of the difference.
  • Long-range Thunderer has 121 continuous and 4 explosions@1610 vs 277 and 8@1680, so Defensive AA would still leave Thunderer 35 short of Ohio's continuous and although a 3220 damage flak burst would be very painful it would be easier to dodge 4 of those than the 8 smaller explosions Ohio would be putting out.

As to how to fix Thunderer I don't know. Or to put it another way they've already done the things I thought of tweaking to make 457-Conqueror more viable; they've given her the rudder-shift of legendary-module Conqueror, dropped the turret traverse from 45 to 30 seconds (and I'd thought 36 seconds like Hood) , changed the dispersion to Warspite/Hood formula and given her normal-fuse AP, and filled in the zero short-range AA hole. But when I thought about tweaking the reload I thought of a couple of seconds, down to 28 seconds, and when I thought about increasing the AP damage I was thinking of a few hundred (maybe) as I didn't want to make it too much more than the slightly larger diameter shells of Yamato. So a four second difference in reload and a 850 difference in damage per AP shell, like Ohio has, is well outside this.

 

(Actually... I did have one idea for Thunderer, but as this is supposed to be a lazy cut-and-paste I think we can rule out the ship being remodelled to fit an alternate history where the guns were diverted from the Tiger-class cruisers, say that the two that were converted to helicopter carriers were built in that form and the third was scrapped, which would give us four familiar looking 152mm dual-purpose turrets for deck level (two a side, the four 133mm turrets being removed) and seven equally familiar looking 76.2mm heavy-AA mounts (with the 40mm mounts being removed)...)

 

Spoiler

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
463 posts
10,356 battles
1 hour ago, Major_Damage225 said:

Welp, guess the posibility of a 4x3 460mm "super" yamato are lookong good :Smile_veryhappy:

 

 

 

Or mabe this thing, tier 20, the IJN WTF. 

139196-be287713d7efa893489f3fcb8c0c1936.jpg.c5e6f385617a40965e95ce7959346856.jpg

Looks balanced to me :Smile_trollface:

Another goodie.

b431fa0.jpg

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,433 posts
17,640 battles

Certainly everything I have seen and read about these two ships is that the Ohio massively out performs the Thunderer, now hopefully this is just a matter of them doing testing and finding some balance (although this is WG they do tend to struggle in this regard). 

 

 I fought a Thunderer tonight and whilst the chap playing it did very well  it was quite possible to mitigate the damage from his shots, As for the Ohio I can only go from CCs but she appears to have a lot more versatility. 

 

Im assuming they both will end up being rewards for the NTC the difficulty is as she currently stands the Ohio has a great appeal as a reward ship but I hope she won't end up being too good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,433 posts
17,640 battles
5 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

 

 

How about Hiryu...? :Smile_trollface:

 

Post CV rework I would suggest extreme caution if she does return certainly what ever happens don't expect it to be a simple return it will probably come with A LOT of tweaks. 

 

Still we can live in hope for the return of such a famous ship although for me she might well end up being a port decoration. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FOX]
Beta Tester
32 posts
4,717 battles
6 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

Faster Repair Party CD / Slightly better Repair Party (0,6%) and 33% Citadel repair damage

If wowsft is correct, Ohio's current heal not only has a faster cooldown, but it actually heals more too (0.7% vs Thunderer 0.6% ps, both last 28s). This % will also be applying to larger base HP pool.

 

Yep, you heard that right... As if having better guns, secondaries, plating and HP wasn't enough, she even has a better heal than Thunderer at the moment.

 

My best guess is that the person who was supposed to be increasing the stats of some characteristics of Thunderer screwed up and accidentally kept updating the file for Ohio instead. There may or may not have been vodka involved.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,133 posts
7,085 battles
4 hours ago, thiextar said:

So wargaming "giving up" on selling ship buffs through the ntc was bs and lies.

 

They are just planning to do it indirectly by selling op ships instead.... Time to start the second wave of the revolution soon?

well, this is the very first round of testing.

They might nerf her hard soon, who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×