Friesland: before you spend your FXP

[valrond]

8 hours ago, BruceRKF said:

The main question is: Is Friesland interesting and fun to play? If the answer to those two questions is mostly yes, then she is fine as she is.

I don't get why people are already calling for buffs now that for once there is a premium that is not extremely strong or even op, like many others recently. It's the way ideal premiums are supposed to work: Be interesting and different from tech tree ships, earn more xp and credits, but not be any stronger. Just my two cents.

That would be ok if the ship is good, it has a saving grace or something. Unfortunatelly, the Friesland has nothing. Yep. Nothing. It's main selling point is that it hasn't torps. The dakka is WORSE, much worse to a Kitakaze, which has twice the guns and they can pen 32mm with IFHE. And it has torps. Just last night I played my Kita and killed a pair of ships with torps.

 

The Frieslander? Good DPM if you can pen the target, if not, it is quite meh. No big pool of HP, no heal, no good concealment. What does it have, hydro? other DDs have hydro.

 

So it may be "fun", but if in the end the ship sucks, like this one, it's not worth it. Not for 1 million XP that I'll save for another ship. I own all of the other freexp ships, but this one is  hard pass.

[Shaka_D]

The more I see it in game the more convinced I am it is worthless. Perhaps fun to play from an individual perspective but in terms of its contribution to the team effort I am seriously disappointed in it's offerings. I am trying to see the good side, the possible postives but I can't see any significant enough. One particular game a few minutes ago saw a Friesland player sitting back behind cruisers, moving a little, popping smoke and firing. No scouting, spotting, torping (because none), not even taking on an anti-dd role or harrassing the enemy. The enemy dd's had stealth, torps and controlled every cap while our Friesland was nothing but a dumbed down cruiser. So what WG have actively done is add a ship that is technically in its own class, not quite a cruiser, not quite a dd, but not good enough to be either. Nope, it's garbage and a waste of a ship slot on any team. Well done WG - you didn't think about this one either did you? ANother classic example of WG making decisions without thinking it through.

[valrond]

1 hour ago, Shaka_D said:

The more I see it in game the more convinced I am it is worthless. Perhaps fun to play from an individual perspective but in terms of its contribution to the team effort I am seriously disappointed in it's offerings. I am trying to see the good side, the possible postives but I can't see any significant enough. One particular game a few minutes ago saw a Friesland player sitting back behind cruisers, moving a little, popping smoke and firing. No scouting, spotting, torping (because none), not even taking on an anti-dd role or harrassing the enemy. The enemy dd's had stealth, torps and controlled every cap while our Friesland was nothing but a dumbed down cruiser. So what WG have actively done is add a ship that is technically in its own class, not quite a cruiser, not quite a dd, but not good enough to be either. Nope, it's garbage and a waste of a ship slot on any team. Well done WG - you didn't think about this one either did you? ANother classic example of WG making decisions without thinking it through.

Bingo. It's a DD that can't do anything a DD can. It can't spot, it can't cap, it can't avoid a cap, it can't torp enemy BBs, it can't torp ships in smoke, it can't hunt DDs. It would have to have an insane DPM to compensate for its shortcomings, but it hasn't. As it stands, it would be a tier 8 DD tops, maybe even 7.

[KillStealBoss]

2 hours ago, Shaka_D said:

The more I see it in game the more convinced I am it is worthless. Perhaps fun to play from an individual perspective but in terms of its contribution to the team effort I am seriously disappointed in it's offerings. I am trying to see the good side, the possible postives but I can't see any significant enough. One particular game a few minutes ago saw a Friesland player sitting back behind cruisers, moving a little, popping smoke and firing. No scouting, spotting, torping (because none), not even taking on an anti-dd role or harrassing the enemy. The enemy dd's had stealth, torps and controlled every cap while our Friesland was nothing but a dumbed down cruiser. So what WG have actively done is add a ship that is technically in its own class, not quite a cruiser, not quite a dd, but not good enough to be either. Nope, it's garbage and a waste of a ship slot on any team. Well done WG - you didn't think about this one either did you? ANother classic example of WG making decisions without thinking it through.

It's a situational DD. Just like Asashio but it's 180 degrees different. 

[Ysterpyp]

On 9/4/2019 at 11:25 AM, Alfa_Tau said:

This is a very BIG weakness, as it prevent that role of area denial tipical of DD. Ther is a very nice video of Aerroon that show this. 

 

As Helmut_Khol stated above, better to know what you are buying, then ofc anyone has its taste and preferences. 

Bad spotting for mino

[Bear__Necessities]

2 hours ago, valrond said:

Bingo. It's a DD that can't do anything a DD can. It can't spot, it can't cap, it can't avoid a cap, it can't torp enemy BBs, it can't torp ships in smoke, it can't hunt DDs. It would have to have an insane DPM to compensate for its shortcomings, but it hasn't. As it stands, it would be a tier 8 DD tops, maybe even 7.

It can spot.

It can cap.

It can defend caps.

It can hunt DD’s.

It has good DPM.

 

You are right about it not being able to torp. So at least you are correct about ONE thing and one thing only.

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

35 minutes ago, Bear_Necessities said:

It can spot.

It can cap.

It can defend caps.

It can hunt DD’s.

It has good DPM.

 

Of course it can do all these things. 

I personally just don't see any reason apart from the AA, not to play Kitakaze instead. 

 

Sure the hydro and the 360 turrets are nice, but what Kita has (concealment, torps, 1/4 HE pen) is nicer.

[Bear__Necessities]

55 minutes ago, __Helmut_Kohl__ said:

 

Of course it can do all these things. 

I personally just don't see any reason apart from the AA, not to play Kitakaze instead. 

 

Sure the hydro and the 360 turrets are nice, but what Kita has (concealment, torps, 1/4 HE pen) is nicer.

I’m not comparing it to Kitty. I’m just pointing out it’s not as dreadful as people make out. 

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

4 hours ago, Bear_Necessities said:

I’m not comparing it to Kitty. I’m just pointing out it’s not as dreadful as people make out. 

 

Well, to make it work you gotta have some experience, so it is not easy to use for a lot of people. 

 

Which is precisely why I felt the need to put a slight warning out there with this thread. 

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

2 hours ago, __Helmut_Kohl__ said:

 

Well, to make it work you gotta have some experience, so it is not easy to use for a lot of people. 

 

Which is precisely why I felt the need to put a slight warning out there with this thread. 

Agreed, and that is a good thing actually. I think any reward ship should be hard to master, as they are usually bought and played by players who are supposed to have gathered actual experience next to FXP, coal or other ingame currency.

[Onsterfelijke]

And you need atleast a 10 point skill captain to make it work. I tried it with a 3 point skill captain and that went not very well and you have to too much defensive and so carefull. So you have to discover how to play this ship as it's not a normal DD.

And it will be in the future a submarine hunter but it can hurt any DD, the problem is any damage it gets is hard for the rest of the game.

From 13 point you can try more things then only a HE spammer.

[Corvi]

11 hours ago, Bear_Necessities said:

It can spot.

It can cap.

It can defend caps.

It can hunt DD’s.

It has good DPM.

 

You are right about it not being able to torp. So at least you are correct about ONE thing and one thing only.

 

So can a Yamato. Is it good at it ? Not really .. 

[Bear__Necessities]

10 minutes ago, Corvi said:

 

So can a Yamato. Is it good at it ? Not really .. 

Nice back track, 1st it can't and now it can? And Friesland is good at those lists. Just coz you and others can't currently make it work does not mean it's broken. 

[Corvi]

7 minutes ago, Bear_Necessities said:

Nice back track, 1st it can't and now it can? And Friesland is good at those lists. Just coz you and others can't currently make it work does not mean it's broken. 

 

Mate, just becasue it CAN it doesnt mean that its good at it. Friesland is not GOOD at any of this. It just CAN.

[Bear__Necessities]

18 minutes ago, Corvi said:

 

Mate, just becasue it CAN it doesnt mean that its good at it. Friesland is not GOOD at any of this. It just CAN.

It. Is. Good.

 

Clearly neither of us are going to budge. I’m going to keep on having fun and managing to do the things it apparently can’t do. 

 

I wish you fun times and favourable RNG in all future games.

[HentaiSquirrel]

18 hours ago, Shaka_D said:

The more I see it in game the more convinced I am it is worthless. (...)

Neither pro, nor con: did you take into account the fact the number of people buying her who have never played a T9, of even any ship at all, before?

[Shaka_D]

9 hours ago, Europizza said:

Agreed, and that is a good thing actually. I think any reward ship should be hard to master, as they are usually bought and played by players who are supposed to have gathered actual experience next to FXP, coal or other ingame currency.

Any reward ship should be hard to master? That's a really odd way of looking at things, why should it be harder to play? Why should more experienced players have to work harder to make bad ships work for them, there's no fun in that at all, surely? I now seen far too many games where the Friesland fails terribly, and not many where it succeed as much. If we're going to judge ships as good because in rare situations they work well then I think we're missing out on being realistic. On paper the ship might apparently offer all that WG boasts it to offer, but in actual random gameplay where I've seen it, it's way too situational and as such is not reliable at all - it's doesn't fit the meta, it's stuck in an odd place and suits soloists rather than team players. There are those just trying to justify the expense of having bought it, but I reckon it won't be long until it stays in port like so many others.

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

25 minutes ago, Shaka_D said:

Any reward ship should be hard to master? That's a really odd way of looking at things, why should it be harder to play? Why should more experienced players have to work harder to make bad ships work for them, there's no fun in that at all, surely? I now seen far too many games where the Friesland fails terribly, and not many where it succeed as much. If we're going to judge ships as good because in rare situations they work well then I think we're missing out on being realistic. On paper the ship might apparently offer all that WG boasts it to offer, but in actual random gameplay where I've seen it, it's way too situational and as such is not reliable at all - it's doesn't fit the meta, it's stuck in an odd place and suits soloists rather than team players. There are those just trying to justify the expense of having bought it, but I reckon it won't be long until it stays in port like so many others.

The Friesland so far in my experience is fine, and good enough as a reward ship, but too expensive. We differ in opinion on it, so you can stop use 'bad' as an argument ^^

 

No, reward ships don't have to be bad ships, did I say that? Yes, reward ships should be harder to master (iow. perform at uniqum levels), or at least stay far away from being more potent compared to it's sister and cousin ships. Players earning those ships are supposed to have experience enough to make normal ships perform at optimal or unicum levels. If they can't, they are only good at grinding. Grinding alone does not justify earning ships that overperform either. Ships can offer variation in gameplay, but it should defenitely not offer overperformance by itself. Nor should it be bad. If the Friesland turns out to be performing bad, by all means let them buff it. I would love a speed boost consumable or 2 repairs. You won't hear me complain if they add that 

[Chaos_Umbra]

Yep clearly a bad ship...

 

 

[ColonelPete]

Yep, clearly. I even detonated!!!!11

 

Spoiler

 

[valrond]

50 minutes ago, Chaos_Umbra said:

Yep clearly a bad ship...

 

 

A good game in a 3 man division prepared spank adds nothing to the discussion. XP Number greatly exagerated by plane kills.

For example:

 

[HentaiSquirrel]

Since this thread is seemingly devolving into "i'm right" "no - i''m right" "but i'm righter" "i'm the rightest" ... etc. i'll have my popcorn elsewhere, leaving it at "whatever floats your ship". Cheers 

[Shaka_D]

5 hours ago, Europizza said:

The Friesland so far in my experience is fine, and good enough as a reward ship, but too expensive. We differ in opinion on it, so you can stop use 'bad' as an argument ^^

 

No, reward ships don't have to be bad ships, did I say that? Yes, reward ships should be harder to master (iow. perform at uniqum levels), or at least stay far away from being more potent compared to it's sister and cousin ships. Players earning those ships are supposed to have experience enough to make normal ships perform at optimal or unicum levels. If they can't, they are only good at grinding. Grinding alone does not justify earning ships that overperform either. Ships can offer variation in gameplay, but it should defenitely not offer overperformance by itself. Nor should it be bad. If the Friesland turns out to be performing bad, by all means let them buff it. I would love a speed boost consumable or 2 repairs. You won't hear me complain if they add that 

I'll stop using 'bad' as an argument if you stop using it's 'fine' or 'good enough as a reward ship'? Does that sound fair to you? See, it doesn't really work out does it? This is where the different opinions come into play, you can't call it different opinions if we can't voice them? For me, the ship is rubbish. You like it? That's fine with me, it's your xp and an easy ship for me to kill and certainly no threat to me even when I'm playing some lower tier dd's. Didn't say I want it to overperform, I want it to perform, plain and simple and for me it doesn't from what I've witnessed.

 

edit: Just charged one down in a bb. He sat in his smoke too scared to move, no torps to threaten me he just sat there shooting his pee shooters. I tanked and someone made him go 'boom' a few moments later. It's not a dd to me, lol, it's a dd / cruiser wannabe.

 

Take care matey.

[Chaos_Umbra]

3 hours ago, valrond said:

A good game in a 3 man division prepared spank adds nothing to the discussion. XP Number greatly exagerated by plane kills.

Cause denying the CV any strikes and holding the B cap while wiping out DDs and anything else that goes for the cap clearly means that I had no impact in the match... 

[Mad_Dog_Dante]

2 hours ago, Shaka_D said:

I'll stop using 'bad' as an argument if you stop using it's 'fine' or 'good enough as a reward ship'? Does that sound fair to you? See, it doesn't really work out does it? This is where the different opinions come into play, you can't call it different opinions if we can't voice them? For me, the ship is rubbish. You like it? That's fine with me, it's your xp and an easy ship for me to kill and certainly no threat to me even when I'm playing some lower tier dd's. Didn't say I want it to overperform, I want it to perform, plain and simple and for me it doesn't from what I've witnessed.

 

edit: Just charged one down in a bb. He sat in his smoke too scared to move, no torps to threaten me he just sat there shooting his pee shooters. I tanked and someone made him go 'boom' a few moments later. It's not a dd to me, lol, it's a dd / cruiser wannabe.

 

Take care matey.

Great, you actually got my suggestion, well, kind of... Because, yes that sounds fair to me and is exactly why I suggested it ^^ That slight patronising tone is not chique though 

 

Now that we've both established that opinions differ and understand that players can completely fail at the Friesland because they want (or expect) it to be a 'real' destroyer (with alpha strike capacity i'm guessing as per your example), perhaps you can show me some statistcs that point to where the ship is broken. Or point it out in the stats I pulled up from wows-numbers. Damage (1st) - WR (7th) - Ships killed (6th) - XP (4th) - Planes destroyed (1st) - K/D (5th)? To me these point to a healthy normal ship so far, not a broken underperforming one. But I'm not really at home in WOWS statistcis I must admit, so if you're able to point out to me how these numbers add up to a bad performing ship I'm genuinely interested.

 

Could it be you're looking for confirmation of your bias that it's not a 'real' destroyer?