Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Captain_Riley

IOWA needs BUFFS and COMPLETION

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
115 posts
6,188 battles

Iowa in the current meta has been completely powercreeped as many other ships in the USN and IJN lines, whom have had received periodical 'buffs', but the Iowa has been left out, minus the lowering of the citadel.

First, she needs here complete 1945 anti-air armaments, the Oerlikon mounts missing from her final 1945 loadout, as seen in the pics below for complete historical accuracy to be added to the C-hull

Secondly, her base rudder shift from 22.5 seconds to 18 seconds which with subsequent hulls lowered further to 13 seconds

-120m to her turning circle radius from 920m to a new 800m TCR

Buff torpedo protection from 25% to 40%

Buff base concealment from 16.2km to 14.5km

And finally her sigma adjusted from 1.9 to 2.0

2.png.ec9faf7e6b7657f23f9abc2f08f4139e.png

3.png.0941bf5cf1b76610cf6f05a9a92d472a.png

4.png.99e446207b3e38bfa56d9ada7eb1ad83.png

5.png.4f72b0559f7617fb51e1ffa97ecfa823.png

1.png.bf7e7866b194324dd4258d9b710633f3.png

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 3
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,061 posts
8,562 battles
35 minutes ago, Captain_Riley said:

Iowa has been left out, minus the lowering of the citadel.

Because the... somewhat ridiculous buff to the heal for the entire USN BB line never happened

 

Spoiler

Old:

  • 0.5%/s @ 28s
    • 395/s -> 11 060 total
  • w/ ID 0.6%/s @ 28s
    • 474/s -> 13 272 total

New:

  • 0.66%/s @ 28s
    • 521/s -> 14 599 total
  • w/ ID 0.792%/s @ 28s
    • 626/s -> 17 519 total

 

And your suggestions vary from "that's pointless" to "what the hell are you smoking"

 

 

And having played a few matches of Iowa recently - she's fine. Just like most of the original ships

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
8 hours ago, Captain_Riley said:

-120m to her turning circle radius from 920m to a new 800m TCR

Buff base concealment from 16.2km to 14.5km

So it can turn like a Buffalo while having 11.4 km concealment on conceal build? That's outspotting the Monarch.

 

How about no?

  • Cool 5
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
14,466 posts
20,572 battles
1 hour ago, Captain_Riley said:

How about yes.

 

Check your clan tag for a response.

  • Funny 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
2,992 posts
17,341 battles

I dunno what you are smoking, but I want some of it. That good stuff might help me forget the playerbase's atrocious level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
11,159 posts
9,512 battles

Iowa is a solid BB, git gud :cap_old:

The only problem is, that ships like Musashi and JB exist, who are way too strong compared to the T9 techtree ships.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-IWP-]
Players
9 posts
753 battles
On 5/17/2020 at 2:35 PM, HaachamaShipping said:

So it can turn like a Buffalo while having 11.4 km concealment on conceal build? That's outspotting the Monarch.

 

How about no?

So we're just gonna ignore the fact that Iowa's real turning circle was sub 750m? kek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
28,294 posts
14,932 battles
7 minutes ago, ThatGuyOrby said:

So we're just gonna ignore the fact that Iowa's real turning circle was sub 750m? kek

That is relevant how?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-IWP-]
Players
9 posts
753 battles
Just now, ColonelPete said:

That is relevant how?

The fact that we're getting OP fake ship after OP fake ship and the real ships get non-historic hindrances in the name of so-called "balance"  

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
28,294 posts
14,932 battles
4 minutes ago, ThatGuyOrby said:

The fact that we're getting OP fake ship after OP fake ship and the real ships get non-historic hindrances in the name of so-called "balance"  

That applies to all ships.

No ship burning from bow to stern can extinguish a fire and patch up holes at the press of a button...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-IWP-]
Players
9 posts
753 battles
Just now, ColonelPete said:

That applies to all ships.

No ship burning from bow to stern can extinguish a fire and patch up holes at the press of a button...

and a ship with 16 guns with a reload of 3ish seconds can't fire all game without running it's magazines dry within a couple minutes, a ship can't sink from a fire on deck unless there are so incredibly volatile things on deck, and guns noted by WG as being inferior to the USN MK7 have better penetration in game. Nothing about this game makes sense but what makes even less sense is holding onto these limitations that were put in place when Iowa was one of the few battleships in the game when there have been ships introduced that outshine it in many, many ways. Same could be said about Yamato's turning circle but that's another story all together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
28,294 posts
14,932 battles
11 minutes ago, ThatGuyOrby said:

and a ship with 16 guns with a reload of 3ish seconds can't fire all game without running it's magazines dry within a couple minutes, a ship can't sink from a fire on deck unless there are so incredibly volatile things on deck, and guns noted by WG as being inferior to the USN MK7 have better penetration in game. Nothing about this game makes sense but what makes even less sense is holding onto these limitations that were put in place when Iowa was one of the few battleships in the game when there have been ships introduced that outshine it in many, many ways. Same could be said about Yamato's turning circle but that's another story all together.

And? DD had one or two sets of torpedos on board. The game cannot work like that.

And a fire can make a ship non-combat worthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-IWP-]
Players
9 posts
753 battles
Just now, ColonelPete said:

And? DD had one or two sets of torpedos on board. The game cannot work like that.

And a fire can make a ship non-combat worthy.

A fire on deck is VERY unlikely to do anything significant to a ship unless they were making mistakes like at Jutland or what the Japanese did with their long lance torpedoes during the early years of the war. And comparing DDs having infinite torps to an incorrect turning radius is a non-comparison. Iowa didn't initially get it's real turning circle because WG thought it would be too strong. Now Iowa is surrounded by straight up better ships on all sides so changing the Iowa's turning circle to what it historically was 730 or 750m if I remember correctly would be an easy and sensible move. Iowa really has nothing going for it in the current meta. The second lowest tech tree HP pool, no longer the fastest T9 battleship (second fastest tech tree, when adding premiums it's not even close), AA is basically useless, it's penetration is just not impressive anymore, it's damage is pretty good but that only works if you can hit and penetrate and Iowa's dispersion can be incredibly unreliable at times even with the dispersion mod, and it's armor eats ridiculous amounts of HE damage trading off for alright at best AP protection that can be quite inconsistent. I love the ship, I love playing the ship but in the current meta it's definitely not a good ship. Won't stop me from playing it but I'm not going to act like it's great when it's not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
28,294 posts
14,932 battles
  • fires do not tend to stay on deck
  • the fires in game are not said to represent deck fires
  • you select realistic features you want to have in game and which you do not want, and complain about WG doing the same...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,945 posts
13,646 battles

Sooo, any buffs welcome, of course, but I enjoyed her a lot when I went over the US BB line again for the RP:

 

1149364776_IowaRegrind.thumb.jpg.305b04be3ab0fc6c078a487e7f76e980.jpg

 

Second in PR of all my tier IX BBs (look who's first, lol):

 

51911209_TierIXBBsTaliesn.thumb.jpg.3fe46b2ae3adc5affb6f60e84360b7a0.jpg

 

Lowish Average Damage, but then, same WR than Musashi with 33k less average damage.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-IWP-]
Players
9 posts
753 battles
5 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:
  • fires do not tend to stay on deck
  • the fires in game are not said to represent deck fires
  • you select realistic features you want to have in game and which you do not want, and complain about WG doing the same...

1, they do if the damage control party does their job correctly and they often don't have the chance to as the flammable part of the deck is often separated from the interior of the ship. Interior fires are almost always caused by a shell penetrating and detonating inside the ship.
2. fair enough but that's how they are visually represented
3. Now you're just being ridiculous. Argue factually or don't respond. Destroyers having unlimited torpedoes is a legitimate balancing implementation in a game where every ship has unlimited ammo, giving a ship a 200m+ bigger turning radius than it actually had isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-IWP-]
Players
9 posts
753 battles

Let me be clear here, I agree with three of these things at most. Sigma, TDS, and the turning radius. Iowa's rudder shift has never bothered me since I usually take the rudder mod since I usually run skills to hinder the effect of fires anyway and Iowa's concealment is excellent. It's not exactly special at her tier but 12.7km when built for it isn't bad, far from it. However Iowa's guns were noted as being some of the most consistent and accurate battleship guns ever put on a battleship due to advanced fire control systems now this wasn't saying much for a WWII battleship considering at long range the hit chance was roughly 3% for Iowa which was considered pretty damn good but it's strange that they're so much less accurate and consistent than other ships even at her tier at times (looking at you Musashi). Iowa had an improved version of the TDS found on the South Dakota class so I don't see why Massachusetts and Alabama have around double the torpedo reduction Iowa has save for the sake of being a gimmick for the SD class ships in game. I already stated my argument for the turning radius. The missing AA guns just blatantly don't matter in this meta it wouldn't change the fact that you're a great target for carriers. This will be my last post for a while because I have to go to work, I'll be back on when I get home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
28,294 posts
14,932 battles
34 minutes ago, ThatGuyOrby said:

1, they do if the damage control party does their job correctly and they often don't have the chance to as the flammable part of the deck is often separated from the interior of the ship. Interior fires are almost always caused by a shell penetrating and detonating inside the ship.
2. fair enough but that's how they are visually represented
3. Now you're just being ridiculous. Argue factually or don't respond. Destroyers having unlimited torpedoes is a legitimate balancing implementation in a game where every ship has unlimited ammo, giving a ship a 200m+ bigger turning radius than it actually had isn't.

1. IF..., that is represented by the fires going out -->  your crew did their job in time

2. then pay attention to the glow shining through penetrations in the hull

3. But that is exaclty you problem. WG chose to make BB more sluggish with every Tier. You just choose different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OMPG]
Beta Tester
378 posts
6,686 battles
1 hour ago, ThatGuyOrby said:

1, they do if the damage control party does their job correctly and they often don't have the chance to as the flammable part of the deck is often separated from the interior of the ship. Interior fires are almost always caused by a shell penetrating and detonating inside the ship.
 

Why do you think fires are representing only deck fires in this game?

 

This is an arcade game. This game has key playing features that real life does not have for example angling is not the most important thing in naval combat yet it is very effective in this game. Same goes for things representing fires and that fires can be fully healed if need be. Not to mention torpedoes that do 30+kts more than they did in real life or Battleships that do over 35kts. That is just not realistic in any way.

 

Edited by TohtoriP
-- edited for being dumb and not reading everything before posting --

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
3 hours ago, ThatGuyOrby said:

The fact that we're getting OP fake ship after OP fake ship and the real ships get non-historic hindrances in the name of so-called "balance"  

I wonder what OP ships we referring to, let's see...

2 hours ago, ThatGuyOrby said:

and a ship with 16 guns with a reload of 3ish seconds can't fire all game without running it's magazines dry within a couple minutes

Ah yes, a rant about Smolensk. How Smolensk cannot have enough ammunition. Historically, these guns came with 400 rounds per gun. Even a full reload build Smolensk only approaches the point of running out of ammunition realistically if it fires its guns non-stop for 20 minutes straight on a full reload maximising build. No Smolensk fires its guns the entire game. But lets rant about Smolensk, ignoring that every ship with torpedos somehow carries unlimited amounts of those onboard when most ships carried one set and that was it.

1 hour ago, ThatGuyOrby said:

Let me be clear here, I agree with three of these things at most. Sigma, TDS, and the turning radius. Iowa's rudder shift has never bothered me since I usually take the rudder mod since I usually run skills to hinder the effect of fires anyway and Iowa's concealment is excellent. It's not exactly special at her tier but 12.7km when built for it isn't bad, far from it. However Iowa's guns were noted as being some of the most consistent and accurate battleship guns ever put on a battleship due to advanced fire control systems now this wasn't saying much for a WWII battleship considering at long range the hit chance was roughly 3% for Iowa which was considered pretty damn good but it's strange that they're so much less accurate and consistent than other ships even at her tier at times (looking at you Musashi).

Iowa has a better dispersion than Musashi base at up to 9 km and access to Artillery Plotting Room 2 module. Combined with 1.9 sigma, it is actually one of the most consistent battleships at its tier, way more consistent than a Musashi.

2 hours ago, ThatGuyOrby said:

Now Iowa is surrounded by straight up better ships on all sides so changing the Iowa's turning circle to what it historically was 730 or 750m if I remember correctly would be an easy and sensible move. Iowa really has nothing going for it in the current meta. The second lowest tech tree HP pool, no longer the fastest T9 battleship (second fastest tech tree, when adding premiums it's not even close), AA is basically useless, it's penetration is just not impressive anymore, it's damage is pretty good but that only works if you can hit and penetrate and Iowa's dispersion can be incredibly unreliable at times even with the dispersion mod, and it's armor eats ridiculous amounts of HE damage trading off for alright at best AP protection that can be quite inconsistent. I love the ship, I love playing the ship but in the current meta it's definitely not a good ship. Won't stop me from playing it but I'm not going to act like it's great when it's not.

Iowa has the fourth lowest tech tree hp pool, as Lion, Alsace and Izumo have less. Functionally, adding potential from repair parties, it also beats the FdG and Sovietsky Soyuz. Adding premiums doesn't change that, as most premiums have even less hp than their tech tree counterparts and only Musashi has more. Being second after a down-tiered T10 is pretty good. As for fastest, it has the highest unmodified speed, shared with Missouri and Georgia. It's fourth fastest, if we consider speed boost, though that still leaves a ton of ships that are significantly slower. Izumo and Musashi are slower by about the same margin as the Iowa is slower than a speed-boosting Georgia. In absolute terms. In relative terms, the difference between Izumo and Iowa is more drastic than that of Iowa to speedboosting Georgia. Iowas dispersion with mod is only bested at short range by the Soviets, at long range by the Japanese (and Baijie), at all ranges by Georgia (to make up for 6 guns only) and at no range by the French. Its sigma of 1.9 is only bested by the Izumo and Baijie. Iowa is one of the most consistent gun platforms at T9. As for eating HE damage, the ship has a 38 mm deck and upper belt and thus is again, straight up middle of the pack, worse than FdG, Pommern, Soviets and Japanese, but better than British and French. Certainly no ridiculous vulnerability there.

 

Saying Iowa has nothing going for it is basically ignoring the point of the USN BBs at high tiers, which is that they also got nothing going against them. They are decent to good in every regard, without glaring weaknesses that other ships might have. They are well-balanced designs that perform under most circumstances.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×