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

Småland or Alaska?

73 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[SWAMP]
Players
573 posts
3,410 battles

Hi there, and thanks for taking your time to look through my topic.
 

I am currently sitting at about 1,5M free XP, and wanting to use it on a new ship.

Seeing as both the Alaska and Småland are being removed now, I figure I could realistically and most likely only get one of them.
As such, I do struggle choosing which one to go for, and I would love some additional feedback from the forum on which might be a better fit.
So far, here are the main draws from both ships for me:

Småland:
I recently tried DDs a few months ago, and it went so well that I now consider myself a DD main (though I do like to play aggressively in BBs occasionally).
I currently own the Daring as my only T10 DD, and I feel like I perform very well in the DD hunting role (60%+ solo WR).

Seeing as I recently also started doing clan battles, I feel like Småland is on the "must have" list, especially since I'm drawn to the DD hunting role.
On the other hand, both CBs and randoms are infested with radar these days (and few DDs to hunt), and I feel like my clan would ideally rather have me being in a CA as the role of DDs can be somewhat limited these days.
Then again, having no smoke is less of an issue when there are so many radar ships around, while having generally good range with 12km fast torps and decent guns (with AFT) similarly could help pressuring those entrenched Stalins and Petros which are everywhere these days.

 

Alaska:
On the looks of it, this boat looks great.
I have no real experience with radar cruisers and would love to get better at them (my only T10 cruisers are Henri IV and Smolensk, neither of which seem even remotely comparable to Alaska).
Seeing how tanky she is, I feel like I could make her work near the front, hunting DDs and cruisers while supporting a push when needed.
I don't know how often T9 appears in competitive though (CBs or ranked), but if it is somewhat common I would definitely not want to miss out.

I should note that I generally would love to get both ships, but I don't want to buy me the Alaska for real money (even though it's an option).
Paying about 50-60€ for a pixel boat (the same price as an AAA title game) is just horrendously expensive imo, and ideally not something I want to support.
So for now, I'm content with choosing either one, and any further input would be greatly appreciated! :Smile_Default:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,074 posts
16,197 battles

It's a tough choice, both are excellent ships. Taking a look at your profile and your own words about DD play, however, there's one conclusion: get the Smaland. She's being removed "for being too popular" (when you rarely see her, really) after only being available for a short time, that should tell you something about how powerful the ship is. It's a very strong DD with a unique and fun playstyle that will likely never come back unless they start filling christmas boxes with t10's. As it is, I'd get the Smaland and hope the christmas patch loot either drops you an Alaska outright or just drops enough fxp to get both. But given your natural preferences and my own experience with both ships (I prefer DD's myself, so I can relate) I'd say don't miss out on the Smaland.

 

(edit: I own both ships and both are excellent, but if I had to choose which one I keep, it'd be the Smaland)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LEEUW]
Players
2,625 posts
10,280 battles
29 minutes ago, Hirohito said:

I feel like Småland is on the "must have" list, especially since I'm drawn to the DD hunting role.

                             pointupwards.png

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
21 minutes ago, Hirohito said:

I have no real experience with radar cruisers and would love to get better at them (my only T10 cruisers are Henri IV and Smolensk, neither of which seem even remotely comparable to Alaska).
Seeing how tanky she is, I feel like I could make her work near the front, hunting DDs and cruisers while supporting a push when needed.
I don't know how often T9 appears in competitive though (CBs or ranked), but if it is somewhat common I would definitely not want to miss out.

First rule of how to radar cruiser: Don't get stuck on the fact that your cruiser has radar. Many people needlessly throw their ship away because they feel they need to radar, then are either in a suicidal position where they die or in a useless position where they do nothing other than radar. Alaska is among the very few radar cruisers that won't just outright die when being out in the open, but it still isn't played best when rushing in. Frankly, the best way to support would be to be close enough to your friendly DD to still reliably hit things, but far enough to not make it impossible to disengage by not firing for 20s and steaming away, then picking away at whatever support the enemy has at the cap (cruisers, BBs) and punishing whatever silly enemy cruiser might rush your DD. Once you know the enemy support is mostly gone and you won't get focused down to death, then you can push. Alaska is first and foremost a cruiser killer, not a DD killer and throwing away radars for no good reason can cost you when you need it. It also only has 10 km range, while your ship is spotted from 12.2 km or so away (if I remember correctly).

 

Apart from that, Alaska is likely the overall strongest T9 competitive pick in existence. Certainly for any ranked. For CB, I'd also not be surprised if Alaska saw usage, due to just bringing insane survivability for a cruiser, great guns and a radar. It is likely the best T9 cruiser overall and I cannot recommend the ship enough. I'm not sure if a supercruiser is what you like to play and you seem set on the Smaland (which is not a bad choice), but if in any way you can fit it in (still 3 months before they leave the armory), do it. Alaska also is great for randoms, as a T9 premium makes more credits than Smaland and is among the most fun ships, imo, also due to how forgiving the ship is, making it a less stressful playing experience.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,871 posts
8,187 battles

You will probably be able to get Alaska with 15% discount on black Friday. Maybe even in 2021, if you don't want to spend the money now. Alaska is a good ship, nothing more, nothing less. I mean, you won't get special entertainment value by buying it, so might regret spending much money for it. On the other hand, if you play this game a lot, and you don't mind spending a lot, then it might worth the money. Personally I buy only T8 ships at (25%+30%) discount, as that's my limit for a single ship. Alternatively, if someone asks you what would you like to have for Christmas, you might ask for an Alaska.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,282 posts
19,938 battles
2 minutes ago, HaachamaShipping said:

Hayate isn't getting withdrawn in 3 months.

Hayate likes a word with you too :Smile-angry:

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VIBES]
Players
227 posts
16,773 battles
3 hours ago, Hirohito said:

Hi there, and thanks for taking your time to look through my topic.
 

I am currently sitting at about 1,5M free XP, and wanting to use it on a new ship.

Seeing as both the Alaska and Småland are being removed now, I figure I could realistically and most likely only get one of them.
As such, I do struggle choosing which one to go for, and I would love some additional feedback from the forum on which might be a better fit.
So far, here are the main draws from both ships for me:

Småland:
I recently tried DDs a few months ago, and it went so well that I now consider myself a DD main (though I do like to play aggressively in BBs occasionally).
I currently own the Daring as my only T10 DD, and I feel like I perform very well in the DD hunting role (60%+ solo WR).

Seeing as I recently also started doing clan battles, I feel like Småland is on the "must have" list, especially since I'm drawn to the DD hunting role.
On the other hand, both CBs and randoms are infested with radar these days (and few DDs to hunt), and I feel like my clan would ideally rather have me being in a CA as the role of DDs can be somewhat limited these days.
Then again, having no smoke is less of an issue when there are so many radar ships around, while having generally good range with 12km fast torps and decent guns (with AFT) similarly could help pressuring those entrenched Stalins and Petros which are everywhere these days.

 

Alaska:
On the looks of it, this boat looks great.
I have no real experience with radar cruisers and would love to get better at them (my only T10 cruisers are Henri IV and Smolensk, neither of which seem even remotely comparable to Alaska).
Seeing how tanky she is, I feel like I could make her work near the front, hunting DDs and cruisers while supporting a push when needed.
I don't know how often T9 appears in competitive though (CBs or ranked), but if it is somewhat common I would definitely not want to miss out.

I should note that I generally would love to get both ships, but I don't want to buy me the Alaska for real money (even though it's an option).
Paying about 50-60€ for a pixel boat (the same price as an AAA title game) is just horrendously expensive imo, and ideally not something I want to support.
So for now, I'm content with choosing either one, and any further input would be greatly appreciated! :Smile_Default:

I'm also sitting on around 1.5M free xp, but fortunately I have the Alaska already, so I don't have to choose. :Smile-_tongue:

Imho going for a DD hunter when there are already so many radar ships isn't terribly logical. Speed boost and a gun build will help, but even when you manage to sink the DD on your cap, and break through, the striking power of your torps isn't too good. Yes, they have 12 km range and they're fast, but the Halland's have 15 km range and they're faster as well as more numerous, meaning they're much better against those "entrenched Petros and Stalins".

Then again, killing DDs wins games...

Then again, you don't seem to have any EU DD, so you'll have to train a new captain, likely with the sort of build that would not translate too well on the EU DD tech tree line (they're more torpedo-focused, most people agree).

Overall, I'd rather get the Smaland than the Hayate, but if I didn't have the Alaska I think I'd rather get the latter first.

 

All I can say for the Alaska is: she's very versatile and she fares well against T10s.

She's tanky (27 mm bow, low citadel), she's got good AA, good utility, decent concealment, excellent AP pen angles. The shells are a bit floaty, but very usable against any target. Just don't get stuck on the idea she's a radar cruiser. Her radar is more like the Missouri's: useful if some DD blunders into you and smokes up, or to blap distracted Neptunes who are too busy clicking Left-Mouse to look at the minimap, but it doesn't define her. She's somewhere between a Baltimore and an Iowa, though harder to citadel than either. Don't go nose-in like you're some battleship with strong deck armor: you're not. Keep moving, know when to kite, know when to push.

She's likely better as a captain trainer as well, since she can work both with a survivability BB build and a traditional CA build (except you don't need Demo Expert). Both Expert Loader (esp. if you have Halsey) and Concealment Expert are mandatory, imho. Be advised, though: she burns for as long as BBs do, and she gets one fewer heal to begin with, so you have to take either Superintendent or some fire-reduction skills.

She's not terribly exciting at the beginning of a game, unlike the Smaland I imagine, but as the game progresses she can put her AP angles to good use, and in the late game, if you have good strategic thinking, you can flank distracted BBs and citadel fairly reliably, as you might in a Jean Bart.
Of my T9-10 games, only about 3% were in the Alaska, but she does hold my xp record (even though I'm not even very good with her). :cap_like:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SWAMP]
Players
573 posts
3,410 battles
16 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

 

Imho going for a DD hunter when there are already so many radar ships isn't terribly logical. Speed boost and a gun build will help, but even when you manage to sink the DD on your cap, and break through, the striking power of your torps isn't too good. Yes, they have 12 km range and they're fast, but the Halland's have 15 km range and they're faster as well as more numerous, meaning they're much better against those "entrenched Petros and Stalins".

 

I understand that, but I reckon the meta might change later on, and if so I don't want to be left without a "must have" boat.

 

Just curious though:
I saw that Småland was rather popular in KOTS this time (even over Halland), despite there being a lot of radar ships on each side and a relatively low number of DDs to hunt.
Does anyone here know why the Småland might have been a preferred DD pick by those super unicums playing in KOTS, and what makes up it's general appeal for competitive play?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
17 minutes ago, Hirohito said:

Just curious though:
I saw that Småland was rather popular in KOTS this time (even over Halland), despite there being a lot of radar ships on each side and a relatively low number of DDs to hunt.
Does anyone here know why the Småland might have been a preferred DD pick by those super unicums playing in KOTS, and what makes up it's general appeal for competitive play?

Best vision control at T10 only revaled by radar YY, though Smaland isn't absolutely gimped in main armament. And in KOTS, if the Smaland can catch the enemy DD and allow its team a timely kill on the enemy DD, that's a very big deal, because even if it isn't great at torping things, it is better at it than a dead DD. Also, the Smaland threat really limits what you can do with an opposing DD that isn't a Smaland. Lastly, it should be noted that a supercharged speed boost and a repair can do a lot to get out of a bad situation alive and recover instead of dying or being absolutely crippled for the remainder of the game. And a DDs job on KOTS is often very much not the damage dealing, but the spotting, helping control key areas and staying alive to continue doing that job.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VIBES]
Players
227 posts
16,773 battles
26 minutes ago, Hirohito said:

I understand that, but I reckon the meta might change later on, and if so I don't want to be left without a "must have" boat.

 

Just curious though:
I saw that Småland was rather popular in KOTS this time (even over Halland), despite there being a lot of radar ships on each side and a relatively low number of DDs to hunt.
Does anyone here know why the Småland might have been a preferred DD pick by those super unicums playing in KOTS, and what makes up it's general appeal for competitive play?

The Smaland isn't really countered by radar: her torps are still competitive with the radar range, she won't sit in smoke, she has an excellent speed boost to get out of trouble as well as good survivability (heals). Also, her AA is excellent, so she can loiter within radar range during cooldowns without being too worried about planes, as long as she sets AA traps. Overall she's very versatile as well, which is why I'm trying to get her in time. She's just not a great damage dealer, but that's not as important in competitive modes, which are more about map control and vision, as most players know to avoid overextending and have a sense for incoming torps.

And people don't just play 12 km radar cruisers in competitive because they have 12 km radar. They're Russian, so they also have railguns and they're very tanky when bow-in. Having radar is nice, but I suspect it's not the only reason for the pick.

 

But really, you should also ask yourself if your Daring is good enough for competitive. Are the numerous smokescreens and the long-duration hydro worth giving up for better AA, radar, speed boost, maybe an extra heal, as well as different torps? Unfortunately, I can't comment directly on the Daring, as the recent desync issues made me put my Jutland grind on halt, but I've done well in T8 Ranked with the Lightning this summer, and the Daring seems to be more of that, except better.

If you're happy with your Daring (you should be, judging by the stats), maybe you'd rather pick the Alaska to broaden your options for USN captains, but if you're really into T10 matches and competitive modes, perhaps get the Smaland. I did use the Alaska the last Ranked Sprint (easiest 10k coal ever), but I agree T9s are less useful for competitive.

 

I'll remind you you can mount radar on the Yueyang, but she's just crap if CVs are around, and I wouldn't recommend her except for trolling people in Random. Also, her torps have really slow reload, so between those and the gun skills/modules you need to make the most of you radar, your build is going to be overtaxed.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SWAMP]
Players
573 posts
3,410 battles
8 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

But really, you should also ask yourself if your Daring is good enough for competitive. Are the numerous smokescreens and the long-duration hydro worth giving up for better AA, radar, speed boost, maybe an extra heal, as well as different torps? Unfortunately, I can't comment directly on the Daring, as the recent desync issues made me put my Jutland grind on halt, but I've done well in T8 Ranked with the Lightning this summer, and the Daring seems to be more of that, except better.

If you're happy with your Daring (you should be, judging by the stats), maybe you'd rather pick the Alaska to broaden your options for USN captains, but if you're really into T10 matches and competitive modes, perhaps get the Smaland. I did use the Alaska the last Ranked Sprint (easiest 10k coal ever), but I agree T9s are less useful for competitive.

I'll remind you you can mount radar on the Yueyang, but she's just crap if CVs are around.

 

I love my Daring, but I found that she suffers a bit since DDs are hardly played (and she excels at destroying them), so I lose some of the utility right there.
And while I can screen for torps and provide spotting, her slow speed makes it dangerous to loiter around the edge of radar as I need more of a "cushion" (range) in case the enemy decides to push.
For now, her 10km torps seem to still work in Gale league (there are still some GKs who like to push straight into my narrow spread of torps), but as we're progressing there are more and more 4x Petro/Stalin comps where my 10km torps are largely ineffective and my guns likewise (12,8km).
They do light up a lot of fires, but otherwise just shatter on that 50mm plating, so the amount of pressure I can put out is limited.
As I understood though, the Småland can still make AFT or the range mod work due to better ballistics, while Daring generally shouldn't.

 

9 minutes ago, HaachamaShipping said:

Best vision control at T10 only revaled by radar YY, though Smaland isn't absolutely gimped in main armament. And in KOTS, if the Smaland can catch the enemy DD and allow its team a timely kill on the enemy DD, that's a very big deal, because even if it isn't great at torping things, it is better at it than a dead DD. Also, the Smaland threat really limits what you can do with an opposing DD that isn't a Smaland. Lastly, it should be noted that a supercharged speed boost and a repair can do a lot to get out of a bad situation alive and recover instead of dying or being absolutely crippled for the remainder of the game. And a DDs job on KOTS is often very much not the damage dealing, but the spotting, helping control key areas and staying alive to continue doing that job.

Thanks, that explains a lot.
So in essence, she secures a level of map control that the Halland can't to the same extent, if I understand you correctly?
And should therefore firstmost be played in a rather forward role near the caps (ofc not too close to radar positions) in order to zone out DDs and provide spotting while discouraging pushes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VIBES]
Players
227 posts
16,773 battles
32 minutes ago, Hirohito said:

I understand that, but I reckon the meta might change later on, and if so I don't want to be left without a "must have" boat.

 

Just curious though:
I saw that Småland was rather popular in KOTS this time (even over Halland), despite there being a lot of radar ships on each side and a relatively low number of DDs to hunt.
Does anyone here know why the Småland might have been a preferred DD pick by those super unicums playing in KOTS, and what makes up it's general appeal for competitive play?

I would argue that since semi-stationary Russian radar cruisers are sort of the most common ships in competitive, the solution is probably to play a Hakuryu, or a Richthofen...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SWAMP]
Players
573 posts
3,410 battles
6 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

I would argue that since semi-stationary Russian radar cruisers are sort of the most common ships in competitive, the solution is probably to play a Hakuryu, or a Richthofen...

Yeah... I started out playing CVs (which is why I generally don't struggle in DDs vs CVs), but playing my Hakuryu is both boring as heck, and I'm not good enough to consistently dodge flak and keep my losses low enough. :Smile_sad:
If I'd have to choose between "having" to play the boring Hakuryu over the fun Daring (or DDs in general), I'd rather quit tbh - CVs are just that boring to play for me, as nothing gets the adrenaline pumping like being up close in a DD with everyone on the enemy team eager to sink me. :Smile_veryhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VIBES]
Players
227 posts
16,773 battles
29 minutes ago, Hirohito said:

 

Thanks, that explains a lot.
So in essence, she secures a level of map control that the Halland can't to the same extent, if I understand you correctly?
And should therefore firstmost be played in a rather forward role near the caps (ofc not too close to radar positions) in order to zone out DDs and provide spotting while discouraging pushes?

Imho the Halland has better map control thanks to the much better torps, at least against radar supercruisers. But don't underestimate torps against DDs.

In this game https://replayswows.com/replay/112882#stats I landed 2 very easy torps on DDs on another cap in the Halland, something I couldn't have done in the Smaland.

 

The Smaland is better for straight up murdering DDs because of the better guns and the super speedboost. Radar is useful, but in competitive people will expect that.

Taking AFT helps dealing damage to larger targets (including the important permafires after getting floods), but it sort of prevents you from taking RPF, which is useful both for DD hunting and to avoid torps (unlike the Daring, you have no long-duration hydro).


Remember: just like with the Alaska, you shouldn't let the radar define her.

You can try AFT and the speed boost duration module, and just run around like a headless chicken pew-pewing stuff, tanking damage for the team and attracting the CV's attention, which will lead to many Dreadnought and AA Expert awards, endless frustration for the enemy team, and a high WR.

Sort of what I do in Randoms (I'm not much of a competitive player, I'll admit) with the Udaloi: be everywhere, annoy enemies, set permafires, attract planes and then turn on Def AA when they're close, spam torps then pew-pew some more to distract enemies and make them blunder into them, etc.

Basically, the Smaland has the tools both for the DD-murdering ninja role (RPF and SI recommended) and the BB/CV harassing attention whore role (AFT recommended).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
4 minutes ago, Hirohito said:

 

Thanks, that explains a lot.
So in essence, she secures a level of map control that the Halland can't to the same extent, if I understand you correctly?
And should therefore firstmost be played in a rather forward role near the caps (ofc not too close to radar positions) in order to zone out DDs and provide spotting while discouraging pushes?

Please note the differences in how KOTS is played and how randoms is played though. With randoms, much of it is up to you. Competitive modes like KOTS and any non-CV T10 CB (one can dream, lol), you'll likely first have to talk with the rest of the team how you approach this battle and you are a facilitator first and foremost. In a proper CB team, you should be able to count on your team mates that when it is time to go, they got your back, in randoms, yeah, no. So, in randoms, don't just rush into caps. For starters, there's many more DDs that see play in randoms that are different and some of them just don't care about your radar. For example, if you run into a Grozovoi, not just does the radar not give you a vision advantage (as you outspot it anyway), but the Grozovoi can gun you down if you got no help and you try to pick a fight. But you won't see ships like Grozovoi in CB. Similarly, in randoms, you will find enough people who might throw their ship away, but in suiciding take large amounts of your hp with them, making it much harder to do anything afterwards. A yoloing Marceau, Kleber or even a Shima that uses its guns and doesn't smoke can be a very annoying if not outright murderous enemy.

 

So in random you play conservative, use your radar for those ambushes where you know you can get them and they won't just ruin the rest of the match in return because they spot you in front of the entire enemy team or similar crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SM0KE]
Players
6,145 posts
14,630 battles
6 hours ago, Hirohito said:

any further input would be greatly appreciated!

All things being equal, get Smaland (even though 2 million is a ludicrous price): assuming things stay as they are, there are alternative routes to Alaska (Black Friday version, Xmas boxes etc.), but - so far - all the removed T10s have remained unavailable after their removal.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
2 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

All things being equal, get Smaland (even though 2 million is a ludicrous price): assuming things stay as they are, there are alternative routes to Alaska (Black Friday version, Xmas boxes etc.), but - so far - all the removed T10s have remained unavailable after their removal.

Isn't the only precedent of a removed T10 the Smolensk? Not counting event ship Pay2Rico. And it's not even been a year since removal of that ship.

 

Also, I would say, such logic holds up, IF one is prepared to spend the money on Alaska. It's not cheap.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SM0KE]
Players
6,145 posts
14,630 battles
22 minutes ago, HaachamaShipping said:

Isn't the only precedent of a removed T10 the Smolensk?

Off the top of my head, yes, so I freely admit the data-set is hardly massive.

 

The release of ARP Yamato may also presage more T10s for direct sale too, I guess...

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
820 posts
5,474 battles

Is it certain you will have to choose?

 

Note that:

 

- It will take 3 about 3 months before Alaska and Smaland will be removed.

- Christmas is coming

- IF you are willing to spend on camos and flags, it is feasible to grind the 1.5 million Free XP you would need to get both. Note that Narai (fully decked out in right camos and flags) can net you 30k Free XP per game. Or - in other words - in theory 50 Narai games should get you the required Free XP. With AT LEAST 3 cycles coming up, that means on average about 3 Narai games per day. Should be doable. And that does NOT take into account Free XP you might get through other means (like crates and missions) that you can get between now and then (say Resource Container and so on).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
2,991 posts
17,341 battles

Are you more into CA or more into DD?

Answer that and you have your answer.

 

Bonus questions:

Do you like the lazy US CA shell arcs?

Do you like battlecruiser type gameplay?

Do you like non smoke DDs?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


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

×