Simple question: Austin or Plymouth

[OldPappy]

Like the title says.

I have aquired - obviously - enough steel to get the Plymouth and will have enough, very soon. for Austin if I dont take the plymouth. I know it's very personal based how you play what you get out of a ship, but as it is unlikely that I will get to buy the other ship anytime within 1-2 years the choice will be final. I don't play clan wars so the only source of steel i have is from ranked basically. (Not good enough for clan wars. And no time really during the hours it's being played.)

So I thought I'd gather some input here about the pros and cons of both ships. I love the mino and I am leaning towards the Plymouth due to the radar/smoke combo...

Opinions are gratefully accepted! 

Cheers and have a smashing day!

[Miscommunication_dept]

I have neither.

 

To me neither looks that good. Austin looks very fun but also very situational.

 

Plymouth's smoke/radar combo looks good but dpm is 25% lower than the Mino.

That and the normal heal are why it does not interest me.

 

Probably so hopeful but it's my opinion.

[Prophecy82]

I have Austin.

I like that ship.

Its not very good in Randoms or CB. I had a blast tho in Ranked with it. 

 

If you want it for Randoms you may want to have a DD-buddy which makes your life so much easier. 

That said, If you play mostly Solo, Austin isnt an easy ship to perform good in. 

But I think same is true for Plymouth... at least you got smoke...

[MrWastee]

got both, not too many matches on both.

 

austin:

... i'm not sure what yet to think of this. i had some good matches, but on a lot of losses. sometimes i got almost one shotted like 2-3 mins in match. sometimes i open water kited 2 t9 bb's and survived... i luv atlanta, but this thing for sure plays even more tricky. i perceive it as a div boat, it can be great dd supporter. without spotting and cover on the other it's like dancing on the razors edge.

 

Spoiler

Austin

10

U.S.A.

9

33.33%

595

51 454

0.56

6.56

 

and that's where the plymouth comes into play...

 

plymouth:

swiss knife that got it all, like a guaranteed dead dd each match. radar/concealment is only like 100m off, so when get spotted just radar and smoke up. maxed out radar is over 50 secs, so whatever did spot u most likely will regret. dpm is not a prob in these scenarios either, the shells do hurt a lot on dd's....

basically true belfast play on t10, just without the ifhe pwn. great dd support ship either, but in doubt this ship can handle odd situations simply better on it's own than the austin imo.

 

Spoiler

Plymouth

10

U.K.

19

68.42%

1 262

65 564

0.89

2.11

 

plymouth, hands down.

 

2cts

[Ocsimano18]

I'd wait to see if Napoli is for steel. Seems to be the cruiser of the year.

[Miscommunication_dept]

3 minutes ago, Ocsimano18 said:

I'd wait to see if Napoli is for steel. Seems to be the cruiser of the year.

Really?

 

Terrible AP dpm, far worse that the tier 9 Alaska?

16.2km range, at tier 10?

 

It could be good but I remain skeptical. 

[Prophecy82]

4 minutes ago, Ocsimano18 said:

I'd wait to see if Napoli is for steel. Seems to be the cruiser of the year.

 

With its secondary-gimmick its predestined for RB imo, since most freak-ships are there.

[Miscommunication_dept]

2 minutes ago, Prophecy82 said:

 

With its secondary-gimmick its predestined for RB imo, since most freak-ships are there.

I miss my secondary Siegfried!

[Smeggo]

Austin - for PVE pewpew 

[Panzerblitz]

1 minute ago, gopher31 said:

I miss my secondary Siegfried!

Siegfried and Ägir. Ägir might not have the same range, but the secondary guns are excellent. Both ships lost a viable build with the skill rework and we got nothing in return. Now they are just 2 port queens.

[Prophecy82]

8 minutes ago, gopher31 said:

I miss my secondary Siegfried!

Me too 

[Miscommunication_dept]

1 minute ago, Panzerblitz said:

Siegfried and Ägir. Ägir might not have the same range, but the secondary guns are excellent. Both ships lost a viable build with the skill rework and we got nothing in return. Now they are just 2 port queens.

Agir  never had the range post release. It's standard range was 5.3km while Siegfried had 7.6km. Fully kitted out the Agir would have an 8km range while Siegfried's would stretch to 11.5km. With a 11.9km detection, that was quite fun.

 

Now they both have 7.95km range and no way to buff it, the Agir is the better secondary ship.

 

This was by far the most disappointing part of the commander rework for me. 

[Yedwy]

1 hour ago, gopher31 said:

I have neither.

 

To me neither looks that good. Austin looks very fun but also very situational.

 

Plymouth's smoke/radar combo looks good but dpm is 25% lower than the Mino.

That and the normal heal are why it does not interest me.

 

Probably so hopeful but it's my opinion.

Ditto

[Panzerblitz]

25 minutes ago, gopher31 said:

Agir  never had the range post release. It's standard range was 5.3km while Siegfried had 7.6km. Fully kitted out the Agir would have an 8km range while Siegfried's would stretch to 11.5km. With a 11.9km detection, that was quite fun.

 

Now they both have 7.95km range and no way to buff it, the Agir is the better secondary ship.

 

This was by far the most disappointing part of the commander rework for me. 

Same, and when WG were called out about it, their reaction was akin to "Deal with it"....

[Yedwy]

22 minutes ago, Panzerblitz said:

Same, and when WG were called out about it, their reaction was akin to "Deal with it"....

And so we did - not investing in the ships anymore, at least not past what I would play normally anyway...

[MrWastee]

*just to add:

sap doesnt really cater austin! not being able to citadel cl's broad closeup is a big problem imo!

[OldPappy]

2 hours ago, MrWastee said:

got both, not too many matches on both.

 

austin:

... i'm not sure what yet to think of this. i had some good matches, but on a lot of losses. sometimes i got almost one shotted like 2-3 mins in match. sometimes i open water kited 2 t9 bb's and survived... i luv atlanta, but this thing for sure plays even more tricky. i perceive it as a div boat, it can be great dd supporter. without spotting and cover on the other it's like dancing on the razors edge.

 

  Hide contents

Austin

10

U.S.A.

9

33.33%

595

51 454

0.56

6.56

 

and that's where the plymouth comes into play...

 

plymouth:

swiss knife that got it all, like a guaranteed dead dd each match. radar/concealment is only like 100m off, so when get spotted just radar and smoke up. maxed out radar is over 50 secs, so whatever did spot u most likely will regret. dpm is not a prob in these scenarios either, the shells do hurt a lot on dd's....

basically true belfast play on t10, just without the ifhe pwn. great dd support ship either, but in doubt this ship can handle odd situations simply better on it's own than the austin imo.

 

  Hide contents

Plymouth

10

U.K.

19

68.42%

1 262

65 564

0.89

2.11

 

plymouth, hands down.

 

2cts

Nice, concise and clear advice. Thanks a lot friend!

[MrWastee]

2 minutes ago, OldPappy said:

Nice, concise and clear advice. Thanks a lot friend!

u're welcome! to note, these are cl's! probability to get blapped raises with tier so to say ;D... gl and njoy

[totally_potato]

2 hours ago, OldPappy said:

Like the title says.

I have aquired - obviously - enough steel to get the Plymouth and will have enough, very soon. for Austin if I dont take the plymouth. I know it's very personal based how you play what you get out of a ship, but as it is unlikely that I will get to buy the other ship anytime within 1-2 years the choice will be final. I don't play clan wars so the only source of steel i have is from ranked basically. (Not good enough for clan wars. And no time really during the hours it's being played.)

So I thought I'd gather some input here about the pros and cons of both ships. I love the mino and I am leaning towards the Plymouth due to the radar/smoke combo...

Opinions are gratefully accepted! 

Cheers and have a smashing day!

Austin is basically an Atlanta on steroids in Tier 10. However its the only hightier american cruiser without radar

What is does have is SAP and HE. And an enhanced RB. So you are a very good DD hunter coz you also have hydro. You also have some special armor

You are first of all, exceptionally thin, so BBs overpin you when you are broadside, and unlike manu heavy cruisers and light cruisers, you have 32mm middle section. So with careful angling you hard counter 18 inch guns (Ohio, Thunderer, Kremlin, etc). There are only four ships in the game that hard counter your armor, and they are all japanese. You also have more heals than the average cruiser and it has the American BB healing percentage (0.66% instead of 0.5%). So, for a CL with no smoke, you are very hard to kill, unless you get devstruck out of the water. Ppl keep saying it can't deal with bow on targets, but I think they forgot about HE. And RB. However it is true, that a mispositioned Austin can be killed quite easily, coz low HP and while you are fairly fast at 35 knots, with no smoke or engine boost its feels kind vulnerable. Also I kind felt like a heavy car, while driving that thing but Ig that's just me coz the maneuverability is quite good. Stealth is ok. This ship is balanced coz if caught off guard, you can punish it, unlike Colbert which has french maneuverability and Smolensk which is even thinner and has smoke. Also no radar hurts this ship. And without RB, your reload kinda sucks. 

 

Plymouth is a very versatile ship. Idk what ppl have against it, but I quite like it. Its basically an Edinburgh on steroids. 16 guns so a lot of alpha, and while its no Minotaur in reload, its ok considering the amount of shells your throw out. AA is well, kinda meh. Its slower than Mino by two knots but way better TC and slightly better rudder shift. Consumable wise, Mino has super heal, smoke/radar and hydro, while Plymouth has all of it with no options. Although heal is worser, she is tankier in terms of armor, as she has a bit of belt to bounce crap if needed. HP is worser tho.

 

So Plymouth is a different Mino/Super edinburgh. She has insane utility, and her combo of consumable is quite toxic and the reason why Belfast was so OP, and a very high alpha strike with respectable reload. Also not a big difference in detection range, and radar range so there's that

 

Both are quite good ships, but idk what kind of ship you like, what kind of playstyle you are into. 

For my steel, I went Plymouth first. She is quite nasty in a div. 

I got the Austin later when it went on sale (well a week or two after)

Now its upto you what you like. 

I can tell you, I have more consistent results in Plymouth than Austin

 

I would say get Plymouth first coz she released first so she has more chance of removal and Austin is relatively new, but they don't have that big of a gap between them.

 

So all and all, its your choice

[totally_potato]

2 hours ago, gopher31 said:

Really?

 

Terrible AP dpm, far worse that the tier 9 Alaska?

16.2km range, at tier 10?

 

It could be good but I remain skeptical. 

Who really cares about DPM on supercruisers. Its honestly just irrelevant. 

Alaska burns for 60 secs

Napoli burns for 30 secs

 

Alaska has 12.2 km stealth

Napoli has 10.3 km stealth

 

Alaska has good guns

Napoli has good guns and torps and secs

 

Alaska has radar

Napoli has smoke

 

Alaska goes 33 knots, has 850m TC, and 13 RS

Napoli goes 35.5 knots, has 750m TC and 12.5 sec rudder shift

 

 

So you can't exactly say Alaska is better than Napoli. Both are different ships. Napoli is also way tankier in armor, has like 1k less. 

Napoli looks promising, so let's just wait and watch.

 

[MrWastee]

25 minutes ago, totally_potato said:

*snip

....ye, keep off yammies in austin. had to learn that the hard way lol

 

[Miscommunication_dept]

7 minutes ago, totally_potato said:

Who really cares about DPM on supercruisers. Its honestly just irrelevant. 

Alaska burns for 60 secs

Napoli burns for 30 secs

 

Alaska has 12.2 km stealth

Napoli has 10.3 km stealth

 

Alaska has good guns

Napoli has good guns and torps and secs

 

Alaska has radar

Napoli has smoke

 

Alaska goes 33 knots, has 850m TC, and 13 RS

Napoli goes 35.5 knots, has 750m TC and 12.5 sec rudder shift

 

 

So you can't exactly say Alaska is better than Napoli. Both are different ships. Napoli is also way tankier in armor, has like 1k less. 

Napoli looks promising, so let's just wait and watch.

 

 

You make good points, Napoli is armour is very much like Petropavolosk  meaning it could very easily sneak up on a battleship that would be able to do anything about it. 

Meanwhile it can citadel them with those guns  or smoke up and torp Paolo style.

 

I actually forgot about the armour and that does change things significantly.

 

As you say, we should reserve judgement until release.

 

[totally_potato]

1 minute ago, MrWastee said:

....ye, keep off yammies in austin. had to learn that the hard way lol

 

Me too

I sucked in my first few games, later I got a bit better at it, now I am fairly good at it. Although have to admit, she is kinda situational, but not a bad div ship

[tocqueville8]

3 hours ago, OldPappy said:

Opinions are gratefully accepted! 

I'm leaning Plymouth for my next steel purchase.

 

The Plymouth looks like a weaker but safer Minotaur.

Fewer torps, worse AA and heal, but radar is very nice to have and, importantly, the lower rate of fire should leave you more time to look around between salvoes, improving your survivability through situational awareness.

I've recently got the permacamo for the Mino, and I like the ship a lot, but sometimes having to keep up the dakka is too distracting, or I just need radar but I'm obviously running smoke because I'm not some yahoo...

 

The Austin, on the other hand, seems like a specialized Wooster that trades radar for torps, and higher sustained DPM for higher burst DPM.

I like the Wooster, but she's a below-average performer for me, and I'm much, much, much worse still with the Colbert, another smokeless spammer. Also, I'm pretty sure that the reason I still do okay with the Wooster is that sometimes I manage to surprise and melt a DD using RPF+radar, so even if I generally don't play well, there are going to be a few games where radar gives my team a nice advantage at some points, which offsets poor decisions I make at other times.

With the Austin I'd get no such option.

 

Keep in mind, I mostly play solo, so I value smoke more than other people might.

Last night, over 2 games, I was blessed with 3 random DDs that smoked up my Colbert without me even asking for it, and I easily did about 180k in each game, so if you can get some of that action the Austin is also a solid pick, I'd say.

[Animalul2012]

Austin is very situational not a bad ship but situational and worcester is the better ship overall.

Plymouth suffers from not getting a super heal,less torpedoes and slighty less DPM than minotaur and worse AA but 16 guns are not to be taken seriously and unlike minotaur it can get smoke and radar in separate slots altrough it cant stealth radar like a radar minotaur would do but then minotaur has no smoke. It is a hard ship to play but it can carry games especially late ones. It is the best cruiser available for steel tho.

OR: Wait for Napoli or maybe druid if that interests you but man If Napoli citadel proves to be trolly then BB and some cruisers would have problems with that. Honestly if its armor proves to work I cant wait to use that boy to push in and below 6-7km I can start citadeling some battleship. (Wish it gets slighty better penetration even thou wows fit show it having about 10 to 15 mm less peneration than henri 4 and it gets better below 5km and better ballistics as well.)