Sevastopol or Gibraltar?

[Cpt_ZombZan_GR]

I need some advice at which of those two trashes is less trash to get :)

[Yedwy]

Why get the trash in the first place? I have both and Sevastopol is easier to play since she is less likely to “randomly explode” due to better armor sheme and longer range, Gibraltar is something like an overgrown Fiji without torps, she needs to get some jucy broadsides to really rack up the damage and the range module and full stealth build are pretty much mandatory or you will die in 3 min esp with cvs around…

 

Imho only cruser worth the chore you can get for RP is Colbert because she is so hilarious…

[Cpt_ZombZan_GR]

9 minutes ago, Yedwy said:

Why get the trash in the first place? I have both and Sevastopol is easier to play since she is less likely to “randomly explode” due to better armor sheme and longer range, Gibraltar is something like an overgrown Fiji without torps, she needs to get some jucy broadsides to really rack up the danage and the range module and full stealth build are pretty much mandatory or you will die in 3 min edo with cvs around…

 

Imho only cruser worth the chore you can get for RP is Colbert because she is so hilarious

its mostly for collection reasons BUT i wish to have some battles in it before park it forever ahha its the 2 missings RB ships

[________________Morrison]

37 minutes ago, Cpt_ZombZan_GR said:

its mostly for collection reasons BUT i wish to have some battles in it before park it forever ahha its the 2 missings RB ships

just get sevas end then gibraltar i guess? 

 

Going for gibraltar at some point tm. hector seems more fun ESP since it and brisbane are both common wealth iirc.

 

2 ships 1 captain ey

[HMS_Kilinowski]

1 hour ago, Cpt_ZombZan_GR said:

I need some advice at which of those two trashes is less trash to get :)

 

I got Sevastopol. The only two RB-ships missing are Gibraltar and Colbert.

 

The Sevastopol at least gets mentioned occasionally when people are discussing CB line-ups. That is a long shot from being actualyl used, but then again nobody ever even mentioned Gibraltar or Colbert for CB. So in a way, Sevastopol is one step ahead.

 

It's not a bad ship, it's just missing some mitigating quality. No radar, no secondaries, no torps. The Siegfried is just better tier for tier and a better package. Even Siegfried misses the punch against DDs. Sevastopol is really a BB taking a cruiser spot. But then again Siegfried is very poserful, so Sevastopol is still balanced.

 

Gibraltar is imo a bit like Anchorage. A smoke cruiser with a huge firing penatly in smoke can be even worse than a cruiser that doesn't have smoke at all. At least there you know you will be spotted. But a smoke cruiser that feels safe in smoke and suddenly gets spotted by a DD, cen be devastating. And 9.5km smoke firing penalty is just not practical. Maybe when you are in division with on or two DDs, that make sure no enemy DD gets within 9.5km of you, but even then DDs have other jobs to do than babysit a Gibraltar.

 

I'd say Sevastopol is still the better pick, but I could perfectly live without ever having either of them

[________________Morrison]

13 minutes ago, HMS_Kilinowski said:

 

I got Sevastopol. The only two RB-ships missing are Gibraltar and Colbert.

 

The Sevastopol at least gets mentioned occasionally when people are discussing CB line-ups. That is a long shot from being actualyl used, but then again nobody ever even mentioned Gibraltar or Colbert for CB. So in a way, Sevastopol is one step ahead.

 

It's not a bad ship, it's just missing some mitigating quality. No radar, no secondaries, no torps. The Siegfried is just better tier for tier and a better package. Even Siegfried misses the punch against DDs. Sevastopol is really a BB taking a cruiser spot. But then again Siegfried is very poserful, so Sevastopol is still balanced.

 

Gibraltar is imo a bit like Anchorage. A smoke cruiser with a huge firing penatly in smoke can be even worse than a cruiser that doesn't have smoke at all. At least there you know you will be spotted. But a smoke cruiser that feels safe in smoke and suddenly gets spotted by a DD, cen be devastating. And 9.5km smoke firing penalty is just not practical. Maybe when you are in division with on or two DDs, that make sure no enemy DD gets within 9.5km of you, but even then DDs have other jobs to do than babysit a Gibraltar.

 

I'd say Sevastopol is still the better pick, but I could perfectly live without ever having either of them

Colbert in cb is pretty niche but nice.

 

I want to play sevas in cb. Cause I always get teamed up with people in bbs that whine about taking damage. But people are agaisnt it. cause its a bb in a cruiser slot.  No crap sherman.

[Yedwy]

I played Seva in CB this season, quite often actually

[HMS_Kilinowski]

So where does it excel?

 

If I'm in a staring contest, i might as well take Stalingrad for better tanking and sigma or, if I need the fires, go for Moskva, the one ship that can reliably hit a Kleber.

Why take a cruiser into CB, that has no utility, can't kite and can't smash DDs?

[________________Morrison]

16 minutes ago, HMS_Kilinowski said:

So where does it excel?

 

If I'm in a staring contest, i might as well take Stalingrad for better tanking and sigma or, if I need the fires, go for Moskva, the one ship that can reliably hit a Kleber.

Why take a cruiser into CB, that has no utility, can't kite and can't smash DDs?

For people that don't have a a stalingrad.

 

Cant play petro cause slot hoggers.

 

Suck at moskva.

 

Yea Puerto rico has more FP but its of no use if everyone is island hugging and you cant use your other six rifles.

[Karkong_the_Impaler]

Sevastopol is much younger than Gibraltar and is already been played almost as often.

And with a higher success rate. And more Damage. Actually looking at the stats, it's just second to Balansgrad itself.

[Matt_FSR]

I have neither, but from what I've seen in reviews / videos the Sevastopol probably has the higher battle influence, provided you're able to get good hits on target AND get decent use out of its' wierd but long-lasting heal, allowing you to go dark, repair, come back and keep doing damage.

 

Gibraltar however....  if you want to become a professional stabber:

 

 

[tocqueville8]

I have both and I think they're both fine. Stat-wise they're both above-average for me so far.

Gibraltar has very good damage output as long as she can find broadsides and has some spotting, a bit like the Druid (no HE, struggles to aim at targets behind her). She thrives in messy games and around islands. With double rudder she can also push nose-in and juke, maybe as she makes a run for the next island, where she'll smoke up.

 

Sevastopol has more of a roaming playstyle, although she also can't really kite with her terrible HE DPM. The consumables and weapons discourage you to "make plays" (no radar, low alpha, bad armor, no torps), focusing instead on consistency: speed boost to a good spot, shoot a bit, tank damage, activate heal, shoot some more, tank some more, go dark, repeat cycle. Four heals are very rarely used, making a case for not taking SI, but you want to use those three as a metronome for your gameplay, so to speak: the ship is a damage sponge if you play correctly.

 

Overall, Sevastopol is the one I would be more relaxed playing in general, as she's just this comfortable, if wonky battlecruiser. The Gibraltar is less consistent, but also has higher highs as she encourages you to play at mid range around caps, islands and smokes.

[Miscommunication_dept]

Gibraltar is a bit limited by a useless consumable (smoke) and it's citadel is huge and so easy for battleships to hit from many angles.

 

Sevastopol is good. It's heal and concealment make it significantly different to Stalingrad while the guns retain some of those advantages.

 

Gibraltar is actually quite fun and obliterates DDs and superlight cruisers that charge it but no torps and no HE severely limit it's effectiveness against ships with a little more armour.