Iowa BB help

[V00Doo]

Can anyone that has and is successful with the iowa, enlighten me. i am really struggling to have a good game with this ship, receiving large amount citadel hits, even when im face on to enemy ship or angled , also the guns, at a distance of 10km all the shots either splash all around the ship with in inches of it, or the ones that do hit extremely low dmg rolls 1300 max. now i know against light armour ships HE will do more dmg and AP is for heavy armour , an example i came up against the north C , he was broad side on to me fired full salvo from a distance of 12km only 2 shots hit the others splash alll around him, and out of those two that hit, was low dmg, i then turn my ship face on to him he fires his front guns and every single one hits and 2 citadel hits. 

 

havent played the ship for a while, but surely the iowa was never this bad, so if anyone has any tips/tricks/advice for using this ship please enlighten me

[Poster_2015]

I honestly consider Iowa somewhat mediocre BB. Now the ship on its own is not particularly weak, but the are 2 factors.

 

1) It doesnt have any real "strong points".

Its not particularly tough.

Its guns are probably the best before Yamato, but they arent any major leap. 

Its actually NOT fast. Now you might think its a fallacy, but this ship is for one nerfed compared to RL (from 33kn to 30), and it bleeds speed in an insane way. Any turn , any manouver loses all the speed advantage it might have (very little over 28kn izumo, 26kn NC, 30kn Amagi/Tirp), some tight turns get it below 20kn.

 

2) What it does have is a decent mix of stats for nose tanking enemies, and good short range guns. The AA isnt good enough to offset the major leap in efficiency CVs get at this tier. The very poor acceleration actually means standing still with nose at enemy is a major risk to your health given any competent enemy DD is nearby.

 

You can play with the bulk of your team OFC but it will yield average results. I have personally best games in Iowa when i go through the areas further from center (think North map and D cap), but push them very hard. When going straight line the ship is fast, so it doesnt take ages to go around, and with a small backup it can wreck havoc on the CAs/ Low tier BBs and even DDs that usually go there. On other hand the AA is sufficient that CVs wont just destroy you (unless a Midway) when you are separated (but be prepared to take damage). 

 

[Comrad_StaIin]

the guns on the Iowa are not the best I think 

they are too inaccurate 

the Izumos guns have a slight edge there

[Poster_2015]

Well to each his own to be honest. In my opinion Izumo guns lack the punch compared to Iowa (although they arent bad), and with more aggressive playstyle i prefer, its easier for me to compensate for poor accuracy then for poor penetration. If you are close enough you hit them anyway, but on other hand Iowa seems to be able to citadel through very angled hulls even at close range - something izumo lacks.  I guess its just playstyle related. 

 

When writing this, I actually think I could nail what i dislike about Iowa. Its a typical "american shotgun" that wants to be close range (even though the guns are a MAJOR step up from NC at long range, they are still suited more for brawling), but the hull is actually awful for that. Its mere 10% faster then NC, but actually SLOWER when manouvering. It has abysmal turn radius (worse then even Yamato - who had his artificially inflated to 1.5x real life value), it has slower rudder, it has much larger citadel area then NC without improving the armor. 

 

In the end, it feels that Iowa just gets the "worst of two worlds". It inherits poor accuracy of US BB - which is entirely "game made" - even if fire control wasnt the best on early US BBs, Iowa definitely had top notch fire control in real life - especially radar/long range one. On other hand the "real world" stats it keeps are : not the best manouverability, the armor which was same as NC, but for such a late design "no improvement = going backwards",and poor brawling characteristics (Iowa was never designed for close range brawling with other BBs - not many were, but Iowa was specifically a CV escort ship which was very unlikely to get in close contact with enemy BBs). So you have a brawler with poor rudder and rather meh armor, or a sniper with poor accuracy. 

[Sander93]

No idea what you're talking about, Iowa is easily the best tier 9 and the best battleship-for-its-tier in the game. Only a few minor tweaks could make it a tier 10. It absolutely wrecks everything on its tier and especially those below it. Maneuverability is great for a ship its size, speed is great. Rudder shift time is on par with everything else. Evasive action slows you down to about 25 knots which is still more than most other battleships get while turning so I have no idea where you got the idea that it's too sluggish. 

 

The Iowa is a brawler. Don't bother sniping (don't bother sniping in any ship actually) and sail straight towards enemy contact. Iowa's ideal engagement distance is 10-15km, where the guns get relatively accuracy and pack a big punch. 

 

The ship's only weakness is the side armor and large (or at least easy to hit) citadel areas, so avoid showing your broadside to any battleship that's about to fire. That's basically the key. Sail for close quarters combat, try to use the third turret as often as possible and always keep track of the enemy's reload time. Turn to face the enemy's salvo with the ship angled and turn to return fire with full broadside. Repeat. The very essence of the Iowa's gameplay is maneuverability, but that's something I can't really explain. You need to have a sense for tactics for it. 

 

I'm running 105.000-110.000 average damage with my Iowa, #8 highest in the world. Easily my most favorite ship in the game.  

[Prospectar]

I know this is semi topic, but im currently on my NC getting really close to Iowa. Hoping the Iowa is a step in the right direction. The best use of the NC i found so far is to head straight into the enemy brawling. This is fun and ok when your team backs you up. Often that isnt the case... 

[Poster_2015]

Iowa its about same, just you are less manouverable .

Sander, you stats in Iowa are great, and I dont deny that. But the fact that you need less damage to be top 8 in Iowa then in Amagi tells us something doesnt it? Iowa is definitely not that great, the saving grace for her is that Izumo performs even worse. 

Otherwise I definitely agree on your tips on playstyle - but that sometimes is hard to realise without playing in a squadron which most people do (and it seems its not the case for you). If you dont have backup, one Shimakaze or Midway is enough to ruin your day. Still I agree  - brawling is better on her - better on all BBs but especially US ones.

[Sander93]

Nope, I always play alone. Comparing damage across tiers is unrealistic IMO. The power creep between tier 9 and tier 8 is relatively small while also facing much more powerful foes (tier X) the other half of the time means tier 9 in general is hard to play. The Amagi usually faces tier 7 and 6 which it absolutely dominates, it's only logical it has more damage potential. Hell I have 100.000 damage even in the Fuso because it's much easier to deal a lot of damage in low tier battles. 

 

Not saying the Iowa is a godlike vessel, it has been nerfed a lot since its first appearance. It used to have much better armor and the guns were more accurate. It is, however, not as bad as you made it out to be. Far from it. 

[vaskemaskina]

The description says fundamentally different armor system featuring an internal armor belt. Is that a marketing crap to sell the ship? It seems to take the same dmg as the NC if not more.

[Sander93]

The armor is supposed to be resistant to anything up to her own guns, which ingame it's clearly not. But then again if it was, it would be completely overpowered. It's already a really good ship. 

[Poster_2015]

The armor wasnt resistant to her own guns as well. This ship really was just a NC with better guns and longer hull for greater speed. Iowa armor was not enough to even withstand NC guns once "super heavy" shells were introduced, and its guns were upgraded a notch since then. All battleships were supposed to be resistant to own guns, but progressively it became harder and harder to achieve - and initial experiences indicated that BBs will very rarely be subjected to other BB fire - torpedo/bomb protection was more important. Iowa's were almost cancelled, and they were finished with a plan to be "glorified escort cruisers for carriers" already in place.

 

So no, the armor of Iowa IRL couldnt defend vs own guns, because it would had to be achieved by dropping speed and AA armament - so its PRIMARY purpose would be hurt, in order to make her better at SECONDARY goal of fighting enemy BBs. As far as i know any Iowa class BB had NEVER fought another battleship, and in fact you can argue they havent fought ships at all - there was some small skirmish with something barely bigger then a fishing boat once. 

[Sander93]

Yeah but that´s what I said: anything up to [not including] her own guns. But since her guns should be the most powerful in the game with the only exception being the Yamato (and even that performance comparison is apparently questionable) anything below it should have real trouble penetrating the armor, especially the all-or-nothing-armored citadels. Ingame however even tier 7 ships have no trouble scoring citadel hits on an Iowa. 

 

But as I said, if they hadn't nerfed the armor (which was way better during CBT) it would be overpowered. 

[Poster_2015]

Well but the truth is, the whole "immunity" concept was very limited. In fact even South Carolina 12 inch guns were enough to pierce Iowa belt at 6km range assuming no angling. If you look at the belt thickness , it generally didnt grow much over the years - sure there were some small technical tweaks, but side armor wasnt improved much "from tier 3 to 9". Thats because the combat doctrine pushed the engagement range further and further away - and thus the desired "immunity" zone was also pushed further and further away. The deck armors improved, the compartments divisions improved, redundancy improved, but the actual side armor didnt improve much.  And side armor is what people usually talk about here in game - the one dictacting the toughness at 12km brawling ranges. Iowa armor is exactly the same as NC here (who was SAID to be proof vs own guns, but NOT own guns+ super heavies mind it), 

 

If you look at NC *without* the super heavy shells, which was just before when the real disjunction started - it was "immune" to own shells from over 18km away, with 15km+ being very well protected zone (only penetrable with straight angle).

 

In reality Iowa advantage over said South Carolina would be the superior fire control, guns to go with the fire control to result in effectiveness at well over 20km engagements. If Iowa got into brawling range of SoCar, it would still have better shells more speed etc, but it would be a lot more fair fight. The game throws that out of the window (there is zero advantage in accuracy of Iowa vs South Carolina - at same range they have same disperion), and forces BBs to brawl if they want to have impact. And at "brawling" ranges, no BB was really armored enough to withstand own fire. 

 

 

Now on topic of in-game Iowa, those games feel less and less appealing lately. As Iowa 90% of the games consist of 3 shimakazes making it basically impossible to push+ 2Yamatos actually citadelling you (not often but still) from 20km range if you want sniping wars. You really feel like "food" in thos games. 

[Soppatykki]

The Iowa feels just like a NC with a bad MM. Yes, Iowa needs to get close, but lately that is immensely hard, with all those DDs running around. Personally I hate the Iowa, NC was awesome, but Iowa is just horrendous.  

 

With other American BBs I felt like a big bad bully, but with Iowa I feel weak and vulnerable. Everything seems to hurt Iowa badly, while it cannot hit anything from afar and getting close usually gets you dead. Now the cases when the enemy lets you close, you can be dangerous, but those a few and rare. In order to brawl you need the enemy willingly let you close the distance. If they dont, you either chase them uselessly, or show your juicy citadel to them and neither is a good option. 

[Admiral_noodle]

I've had 5 games in Iowa and I'm yet to have a good one. Worse still I'm yet to have an *enjoyable* one. I had one experience where an angled amagi took 8 hits for no damage when using AP. Yes I switched to HE eventually but the Iowa seems useless unless the event is broadside on and within about 12km. Now who does that at tier 9?

 

She also feels terribly sluggish. The New Mexico is nimbler and a lot more fun. Even if she is slow. I have amagi now and at least she feels (from two coop games) like she's going to be fun to play. The guns are noticeably more accurate, and she's more agile.

 

I'll try to "brawl" in the Iowa, but with shimas around (and other DDs) it's easier said than done. So far the Iowa is a disappointment. In fact everything after the New Mex has been.

[Poster_2015]

Well I recently came back to Iowa, mostly to finish her and get some money back (not planning on keeping her, nor getting Montana anytime soon). Its even worse than i remember. Iowa really suffers from the disjunction between its real life intended purpose, and the "in game purpose". It was a BB with emphasis on very long range engagements (well all of them were at high tiers, but the game forces us to brawl for balance reasons, but Iowa was a pinnacle of it). It really should get a lot better fire control/lower dispersion - but the game gives every US BB from South Carolina to Montana exactly same dispersion characteristics (dispersion is only based on class/nation , not the gun or anything like). 

 

Even worse, Iowa has "improved" guns over NC, which actually perform worse in game. The good part is slightly faster shots, but it comes at a steep price - they have "ineffectiveness" zone at ~14-18km - they tend to do minimal or just 0 damage there due to angle of fall. As a result, Iowa is less effective at medium-long ranges then NC (faster guns at those distances in game, mean they dont really count as "plunging fire"), with a much improved effectiveness at short range. Problem is the current meta at least prohibits getting that close.

 

Then comes the issue of armor/survivability. Iowa is extremely poor to handle - it accelerates and decelerates very very slowly (maybe worst in game, i havent really played Montana), its actually not that fast (artificially slowed from 33kn to 30.3 - same as tirpitz or amagi basically). It also bleeds speed in a very bad fashion when turning, and it has huge turning radius. On the armor front it has enough armor/size on non citadel areas to basicaly take normal 0.33 damage from almost any shell (unlike NC), and the citadel area is way bigger. 

 

In short, the actual advantages Iowa had in RL in game are either not present (good fire control and accuracy, higher speed then oher battleships), dont work well (All or nothing armor scheme which doesnt work with game mechanics - there are no real overpenetrations on Iowa, but every bullet is doing the 4-5k damage range on her), or even work against her (the speed of bullet at typical engagement ranges). 

 

Ill get past Iowa i guess without much trouble, im used to bad ships, but at this point I must say Izumo was simply better (much better torpedo protection, better armor, better secondaries - all very nice for pushing and getting close). 

 

What Id like to see would be actual departure from "nation based dispersion" towards more "gun/ship based dispersion", and making Iowa a good sniper. However if its against WG idea of the balance i would do at least the following:

 

- Increase the speed of Iowa to historical 33kn, and improve her acceleration and reduce speed bleeding in turns (it already has highest turning circle in game outside of CVs, lets not double down on that).

- Improve her torpedo protection - I must say I dont know much FACTS about that , but its said it was a marked improvement over NC, and it really is needed in game

[EsaTuunanen]

Even worse, Iowa has "improved" guns over NC, which actually perform worse in game. The good part is slightly faster shots, but it comes at a steep price - they have "ineffectiveness" zone at ~14-18km - they tend to do minimal or just 0 damage there due to angle of fall.

That's really game mechanics trolling them in there just like in accuracy.

(or in Yamato's immunity to 16" shells by just showing bow)

 

Super heavy AP's penetration of deck armor was around 70mm from that 14km range and in 10 degree falling angle.

At 18km it was around 100mm.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_16-50_mk7.htm

I don't think many ships would have had thick enough topmost deck to bounce them for preventing normal penetration.

[Poster_2015]

Well one more thing that maybe could help with the Iowa situation would be to change the upgraded hull to that of Missouri/Wisconsin. The later 2 Iowas had reinforced frontal bulkhead on citadel front end by extra 80mm. That would help tremendously vs Yamatos specifically, who can right now citadel Iowa with easy through the bow. 

[Agantas]

Here is a guide on how to use Iowa's main guns. It mainly focuses on how the turret works and how to reload it.

 

[Querulous]

I am looking at the final hull for Iowa - 5 million, but does not seem to increase any stats. Is there a hidden reason to buy this that justifies the cost ?

[Querulous]

I further saw a report on Armor Patrol that Iowa will be buffed in next patch.... so maybe not worth playing for a bit. Hope thay make that last hull more obviously useful.

[_Flyto_]

The description says fundamentally different armor system featuring an internal armor belt. Is that a marketing crap to sell the ship? It seems to take the same dmg as the NC if not more.

 

It's historically accurate, at least with the deck armour, but AIUI the way that the game models damage means that this historical advance in armour design is actually detrimental.

NB - this is theorycrafting w.r.t. Iowa, as I don't have one, but it definitely applies to Tirpitz...

 

The idea was to have a thin armour deck that was just strong enough to trigger an AP shell's fuse and cause it to detonate before it reached the main armour deck / roof of the citadel - thus wasting the explosive energy in destroying "unimportant" areas such as crew messes, offices, etc.

Unfortunately, unlike reality, the game has hitpoints, and so long as a shell doesn't get into a ship's citadel, the game doesn't care whether it causes damage to a crew canteen or to something important - the same number of hitpoints are deducted. Consequently, in-game this sort of armour scheme makes citadels hard, but causes the ship to take high damage from normal AP penetration, as though it had much less deck armour than it does.

 

(NB I realise Iowa is not all that hard to citadel, but I think that's usually through the side, not the deck)

[Unintentional_submarine]

The 'internal armor belt' line relates to this

Literally a belt that wasn't on the outside of the ship. Ingame however, it is treated as being on the outside. It can bounce shells, rather than suffer penetration hits every time.

[SV_Kompresor]

TBH I too find it quite unenjoyable to play compared to north carolina....

1. since it's a tier 9 it's difficult to make profit with it unless you have a premium account

2. it turns like a brick

3. it's very large

4. not too accurate

 

This is probably true for all tier 9 and 10 battleships but still....I personally prefer the NC

[Admiral_noodle]

I found a way to enjoy Iowa. Division with a Yamato and hide behind it