Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

[Panocek]

34 minutes ago, Nechrom said:

But it's the Cleveland we're talking about here. Currently a CL at tier 6 with better protection, better DPM and better AA than most tier 8 CA.

Smack some radar on it, reel back on the turret traverse nerf and you're basically good.

 

Not quite. Certainly Cleve outdoes Pepsi and NO in terms of useful AA, but other T8 CL with exception of Mogami have the same or better AA, while ALL other CLs have range and ballistics advantage. DPM advantage also goes to the drain, with Cleve lacking any exploding dildos for close and personal moments. Only Kutuzov is worse in terms of concealment. Waterline citadel is kinda offset by longer engagement ranges = more underwater pens. 

[Darth_Glorious]

Play Cleveland in Ocean map will be fun with that 14.6 km max range...Really dev ?

[Jvd2000]

Wow and i hate my Duca at tier VI with that kind of range.... And playing the tier VIII JPN cruisers the range feels already a bit to close and personal compared with the soviet and French ranges. Think that Hipper / Prinz have better range too.

 

Hope it will not become a glorified ATLANTA where you have to hide behind islands and use the arcs of your ship for BB harasmen since float times will not allow you to hit anything that can WASD.

[Jvd2000]

13 minutes ago, Darth_Glorious said:

Play Cleveland in Ocean map will be fun with that 14.6 km max range...Really dev ?

Seems Cleve will play as UK cruisers but instead of smoke it will need islands...

 

hope it will have the consumable to build a tempory island to hide behind.

[loppantorkel]

Not entirely sure about the complaints about range. If range above 14.6 km with the current ballistics is a selling point, I'll probably play other ships anyway. I hope they make the line viable by other means.

[Panocek]

Lack of range isn't so much of an issue, lack of damage potential is. RoF 10/min should be IMO starting point. Same with Worcester, loking at historical specs - Neptune level of firepower basically (12 barrels at 5s reload)

[Aotearas]

10 seconds reload on tier VIII Cleveland ... well, those stats are stockhull, so perhaps it gets a turret upgrade, because given the technical data of those 6"/47 Mk.16 the RoF was 8-10 per minute, so with 10 seconds reload 6 shells per minute is way below the normal, particularily for a tier VIII CL.

 

Mogami 155 also have 10 seconds but she gets an addition 3 barrels and has torpedoes as other means to inflict damage.

Edinburgh gets 7,5 seconds with the same number of guns, also gets torps and smoke to use her dpm in relative safety.

 

A gun upgrade that buffs the RoF to 8 shells per minute (7,5 seconds reload) sounds the most plausible for me. Maybe even higher (10 rpm/6 seconds reload) if Cleveland stays limited with its range as it looks right now.

[Boris_MNE]

ST, American cruiser Buffalo, tier IX

Hit points – 42500. Plating - 25 mm. Armor belt – 152 mm. Torpedo damage reduction – 4%.

Main battery - 4х3 203 mm. Firing range – 14.1 km. Maximum HE shell damage – 2800. Chance to cause fire – 14%. Maximum AP shell damage - 5000. Reload time - 15 s. 180 degree turn time - 30 s. Maximum dispersion - 131 m. HE initial velocity - 823 m/s. AP initial velocity - 762 m/s. Sigma value – 2.0.

Maximum speed - 33 kt. Turning circle radius - 800 m. Rudder shift time – 15.7 s. Surface detectability – 13.1 km. Air detectability – 10.0 km. Detectability after firing main guns in smoke – 7.6 km.

Available consumables:

Slot 1 - Damage Control Party

Slot 2 - Defensive AA Fire/Hydroacoustic Search

Slot 3 - Catapult Fighter/Surveillance Radar Data

Slot 4 - Repair Party

All stats are listed with stock modules, without crew and upgrade modifiers.

The numbers are preliminary and are subject to change during the testing phase.

 

MEHBOTE at the best.

[El2aZeR]

Wait a second, so Balti keeps her 27mm armor but Buffalo doesn't get it?

I don't even...

[Panocek]

6 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Wait a second, so Balti keeps her 27mm armor but Buffalo doesn't get it?

I don't even...

Don't do logic when it comes to WG.

 

14 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

10 seconds reload on tier VIII Cleveland ... well, those stats are stockhull, so perhaps it gets a turret upgrade, because given the technical data of those 6"/47 Mk.17 the RoF was 5-8 per minute, so with 10 seconds reload 6 shells per minute is a pretty conservative point, particularily for a tier VIII CL.

 

Mogami 155 also have 10 seconds but she gets an addition 3 barrels and has torpedoes as other means to inflict damage.

Edinburgh gets 7,5 seconds with the same number of guns, also gets torps and smoke to use her dpm in relative safety.

 

A gun upgrade that buffs the RoF to 8 shells per minute (7,5 seconds reload) sounds the most plausible for me.

Based on navweaps 6"/47 mk16 (Brooklyn, St. Louis, Cleveland Fargo) had 8-10 rounds per minute.

[Aotearas]

13 minutes ago, Boris_MNE said:

Available consumables:

Slot 1 - Damage Control Party

Slot 2 - Defensive AA Fire/Hydroacoustic Search

Slot 3 - Catapult Fighter/Surveillance Radar Data

Slot 4 - Repair Party

I noticed the same thing with the other cruisers but I'll just quote this here since it's easier ...

 

Weren't the US CLs supposed to be able to slot hydro, DefAA and radar in seperate slots so they can use all three? What happened to that?

 

 

5 minutes ago, Panocek said:

Based on navweaps 6"/47 mk16 (Brooklyn, St. Louis, Cleveland Fargo) had 8-10 rounds per minute.

Whoopsie, I checked the Mk.17 guns, not the Mk.16.

[El2aZeR]

7 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

Weren't the US CLs supposed to be able to slot hydro, DefAA and radar in seperate slots so they can use all three? What happened to that?

 

Wasn't it only T9+?

Or they scrapped it so they can keep this as a gimmick for the RU BB line.

(I'm not even joking sadly.)

 

EDIT: Buffalo is a CA btw.

[Aotearas]

2 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

EDIT: Buffalo is a CA btw.

 

Derped again ... I blame my two nightshifts I just had.

 

I should just go to bed now 

[FishDogFoodShack]

14.6 km range at t8 is unplayable. Duca has the same problem at t6 but can bandaid it with her spotter plane, but this? Mogami has to live dangerously with her 15.7, but 14.6 on neo-cleveland takes the cake for risk-it-all, BB food badrange.

[fumtu]

New T8 Cleveland stats are BS. 16mm armour at T8? 14.6km range? 10sec reload on stock version? WTH... So now your bow could be overmatched not just by any T8-T10 BB but also by HIV and newly announced Stalingrad and Kronshtadt. And not to mention that DDs will eat you alive as T8-T10 DDs have more guns and much faster RoF compered to dds that Cleveland meets at T5-T8. Also you don't have a range to fight from distance. So she is quite squishy, without smoke or heal and she has to be close to enemy to do any damage. Not to mention 10sec stock reload. For comparation Mogami also have 10sec reload but also one more turret and 2x4 more torps on either sides. This doesn't look good. 

[Exocet6951]

Considering that those stats appear to be barely out of closed testing, I think everyone should take them with a grain healthy dose of salt.

Those FB posts are made by community managers, aka marketing.
They're made to remind us that the ships are in the making, to keep us on the line.
They're not here to give us actual information.

[Aragathor]

18 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

They're not here to give us actual information.

Then why post stats at all? They could have just dropped a lineup with the test names, put up some gung ho text about "New testing ships on the horizon! Action stations! Gib money!".

Instead they are, rightly so, catching flak for saying things like "stats were corrected accordingly" and posting ships that are a copy/paste with microscopic changes.

If that's how they understand marketing then they should be fired, for generating negative hype.

 

If I had to post those stats I would be writing things like "preliminary, first stage, alpha version" and going out of my way to make sure that everyone and his dog sees that these ships will change.

[loppantorkel]

31 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

They're not here to give us actual information.

I think Buffalo looks like a quite large ship.. Are CLs supposed to be smaller than CAs? I know it's gun calibre, but generally speaking... sizes of the ships, what's to expect?

[Major_Damage225]

I dont want to sound pesimistic regarding Cleveland but.... enjoy her while you still can. 

[Exocet6951]

24 minutes ago, Aragathor said:

Then why post stats at all? They could have just dropped a lineup with the test names, put up some gung ho text about "New testing ships on the horizon! Action stations! Gib money!".

Instead they are, rightly so, catching flak for saying things like "stats were corrected accordingly" and posting ships that are a copy/paste with microscopic changes.

If that's how they understand marketing then they should be fired, for generating negative hype.

 

If I had to post those stats I would be writing things like "preliminary, first stage, alpha version" and going out of my way to make sure that everyone and his dog sees that these ships will change.

 

Honestly I can't pretend to know their strategy, but considering that they have use lighting torches and making pitchforks on a bi monthly basis, and we still fork over ridiculous amounts of cash, it's safe to say that they know what they're doing 

 

Ultimately, this isn't much different than those neat graphics showing a new ship with those useless stat 'numbers' (like AA, artillery, etc...) claiming historical stats from a given year, then neither the ingame stock or upgraded hull has similar stats.

[Comodoro_Allande]

The fact that the Baltimore at tier VIII gets the 27 mm plating (actually present at tier IX) but the Buffalo (new tier IX) doesn't get it, plus the garbage stats of tier VIII Cleveland (still with tier VI plating, reload and range) makes me think this could be a plethora of typos 

[Toivia]

Yeah, most of the listed stats look fishy at best. Either the ships get really pathetic stock values (old Fuso like) or this is some very early placeholder stuff.

 

Heck I believe Buffalo was even supposed to have torps, for instance (here the old version: http://shipcomrade.com/ships/buffalo) - nowhere listed still.

[LDPDC]

Can't believe this are T8 Cleve stats. Needing to go 14 km to a Yamato to be able to open fire? Hmmmm nope, thx. I mean T8 sees at least 2/3 of its games as T9-10, in this bracket, BB are deadly accurate at this range.

[ApolloF117]

1 hour ago, Toivia said:

Heck I believe Buffalo was even supposed to have torps,

why would it have if it never got fitted with pedos? if i change that stupid sites info icon from torpedo to tomahawk missile, the AA weapons to Phalanx CIWS , you will ask the same question?

if the ship was fitted with actuall torpedo launchers , then it will get it, just like every other ship in the game so far, except the underwater launchers

[Comodoro_Allande]

1 hora antes, ApolloF117 dijo:

why would it have if it never got fitted with pedos? if i change that stupid sites info icon from torpedo to tomahawk missile, the AA weapons to Phalanx CIWS , you will ask the same question?

if the ship was fitted with actuall torpedo launchers , then it will get it, just like every other ship in the game so far, except the underwater launchers

 

The Buffalo model was in-game since beta, and with mods you could see the model in port and her stats, including as armament 2x3 torp launchers wiith the same stats as the ones Atlanta had