Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

[DFens_666]

1 hour ago, piet11111 said:

Alaska might not penetratie as hard but its shells behave much better.

 

Then it would mean that it punishes Cruisers harder... ?

If the penetration is not so good, and the dispersion is good, that means you can punish sorfter targets easier. What does it help me when my shells all hit the belt of a BB and they shatter

[1MajorKoenig]

1 hour ago, Riselotte said:

Also while they increased the hp of above water modules a bit, it still shouldn't prevent that you can sit perfectly broadside and still not get citpenned. This should still be doable, whereas Kronshtadt basically just blows up in this situation.

 

Also, funnily enough, I'm not even all up in arms about this, because lack of reachable citadel is basically already a standard for BBs and vs cruisers Alaska just gets wrecked by the massive dpm if it doesn't watch out. 

 

Alaska is another step in the wrong direction. Now even cruisers (haha) don’t have citadels anymore. Kronstadt is a bit OP but is enough “cruiser” and has enough downsides left. Alaska seems OP and just a bit stupid. Not a fan of what I am seeing. My fear is that WG tries to please the NA community who have been crying for this ship for more than three years now at the cost of some more gameplay

[Toivia]

1 hour ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

 

Alaska is another step in the wrong direction. Now even cruisers (haha) don’t have citadels anymore. Kronstadt is a bit OP but is enough “cruiser” and has enough downsides left. Alaska seems OP and just a bit stupid. Not a fan of what I am seeing. My fear is that WG tries to please the NA community who have been crying for this ship for more than three years now at the cost of some more gameplay

Alaska still has some downsides left compared to Kron, thankfully (worse DPM, worse gun angles, AP pen and lower hp). But yes, it is my worry that it may yet get overbuffed.

And when it comes to the underwater citadel, we'll see if they allow Vanguard to keep the huge above water one. If so, I'm fine with some exceptions even on a (very large) cruiser. Now it they come up with a new line of ships with fully submerged citadels though...

[Exocet6951]

59 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

 

Alaska is another step in the wrong direction. Now even cruisers (haha) don’t have citadels anymore. Kronstadt is a bit OP but is enough “cruiser” and has enough downsides left. Alaska seems OP and just a bit stupid. Not a fan of what I am seeing. My fear is that WG tries to please the NA community who have been crying for this ship for more than three years now at the cost of some more gameplay

 

See that's why I've been having my point of view on large cruisers.

I don't have an issue with them fundamentally, but their implementation as cruisers implies coming up with ridiculous solutions to nigh-impossible to solve problems.
I truly think that it would have been a much more better ship for the game had it been a battleship with tankier plating, ability to heal citpens, and those USN AP shells.
Of course we'll never know if it could have worked, and perhaps I've been wrong all this time....

But I LOATHE seeing non-DD ships with no reliable citadels.
It laughs at the entire fundamental way AP shells and their damage were designed.

[1MajorKoenig]

2 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

 

See that's why I've been having my point of view on large cruisers.

I don't have an issue with them fundamentally, but their implementation as cruisers implies coming up with ridiculous solutions to nigh-impossible to solve problems.
I truly think that it would have been a much more better ship for the game had it been a battleship with tankier plating, ability to heal citpens, and those USN AP shells.
Of course we'll never know if it could have worked, and perhaps I've been wrong all this time....

But I LOATHE seeing non-DD ships with no reliable citadels.
It laughs at the entire fundamental way AP shells and their damage were designed.

 

While I still like having these large cruiser killers as high tier cruisers I think they are slightly overbuffed. Especially this citadel stuff. 

 

I have Kronshtadt myself and really like her but she honestly feels more like T10 - a good alternative to the likes of Hindenburg. Not really a tier lower though and she still has this abysmal armor and large citadel that is needed to compensate for her great alpha strike. Nevertheless they easily contribute to powercreep at higer tiers. Just compare these ships to poor old Ibuki...

 

Alaska - I don’t really know though. Would be curious whether the trend continues and we are going to see B-65 and O-Class Cruiser Killers as well...

 

 

[Toivia]

You might be right. I definitely agree Kron and Alaska are powercreep (Ibuki has been mentioned, Donskoi has basically the same concealment as Kron, but is awful in pretty much everything else).

I might just be a little more open to those cruiser killers because I personally consider them the most beautiful ships that sailed (or almost sailed). And with their performance, I might be a bit biased cause I struggle real hard with Kron.

[1MajorKoenig]

6 minutes ago, Toivia said:

You might be right. I definitely agree Kron and Alaska are powercreep (Ibuki has been mentioned, Donskoi has basically the same concealment as Kron, but is awful in pretty much everything else).

I might just be a little more open to those cruiser killers because I personally consider them the most beautiful ships that sailed (or almost sailed). And with their performance, I might be a bit biased cause I struggle real hard with Kron.

 

The only secret about Kronstadt is to play her like a cruiser and not like a BB even if she looks like one. Once you accept this one fact you will have a blast playing her.

[Lebedjev]

6 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

The only secret about Kronstadt is to play her like a cruiser and not like a BB even if she looks like one. Once you accept this one fact you will have a blast playing her.

And shoot dd with ap. =o

[HaachamaShipping]

1 hour ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

 

Alaska is another step in the wrong direction. Now even cruisers (haha) don’t have citadels anymore. Kronstadt is a bit OP but is enough “cruiser” and has enough downsides left. Alaska seems OP and just a bit stupid. Not a fan of what I am seeing. My fear is that WG tries to please the NA community who have been crying for this ship for more than three years now at the cost of some more gameplay

Frankly, as long as BBs can have citadel immunity, I don't give a damn if this ship has citadel immunity at close range. The cruisers that get most affected are the likes of Kronshtadt, Stalingrad, Moskva, which already get to be tanky af, while most others don't have to care much. Dpm machines like Mino, Des Moines and Worcester will just outtrade this ship like they outtrade angled cruisers (not like Worcester or Mino can reliably citadel anything at range anyway), while Zao and Henri can burn the ship down and even Hindenburg can either go for the HE dpm contest or AP into the side. Might not cit-delete, but when you shave off a third of the hp every 9.7 seconds, that's still a lot.

 

I'd agree, unreachable citadels are dumb, but if BBs can have it, then cruisers shouldn't be the complete victims, as it's already the case that cruisers are the class that gets crapped on by all the newest toys of other classes.

[1MajorKoenig]

2 minutes ago, Riselotte said:

Frankly, as long as BBs can have citadel immunity, I don't give a damn if this ship has citadel immunity at close range. The cruisers that get most affected are the likes of Kronshtadt, Stalingrad, Moskva, which already get to be tanky af, while most others don't have to care much. Dpm machines like Mino, Des Moines and Worcester will just outtrade this ship like they outtrade angled cruisers (not like Worcester or Mino can reliably citadel anything at range anyway), while Zao and Henri can burn the ship down and even Hindenburg can either go for the HE dpm contest or AP into the side. Might not cit-delete, but when you shave off a third of the hp every 9.7 seconds, that's still a lot.

 

I'd agree, unreachable citadels are dumb, but if BBs can have it, then cruisers shouldn't be the complete victims, as it's already the case that cruisers are the class that gets crapped on by all the newest toys of other classes.

 

While I somewhat agree with your statement I am against any further “no-citadel-ships” as it removes any incentive to play a tiny little more smart. 

 

Funnily you compare Alaska and Kronstadt to T10 cruisers. And that’s what they are - just downtiered to not break the “don’t sell T10 premiums”. Recently we have further seen a new category: T11 premium cruisers. Brave new world 

[Vlad_Vado]

On 6/10/2018 at 3:03 AM, Verdius said:

 

Yeah. I find it really WG of them to announce that it is going to be the final state before even giving that version out to to ST or CCs to actually test.

CCs tested the final versions of these ships. You can watch at least flamu video with the last iteration of La Terrible (not sure if other CCs have done it already). Flambass tried it on stream and still doesn't liked it. Also stated that he liked a lot Jean Bart and was willing to get it (same for bourgogne (that's the reaseon he didn't purchased Stalingrad for steel, to wait for other ships to come and see if they are going to be purchased by steel, coal or freexp).

[HaachamaShipping]

15 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

 

While I somewhat agree with your statement I am against any further “no-citadel-ships” as it removes any incentive to play a tiny little more smart. 

 

Funnily you compare Alaska and Kronstadt to T10 cruisers. And that’s what they are - just downtiered to not break the “don’t sell T10 premiums”. Recently we have further seen a new category: T11 premium cruisers. Brave new world 

Alaska is no Conqueror though. Yes, the citadel allows you some dumb crap, but let's be real, you aren't going to outbrawl the citadel-less BBs, if they are smart. Even something like an Amagi could easily just angle and lolpen you through the bow, stern or anywhere and deal massive damage in normal pens. And unlike other T9 USN cruisers, you don't have a lot of dpm to throw around. 

 

And you can compare Alaska and Kronshtadt also to T9 cruisers, most still holds true. What's a Kronstadt going to do to a Roon that knows how to stay angled? Overpen the superstructure? Similarly, the only ship at T10 that might be T11 is Stalingrad, so singular. Salem is very much a sidegrade from Des Moines, to some a downgrade. I consider Stalingrad OP, but Kronshtadt and alaska, while powerful, are basically the Graf Spees of T9. And few will tell you Graf Spee is OP, though it has massively more hp than any other T6 cruiser, can overmatch T6 cruisers (while the T9s cannot do such to their peers), doesn't have BB dispersion like Kronshtadt and likely is more tanky compared to its peers than Kronshtadt is.

 

If you want proper powercreep in free xp boats, Missouri and Musashi, basically are T9.5. But the T9 cruisers are pretty ok.

[Lebedjev]

30 minutes ago, Riselotte said:

Kronshtadt and alaska, while powerful, are basically the Graf Spees of T9. A

 

Bha i disagree with that point. =o

Kron/Alaskha "share" only one data with that ship, other from that they are totaly not similar (gun arrangement/armor etc).

 

For me the better comparaison would be Scharnhorst.

And people really exaggerate how "bad" Kron gun really are.

[Toivia]

31 minutes ago, Riselotte said:

Alaska is no Conqueror though. Yes, the citadel allows you some dumb crap, but let's be real, you aren't going to outbrawl the citadel-less BBs, if they are smart. Even something like an Amagi could easily just angle and lolpen you through the bow, stern or anywhere and deal massive damage in normal pens. And unlike other T9 USN cruisers, you don't have a lot of dpm to throw around. 

 

And you can compare Alaska and Kronshtadt also to T9 cruisers, most still holds true. What's a Kronstadt going to do to a Roon that knows how to stay angled? Overpen the superstructure? Similarly, the only ship at T10 that might be T11 is Stalingrad, so singular. Salem is very much a sidegrade from Des Moines, to some a downgrade. I consider Stalingrad OP, but Kronshtadt and alaska, while powerful, are basically the Graf Spees of T9. And few will tell you Graf Spee is OP, though it has massively more hp than any other T6 cruiser, can overmatch T6 cruisers (while the T9s cannot do such to their peers), doesn't have BB dispersion like Kronshtadt and likely is more tanky compared to its peers than Kronshtadt is.

 

If you want proper powercreep in free xp boats, Missouri and Musashi, basically are T9.5. But the T9 cruisers are pretty ok.

Incidentally, angled Roon is one of the best targets for a Kron. Easy 10k+ salvoes. Kron AP pen is so good it can't deal with broadside cruisers at any normal fighting ranges (within 15kms, over that distance the AP starts to not overpen so much), it just overpens. But when they angle, AP sticks in.

 

What you should do in a cruiser against Kron is stay bow on/stern on. Then he can't do much while your HE will burn him down.

 

NOTE: If by angled, you meant bow/stern on, disregard this post. "Angled" is often used in meaning either "at an angle" or "bow/stern on" or both of them, tough to discern poster's meaning.

 

Other than that, what Missouri/Musashi is to BBs, Kron and Alaska are to cruisers. IE: powercreep.

[HaachamaShipping]

1 hour ago, Lebedjev said:

 

Bha i disagree with that point. =o

Kron/Alaskha "share" only one data with that ship, other from that they are totaly not similar (gun arrangement/armor etc).

 

For me the better comparaison would be Scharnhorst.

And people really exaggerate how "bad" Kron gun really are.

Apart from gun arrangement, the comparison between Kronshtadt/Alaska and Scharnhorst quickly ends, when you look at armour profile. Scharnhorst is a German BB, immune to citadels, resistant to most HE, has a lower bow that can bounce Musashi (and won't encounter Yamato). It also has 350 mm belt, just to shrug off most AP, as long as it isn't showing broadside. Scharnhorst is by all means an undergunned BB and not a cruiser. Now look at Kronshtadt or Alaska vs Graf Spee. Yes, Graf Spee has a different gun arrangement, but its guns are barely smaller and having fewer 3 tiers lower is kind of to be expected. Armour-wise, Graf Spee like the T9s shrugs off cruiser AP while angled, but can be easily damaged by any and all HE thrown at it. None of their armour holds up to same tier BBs except at the belt. Graf Spee by all means is harder to citadel by same tier BBs than a Kronshtadt by T9 BBs and Alaska only is better due to submerged citadel. But compared to other T6s, Graf Spee's citadel is the best you could get, not extending above the waterline and being fairly protected from the front and rear. Nürnberg shot from the front or Pensacola shot from the front will likely get overmatched and give citpens when hit, Graf Spee gives mostly regular pens. Kronshtadt cannot boast that kinda survivability tier for tier. Tier for tier, Graf Spee is pretty much the same kind of ship as the two T9 free exp cruisers.

1 hour ago, Toivia said:

Incidentally, angled Roon is one of the best targets for a Kron. Easy 10k+ salvoes. Kron AP pen is so good it can't deal with broadside cruisers at any normal fighting ranges (within 15kms, over that distance the AP starts to not overpen so much), it just overpens. But when they angle, AP sticks in.

 

What you should do in a cruiser against Kron is stay bow on/stern on. Then he can't do much while your HE will burn him down.

 

NOTE: If by angled, you meant bow/stern on, disregard this post. "Angled" is often used in meaning either "at an angle" or "bow/stern on" or both of them, tough to discern poster's meaning.

 

Other than that, what Missouri/Musashi is to BBs, Kron and Alaska are to cruisers. IE: powercreep.

By angle, I mean autobounce. and I don't see it really as powercreep. Yes, it has a lot of hp and big guns. It has garbage dpm, worse concealment, worse accuracy and the armour is very much cruiser levels. Is it powerful? Sure. But so is Roon or most properly played T9 cruisers. Ibuki or Seattle might disagree, but that's more an issue with those ships than the other two.

[mariouus]

2 hours ago, Toivia said:

Other than that, what Missouri/Musashi is to BBs, Kron and Alaska are to cruisers. IE: powercreep.

Not really. Apart from Neptune, aginst what both Kronsthat and Alaska are stronger than any other tier.9 Cruiser. Kronsthat and Alaska are not overpowered against other tier.9 cruisers. Infact, when other tier.9 angle up, use their manouvrability and use proper ammo at right moments (In other word, play like any ship should be played) than Kronsthat is actually fairly weak against them. Kronsthat is a Random battle warrior and its good stats mostly comes from the fact that it exploits fairly low skill level of the Randoms and due the fact that it is better against tier.7 ships than other tier.9 cruisers.. In Competetive games, where it would face people, who knows what they are doing in other tier.9 cruisers, it would be rather bad

[Lebedjev]

Erf duno. :/

Scharn and Graff have the same gun, one is T6, the other T7, so it mean they will mostly play T7 match. :=

For pure gameplay, i will totaly play differently a 1|1 ship, than a 2|1 ship.

For armor tier for tier, i am doubtfully.

 

Against AP :

Graff spee main belt is worst than a Budyonny and with that you will probably not be able to tank BB ap, when show angle. :/

Where Kron&Alaska have the double main belt, than regular ship, it's hard for me to said " very much cruiser levels".

 

Against HE :

It's another story. #hemeta :=

 

Against Roon, bha because Kron have better hp pool, Kron have the upper hand, sure you can kitte him away, but that also mean you need to take evasive manoeuvre and denied area is kinda a huge thing in wows.

 

[1MajorKoenig]

3 minutes ago, Lebedjev said:

Erf duno. :/

Scharn and Graff have the same gun, one is T6, the other T7, so it mean they will mostly play T7 match. :=

For pure gameplay, i will totaly play differently a 1|1 ship, than a 2|1 ship.

For armor tier for tier, i am doubtfully.

 

Against AP :

Graff spee main belt is worst than a Budyonny and with that you will probably not be able to tank BB ap, when show angle. :/

Where Kron&Alaska have the double main belt, than regular ship, it's hard for me to said " very much cruiser levels".

 

Against HE :

It's another story. #hemeta :=

 

Against Roon, bha because Kron have better hp pool, Kron have the upper hand, sure you can kitte him away, but that also mean you need to take evasive manoeuvre and denied area is kinda a huge thing in wows.

 

 

While Graf SPEE and Scharnhorst both use 283mm guns, Scharny uses the more modern L/54.5 versus GS’s slightly older L/52s.

 

For some wanky reason however the L/52 is better in game - both in damage and In accuracy terms.

[HaachamaShipping]

3 hours ago, Lebedjev said:

Erf duno. :/

Scharn and Graff have the same gun, one is T6, the other T7, so it mean they will mostly play T7 match. :=

For pure gameplay, i will totaly play differently a 1|1 ship, than a 2|1 ship.

For armor tier for tier, i am doubtfully.

 

Against AP :

Graff spee main belt is worst than a Budyonny and with that you will probably not be able to tank BB ap, when show angle. :/

Where Kron&Alaska have the double main belt, than regular ship, it's hard for me to said " very much cruiser levels".

 

Against HE :

It's another story. #hemeta :=

 

Against Roon, bha because Kron have better hp pool, Kron have the upper hand, sure you can kitte him away, but that also mean you need to take evasive manoeuvre and denied area is kinda a huge thing in wows.

 

I mean, for pure gameplay, whether you got one gun turret at the front at T6 or two at T9, it really doesn't make much of a difference. The main thing is, T9 cruisers can angle to autobounce your 6 shells, no T6 cruiser can easily tank Graf Spee shells. They can take them on the belt, but that's it. Shoot at the nose and it'll go through. 

 

Against AP, cruiser AP bounces off. BB AP does not, unless you shoot the belt. Shoot Kronshtadt's bow or upper belt or have it overmatch the deck, it's all the same. Similarly, you can just wreck Alaska.

 

And I really doubt your Kronshtadt vs Roon claim. For all intents and purposes, the Roon doesn't need to kite. It can just stay there and HE spam you with 6 rearguns till you die. Whether you shoot from 4 km or 20 km, you'll still not overmatch and if you get too close, most T9 cruisers have a set of torps, Kronshtadt doesn't. You can shoot AP back, but it'll not do much. you can shoot HE, Roon will still be better. Even worse against ships with actually good HE. And not only are fires percentage-based, so your 20k additional hp doesn't matter, Kronshtadt has 45 second fire duration, so fires hurt disproportionally more if they are left to burn.

 

Also, Kronshtadt has 25 mm bow armour, deck armour, stern armour. Except for the belt, which intelligent people can easily avoid shooting (unless the Kronshtadt shows broadside, then you can just citadel it to crap), the Kronshtadt is armoured worse than a damn Hipper.

[Toivia]

Yes, one on one, any decent player in a regular cruiser will burn down the Kronshtadt with HE (pretty much can be said against most BBs if you wiggle a bit), but how often can a cruiser keep sailing or sitting in a straight line in a typical battle?

The reason Kronshtadt and Alaska are powercreep is that they functionally represent another BB in the matchmaker, meaning they can easily be the 6th BB any regular cruiser has to watch out for/angle against at any range.

 

And while Kronshtadt and Alaska are still vulnerable to any real BB guns overmatching them like regular cruisers, they have a much larger HP pool to keep them in battle longer. Also their size and manoeuvrability isn't that much worse than other cruisers while concealment is very competitive at high tier and the radar offers them more means to keep enemies on their toes.

 

So really the argument that Kron ad co. aren't better than other T9 cruisers doesn't fly for me at all.

 

EDIT: Oh, and I forgot the issue with 305mm AP versus DDs. It overmatches them, does a lot of damage yet is a smaller caliber than BBs, so often stick in them for pen DMG.

[Major_Damage225]

7 minutes ago, Toivia said:

Oh, and I forgot the issue with 305mm AP versus DDs. It overmatches them, does a lot of damage yet is a smaller caliber than BBs, so often stick in them for pen DMG.

I dont know about Alaska AP but Kronny's AP has a really bad habbit of overpenning, the only time it can do full pen damage to DD's is if that DD's is nose in and viceversa, otherwise it'll go straight through. 

Im not defending it, just saying 

[Toivia]

4 minutes ago, Major_Damage225 said:

I dont know about Alaska AP but Kronny's AP has a really bad habbit of overpenning, the only time it can do full pen damage to DD's is if that DD's is nose in and viceversa, otherwise it'll go straight through. 

Im not defending it, just saying 

And DDs that you radar do what? That's right: run away, definitely not broadside.

[HaachamaShipping]

20 minutes ago, Toivia said:

Yes, one on one, any decent player in a regular cruiser will burn down the Kronshtadt with HE (pretty much can be said against most BBs if you wiggle a bit), but how often can a cruiser keep sailing or sitting in a straight line in a typical battle?

The reason Kronshtadt and Alaska are powercreep is that they functionally represent another BB in the matchmaker, meaning they can easily be the 6th BB any regular cruiser has to watch out for/angle against at any range.

 

And while Kronshtadt and Alaska are still vulnerable to any real BB guns overmatching them like regular cruisers, they have a much larger HP pool to keep them in battle longer. Also their size and manoeuvrability isn't that much worse than other cruisers while concealment is very competitive at high tier and the radar offers them more means to keep enemies on their toes.

 

So really the argument that Kron ad co. aren't better than other T9 cruisers doesn't fly for me at all.

 

EDIT: Oh, and I forgot the issue with 305mm AP versus DDs. It overmatches them, does a lot of damage yet is a smaller caliber than BBs, so often stick in them for pen DMG.

And what of this doesn't apply already to Graf Spee? For a Nürnberg, a Graf Spee's guns are functionally another set of BB guns in every way and can citadel it hard if it looks down upon them.

[Toivia]

12 minutes ago, Riselotte said:

And what of this doesn't apply already to Graf Spee? For a Nürnberg, a Graf Spee's guns are functionally another set of BB guns in every way and can citadel it hard if it looks down upon them.

Umm, 6 Graf Spee guns that never hit anything? But yes, Graf Spee is OP for a Tier 6 cruiser, if that's what you wanted to hear from me. With the heal, it was clear powercreep back in the day. What keeps it in check is that 6 guns is simply not enough to really terrorize anything.

 

EDIT: And then there's the fact Graf Spee overmatches T5 BBs. lol

 

EDIT2: Hmm, got curious and looked at T6 cruiser stats. Graf Spee is at the forefront for both winrate and damage. And that despite being one of the most played and given away for free to many players, thus very likely even the "not-so-great-ones" (the more any ship is played, the worse its stats end up getting in general - Kron stands out far more in stats, but it gets arguably played by somewhat more competent people that have large reserves of FreeXP to begin with, you'l also notice its stats keep dropping steadily as more and more players get it and people learn to exploit its weaknesses). That seems to corroborate my thoughts.

[HaachamaShipping]

1 minute ago, Toivia said:

Umm, 6 Graf Spee guns that never hit anything? But yes, Graf Spee is OP for a Tier 6 cruiser, if that's what you wanted to hear from me. With the heal, it was clear powercreep back in the day. What keeps it in check is that 6 guns is simply not enough to really terrorize anything.

From personal experience in the ship, I have to disagree. These guns can dish out a world of pain and they can hit things pretty reliably. I didn't think too much of it at first, but by now, it's my favourite T6 cruiser after Leander and Perth. And stats kind of show that the ship has to be able to hit things, because how else is it second in overall WR, despite being almost as prolific as a tech tree ship.

 

Also, few people consider this powercreep at T6. It's now at T9 that somehow people have all the complaints for whatever reason.