Guide: British Cruisers

[Ryuuteimaru]

Thats what happens when you fight semi decent players, even slight angle and the ship goes from MEH to totally useless.

[Capra76]

But not all ships are "finishers". Battleships should not be finishing off low health cruisers. In the same vein RNCL shouldn't be firing at low health BBs. 

 

And in a tight 1 v 1 game, are you happy for that to be decided by a 10% HP BB simply angling against a 100% HP CA and waiting for the inevitable citadel hits?

[Goats_Beard]

Some years ago Portsmouth historic dockyard ran a billboard which seems to sum things up nicely...

 

 

 

 

[indycar]

i play ships to be parked near some lovely beach and wait if some maus-armoured DD wanders into my mortar range.

 

ships like that (pensa, furutaka,..) should be played with speed and agility not parked in smoke and behind islands

[SgtToad]

I said above "Just had another game in Edinburgh - 91 hits on a Tirpitz, for 8742 damage. Thats an average of ... 96 damage per shot landed"

 

I just had a game in Bismarck, my secondaries against a Bayern scored 10 hits for 1,964 damage. Thats an average of 196 per shot landed. Thats HE (without any fires).

 

So against BBs, the Bismarck's secondaries are landing more than double the damage per hit compared to a t8 cruiser's main armament. (when superstructure depleted, which is going to be a lot of the time).

 

So far beyond defensible...

[EsaTuunanen]

Playing through the T5 Emerald today, when I had this occur.

Fire 7 guns on a T5 US Nicholas Destroyer, range of about 4-5 km its broadside on. 2 shots miss, 5 go straight through the side plating, 4 come out the other side = Over Penetrations! 1 did damage!

 

Can someone explain, I thought these were designed to do penetrating damage to Destroyers.

Bow and stern section of Nicholas has 10mm side plating which isn't enough to trigger fuze.

Side of mid section of T5 destroyers is 13/14mm (except 10mm in Gremy) which should be enough.

At T6 destroyers start having 16mm side plating which is enough to trigger fuze.

But then again by angling they can auto-bounce 152mm APs.

[Chiledip]

This is Schopenhauer man. You took example that is obviously skewed. And murder is murder. You can't commit almost murder, semi murder, and half slaughter. It's not based on opinion, it's a fact: person was forcefully killed - murder.

You drive Ford Focus, and it's utter crap. So that means, that Ford Mustang is also crap? This is Ford, and this is Ford. You have a 9 mm beretta, and it' can't penetrate 10 mm hardened armour. So that means that 30 mm gatling gun with uranium shells also won't do it? They both shoot projectiles after all? You get the idea. 

 

As a base of principle, I don't dismiss weaker, or how you put it, lesser players. I avoid calling people noobs, potatoes and tomatoes. However, if I make an effort, to explain something to someone, and I show facts, arguments, detailed explanation based on my experience, even do a freakin vid in which I show how good it perform, provide statistics and comparisons, and if I only hear wah wah go play tier 1 - 5, or that my opinion is "comic". Well, it's dr. Dropsiq and mister Drops. The second one is a bit snappy, sarcastic, and overall an [edited]. I have much respect for people that don't play as good as me. It might be lack of time, talent, ability, approach - anything. But I don't respect people, who don't think and are being douchebags, when I'm trying to be nice You get the idea. 

And, although yes, he's opinion is surely viable and he is entitled to it, it might not change that intelectual value of said opinion is null. It's like me having an opinion on colonialism. I have one, but I'm ignorant. And I will accept and explanation showing me why I'm ignorant. That's where I begin to differ from my two buddies in that topic. 

But if someone went on a rampage in your community how X and Y is crap. And you could see he is clearly wrong, explaining him in detail why is that, only to receive aggressive posts telling you to [edited]off and how ignorant and comic you are, how would your community act? After two days of detailed explanations? If you went back to the first page of this thread, you would see a pretty big effort I made already to explain my opinion. So, I'm sorry, but at some point you have to say enough  

I will, but like I said. There is a difference in discussion with people who voice their opinion in very definite terms, but are not backed up by anything. And people that also have a strong opinion, but can actually base it on anything. Have an idea of what they talk about.  

You are and you are not. You are entitled to voice an opinion if they are fun or not. If they feel strong on CO - OP or not. But you shouldn't voice opinions on PvP with limited experience in it. I mean, is this really that hard? There are a sterotypes, that how many Poles are in a room, that many opinions are in the room. But this is new even for me   

 

The example of murder is ideal. If you think that someone needs to have actually performed a task in order to very accurately critique it, you need to think again. This is especially true in terms of making decisions about whether you will enjoy something or know that it is compatible with you. I do not need to try tap dancing to know that I don't find it fun, we could keep discussing this but in actuality, if you think about it,there are just too many real world examples that should tell you otherwise. Some of the best football managers in the world have never played at any level, many former players cannot analyse the game as well as these guys and their staff. In my game some of the  best analysts/commentators have never played the game at any level.

 

Your Ford examples don't work. You have mixed your tiers up!  If Ford left the steering wheels out of every car and removed the crumple zones on every car I think I could confidently say that I would dislike every car. There would be no reason to kill myself by trying them, I would be able to see the features (or lack thereof) and be able to make a decision. 

 

By saying that you hadn't played the first levels, he was trying to demonstrate that your view does not apply for the whole line. You said that yourself. What you don't need to do is pull the "look at your stats" card, that is devisive! If you have respect as a good player that ought to give you enough credibility that you don't have to try to destroy someone else's credibility! Ever!  It's needless and only detracts from your achievements and your standing. I have had many weak players try to tell me that I am wrong about something. I will try once to explain my viewpoint, if he will not listen then it his loss and not mine, I will not throw his record in his face or remind him that I am who I am.  The truth is that he is probably more reflective of the real heart of the game, the average player, and thus his opinion is probably more important to the game than mine is. It is me (and thus you) who is the outlier here, the difference is, I know it!

 

You need to have empathy for people who feel excluded from playing a line of ships that they were looking forward to playing, they may be pretty angry. Your tips etc are really welcome I am sure, but it isn't going to make anyone suddenly able to play these ships adequately. They are telling you what the problems are from their less skilled perspective, and you are giving answers from a different perspective, that of a better player. The question you should ask yourself is, how you would feel about the line if you were an average player, and if you are honest with yourself, you wouldn't like it.

[Effrit_TR]

Bow and stern section of Nicholas has 10mm side plating which isn't enough to trigger fuze.

Side of mid section of T5 destroyers is 13/14mm (except 10mm in Gremy) which should be enough.

At T6 destroyers start having 16mm side plating which is enough to trigger fuze.

But then again by angling they can auto-bounce 152mm APs.

 

Cheers, the Nicholas was side on (top of the T to my incoming fire), I was firing into the 15 mm side plates (double checked the thickness) they should have triggered and been penetrating hits, however they didn't.

[Admiral_noodle]

 

Sorry, any attempt to defend this is ridiculous.

 

I'm not defending it. I'm stating facts. Like USN cruisers don't have torpedoes. That's also a fact. It's a fact that RNCL are better of picking othe targets than low health BBs which have their superstructure. It's a fact that the tier 6+ ships are very good in divisions. Even better if those divisions include ships which make up for the RNCL weaknesses. team work helps too. 

 

I'm not defending them because at no point did I say "and you should enjoy these facts". 

[Admiral_noodle]

"You need to have empathy for people who feel excluded from playing a line of ships that they were looking forward to playing, they may be pretty angry"

- this is the main point. I wish the "hard to play" ships had been something other than the RNCL. As notser says in his latest video the problem is sometime you have no answer to a play other than retreat and do something else. A lot of people find the line too niche, too difficult to make work, too situational to enjoy. And they really wanted to enjoy the Royal Navy.

 

I skipped to Leander. She's quite fun but there are moments where you think "welp. Can't do anything here"

[C4PT41N_0BV10US]

 By saying that you hadn't played the first levels, he was trying to demonstrate that your view does not apply for the whole line. You said that yourself. What you don't need to do is pull the "look at your stats" card, that is devisive! If you have respect as a good player that ought to give you enough credibility that you don't have to try to destroy someone else's credibility! Ever!  It's needless and only detracts from your achievements and your standing. I have had many weak players try to tell me that I am wrong about something. I will try once to explain my viewpoint, if he will not listen then it his loss and not mine, I will not throw his record in his face or remind him that I am who I am.  The truth is that he is probably more reflective of the real heart of the game, the average player, and thus his opinion is probably more important to the game than mine is. It is me (and thus you) who is the outlier here, the difference is, I know it!

Oh, you must be nice person in real life Unfortunately, I'm not that nice.

But, you ring a fine question - who is the more important player here? An below average player, or a good one. Too which the game designers should appeal more. Well, obviously, you would answer that to the average Joe, since he is the majority. Well, we have that already in game. BB's are an average Joe dream. Fighter Deck CV's are an average Joe dream. Two classes, that DESTROY this game and make it unplayable, unfun, and limited. But I guess average Joe is delighted! But the problem is, now the "pro" players start looking for something else. And since there are no "pro" players, there is no esport, there are no clans, there is less and less content, less and less guides, media exposure, streams, vids. Aaaaand we have WoWp again. I know it might sound harsh, but I don't give a damn about his opinion, or opinion of a weak/not understanding player, when it comes to game balance and game development. Because he will not organise an event, he will not make vids and streams, he will not push this game into something bigger and better. Because he is a casual, he doesn't have time, he have wife, kids, 2 jobs, other hobbies, whatever. It is a dedicated player that utterly makes this game better and more enjoyable. It's a harsh truth, but, in my opinion, it's the truth.

And, I say it again, higher tiers, especially VI to VIII are more important for the game, then II - V. Because they might be used for more then grinding. Furthermore, how much time you grind low tiers and how long you grind high tiers? Which costs you more time and effort? I would love for each line to start crappy and improve greatly from tier V. So yes, while I might not play lower tiers, I also never said whole line is great or not. I said that ships I played are great. 

 

 You need to have empathy for people who feel excluded from playing a line of ships that they were looking forward to playing, they may be pretty angry. Your tips etc are really welcome I am sure, but it isn't going to make anyone suddenly able to play these ships adequately. They are telling you what the problems are from their less skilled perspective, and you are giving answers from a different perspective, that of a better player. The question you should ask yourself is, how you would feel about the line if you were an average player, and if you are honest with yourself, you wouldn't like it.

I do. But, also, I think it's hardly worth an effort you know. To cry so much and moan, and whine. I understand, somebody dislikes them, it's not what he expected, he thinks they're weak. Ok. But then, I would see that there are some players, that are getting outstanding results with those ships. So I would also try to do that, I would try to get better, I would try to reach ships that are said to be better. But they don't even do that. They don't put minimum effort into changing this situation. You know, I was a complete noob in WoT. A totall red guy. Cause nobody helped me get better, and I didn't also had a need to get better. I just drived tanks, got those that I liked and fought with them. Yeah, I loved Tiger II and it was mildly frustrating that it wasn't what I expected from that mighty machine, same with Panther. But was I this outraged? Never. It's just a fuckin game. And not that great why we're at it. It still develops. And you know, I might not be known on ENG section so much, but on PL section everybody knew Dropsiq was waiting for the Royal Navy. And they asked me, hey, Dropsiq, what if they are totall crap? And I said, well, I would still grind them to tier X since those are great ships, and I like to fight in them. Even if they are subpar. 

So, although I have empathy for players that can't handle RN, I don't have empathy for bad players demanding stuff cause it's too hard for them. Get better if you really want. See - they perform great, you need to get better. Cause if we will have empathy, and then adhere to lower player standards, we will just kill this game with our own hands.

 

Bonus: lulz dreadnaught

And bonus nr 2: high caliber and confederate

As predicted, MM is crapand I don't intend to play either Danae and Caledon for at least a week.

 

[EDIT] Oh, and I dismissed first two paragraphs of your post, since I think we just don't understand each other, and my english isn't good enough to say what I mean. So let's just skip that, aight?

[Dampfboot]

Can only recommend to Wargaming to watch Flamu's commentary:

Pretty much sums up this line very nicely. Funny troll line in certain situations but useless if facing any semi-skilled player using OP things like angling his ship and WASD hack.

[Chiledip]

I am a thoroughly pleasant fella in real life, just ask my ex-wife!

 

What I am trying to suggest to you is that you need to look at the bigger picture. I am not talking about catering to the lowest common denominator, I am talking about catering for the average, median player. That demographic MUST be where the core of the game is aimed at. I am not saying that more skilled players shouldn't also have their niches, options etc but should NEVER be at the expense of the core of players. In this case it would have been sensible to have a slightly more playable primary tree of RN cruisers, with a later second optional line with higher skill ceiling. You can add things for the better player without excluding the majority!

 

If you want to grow this game into a viable esport, the number one thing that you will need is a large, engaged and growing community. That is what sponsors are looking for and they will decide your viability. If you continue to feel like your whims are more important than that of the average Joe, you may end up with the game that you want, but the game that you want won't be where you want it to be. Please try to take that in before coming back at me, I am speaking from experience. Your content is all well and good, and you may argue that it adds to the to the engagement of the community and I agree with this. You need this kind of contribution, but NEVER ever feel like your opinion and wants are more important than those of the masses. They may be less informed, but funnily enough they are more important.

[Deckeru_Maiku]

To see how a relatively new player would experience the RN cruisers, I played a bit on my second account today. It's a Tier 8 battlepass (or whatever it's called), so no camo could be used. Or, at least it was T8 when I started.

I needed a total of 5 battles to go from T1 to T3, then added another 5 T5 battles.

 

Result: http://worldofwarships.eu/de/community/accounts/535306049-Deckero_Maiko/!/pvp/ships/?bestShip=caledon

 

Games consisted usually of 7 ships only, but no bots to fill up the ranks. Ships were a mixture of all classes, with a setup about like this: 1-2 BB, 3-4 Cruiser (all nations, not only RN) and 1-2 DDs.

The one lost battle with the Caledon was the one with those 4 kills and 60k+ damage done. The rest of the team evaporated around me, so I ended up as the sole survivor. And the only one getting any kills at all...

 

In the end, after those 10 battles, I had due to the daily first win bonus, enough exp to get two containers.

 

So... RN on low level is absolutely wrecked, right?

[Admiral_noodle]

We know they can all get good results but you need to be relatively high skilled and concentrating hard to do it. The valid complaint that's being made is that why is this being done to the RN which will be popular. Or would be. Maybe to her people to "get good?" Seems a bit unfair or at least disappointing to the players who have been looking forward to sailing RN since beta...

 

Litterally sny ship can get good results with good play and luck. And enemies who allow themselves to be ambushed from behind a rock. But a lot of players just want a chilled playing experience wrecking things.

 

Anyway this is supposed to be a guide. We have a wealth of "how to" RNCL so that should help anyone determined to play them.

 

I am. Regardless of their state.

[Chiledip]

To see how a relatively new player would experience the RN cruisers, I played a bit on my second account today. It's a Tier 8 battlepass (or whatever it's called), so no camo could be used. Or, at least it was T8 when I started.

I needed a total of 5 battles to go from T1 to T3, then added another 5 T5 battles.

 

Result: http://worldofwarships.eu/de/community/accounts/535306049-Deckero_Maiko/!/pvp/ships/?bestShip=caledon

 

Games consisted usually of 7 ships only, but no bots to fill up the ranks. Ships were a mixture of all classes, with a setup about like this: 1-2 BB, 3-4 Cruiser (all nations, not only RN) and 1-2 DDs.

The one lost battle with the Caledon was the one with those 4 kills and 60k+ damage done. The rest of the team evaporated around me, so I ended up as the sole survivor. And the only one getting any kills at all...

 

In the end, after those 10 battles, I had due to the daily first win bonus, enough exp to get two containers.

 

So... RN on low level is absolutely wrecked, right?

 

In a word, no.

 

"To see how a relatively new player would experience the RN cruisers" would be impossible for you, with nearly 6000 battles with a better than average win rate. Please don't ask me to explain why. Did you have the part of your brain removed which stored the experience you have? Come on mate! Huge sample size too, really relevant.

 

Is this the kind of straw that you need to clutch to?

[CavScorpion_2014]

I've been pretty vocal at times with my disdain for people who refused to learn how to play a certain style.

I diligently went back down the lines using youtube vids and the few guides around to re-learn difficult ships and my results skyrocketed.

 

I actually learned to enjoy ships I'd previously hated by playing their strengths.

 

Yet, here I give in, I've free XP'd past both 4/5 as 2/3 made me want to vomit but I really want the T10 (The first T10 I've ever really lusted after) so I will grind them out, the MM hasn't helped but I don't see the WR's balancing out long term, this makes playing a Lex against a Shoku seem easy.

If the guns were accurate, strangely, I could deal with the rest as I could see a way to make it work.

Just got the T6 as I am out of free XP, consumables now look interesting, maybe I can make it work from here on out, it doesn't excuse what appears to be half the line totally broken, this was a dramatic gamble, badly implemented, not since World of Warplanes has WG messed up this badly.

Do you really hate us Brits that much?

[BloodRose13]

So, I am still not seeing an apology from Wargaming. However I am seeing certain members of staff claiming "everything is fine, you just need to get good" and posting the odd screen shot of a good game.

I am guessing the infrequent posting of these screenshots is because they have to go through 10 to 20 bad battles to get a good one.

[CavScorpion_2014]

So, I am still not seeing an apology from Wargaming. However I am seeing certain members of staff claiming "everything is fine, you just need to get good" and posting the odd screen shot of a good game.

I am guessing the infrequent posting of these screenshots is because they have to go through 10 to 20 bad battles to get a good one.

 

Let's see them post their overall WR's ;-) Not seen any floating around over a decent sample size!

[Chiledip]

I think some may be able to produce good figures,including averages. Just the vast majority won't.

[Admiral_noodle]

I think some may be able to produce good figures,including averages. Just the vast majority won't.

 

Anyone can do well. You just have to play a certain way. Question is whether that "way" is fun to a lot of people. I'm betting no. 

 

And my main gripe remains the flat no-fun zone tiers 3-5 which is so demoralising. You don't get a "good" ship till Fiji and even then the ships can't do things others can... but then they can do things others can't. Again comes down to what is fun to each player. 

[CavScorpion_2014]

I think some may be able to produce good figures,including averages. Just the vast majority won't.

 

Agreed, top players will do well, in the most anticipated Navy to hit the game Very few seem happy about that!

 

Are you doing better than the other ships where you excel at - for your skill level tier for tier? Or just better than everyone else who is sucking at them?

 

If you are telling me you are pulling the same WR's tier for tier that you can pull in other cruisers of different lines - then yes, clearly it's a player base problem, but you posting one off wins won't help show that! I could post my Lexington stats all day - way better than the average, doesn't mean that it does better than a Shoku in the hands of an equal captain!

 

[Admiral_noodle]

Of course you can track both individual and player stats at warships.today. It will be interesting to see what kind of player out scores their other cruisers in RNCL and what other lines they play etc...

[Xevious_Red]

With the exception of the Caledon, all my WR are above the norm for equal ships. The sample sizes are really low though at low tiers, as in 1-20 games.

 

With the exception of the black swan/Weymouth all my average damages are lower however.

[CavScorpion_2014]

With the exception of the Caledon, all my WR are above the norm for equal ships. The sample sizes are really low though at low tiers, as in 1-20 games.

 

With the exception of the black swan/Weymouth all my average damages are lower however.

 

I felt I had very little influence and was praying to the RNG gods, first match in the T6 though..... hmmm..... There might be something to this line!