Jump to content
Kandly

Guide: British Cruisers

806 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts


[HEROS] Leronex
In AlfaTesters
4,574 posts
11,379 battles

I think it's not about if I, personally, enjoy them. I think the real issue here is should we make lines similar in skill demanding to perform at certain levels, or not? Cause, in my opinion, RN cruisers I played: Leander, Fiji and Edinbourgh, are a very capable ships. Much better then some of their counterparts. But to take that potential they need to be learned and that take some time and effort. And then there's Zao, that requires no skil whatsoever to perform, but is plan and bland in terms of gameplay, both as a opponent and as a driver. Which philosophy of development should we choose? 

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 posts
3,460 battles

Well, I free xp'd up to tier 4 (little bit of an "easier" time due to MM) as I don't want to "waste" free xp to tier 7 (again, "easier" time in MM) and in my one and only game I found the thing quite fun! Yep, fragile, but able to wiggle plenty, and with repair, it's achievable with risk (keep an eye on repair cooldown). I went with a BB and we took on 2 t3 teacrusiers, then german BB (although at this point we had another couple firing at them too), then took on 2 more BBs. At t4 it's not TOO hard to be "ok", and I torped one BB, and kept shooting, and shot at the second (better played) one too. We won. I ended up with 55k+ damage. And I'm not a good player by any means. So it is possible to do ok, just got to be a little cautious. Yes, the AP IS frustrating to use, but citadels are possible (I managed a lucky one on one of the t3 teacruisers). IMO if I'm being shot at by 2 BBs and they are missing plenty, it means my friendly BBs aren't taking damage, but are dealing it. And the torps work ok. My driver also does not have a 5th tier skill, yet, so it wasn't as if I was camoflagued. 

 

TL/DR - I'm not a good player, tier 4was UKCA was quite fun, can go aggressive, bow on, and wiggle against BBs to torp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[ST-EU] Ev1n
518 posts
1,064 battles

I think it's not about if I, personally, enjoy them. I think the real issue here is should we make lines similar in skill demanding to perform at certain levels, or not? Cause, in my opinion, RN cruisers I played: Leander, Fiji and Edinbourgh, are a very capable ships. Much better then some of their counterparts. But to take that potential they need to be learned and that take some time and effort. And then there's Zao, that requires no skil whatsoever to perform, but is plan and bland in terms of gameplay, both as a opponent and as a driver. Which philosophy of development should we choose? 

 

While this is probably a very unpopular point of view right now, this is exactly one of the points here. However, the question is rather: can we integrate both of these "philosophies" (i think the word is too big in this context) into the same framework, but with different content.

From our point of view the answer is yes. There is no strict rule that says content has to be equally easy to play - the only requirement is that its balanced in terms of effectiveness. Of course at first it may seem unfair that an average Joe Potato can just show up and be effective on average with other ships of a similar type while you have to endure to get good and harvest the potential. However, i believe this is acceptable, as those players who do put in that effort and skill will eventually start getting above average results in the long run.

 

Now, whether this approach should have been taken with this particular piece of content is an entirely different question - this one purely philosophical. 

 

I guess we'll just make sure that British Battleships don't require any effort and are as boring as afternoon tea. :tea_cap:

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,929 posts
7,756 battles

I don't know if this already has been posted, if not, feel free to read everything in it what you want:

 

hIup81a.png

I'm only sorry for this gy that he probably looses his ST-Title...

 

Sorry out of +1s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players, In AlfaTesters, Weekend Tester
4,268 posts
823 battles

I guess we'll just make sure that British Battleships don't require any effort and are as boring as afternoon tea. :tea_cap:

I think you missed the point, the main problem with the cruisers is the shell trajectory, it is not representative nor does it bring justice to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[LOBUZ] 44smok
[LOBUZ]
4,100 posts
14,950 battles

Guess my biggest problem with the line is that low tiers learn you nothing. Similarly to IJN BBs - Myogi teaches a regular player that battleship guns cant hit anything anyway and the only way you can be useful is to sit at range and not get yourself killed. Then they go to Kongo and instead of learning hpow to angle and use the guns properly they simply utilize range. Which leads to all the problems with BB passiveness on high tiers. People just dont have the opportunity to learn how to play the line properly.

 

Same with teacruisers - the line is all about playing hide and seek, choosing your fights and withdrawing when in danger. Gess what. Tier 2-4 offer you nothing of that experience. You dont get at least enough concealment to get the idea that pushing onto the first line and shooting at anything within range may not be the best idea. You get spotted as any other ship in the game. And you try to make your damage out of any opportunity before you get sunk. You dont get to learn positioning and then you can't utilize your smoke cause it is too short for a flank speed vessel.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 posts
3,460 battles

I think you missed the point, the main problem with the cruisers is the shell trajectory, it is not representative nor does it bring justice to them.

 

i disagree a little - as has been said, the trajectory is so that the "special" AP shells get good angles onto the deck etc, thus can get through and not bounce from the "side" armour. I found shooting at waterline on 2 -1 tier teacruisers had very little effect, but aim just above deckline and there is more success. However, I have only had one game in a t4........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players, In AlfaTesters, Weekend Tester
4,268 posts
823 battles

 

i disagree a little - as has been said, the trajectory is so that the "special" AP shells get good angles onto the deck etc, thus can get through and not bounce from the "side" armour. I found shooting at waterline on 2 -1 tier teacruisers had very little effect, but aim just above deckline and there is more success. However, I have only had one game in a t4........

 

And I disagree with this, the Trajectory makes them look more like they are firing mortars, certainly not representative, and does not give the ship's justice whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,929 posts
7,756 battles

 

While this is probably a very unpopular point of view right now, this is exactly one of the points here. However, the question is rather: can we integrate both of these "philosophies" (i think the word is too big in this context) into the same framework, but with different content.

From our point of view the answer is yes. There is no strict rule that says content has to be equally easy to play - the only requirement is that its balanced in terms of effectiveness. Of course at first it may seem unfair that an average Joe Potato can just show up and be effective on average with other ships of a similar type while you have to endure to get good and harvest the potential. However, i believe this is acceptable, as those players who do put in that effort and skill will eventually start getting above average results in the long run.

 

Now, whether this approach should have been taken with this particular piece of content is an entirely different question - this one purely philosophical. 

 

I guess we'll just make sure that British Battleships don't require any effort and are as boring as afternoon tea. :tea_cap:

 

In effect you made a line of ships that will only appeal to a select few superunicums which will be the only ones being able to get decent battles in those 'certain death zero carry ability tincans' - I must say that I find that train of reasoning extremely counter productive and illogical for a big company that makes money from masses by releasing a much anticipated line of ships that the vast majority of players will never find any pleassure in playing but only frustration and anger.
  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[-AWF-] von_Boeg
1,194 posts
6,197 battles

Now, whether this approach should have been taken with this particular piece of content is an entirely different question - this one purely philosophical. 

 

I guess we'll just make sure that British Battleships don't require any effort and are as boring as afternoon tea. :tea_cap:

 

I like this kind of understatement; the first line says quite a lot.

 

However, it also tells us that the second line is not a given fact. Let us just assume the Russian line will be the best one there as well and we will not be disappointed. 

Edited by von_Boeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[-AWF-] von_Boeg
1,194 posts
6,197 battles

Now i fear about the upcoming changes to the ijn dd line

 

As for me, I do not give a [edited]. I have been waiting for this line the whole time since I started playing and ALL my worst fears have been implemented. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[HEROS] Leronex
In AlfaTesters
4,574 posts
11,379 battles

While this is probably a very unpopular point of view right now, this is exactly one of the points here. However, the question is rather: can we integrate both of these "philosophies" (i think the word is too big in this context) into the same framework, but with different content.

From our point of view the answer is yes. There is no strict rule that says content has to be equally easy to play - the only requirement is that its balanced in terms of effectiveness. Of course at first it may seem unfair that an average Joe Potato can just show up and be effective on average with other ships of a similar type while you have to endure to get good and harvest the potential. However, i believe this is acceptable, as those players who do put in that effort and skill will eventually start getting above average results in the long run.

 

Now, whether this approach should have been taken with this particular piece of content is an entirely different question - this one purely philosophical. 

 

I guess we'll just make sure that British Battleships don't require any effort and are as boring as afternoon tea. :tea_cap:

Yes, I support this design. From my experience with differen't MMO's there were classes and champions that were absolutely monstrous when played correctly, but were utter thrash when played by a newbie. I think, and this is my opinion after relatively few games, so it might change, that RN cruisers are pretty well designed. I would change few things, most of all, I would give them better protection and lower the effectiveness of Damage Control Party. That would ease on Joe Potato, while still not influencing sophisticated gameplay of the line. 

I will not go into commenting about BB's, cause I'm already marked as nr 1 BB hater, and there is price on my head. 

 And I disagree with this, the Trajectory makes them look more like they are firing mortars, certainly not representative, and does not give the ship's justice whatsoever. 

We had a dude that was talking about "making ship justice" before. He's nick was VonPletz, and he hated GE cruisers with all his heart, cause in his eyes WG didn't "do justice" to their superior design. What he didn't understand is that this is a game, and there is no need for doing "justice" to anything, there is only the need for balance. Bad trajectory is a way to ensure RN CL's will be used on close range, when they can be shot at, even in smoke. Therefore, their gigantic advantage doesn't break the game balance. It's kinda obvious. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players, In AlfaTesters, Weekend Tester
4,268 posts
823 battles

We had a dude that was talking about "making ship justice" before. He's nick was VonPletz, and he hated GE cruisers with all his heart, cause in his eyes WG didn't "do justice" to their superior design. What he didn't understand is that this is a game, and there is no need for doing "justice" to anything, there is only the need for balance. Bad trajectory is a way to ensure RN CL's will be used on close range, when they can be shot at, even in smoke. Therefore, their gigantic advantage doesn't break the game balance. It's kinda obvious. 

 

Don't give me the Balance BS. We all know it's not because of balance.

 

And it maybe a game, but you still need to give each ship justice, and right now, the Royal Navy has been given none.

Edited by Commodore_Ahsoka_Tano

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[RN] indycar
920 posts

Don't engage battleships he says.

 

That's so easy isn't it, when every match has between 5-7 battleships in each team. I would imagine the only people happy about this line of comedy-boats ships are Pensacola captains, as they are no longer the first thing everyone wants to shoot at.

 

oi leave my pepsi out of this thread. pepsi is god compared to those rubbish paperboats

 

A presumed DD hunter that gets eaten by dds..isnt that something:))

 

aye eaten is not big enough word

 

 

also the 6" cp xiv ????? guns

never heard of those guns before if wg ment 6" qf mk xiv they should have elevation of max 15deg

 

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=yh3OAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA84&lpg=PA84&dq=6%22+cpxiv&source=bl&ots=wqg15LeyWA&sig=hs-5Dv_2JwpxvtiosDawbxXu8pw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiAwO-0nOrPAhWHERQKHd6LD2IQ6AEITTAI#v=onepage&q=6%22%20cpxiv&f=false

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 posts
3,460 battles

 

And I disagree with this, the Trajectory makes them look more like they are firing mortars, certainly not representative, and does not give the ship's justice whatsoever.

 

I don't understand. i don't really care how it looks, tbh, just how it performs. AP can't pen the belt, so to "balance" a little to get effect of the shells (in game, no idea about RL) then the trajectory works in concept, I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players, In AlfaTesters, Weekend Tester
4,268 posts
823 battles

 

I don't understand. i don't really care how it looks, tbh, just how it performs. AP can't pen the belt, so to "balance" a little to get effect of the shells (in game, no idea about RL) then the trajectory works in concept, I believe.

 

If you like Mortars on a ship and not guns then yes it does work in concept, but they are guns so no, the concept is a complete fail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[-AWF-] von_Boeg
1,194 posts
6,197 battles

We had a dude that was talking about "making ship justice" before. He's nick was VonPletz, and he hated GE cruisers with all his heart, cause in his eyes WG didn't "do justice" to their superior design. What he didn't understand is that this is a game, and there is no need for doing "justice" to anything, there is only the need for balance. Bad trajectory is a way to ensure RN CL's will be used on close range, when they can be shot at, even in smoke. Therefore, their gigantic advantage doesn't break the game balance. It's kinda obvious. 

 

And what about the Admiral Kuznetzov?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
137 posts
8,878 battles

If you pay attention to the map and use your excellent concealment to your advantage, you can easily avoid close encounters with most battleships, I am much more scared of CA's

 

So we evade BB's and CA's by watching the map and spend the game hiding/running waiting for a DD to pop up and then, as we have seen, the outcome is dubious.

 

As for the comments re player skill - the same could be said that a Formula Driver in a Skoda will outperform an average driver in a Mercedes - It doesn't mean the Skoda is better now does it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
114 posts
1,128 battles

People saying the low tiers are terrible aren't playing it right. Using danae (christened HMS Scorpion) I got six kills. Two by Shere fire power and four by torps. The only games that are russian biased are world of warplanes and warthunder end of story. They're like that because let's be honest russias air force during 42-43 wasn't exactly the best bar the IL2. Back on topic I bet half the people complaining about the RN aren't even British. Go play your own country's if you aint happy with ours. Or if you are British and don't like our tree go play the German line. Unless you voted out in which case go play dark souls

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players, In AlfaTesters, Weekend Tester
4,268 posts
823 battles

People saying the low tiers are terrible aren't playing it right. Using danae (christened HMS Scorpion) I got six kills. Two by Shere fire power and four by torps. The only games that are russian biased are world of warplanes and warthunder end of story. They're like that because let's be honest russias air force during 42-43 wasn't exactly the best bar the IL2. Back on topic I bet half the people complaining about the RN aren't even British. Go play your own country's if you aint happy with ours. Or if you are British and don't like our tree go play the German line. Unless you voted out in which case go play dark souls

 

Or Wargaming could, you know, actually fix the line.  The Danae is mediocre at best, it's a manageable ship, but when you get to the Emerald.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
114 posts
1,128 battles

Look I've been waiting for this line for like others a long [edited]time. I even went a played a bit of fighting steel and warthunder to kill time. Do you know how broken warthunder is. But I digress. Just play the British cruisers like the Japanese ones they're almost mirrors of

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[HEROS] Leronex
In AlfaTesters
4,574 posts
11,379 battles

And what about the Admiral Kuznetzov?

What about it? Range and ballistics, that's what bothers you? Yeah, but Kutuzov doesn't have heal, as well he's torpedoes are not as good. As is it's camo. It's kinda a different cruiser, pretty strong, but different. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players, In AlfaTesters, Weekend Tester
4,268 posts
823 battles

Look I've been waiting for this line for like others a long [edited]time. I even went a played a bit of fighting steel and warthunder to kill time. Do you know how broken warthunder is. But I digress. Just play the British cruisers like the Japanese ones they're almost mirrors of

 

World of Warships/Tanks/Warplanes are broken as well.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
393 posts
2,915 battles

Only time I've seen them do anything is 3 unicom leanders and 2 DD chain smoking with a couple of BB support, literally nothing you can do against it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×