Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Ryouzanpakku

T8 Cleveland - what changes would you like to see?

80 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
131 posts
1,010 battles

For me it would be:

 

1) Better shell trajectory - lets say Omaha-like

2) Reload buff - 6sec is historical afaik

3) Turret traverse less then 20sec

4) Firing Range buff to T8 values ofc

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MUMMY]
Beta Tester
1,278 posts
4,998 battles

The old citadel placement would be hilarious.

 

Other than that a slight range increase and tier 8 tweaking on the HP and AA values would be nice.

 

And I'm not sure touching the shell arc is a change I would like. Right now abusing terrain is one of the things that makes the Cleveland fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
1,016 posts
15,380 battles
30 minutes ago, Ryouzanpakku said:

For me it would be:

 

1) Better shell trajectory - lets say Omaha-like

2) Reload buff - 6sec is historical afaik

3) Turret traverse less then 20sec

4) Firing Range buff to T8 values ofc

 

1) Not sure about that I kind off like current Cleveland arcs

2) Yes that would be nice

3) Also nice. Historic train rate was 10 degree per second so that would make 18sec for 180 degree

4) This is expecting as 14.something would be too short for T8 but I think that we won't get too much maybe 1.5km-2km at the best.

 

15 minutes ago, Max_Kammerer said:

Radar...

 

So far WG only mentioned that T9 & T10 of light cruiser line will have radar. Nothing solid on Cleveland for now but it would be nice to have a radar.

 

2 minutes ago, ollonborre said:

And I'm not sure touching the shell arc is a change I would like. Right now abusing terrain is one of the things that makes the Cleveland fun.

 

I agree, I kind off like Cleveland arcs. And if WG only slightly increase range than you will need those arc to prevent being insta-deleted from T8-T10 BBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTT]
Players
3,604 posts
7,459 battles
52 minutes ago, Ryouzanpakku said:

For me it would be:

 

1) Better shell trajectory - lets say Omaha-like

2) Reload buff - 6sec is historical afaik

3) Turret traverse less then 20sec

4) Firing Range buff to T8 values ofc

1) no thanks, see above

2) I dont see that happening when every other 6" gun at T8 has 7.5s reload, no reason for Cleve to get anything else

3) that would be nice

4) bit more, yes, but with those arcs no need for 17-18km range. Make it 15.5 to 16km or there abouts?

 

otherwise, T8 armour scheme (i.e. upgrade nose/stern and superstructure) and maybe a bit of extra HP combined with Cleveland's superb citadel layout will make her a pretty durable T8 CL. That and the addition of the Concealment Mod (for 10.2km concealment total) would probably be enough in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
90 posts
5,982 battles
12 minutes ago, fumtu said:

So far WG only mentioned that T9 & T10 of light cruiser line will have radar. Nothing solid on Cleveland for now but it would be nice to have a radar.

T8 does tend to be the Tier that ships get their nation specific gimmick, like Radar, RN Superheal for the RN CL, super speed boost for the frenchies so her having radar is a possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
1,016 posts
15,380 battles
11 minutes ago, snakecake said:

T8 does tend to be the Tier that ships get their nation specific gimmick, like Radar, RN Superheal for the RN CL, super speed boost for the frenchies so her having radar is a possibility.

 

I know that but when WG introduced US cruiser line split they mentioned that T9 & T10 -  Seattle and  Worcester will get radar. They didn't mentioned anything about Cleveland at T8. As I said it would be nice and maybe in the end it would have but so far there is nothing that will confirm that Cleveland will have radar. It should have both hydro and DAA on separate consumable slots tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WOTN]
Quality Poster
2,032 posts
13,625 battles
1 hour ago, Ryouzanpakku said:

For me it would be:

 

1) Better shell trajectory - lets say Omaha-like

2) Reload buff - 6sec is historical afaik

3) Turret traverse less then 20sec

4) Firing Range buff to T8 values ofc

Better reload would likely be in order, and better firing range would be nice. I really think that having a turret rotation of around 25 seconds for a ship like the Cleveland is perfectly fine and I could do with some more range. Beyond that, I would like to see her armor plates bought in line with the other tier VIII cruisers and some more health. Apart from that, she really doesn't need it. Also, her shell arcs are fine. American light cruisers should be more like the Atlanta anyways, the best tier 7 cruiser.

Spoiler

Belfast fans, f*** you, fight me!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[H_FAN]
Players
1,862 posts
20,842 battles

Clveland has had a health pool advantage in T6, that would be different in T8, nevertheless she can be compared with Mogami 155, Chappa, Edinburgh f.e. so faster RPM than 7,5 would be wrong , range 16-16,5, Def AA+hydro sep slots, the CE  will prob be good. Healt buff to say 38000. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CZWSM]
[CZWSM]
Players
224 posts
12,221 battles

So it will be very average ship with bad concealment, without radar, smoke, torpedos... nothing interesting... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CZWSM]
[CZWSM]
Players
224 posts
12,221 battles
43 minutes ago, ZeMalm said:

One thing we do not need is a bunch of new Radar ships.

yes, agree in 200% 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MUMMY]
Beta Tester
1,278 posts
4,998 battles
10 minutes ago, Max_Kammerer said:

So it will be very average ship with bad concealment, without radar, smoke, torpedos... nothing interesting... :)

Is this sarcasm? Since in my mind you don't need to pile on gimmicks, big buffs or overhauls in order to create a solid ship. Just get the Cleveland on tier 8 with tier 8 tweaks and that's it, jobs done, everything we liked about the Cleveland is still there but now it is tier 8.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CZWSM]
[CZWSM]
Players
224 posts
12,221 battles
9 minutes ago, ollonborre said:

Is this sarcasm? Since in my mind you don't need to pile on gimmicks, big buffs or overhauls in order to create a solid ship. Just get the Cleveland on tier 8 with tier 8 tweaks and that's it, jobs done, everything we liked about the Cleveland is still there but now it is tier 8.

Partially sarcasm, partially not... IMHO it is maybe tier VII, but hardly VIII. In comparison with Fiji it is wearker ship... But it is my personal feeling about Cleve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[_MIA_]
Players
2,942 posts
5,366 battles

The things u are demanding would straitup make it OP.

Compare it to Chapayev, which would come close in performance being CL

- Better shellarcs than now -> Easier time hitting at long range

- Better reload than Chapa -> lol woot? 7,5 sec would be borderline OP already. Maybe something along the lines of 9-10 sec.

- Better turret traverse than chapa -> id go for 25 sec seems ok.

- Firing range -> yes ofc a no brainer.

 

But here is the deal: Chapa is a floating citadel, cleveland currently isnt. U cant have good Armor and superior gunpower to other CLs. Cleveland like that would crap on any other cruiser out there.

 

The main changes ofc for Cleveland need to be:

- Higher range

- Better plating

- More health

- Better AA

 

These are the only must haves which definentely need to change. Imo reload cant be buffed above Chapa levels. Turret traverse must be in line with other Cruisers.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
200 posts
14,464 battles

Kinda weird reading how people expect mroe range yet want to keep the arcs.

How do you people think you will hit anything at 17+km with travel times of ~16+ seconds?

I really like you guys to show me how you hit stuff that aren`t BBs driving straight at max ranges. So yeah the arc has to be more shallow. And i think it is a moot point to say you shouldn`t engage at mid-close ranges with this Light Cruiser vs most other cruisers.

Turret Traverse wouldn`t really be needed good enough imho.

The Pen might be an issue though, since it`s AP will be pretty much useless anyways. So IFHE a must i guess :/ too one dimensional. Like UK-Opposite ship. HE only. Unless of coruse you wanna give it`s AP like serious OPness for it`s caibre.

Reload might be ok too, since NO currently has 10 secs with second guns. So ~7,5 doesn`t sound that bad. It isn`t a Machinegun-Limey afterall.

 

But since it is WG, i fear a 1:1 portation from T6 to T8 with nothing changed.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MUMMY]
Beta Tester
1,278 posts
4,998 battles
14 minutes ago, StoneRhino said:

Kinda weird reading how people expect mroe range yet want to keep the arcs.

How do you people think you will hit anything at 17+km with travel times of ~16+ seconds?

I really like you guys to show me how you hit stuff that aren`t BBs driving straight at max ranges. So yeah the arc has to be more shallow. And i think it is a moot point to say you shouldn`t engage at mid-close ranges with this Light Cruiser vs most other cruisers.

Turret Traverse wouldn`t really be needed good enough imho.

The Pen might be an issue though, since it`s AP will be pretty much useless anyways. So IFHE a must i guess :/ too one dimensional. Like UK-Opposite ship. HE only. Unless of coruse you wanna give it`s AP like serious OPness for it`s caibre.

Reload might be ok too, since NO currently has 10 secs with second guns. So ~7,5 doesn`t sound that bad. It isn`t a Machinegun-Limey afterall.

 

But since it is WG, i fear a 1:1 portation from T6 to T8 with nothing changed.

No one said anything about giving it Kutuzov range. Mogami range of around 15.8 will do just fine. Means you can atleast take potshots at BB's and still hit them. And with that range you are also able to have the option of still being useful even if you don't get close to your enemy.

 

The AP I also feel has great pen for tier 6, so maybe a slight increase to make it tier 8 material.

 

Reload of 7.5 is in line with other 155 armed tier 8 cruisers, no real issue there.

 

All in all like I said before, you don't need much to make it a viable tier 8. Just make it a tier 8 Cleveland, it's not much harder than that.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
1,016 posts
15,380 battles
32 minutes ago, StoneRhino said:

Kinda weird reading how people expect mroe range yet want to keep the arcs.

How do you people think you will hit anything at 17+km with travel times of ~16+ seconds?

 

You can forget about 17+km range Cleveland. This is not a Chapa, Edinburgh and 155mm Mogami both have bellow 16km range so that is probably what we can expect for Cleveland too. Even WG mentioned that:

 

The US Light Cruisers will encourage team play at medium distances, with a good rate of fire but not the most comfortable ballistics. In the new branch, the Defensive AA Fire and Hydroacoustic Search consumables will be available in separate slots. At higher tiers, Radar is also planned.

 

https://thedailybounce.net/2017/12/23/wargaming-fest-2017-world-of-warships-2018-plans/

 

So my guess Cleveland arcs will stay, maybe slightly tweaked but still very high in the orbit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
558 posts
10,584 battles
4 hours ago, ollonborre said:

The old citadel placement would be hilarious.

 

What was the old placement? Just curious 

 

Anyway, for me I would like a range increase, say, 16.3 km. Reload seems reasonable as is, but a turret traverse buff would be welcomed. Slightly better shell travel time (e.g. same time for old and new range). HP buff as well, but no radar please 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MUMMY]
Beta Tester
1,278 posts
4,998 battles
12 minutes ago, Freyr_90 said:

 

What was the old placement? Just curious  

1437422123-cleveland-citadelle.jpg

 

This was the placement during Beta atleast (blue parts are citadel areas). So as you can see it was not where you normally think it is and it was tiny. Citadelling a Cleveland during Beta was a nightmare if you did not know where to aim, or just down to dumb luck since even if you knew where to aim it was small and annoying.

 

EDIT: Seems like the forum ate the picture... See if this works instead: http://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2015/30/1437422123-cleveland-citadelle.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×