Search the Community

I covered Admiral Schroder back in September when the ship was first announced. I was wary of her secondary performance, since she only has base German battleship dispersion on her secondaries. Since there are no secondary accuracy-enhancing skills available for cruisers, the only way to improve this dispersion is through the secondary battery modification 1, which decreases dispersion by 20%. I won't go into the details here, but if you'd like to read more, here's a link to that original post where I discuss the specifics: Now, I want to be perfectly clear that I did not breach my NDA agreement with WoWs - in fact, I've never played the ship. The opinions and statistics I mentioned were entirely based on the devblogs that were publicly available, and were not influenced by others who had played the ship. When WoWs released an article outlining the now live update, they claimed Admiral Schroder had "powerful, long-range, and accurate secondaries." I commented on this, because I felt that this was a misleading description of the ship. A ship which many will likely spend a significant sum to obtain under the impression that this is some sort of German streusel-flavored Napoli. When I directly expressed my concerns to a WoWs employee, the response I received was as follows: To which I replied: The argument this person is trying to make is that having many more secondary guns and poor accuracy is akin to having fewer, more accurate secondary guns. To be clear, I understand the reasoning for the balance decisions, but I disagreed (and still do) that having a high rate-of-fire with mediocre accuracy did not make the ship "accurate". It just increases its chances of hitting something. The response I got was a little disparaging: Now, I'm not trying to drag this person through the mud. I've deliberately left their name out of it for that reason. I respect this person, but we disagree on a few things, the definition of accuracy being one of them. I'm not playing semantics. I'm in my final year of an engineering degree, and I know the definition of accuracy, volume, flux, etc. One could define the rate-of-fire through the dispersion ellipse of secondary guns to be the flux, or volume of fire, while accuracy is the ability to consistently hit targets. I've done the math. I know what I'm talking about when it comes to secondaries. This ship does not have accurate secondaries. Let's look at a very, very small sample size from a couple Community Contributors who posted replays in which they took the Admiral Schroder out into battle with a secondary build: 129 hits for 1001 shells fired = 12.9% hit rate. 76 hits for 613 shells fired = 12.4% hits. 155 hits for 1682 shells fired = 9.2% hits. 158 hits for 568 shells fired = 27.8% hits. This is kinda an outlier, since the CC was basically at point-blank range for most of the time. 93 hits for 670 shells fired = 13.9% hits. 51 hits for 464 shells fired = 11.0% hits. Despite all evidence to the contrary, this is what's on the WoWs website this morning: Yep, still says accurate. 12% hits is not accurate. I'm not saying she should be buffed; I'm saying her description needs to be changed. Just say "mediocre accuracy is compensated by a high rate-of-fire." Easy fix. Is running a secondary build the best way to play the Schroder? That's what I've heard. Doesn't make her secondaries good, though. Personally, if you want a brawling cruiser and are going to spend money on a ship, I recommend the Napoli. Its secondaries are twice as accurate and hit pretty hard, and her main battery guns are more lethal. Also, she's Tier X. I'm not saying don't buy the Schroder - it's your money, and who am I to tell you what to do with it - but I hope that this post will help save some folks from investing in a ship that isn't as advertised. Thanks for reading, and take care, ~Murrel