Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
aether_tech

Small sample sizes aside, Arizona feels a smidge overpowered....

32 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

873
[MPIRE]
Beta Testers
3,804 posts
6,761 battles

I've never gotten back-to-back Kraken+Confederates and/or High Caliber in a ship in its first 5 or so games. Even in the Nikolai and Gremy. This thing just has all the right buttons, even when it gets up-tiered.

 

IpZecBH.png

 

While my game 1 wasn't spectacular, due to having to learn how to play an American standard BB, game 2 and 3, and I already feel pretty good about it.

 

G1 - Tier 8 match, multiple enemy biskmarks, and atagos, and stuff against my team of north cals, and new orleans + one hipper. Aim for the forehead, and farm damage....

G2 - https://wowreplays.com/Replay/25229

G3 - https://wowreplays.com/Replay/25511

 

I can see why people wanted to refer to it as a Tier 6 Nikolai, before it got it's Sigma balanced. It's tanky, with excellent angles for its guns, slow and ponderous, but turns rather tightly once the rudder kicks over enough. I even shot down a plane or two! 10/10 would seal-club with again!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
501 posts
12,751 battles

Arizona is one of my favorite ships, she has impressive armor and is relatively accurate, the downside being that her AA is absolute garbage, while you might be able to get a kill or two, if a cv focuses you, you are essentially screwed 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,326 posts
95 battles

I got it from Santa along with Texas and Warspite, but haven't tried yet. Now I want to have a run at it so much! :teethhappy:

 

Texas and Warspite are both awesome BTW...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
765 posts
2,849 battles

Arizona is terribly slow but high in concealment.  Other than that its about average.  I've beean doing better in the Texas, myself.  I see its stats are a bit high, but its an expensive ship too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
387
[ARPOG]
-Members-
870 posts
11,070 battles

It's because the Arizona has a sigma of 1.8, making her surprisingly good for deleting cruisers and landing big hits on broadsides, despite the mediocre accuracy on paper. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,326 posts
95 battles

It's because the Arizona has a sigma of 1.8, making her surprisingly good for deleting cruisers and landing big hits on broadsides, despite the mediocre accuracy on paper. 

 

 

 

I love your recent WR :trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
516
[HEROS]
-Members-
1,462 posts
5,897 battles

Agreed about Arizona's performance, she's a great ship!  I love my NM so she's not going anywhere, but for T6 BB action, the Arizona is the new go to ship!

 

Arizona 6 BB  USA 6 83.33% 104,255 2,254 11.0 1.8 0.0 83% 37% 0% 1,701

 

Just picked her up on sale because I really wanted her after missing her when she originally went on sale.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,231
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
38,069 posts
30,849 battles

Arizona was an amazing BB before the MM changes.  When she first went on sale, she only immediately took reign as the Best Performing Tier VI BB and has never yielded that title on the server ever since.  Not even Dunkerque has supplanted her.

 

The only issues Arizona has are her USN Standard BB speed and that MM is a problem for Tier V & VI ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,003 posts
1,451 battles

Does the Arizona's armor belt even cover all the area its supposed to?  It almost looks like its actually supposed to go to the front of the torpedo bulge and back a little further then it does. 

 

Can WG also put the USN's citadels back below the water?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,231
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
38,069 posts
30,849 battles

Does the Arizona's armor belt even cover all the area its supposed to?  It almost looks like its actually supposed to go to the front of the torpedo bulge and back a little further then it does. 

 

Can WG also put the USN's citadels back below the water?

 

AZ's protection is best bow on against 356mm or smaller armed AP as she'll bounce them with ease.  But like other Battleships, once you show a flatter angle of your sides, you're playing with fire.  But since she sees more Tier VII+ BBs now with the current MM sporting 16" BBs, that is a problem because they'll punch through her armor through any angle.

 

USN BB citadels?  That's part of "National Flavor," epitomized by Iowa / Missouri.  It's a real kick in the nuts for them.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,003 posts
1,451 battles

 

AZ's protection is best bow on against 356mm or smaller armed AP as she'll bounce them with ease.  But like other Battleships, once you show a flatter angle of your sides, you're playing with fire.  But since she sees more Tier VII+ BBs now with the current MM sporting 16" BBs, that is a problem because they'll punch through her armor through any angle.

 

USN BB citadels?  That's part of "National Flavor," epitomized by Iowa / Missouri.  It's a real kick in the nuts for them.

 

Seriously?  thats the USN "paradigm"!?  crapcitadel placement?  Really?  WG, your bias is showing....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
672 posts
2,946 battles

I think the big issue is that AZ's natural predator, CVs, are pretty much unicorns these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,677 posts
3,060 battles

Arizona is probably my favorite Battleship. I love how the armor can just soak up anything tier 6 has to throw at it. I have gotten into close range brawls alone against multiple tier 6 Battleships, usually Fusos, and won because the armor just can outlast theirs. I rarely sees carriers anymore so for me the biggest issue is the slow speed, but I really don't mind it. I really hope to see the Pennsylvania as the tier 6 of a second USN Battleship line. The Pennsylvania would be pretty much the Arizona only with even better armor. I think after Pearl Harbor, the PA received various anti-aircraft defenses along with improved deck armor, increased to 150mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
233 posts
2,402 battles

Arizona was an amazing BB before the MM changes.  When she first went on sale, she only immediately took reign as the Best Performing Tier VI BB and has never yielded that title on the server ever since.  Not even Dunkerque has supplanted her.

 

The only issues Arizona has are her USN Standard BB speed and that MM is a problem for Tier V & VI ships.

 

I rather like the Arizona...very much able to stand up to anything in her tier and some above her.  I fought a NC with her, and while I did lose the fight, the NC limped away in really bad shape and was finished off soon after.  I learned really quickly not to go off alone because her AA isn't up to the task of fending off any CV strikes.  This is a huge problem because let's face it....cooperation in random battles is next to non existent and it usually ends up being a pell-mell brawl.

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
516
[HEROS]
-Members-
1,462 posts
5,897 battles

 

AZ's protection is best bow on against 356mm or smaller armed AP as she'll bounce them with ease.  But like other Battleships, once you show a flatter angle of your sides, you're playing with fire.  But since she sees more Tier VII+ BBs now with the current MM sporting 16" BBs, that is a problem because they'll punch through her armor through any angle.

 

USN BB citadels?  That's part of "National Flavor," epitomized by Iowa / Missouri.  It's a real kick in the nuts for them.

 

Arizona's Belt Armor is 13.5" thick, if a 16" shell hits that at any angle aside from nearly broadside it has a good chance to bounce.  I was frustrating the heck out of a North Carolina as he was charging me bow on and I was angling slightly.  He bounced more than he connected with.  The key is to have the right angle to goad them into shooting at the belt instead of the superstructure/upper decks.  That's true of ALL of the USN BB's below T7.  Colorado is no different with the 16" rifles on board.

 

 

Seriously?  thats the USN "paradigm"!?  crapcitadel placement?  Really?  WG, your bias is showing....

 

He was joking.  The US's National Flavor is damage control (you'll note that the USN BB's have the longest Damage Control Party activation time) and AA.  Neither improve survivability long enough to really be noticeable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,003 posts
1,451 battles

 

Arizona's Belt Armor is 13.5" thick, if a 16" shell hits that at any angle aside from nearly broadside it has a good chance to bounce.  I was frustrating the heck out of a North Carolina as he was charging me bow on and I was angling slightly.  He bounced more than he connected with.  The key is to have the right angle to goad them into shooting at the belt instead of the superstructure/upper decks.  That's true of ALL of the USN BB's below T7.  Colorado is no different with the 16" rifles on board.

 

 

He was joking.  The US's National Flavor is damage control (you'll note that the USN BB's have the longest Damage Control Party activation time) and AA.  Neither improve survivability long enough to really be noticeable.

 

Mediocrity is their paradigm.  They get nothing that stands out except their crapball features. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
204
[R-R-R]
Members
1,069 posts
11,452 battles

This used to be my favorite premium ship but not anymore.

 

These days I seem to play against CVs and especially Saipans so often. Had a game in which saipan decided to dive bomb me every single turn until I got sunk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15
[FG]
Members
122 posts
17,568 battles

I like the AZ in that she's very flexible and accurate.  She can throw citadels at 15km but also brawl at ranges under 5km very well.  Her speed is the only thing that is a detractor... Shame you can't hang 2 or more speed flags on her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,003 posts
1,451 battles

Honestly, no, the AZ isnt any bit of OP'd, its simply how the USN line should be.  Reasonably accurate, not this 1 round goes left of the screen, 1 goes right, the rest go long and you get 2 ricochets off a broadside cruiser at 6km range 4 salvoes in a row like the other ships. 

 

Got the NM all maxed out and stuff, and yeah, the AZ is better then that thing.  NMs accuracy is crapand the shells seem to lolbounce more.

 

AZ is honestly the model USN Ship, and really how WG needs ot model the rest of them after. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,596
[-KIA-]
Banned
9,382 posts
28,311 battles

5k damage and 4.5% gap to the next tech tree ship doesn't make a ship OP as long as it's American.  Meanwhile when a Russian ship breaks ahead of the next tech tree counterpart by that margin, the community hollers Russian bias.  Double standards much?

My only issue with the Arizona is that god awful 35 second reload time.

New Mexico suffers from the same problem.  Just be thankful Arizona's accuracy and sigma are much better in addition to being a better tank.

Edited by TenguBlade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,003 posts
1,451 battles

5k damage and 4.5% gap to the next tech tree ship doesn't make a ship OP as long as it's American.  Meanwhile when a Russian ship breaks ahead of the next tech tree counterpart by that margin, the community hollers Russian bias.  Double standards much?

New Mexico suffers from the same problem.  Just be thankful Arizona's accuracy and sigma are much better in addition to being a better tank.

 

LOL, the USN BB at T6 has like a 49% win rate.  The Arizona is the only USN ship, besides the Texas and Ark B that are performing what could even be remotely considered "well".  The Russian, IJN, RN, KMS ships are all performing 50-54%, barring a few low tier IJN ships.  RU ships are basically all 50%+.  Isnt Double standards, the USN line is performing like crapand the AZ is the only half decently performing one in the line. 

 

It would be double standard if the USN line was like 53% and the AZ was at 57-58%, then sure, that would hold up, but not when the USN line it 47-49% at every tier, and the AZ is one of 3 that holds a positive WR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,596
[-KIA-]
Banned
9,382 posts
28,311 battles

LOL, the USN BB at T6 has like a 49% win rate.  The Arizona is the only USN ship, besides the Texas and Ark B that are performing what could even be remotely considered "well".  The Russian, IJN, RN, KMS ships are all performing 50-54%, barring a few low tier IJN ships.  RU ships are basically all 50%+.  Isnt Double standards, the USN line is performing like crapand the AZ is the only half decently performing one in the line. 

 

It would be double standard if the USN line was like 53% and the AZ was at 57-58%, then sure, that would hold up, but not when the USN line it 47-49% at every tier, and the AZ is one of 3 that holds a positive WR.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

 

Arizona is not "half-decently performing" in the slightest when it completely blows all the tech tree ships away in performance metrics.  The comparison I made was with the numbers of the Bayern, the current T6 tech tree leader (and leading both Fuso and New Mexico by decent margins), not the New Mexico.  I should also note that while Dunkerque is closer to Arizona than Bayern in performance, the American dreadnought still outstrips her significantly.  Whether her tech tree analogue is doing well or not, or whether ships of her country are doing well or not, has no relation to how balanced Arizona is against the meta.  If the New Mexico is bad, then it should be buffed; likewise, if the Arizona is too good, it should be nerfed, albeit to a much lesser degree than New Mexico needs buffing.  Allowing two representatives of the opposite ends of the spectrum to coexist in the same niche does not mean they cancel each other out.

 

You also were not around for the situation I was describing.  Everyone called the Molotov and Budyonny Russian bias because they outperformed the other T6 ships.  At the time, Budyonny led the tech tree cruisers by about 6k average damage and almost 3% WR, with Molotov slightly ahead of her.  The CA subforum was filled with hate for the developers for "favoring" the Soviet cruisers from the time they were launched until the UK CLs gave people something else to complain about and unicums a more interesting vehicle to play.

Edited by TenguBlade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,003 posts
1,451 battles

Because the USN isnt allowed to have good ships.  I know, any time the US stuff in a WG game starts to perform well, its OP and has to be nerfed.  Its a trend that carries over from WoT.  So the USN has a ship that is performing really well, yeah, lets nerf it....

 

It only has main battery guns and decent armor going for it.  ITs still slow as crap, weak secondaries and pretty poor AA.  What else could WG nerf on it?  Accuracy so it cant hit anything like the NM!?

Edited by KnightFandragon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×