Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
iChase

Alabama Review - Solid But Difficult

  • You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.

50 posts in this topic

Welcome to the fray, iChase :honoring:

tossing my thoughts into this :B

 

Good preview iChase, thanks.

Thanks :great:


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:|  

You're not LWM... where'd my mousey?


3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the new forum icon you choice I-chase!

 

Also hope your mother gets better soon! :aqua:


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lower the citadel, and I'll buy the Deluxe package! Otherwise, I'm only getting the base one at best :x


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post, thank you.

 

I just watch BB reviews to see where their weaknesses are.

 

Allows me to understand where the next nerf to the other classes will be. :P


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great review, Chase.  I'm still bitter about the DEBBs making citadel mechanics idiot proof -- not so much for their inclusion, but how they've changed the culture and meta around what's an acceptable battleship and what isn't.  I had a lot of success in Alabama (so much so that I mistakenly thought her accuracy was better than North Carolina, Iowa, Missouri and Montana).  Expose your side and you'll get punished.  I'm still trying to appreciate how this is a bad thing in people's minds....


2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great review, Chase.  I'm still bitter about the DEBBs making citadel mechanics idiot proof -- not so much for their inclusion, but how they've changed the culture and meta around what's an acceptable battleship and what isn't.  I had a lot of success in Alabama (so much so that I mistakenly thought her accuracy was better than North Carolina, Iowa, Missouri and Montana).  Expose your side and you'll get punished.  I'm still trying to appreciate how this is a bad thing in people's minds....

 

IMO it's really simple mouse. Flexibility is generally considered more useful than extreme's in one or two area's. Although what counts as flexible is very meta dependent. The KM BB's are incredibly flexible as a whole, unless your trying to snipe from extreme range there's little they do poorly. So it's very hard to get them into a bad situation in general terms beyond very obvious basic mistakes.

 

The citadels certainly get a lot of credit, but it's a long way from the whole story.

 

Equally i think a lot of it is meta changes rather than KM BB's specifically that have transformed opinions on citadels. Remember back in beta when most BB drivers advised not targeting cruisers because they were too hard to kill. Now look at the high tier cruiser situation. People have learned about vulnerabilities and adjusted their targeting appropriately. And ofc the KM BB's will have pushed people to target the non-KM BB's even more as their a so much easier target. All of this produces a very real change in perceived durability on the user end and elevates one of the ships weaknesses a little bit more. Simply put the degree to which a tall citadel is a disadvantage has grown in real terms over time IMO. KM BB's just accelerated the percolation to general consciousness by providing a sharp contrast.

 

That doesn't mean i disagree with your Alabam review, but i also don;t think the changes in citadel perception have been entirely driven by how good the KM are in that regard, rather i think they highlighted an issue that was allready there and on the cusp of being generally noticed.


5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SEVEN HELLS SHE HAS A CITADEL?!?! Wargaming hates America!!!!

 

 

 

:trollface::trollface::trollface::trollface:

 

No really, she is a high Tier USN BB....I'm just not sure what people were expecting?


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its actually very sad to see WG still hasnt learned their lesson on USN BBs.  Another chance to NOT [edited]it over with the high [edited]citadel and yet they dun [edited] it up again.


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SEVEN HELLS SHE HAS A CITADEL?!?! Wargaming hates America!!!!

 

 

 

:trollface::trollface::trollface::trollface:

 

No really, she is a high Tier USN BB....I'm just not sure what people were expecting?

 

What I dont understand is why WG insists on making the citadel so high in the first place.  You ALREADY take more damage when you sit and stay broadside, there is no need to amplify the damage by making the critical hit zone a 50% chance or better to be hit.  We already know to angle, we already know all that crap.  There is no point in making it almost an assured hit on every shot.  There is no need to [edited]the ship over with such a large delete zone.  TUrning a T8+ BB into a fat [edited]cruiser is just stupid. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO citadels are a way to make the game move along faster. Cit hits, again IMO, should be broken down further into 2 areas, machinery and magazines. Mag hits do the same damage as now, perhaps a detonation, perhaps not, but a loss of reload speed for sure. Machinery hits do half the full citadel damage, but reduce speed.

 

Tanking is gamey, reversing is gamey, camping is gamey. Gamey is no different that gimmicky really. Ships that didnt move rolled a lot, as in 15-20 degree rolls, anyone who's every been on a ship knows that stopped ships roll violently in mild swells and will be rapidly pushed sideways to the current. Moving at speed allows the ship to cut through the swells and maintain enough stability that the guns can compensate for roll and pitch.


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good analysis, Carl (have a +1), and I don't see any faults with your line of reasoning.  I don't tend to shoot often at Battleships, especially not German ones (I focus on destroyers and cruisers first -- they die faster). When I do, it's always when a broadside is offered so I can take a huge chunk of their hit points away from them.  Given the choice between an IJN, USN or KMS battleship to shoot at, all things being equal, you can bet I'll be going for the ones I can citadel rather than ones I cannot.  It gives me a better chance of removing a ship instead of simply damaging it.  I don't think any of us were expecting the Kriegsmarine to shake up the battleship meta as significantly as it has.

 

This makes me wonder at what the Royal Navy Battleships and Soviet Navy Battleships will bring when they're introduced.  Will either of them be game changers?  I suspect the Soviet Battleships will be a contender if, by popular suspicion, they bring another 460mm gun armed behemoth at tier 10.  I can't foresee the Royal Navy being as significant a contributor.  My best estimations will be that early ships will appear quite similar to IJN Battleships and later ships will seem almost American.  The line may appear to be decidedly average, taken as a whole.  I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see the Royal Navy taking primacy and it will take more radical designs, either Soviet, French or Italian to unseat the Kriegsmarine as the go-to Battleships in World of Warships.

 

 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, hope my other post in your own thread doesn't come off wrong btw.

 

I'll comment on the RN below as i've done a few ADLA's on them and considered a few more, (but no repeats or you'd have got KGV by now, that one ship i really want to break everything down on in real detail), but i just want to make a couple of other comments on the whole Flexibility thing. I brought it up because when you see the good tanks discussed in WoT flexibility is a key point. good enemy players will try to create situations where your only options are bad options. The more flexible you are the harder that is to do. Atlanta is sort of the ultimate WoWs example of hyper inflexible and it's pitfalls at work.

 

As for the RN. One thing that's nearly certain to be true is very good concealment but poor range. Warspite is one of the tallest (only the Nelsons are noticeably taller), and has one of the highest mounted directors. So she's likely to have one of the highest tier for tier ranges and concealments of any of the RN BB's. When they come along Repulse and Renown are likely to be able to get sub 11km, possibly sub 10km concealment in full builds. Tehey also have pretty good AAA. i haven;t mentioned this much in my ADLA video's, but  i wouldn't rule out CV DF on Rn BB's from T6 up.

 

Talking of CV's. I think a resurgence in CV population if WG'ing get the CV rework right would do a lot to shake up the meta and perceptions of strength vs durability vs flexibility. It wouldn't really touch Bismark, (damm it does she need a nerf), but most of the rest would see some adjustment with likely only Gini getting stronger. Also a resurgence in cruiser would lily hurt the Km BB's quite a bit. Scharnhorst aside they tend to be the worst at killing cruisers, and not really any more durable vs them, so if they suddenly got more desirable in some fashion with more presence you'd see the Km take a hit. They're really optimized for a BB heavy meta where caps are super important, (mush as Heavy tanks in WoT would be a lot more valuable in a WoT domination mode, when you cna;t hit and run all match without win chance consequences due to giving up caps, the tanks that can sit and slug it out gain value). Change the environment and they lose some strengths and attendant flexibility.

Edited by Carl

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a very simple reason why German BBs do so well, imo.

 

Their armor, as already mentioned, is idiot-proof.

 

Their secondaries make it very dangerous to stay near them.

 

Their large amount of secondaries means they have lots of DP guns, which means they have more DPS at long range than other nation's usually... And long range dps is the most important by far.

 

Their only 'drawbacks' are the generally inferior TDS and firepower.

 

Which doesn't matter.

 

TDS usually isn't awful enough to make it worse than other BBs at your tier, with some exceptions.

 

And the worse firepower means nothing, because every shot you take in WoWs is generally at short to medium ranges for naval gunnery.

 

The ranges we fight at in WoWs is typically well below the ranges at which the belts of BBs are able to resist BB firepower, which is part of the reason deck-pens (without overmatch) is nigh impossible.

 

This isn't helped by the game's emphasis on horizontal rather than vertical dispersion, which is somewhat opposite to what happened in naval warfare. This is part of the reason why sailing broadside, aside from firepower benefits, was preferable to sailing at the enemy head-on. Not only were you directing your strongest armor at the enemy, but you were also reducing the probability of you being hit!

 

And despite the fact many of the KM guns are weaker... Being weaker at the ranges we're talking about is honestly a question of the guns just not being overkill... Or at least, less overkill.

 

Even at tier X, one doesn't need 16in guns to citadel a broadside BB

15in guns will do the work just fine... However, given the way overmatch mechanics work, the extra size of higher caliber shells has more of a relevancy than their greater penetration, and even damage.

 

Unless there is a way to balance the extreme power of guns relative to armor at the ranges we fight... Well, KM BBs will likely stay as one of the strongest lines in the game, no matter what other nations you add. Their protection schemes offer only benefits at the ranges we fight, and only becomes a liability well past our typical engagement ranges.

 

My 2¢


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 which is part of the reason deck-pens (without overmatch) is nigh impossible.

 

Actually most of the BB guns could penetrate most cruiser citadel roofs if autoubounce wasn't a thing at quite modest ranges.

 

Also the DP thing is a bit of a fallacy. It on;y applies to the T6 and T7. Grober and freddy are worse than the US, as is Tirpitz and Bismark.

 

Lastly the firepower disadvantage is more in dispersion and especially alpha/DPM. Also most of them really don;t have the pen to go through same tier citedels all the way out to maximum range, unlike their contemporaries. I agree it's generally less relevant as not a lot of shooting happens at those ranges, but it is there.

Edited by Carl

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ranges we fight at in WoWs is typically well below the ranges at which the belts of BBs are able to resist BB firepower, which is part of the reason deck-pens (without overmatch) is nigh impossible.

 

This isn't helped by the game's emphasis on horizontal rather than vertical dispersion, which is somewhat opposite to what happened in naval warfare. This is part of the reason why sailing broadside, aside from firepower benefits, was preferable to sailing at the enemy

My 2¢

So we shouldnt also have the absurd weak [edited], oversized citadel [edited]weakpoint either.  KMS BBs do well cuz they have well protected citadels, USN ships should as well.  Atleast not huge like they are...


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Actually most of the BB guns could penetrate most cruiser citadel roofs if autoubounce wasn't a thing at quite modest ranges.

 

Also the DP thing is a bit of a fallacy. It on;y applies to the T6 and T7. Grober and freddy are worse than the US, as is Tirpitz and Bismark.

 

Lastly the firepower disadvantage is more in dispersion and especially alpha/DPM. Also most of them really don;t have the pen to go through same tier citedels all the way out to maximum range, unlike their contemporaries. I agree it's generally less relevant as not a lot of shooting happens at those ranges, but it is there.

 

I was more considering BB vs BB, but I know exactly what you mean. Auto bounce is a necessary mechanic, because of the power of the guns at the ranges we fight. If not for that, almost everything would be a citadel piñata, even BBs.

 

As for the DP guns, that also applies to tier IV and V. Tier 8+ USN BBs beat it, because you're finally getting to the AA beasts that are the USN fast BBs... and one would hope they could beat them, being 'the AA nation.'

 

And may point is with the citadel pen... they're not exactly extremely vulnerable to citadels at the ranges they can't citadel other BBs, and nor are they at the ranges they can citadel enemy BBs. The same does not hold true for other nations...

 

My point is, there's a big issue for this game relative to firepower over armor, and you won't get another 'tanky' BB nation unless this is fixed. The only other things I can think of would be for them to make gimmicks like super-effective decapping plates, or a nation who's BBs have a special modified that greatly skews shell normalization to make their armor more effective when angled...

 

Until then, it's just a completion to see who's citadel can be the lowest, which is basically a question of still eating loads of 33% regular pens, just not a full 100% pen.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we shouldnt also have the absurd weak [edited], oversized citadel [edited]weakpoint either.  KMS BBs do well cuz they have well protected citadels, USN ships should as well.  Atleast not huge like they are...

 

That's because their armor schemes emphasize better protection at closer ranges. At long range, it's quite vulnerable to plunging fire, which is something, for example, SHS shells were meant to exploit, the power of plunging fire. 

 

Of course, good luck shooting from far enough away to get plunging fire.


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I was more considering BB vs BB, but I know exactly what you mean. Auto bounce is a necessary mechanic, because of the power of the guns at the ranges we fight. If not for that, almost everything would be a citadel piñata, even BBs.

 

As for the DP guns, that also applies to tier IV and V. Tier 8+ USN BBs beat it, because you're finally getting to the AA beasts that are the USN fast BBs... and one would hope they could beat them, being 'the AA nation.'

 

And may point is with the citadel pen... they're not exactly extremely vulnerable to citadels at the ranges they can't citadel other BBs, and nor are they at the ranges they can citadel enemy BBs. The same does not hold true for other nations...

 

My point is, there's a big issue for this game relative to firepower over armor, and you won't get another 'tanky' BB nation unless this is fixed. The only other things I can think of would be for them to make gimmicks like super-effective decapping plates, or a nation who's BBs have a special modified that greatly skews shell normalization to make their armor more effective when angled...

 

Until then, it's just a completion to see who's citadel can be the lowest, which is basically a question of still eating loads of 33% regular pens, just not a full 100% pen.

 

Citadel issue wouldnt be an issue if WG would just put in all the ships STS, armor plates, put the armor in the right spots, shrink it down properly, make it the right width.  Arizona, New Mex, they already have ships that dont get [edited] by citadels, and its cuz  they put in all the armor.  Those ships are still missing the STS, which would add a few more inches over the entire ship, but yeah....citadels are only an issue at high tier cuz WG has this obsession for huge citadel pens for some reason.  That, or shrink Citadels down to include ONLY the ammo magazines under the main batteries, which is actually where they should be, since ammo is all that actually catastrophically exploded like in this game. 

 

The thickness of armor to have ot go through if WG put in all the armor and STS is like 540mm. before you angle it.  Throw in just the 19 degrees of the belt angle and then a little bit of our own angling and lol, one tough [edited]ship. 

Edited by KnightFandragon

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's because their armor schemes emphasize better protection at closer ranges. At long range, it's quite vulnerable to plunging fire, which is something, for example, SHS shells were meant to exploit, the power of plunging fire. 

 

Of course, good luck shooting from far enough away to get plunging fire.

 

Those SHS are goddamn useless in this game.  They are so hilariously easy to avoid with their speed and angle of impact.  Firing those hunks of useless crapjust means lol 1000 point pens all day cuz they come in at such a [edited]angle they just ring off the tops of cruiser masts and crap.  Id trade in those worthless 16s for the Arizona 14s any day. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.