Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
_Zeka

Which is more OP? Conqueror vs. Khabarovsk

84 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

699
[OO7]
Members
2,092 posts
8,227 battles

So myself and a few of my clanmates have gotten into a bit of an argument about the Conq, which carried over to the Khab, which is turning into a slug-fest at this point. While the Khab is quite strong yes, it at least does require some degree of giving a damn about what you're doing. IMHO its not nearly as OP as they're making it out to be. My main argument in favor of the Khab is exactly that; it requires at least some degree of skill to perform well in her. Unlike certain other ships I know of.

 

First off, the pros and cons of each:

Khabarovsk:

Pros: Cons:
Very Fast Extremely vulnerable to AP
High RoF and decent chance of fire Turns like a brick (760m TC)
Very tanky for a DD with a high HP pool and heals 10km base detection range

While the chart above only scratches the surface, I'm too lazy to make a fully detailed list. I covered the biggest ones. Back to the "Is it OP;" The Khab, while it has a significantly faster reload, her guns are significantly smaller and don't have nearly the alpha strike. Most Khab shells that are HE will do about 600 damage per salvo and possibly maybe set a fire. In between shots you have to spam your A and D keys to dodge incoming return fire. Its a very dynamic play style and can net very good results/rewards. The Khab requires you to at least have a clue about what you're doing, because even though you are quite tanky for a DD, mistakes can and will be punished, and usually quite harshly in the form of AP hits or even a sortie of metal fish, because you can't take an extended beating, heals or no heals. 

 

Meanwhile, on the Conq's end of things:

Pros: Cons:
11km concealment in a BB Cant recover torpedo/cit damage
Stupidly high HE fire chance  
/4 HE pen  
Insanely high HE alpha strike  
Underwater cit  
Superheals  

Notice the difference? Im not arguing that it shouldn't have high alpha, but it has like what, a 50% fire chance? Plus it also has the German divide by 4 HE penetration because reasons. And aside from the HE, it also has stupid concealment for a BB, underwater cit, half the normal AP fuse arm time, super heals, and AA that can potentially rival a Des Meme. Because reasons. Her only real obvious weaknesses are both almost non-factors. The things as damn near impossible to citadel, so that's out of the equation. And any BB with half a brain will know exactly how to dodge fish and put themselves in highly protected/advantageous torpedo defensive positions.  

 

I normally don't watch Flamu but:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTCgNKujaXM 

 

IMHO, HE should be either high alpha strike but low DoT or high DoT but low alpha. The Khab has a fast rate of fire on her 130mm guns, but the HE alone doesn't pack a huge punch. Most HE salvos from a Khab will do about roughly 600-1000 damage. While that can add up quickly, the majority of her damage comes from fires. I've had multiple games in the Khab with like 200k+ damage and literally like 70% from fires. meanwhile, the Conq can fire one HE salvo and alphastrike the target for 10k damage alone, and then set multiple fires on top of that. Damacon the fires? Well hahaha sucks to be you, because roughly 35-ish seconds later (accounting for reload time and shell travel time) BAM another 10k HP gone and more fires. The Khab has a high DoT but relatively low alpha that can add up from her sheer RoF, but what can take a Khab to do damage wise in about 2 minutes the Conq can do in half the time, because it has both stupidly high HE alpha strike and high fire chance.

My own personal suggestions to "balance" both:

Khab: 

  • Take away her 50mm armor. No more shattering 220mm Moskva HE. Do that and the Khab will be relatively balanced IMO

 

Conq:

  • Take away her 419s, but give the 457s a few buffs to compensate
  • Nerf the superheals to recover maybe 50% of fire/HE damage instead
  • Possibly nerf her concealment
  • Lower her fire chance and/or give her guns the standard /6 HE pen instead of the German /4
  • Lower her alpha strike; force her to choose between high alpha and low DoT or vice versa

 

 

Edited by FireAndHEspam
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,819
Members
5,574 posts
7,121 battles

I guess it depends on whats worse, a pest, or a killer?

 

A 9mm sub machine gun, or a bazooka?

 

 

Edited by Wulfgarn
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
145
[JEEP]
Beta Testers
577 posts
4,669 battles

...Yer screenname is "FireAndHESpam" and you are complaining about the two worst HE spammers in the game right now? The latter of which only spams because WG itself has been pushing that stupidity?

Noooo no troll here, not at all....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
699
[OO7]
Members
2,092 posts
8,227 battles
1 minute ago, Speedstang said:

 

That is all I have to say about this matter.

Thats the same link that's in my post, I just have it displayed as a link instead of the actual vid. You never know what you may get in trouble for with WG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
699
[OO7]
Members
2,092 posts
8,227 battles
Just now, YukonHunter said:

...Yer screenname is "FireAndHESpam" and you are complaining about the two worst HE spammers in the game right now? The latter of which only spams because WG itself has been pushing that stupidity?

Noooo no troll here, not at all....

I'm not complaining about the Khab, in this case I'm actually defending it, but mainly the Conq. whether you think i'm a troll or not, whatever, but the Conq is honestly just stupidly OP

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,740
[INTEL]
Members
8,603 posts
25,771 battles

Conk is mediocre. It can't carry. It does gaudy damage, but in Solo games GK and Yammy both win more. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3
[CAPT]
Members
2 posts
2,889 battles
1 minute ago, YukonHunter said:

...Yer screenname is "FireAndHESpam" and you are complaining about the two worst HE spammers in the game right now? The latter of which only spams because WG itself has been pushing that stupidity?

Noooo no troll here, not at all....

Ye be right lad, there be no trolling here at all. Just a post on a forum asking what's more op. Inspired by a debate in a clan chat.

..

soooooooooooooooooo -sips tea-

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
445 posts
2,076 battles
2 minutes ago, FireAndHEspam said:

Thats the same link that's in my post, I just have it displayed as a link instead of the actual vid. You never know what you may get in trouble for with WG

Oh. My bad, admittedly I only read the first part of your post, because there's not really much of a debate here. This ship is just so broken it's not even funny.

Edited by Speedstang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,317
[SOUP]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,589 posts

"Which is more OP? Conqueror vs. Khabarovsk"

........ME!
*Le Ca Ira on a flamethrowing accordion*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
445 posts
2,076 battles
1 minute ago, Taichunger said:

Conk is mediocre. It can't carry. It does gaudy damage, but in Solo games GK and Yammy both win more. 

 

It very much can carry. It has very tough armor, an underwater citadel, the lowest concealment, very powerful AA, very good accuracy, superheal, and good range. Match starts, enemy BB spotted, rain HE down on it while concealing yourself between shots, it's dead, repeat. Already several hundred thousand damage. DD gets too close, alpha it to death with your HE and accuracy. Caught a few fires from an enemy cruiser? No matter, go ahead and heal back to full hp in one go. Back to killing every other BB while concealed at a ridicoulous range. Do you see where I'm going with this? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,249 posts
737 battles

If the Khabarovsk keeps the 50 mm armor, why not also give her a citadel? Besides, 50 mm isn't enough to fuse BB AP shells anyways, since fusing thickness is 1/6 caliber, but it gives cruisers and DDs a better chance. In fact, for a 406 mm AP shell, the Khabarovsk needs 40+ degrees of angling to even fuse it.

Edited by DeliciousFart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
699
[OO7]
Members
2,092 posts
8,227 battles
4 minutes ago, DeliciousFart said:

If the Khabarovsk keeps the 50 mm armor, why not also give her a citadel? Besides, 50 mm isn't enough to fuse BB AP shells anyways, since fusing thickness is 1/6 caliber, but it gives cruisers and DDs a better chance.

Because then she basically becomes a pure light cruiser, just like the Atlanta, which has around the same levels of HP, and that thing has a cit; and she's also among the worst performing CLs in the game currently. Granted I havent checked up on it too too recently (about a month ago), So unless you also want to give the Khab at least Zao levels of HP to compensate for it...yea uhh no. Khab is already vulnerable enough to AP rounds, especially the German and British CL semi-AP 

Edited by FireAndHEspam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[SALTY]
Members
1,291 posts
4,139 battles

Please the masses, throw away any sense of challenging game play.

Welcome to the new meta, the game is well and truly on its way to a potato-proof game.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,819
Members
5,574 posts
7,121 battles
13 minutes ago, aAkula said:

Please the masses, throw away any sense of challenging game play.

Welcome to the new meta, the game is well and truly on its way to a potato-proof game.

True

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,042 posts
1,915 battles

Don't forget that a Yamato under the command of Yamamoto will have a similar, but one use, superheal and also a massive reload time reduction, down to a miximum(new term, awesome like the coolest action music playlist ever) of about 14 seconds for the biggest caliber of guns in the game.:Smile_amazed::Smile_facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,071
[OPG]
Members
3,983 posts
5,722 battles
1 hour ago, DeliciousFart said:

If the Khabarovsk keeps the 50 mm armor, why not also give her a citadel? Besides, 50 mm isn't enough to fuse BB AP shells anyways, since fusing thickness is 1/6 caliber, but it gives cruisers and DDs a better chance. In fact, for a 406 mm AP shell, the Khabarovsk needs 40+ degrees of angling to even fuse it.

Huh....?  That 50mm armored plate most definitely can fuse BB caliber AP.  Just my last battle in the Khaba I made the mistake of running aground while showing broadside to a Kurfurst about 12km away.  He fired one volley and did over 15k damage.  

*edit

I think you are confusing AP fuse time, which varies greatly depending on shell velocity and range.....with HE pen, which in most cases is 1/6 the caliber.  

Edited by yashma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,249 posts
737 battles
3 minutes ago, yashma said:

Huh....?  That 50mm armored plate most definitely can fuse BB caliber AP.  Just my last battle in the Khaba I made the mistake of running aground while showing broadside to a Kurfurst about 12km away.  He fired one volley and did over 15k damage.  

*edit

I think you are confusing AP fuse time, which varies greatly depending on shell velocity and range.....with HE pen, which in most cases is 1/6 the caliber.  

No, the plate thickness needed to fuse an AP shell is 1/6 of the shell caliber. However, currently overmatching can also fuse AP shells. For example, he may have overmatched your deck at a shallow angle. This is also the reason why DDs get those annoying regular penetrations from BB AP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
900
Members
5,579 posts
3,952 battles
1 hour ago, aAkula said:

Please the masses, throw away any sense of challenging game play.

Welcome to the new meta, the game is well and truly on its way to a potato-proof game.

If that were the case your stats would have drastically declined over the last half year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,071
[OPG]
Members
3,983 posts
5,722 battles
Just now, DeliciousFart said:

No, the plate thickness needed to fuse an AP shell is 1/6 of the shell caliber. However, currently overmatching can also fuse AP shells. For example, he may have overmatched your deck at a shallow angle. This is also the reason why DDs get those annoying regular penetrations from BB AP.

I would need to see a source for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
699
[OO7]
Members
2,092 posts
8,227 battles
20 minutes ago, DeliciousFart said:

No, the plate thickness needed to fuse an AP shell is 1/6 of the shell caliber. However, currently overmatching can also fuse AP shells. For example, he may have overmatched your deck at a shallow angle. This is also the reason why DDs get those annoying regular penetrations from BB AP.

No, its not. The standard AP fuse time across most ships is 0.033 seconds. With the RN BBs its 0.015s, and most DDs and the RN CLs its 0.001s. Armor thickness has nothing to do with it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,249 posts
737 battles
26 minutes ago, yashma said:

I would need to see a source for that.

 

6 minutes ago, FireAndHEspam said:

No, its not. The standard AP fuse time across most ships is 0.033 seconds. With the RN BBs its 0.015s, and most DDs and the RN CLs its 0.001s. Armor thickness has nothing to do with it

 

From gamemodels3d, the bullet detonator threshold is 68 mm, which is 1/6 of 406 mm, rounded.

cap2.PNG

Inkedcap1_LI.jpg

Edited by DeliciousFart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,249 posts
737 battles
23 minutes ago, FireAndHEspam said:

And that article even confirms the fusing threshold.

As of patch 0.3.1, the armor thickness necessary for AP shell fuzing was as follows (caliber - armor): 410mm - 68mm, 356mm - 59mm, 203mm - 34mm, 155mm - 26mm.

 

Not sure what you're implying here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×