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

Tier 10 BB has 33%-50% more guns than Tier 9

35 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

4,802
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
16,111 posts
14,519 battles

I see nothing wrong with it.  They are Tier X after all.

 

Edit:  The game had always been typically about the next tier being the next best thing, but something always trumps it.  Except Tier X, because that is where the strongest, highest tiered ships are.  Think of it as a reason to chase the Tier X, so that you no longer are the bottom tier ship.  You are always Top Tier.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
96
[KENT]
Members
566 posts
4,005 battles
43 minutes ago, USSRichardNixon said:

Montana 12 Iowa 9

Kurfust 12 FDG 8

Counqeror 12 (16 inch ), 8(457 MM) Lion 9

Yamato 9 Izumo 9

Fix that for you

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,796
[SALVO]
Members
17,069 posts
17,716 battles
47 minutes ago, USSRichardNixon said:

Montana 12 Iowa 9

Kurfust 12 FDG 8

same with Lion/Conqueror...

 

Is that kind of too big a jump?

The choices come down to this.  You can increase the number of guns while retaining the same size gun.  Or you can increase the size of the guns while retaining the same number of guns.  You can't do both (well, perhaps I should say "shouldn't".)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,248 posts
737 battles

I do think that the gap between tier 9 and 10 is much greater than between tier 8 and 9 when it comes to BBs. The Izumo and FDG in particular are frustrating to play and don't offer that great of an improvement over their tier 8 predecessor, while the jump in power at tier 10 is much greater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,339
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
5,840 posts
9,583 battles
8 hours ago, DeliciousFart said:

I do think that the gap between tier 9 and 10 is much greater than between tier 8 and 9 when it comes to BBs. The Izumo and FDG in particular are frustrating to play and don't offer that great of an improvement over their tier 8 predecessor, while the jump in power at tier 10 is much greater.

The best way to play the FDG is by being a bullet magnet and staying alive as long as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,156 posts
6,931 battles
40 minutes ago, HazardDrake said:

The best way to play the FDG is by being a bullet magnet and staying alive as long as possible.

yea,  that thing just feels so clumsy coming from the bis.  add on to that larger superstructer, which leads to a lot of full pens.  You get larger guns, but it doesn't matter much when the gunners shoot into 3 different maps at the same time.  but, i still have fun playing with it.  you can just go nuts with it at the right times,  which is just a blast. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,569
[PSP]
Members
6,268 posts
8,904 battles
11 hours ago, USSRichardNixon said:

Montana 12 Iowa 9

Kurfust 12 FDG 8

same with Lion/Conqueror...

 

Is that kind of too big a jump?

 

Montana -- paper ship

Kurfurst -- paper ship

Conqueror -- construction cancelled

 

See a trend here?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,197
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,809 posts
10,327 battles

I feel pretty bullied in FdG when I see GK's, they just outdamage you to a ludicrous degree. FdG is a poor ship though.

I've caught Montana's in Iowa and hurt them, and if bow-on your firepower's equivalent so the effective increase is less than 33%. Whereas it's always 50% on FdG-GK.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
942 posts
4,083 battles
23 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

 

Montana -- paper ship

Kurfurst -- paper ship

Conqueror -- construction cancelled

 

See a trend here?

 

 

except for Yamato though :Smile-_tongue:

 

and probably the only tier X that had existe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,248 posts
737 battles

The problem is that as a whole, tier 9 battleships are rather lackluster except for the Iowa and the blatantly OP Lion.

 

I think the Iowa is the standard that tier 9 ships should measure up to. She represents a reasonable upgrade over the NC and is plenty powerful in her own right without being overpowered. The FDG feels particularly clumsy and awkward to use due to her immense size, lower maneuverability, and awkward turret angles. The Izumo is similarly underwhelming due to her awful deck armor that makes her mincemeat from IFHE 152 mms and CA HE, bad turret angles, bad maneuverability (a trend among tier 9 BBs except for Lion) and lower speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
432
[FAE]
Members
2,161 posts
2,639 battles

Would not mind a long look at the Izumo for improvements. 

Also FDG really does feel like a slug strapped to a cart wheel stuck in a rut. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,339
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
5,840 posts
9,583 battles
7 hours ago, Snargfargle said:

 

Montana -- paper ship

Kurfurst -- paper ship

Conqueror -- construction cancelled

 

See a trend here?

 

Montana was fully designed and physically possible to construct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,569
[PSP]
Members
6,268 posts
8,904 battles
14 minutes ago, HazardDrake said:

Montana was fully designed and physically possible to construct.

Yes, but it never was. The point I was making is that WG "constructs" ships that never were and then matches them against actual ships of a previous era. No wonder the actual ships are sometimes outmatched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
75
[APOC-]
Beta Testers
328 posts
4,076 battles

Baltimore reloads in 10 seconds and Des Moines reloads in just over 5. Thats almost a 100% increase in shells down range over time. 

An extra turret on Montana seems legit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
440
[MIA-A]
[MIA-A]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,052 posts
7,776 battles

all of the T9s BBs are a step down from the T8 BBs imo except the Lion and that's the real issue. FDG and Izumo need their gun performance greatly increased, and the Iowa should have the option to use the NC guns with the NC dispersion too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,976
[SYN]
Members
14,455 posts
10,465 battles
3 minutes ago, NeoRussia said:

all of the T9s BBs are a step down from the T8 BBs imo except the Lion and that's the real issue. FDG and Izumo need their gun performance greatly increased, and the Iowa should have the option to use the NC guns with the NC dispersion too.

but Iowa's guns are better and more accurate than NC's...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,449
[-K-]
Members
5,290 posts
9,108 battles
17 hours ago, DeliciousFart said:

I do think that the gap between tier 9 and 10 is much greater than between tier 8 and 9 when it comes to BBs. The Izumo and FDG in particular are frustrating to play and don't offer that great of an improvement over their tier 8 predecessor, while the jump in power at tier 10 is much greater.

Agreed here.  The jump from T8 to T9 is pretty linear, but then jumps drastically to T10.  The increased rate of offense is not paralleled by a similar rate of defense/armor.

9 hours ago, HazardDrake said:

The best way to play the FDG is by being a bullet magnet and staying alive as long as possible.

Isn't this kind of a contradiction in terms?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,551
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,872 posts
5,259 battles
1 hour ago, Snargfargle said:

Yes, but it never was. The point I was making is that WG "constructs" ships that never were and then matches them against actual ships of a previous era. No wonder the actual ships are sometimes outmatched.

Actually Montana gets credit as "partially built."  USS Midway's hull was initially started as the Montana build, but was converted to a carrier shortly after construction began.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,569
[PSP]
Members
6,268 posts
8,904 battles
16 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

Actually Montana gets credit as "partially built."  USS Midway's hull was initially started as the Montana build, but was converted to a carrier shortly after construction began.

 

I read about that. Seems that the War Department finally saw the writing on the wall where battleships and carriers were concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53
[W-P-E]
Members
467 posts
14 hours ago, Snargfargle said:

 

Montana -- paper ship

Kurfurst -- paper ship

Conqueror -- construction cancelled

 

See a trend here?

 

I think Conqueror is purely paper while Montana is almost real...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19
[WOLF4]
Members
122 posts
5,847 battles

Well, given the Conqueror was the only one ever started I'd say it was the most 'real' of the three.  Gun count alone is a poor measure anyhow, Ganguts had 12, New Yorks 10, Victory had over 90, lol.

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.

×