Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
dmckay

Marblehead?

66 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

977
Members
4,568 posts
6,509 battles

Simple. I have Xmas doubloons.  On a buying spree. Marblehead looks good. Nice speed. Is she?  Tks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,065
[NDA]
Supertester
4,847 posts
13,843 battles

If you can exploit islands, keep your citadel hidden, avoid T6 or T7 ships, never face a good CV and have a 10 point captain with Concealment Expert than yes she is an ok ship. 

Would I pay money for her.......

Uh4j7Rd.gif

I even own one and I'm not sure I would buy it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
381 posts
25 battles

Large detection range. Squishy as Omaha. Low damage but long range torp. Unfavorable MM.

Gun on Both side. Decent reload.  Fun, as long as no one shoot at you.

 

Do you want American trainer or tier 5 CL in particular?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,732
[TBW]
Members
6,410 posts
12,057 battles
4 minutes ago, Wolcott said:

Anything Marblehead can do, Murmansk can do better.

This is true, I would definitely get the Murmansk first. Your hooked, now you will be like I am and get them all.

Edited by Sovereigndawg
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
787
[MIA-I]
Supertester
2,731 posts
4,763 battles

How do you do with cruisers of that tier?  I won her in last years Santas crates.  Took it out a few times, nothing major.  Wasn't a ship that stood out to me too much.  She's got a good fire chance but she's fragile.  I find where she excels is due to the "Omaha" layout of the front turrets you can just point your nose at an enemy DD, not have to worry about rotating back and forth and get most of your guns firing forward on them.  Works well against cruisers and battleships who might find themselves over extended and running away as well.  Not losing speed by turning to get all guns going though is something you have to watch out for though as well, means you might suddenly find yourself a lot closer to the enemy then you anticipated and being in a squishy cruiser is just what an enemy BB being chased and lit on fire would love to see.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,588
[TBOW]
Beta Testers
3,261 posts
649 battles

If you had to choose, I like Murmansk. Marblehead is a nice ship to own and all. If you are looking to add her to your collection, I’d say do it, but you may move on quicker than expected. 

I kike to use Marblehead for fun. I wouldn’t use her if you are hardcore grinding up to a goal or need credits. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
977
Members
4,568 posts
6,509 battles
43 minutes ago, Sovereigndawg said:

This is true, I would definitely get the Murmansk first. Your hooked, now you will be like I am and get them all.

Why Murmansk first?  Am I missing something?  Seems to be little difference between them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
133
[TFLT]
[TFLT]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
657 posts
7,993 battles

I loved the Marblehead, prior to the AFT nerf.  It's still a decent cruiser and can still be fun, but you need to be a good cruiser drvr to make it work.  You're going to be seeing a lot of T7's.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
599
[ARRGG]
Members
4,732 posts
7,572 battles
1 hour ago, dmckay said:

Simple. I have Xmas doubloons.  On a buying spree. Marblehead looks good. Nice speed. Is she?  Tks

Yes she’s fast like Omaha and Murmansk they have the “best” Cruiser rudder shift in game of any Cruiser any tier, there strength is being able to avoid enemy shots at longer ranges and have got to be played that way

negetives.. she’s fradgile, always zig zag and in today’s MM your often facing  Vll ships ... frustrating 

this class specifically Murmansk is my favorite ship to play with its hard turning and 7 second gun reloads.. there is a learning curve to playing it however

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
599
[ARRGG]
Members
4,732 posts
7,572 battles
18 minutes ago, dmckay said:

Why Murmansk first?  Am I missing something?  Seems to be little difference between them. 

Not a lot of difference side by side Murmansk has an edge

but fully upgraded Omaha and Marblehead are close,

they do not sell Murmansk any more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
301
[CK5]
Members
806 posts
6,592 battles
20 minutes ago, dmckay said:

Why Murmansk first?  Am I missing something?  Seems to be little difference between them. 

The Murmansk has an extra kilometer of range on its guns and a much quicker rudder shift.  That may not seem like much but it greatly helps staying alive.  I have about 350 matches in the Murmansk and I have done OK with it.   

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
240
[ICOP]
[ICOP]
Members
730 posts
11,955 battles
17 minutes ago, dmckay said:

Why Murmansk first?  Am I missing something?  Seems to be little difference between them. 

Slightly better gun range, and a spotter plane that allows you to lob shells from even farther away. This is very handy in a ship as fragile as these two.

Respects,

Am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
301
[CK5]
Members
806 posts
6,592 battles
3 minutes ago, HMCS_Devilfish said:

they do not sell Murmansk any more

A good point.  This is a bit of an academic discussion in that case.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
977
Members
4,568 posts
6,509 battles
11 minutes ago, HMCS_Devilfish said:

Not a lot of difference side by side Murmansk has an edge

but fully upgraded Omaha and Marblehead are close,

they do not sell Murmansk any more

They don't sell it anymore?  I just bought it on the advice of these fine gentlemen. It's there on Russian tree.  Russian premium. 

Bout these cruisers being fragile by the way. Most cruisers are fragile. A few are not but most are. That is why they are cruisers.  I am used to fragile. The only REALLY un-fragile cruiser I got is St Louis.....tank.  I don't know bout the high tier cruisers. Don't play them.

Edited by dmckay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
599
[ARRGG]
Members
4,732 posts
7,572 battles
7 minutes ago, dmckay said:

They don't sell it anymore?  I just bought it on the advice of these fine gentlemen. It's there on Russian tree.  Russian premium. 

Bout these cruisers being fragile by the way. Most cruisers are fragile. A few are not but most are. That is why they are cruisers.  I am used to fragile. The only REALLY un-fragile cruiser I got is St Louis.....tank.  I don't know bout the high tier cruisers. Don't play them.

Last I heard they took Murmansk of the Premium list, live and learn eh ...I’ve owned mine so long it’s got rust streaks 

as for Fradgile this ones made of glass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
977
Members
4,568 posts
6,509 battles
6 minutes ago, HMCS_Devilfish said:

Last I heard they took Murmansk of the Premium list, live and learn eh ...I’ve owned mine so long it’s got rust streaks 

as for Fradgile this ones made of glass

Hey if ya don't check that stuff you don't know....no biggee. I have tried it out in the last hour in co-op. I like it.  Co-op gave me a feel for it. Got kills.  I am now ready for REAL battle! I am used to low tier fragile ships....as I said. Most all of them are glass-like.  Just gotta be clever and not get hit. I get hit. Ergo I suck too often.:Smile_honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,732
[TBW]
Members
6,410 posts
12,057 battles
1 hour ago, dmckay said:

Why Murmansk first?  Am I missing something?  Seems to be little difference between them. 

Yes almost every thing is the same, except my win rate. Murmansk is 60% 48 battles average XP 1160 most destroyed 4 and a destruction ratio of 1.12. well here look for yourself.

shot-17_12.26_13_38.26-0540.thumb.jpg.8c8669cd86978318418ecb644a9f5e37.jpg

shot-17_12.26_13_38.32-0140.thumb.jpg.db58c6757f300b26df431f26a5d2a5c8.jpg

4 less battles in the Marblehead but. Marblehead has a much much faster torp reload time too so you would think it would have the better stats. It's the firing range that makes the biggest difference though I think and that 1 goes to Murmansk.

Edited by Sovereigndawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,732
[TBW]
Members
6,410 posts
12,057 battles
1 hour ago, Amracil said:

Slightly better gun range, and a spotter plane that allows you to lob shells from even farther away. This is very handy in a ship as fragile as these two.

Respects,

Am

I forgot about the spotter even, good catch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
295 posts
9,526 battles

 

the faster torp reload means nothing because the torps are the worst tier for tier of any ship in the game. It is a tier 5 ship that faces tier 7's, and it has tier 2 level torps. I remember putting two torps into a half health DD, and it still couldn't kill it. That was when I realized just how bad a torp system this ship has. It is the weakest of the  Omaha variants, so be forewarned....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
977
Members
4,568 posts
6,509 battles
15 minutes ago, bigalow87 said:

 

the faster torp reload means nothing because the torps are the worst tier for tier of any ship in the game. It is a tier 5 ship that faces tier 7's, and it has tier 2 level torps. I remember putting two torps into a half health DD, and it still couldn't kill it. That was when I realized just how bad a torp system this ship has. It is the weakest of the  Omaha variants, so be forewarned....

I went with the Murmansk. Comments here swayed me to her.  Also, she is, well, she is, hmmmm ya know,  hell I will just say it... SHE IS RUSSIAN!  Been with WG 4 years.  I know the slant.  It's that damn Stalinium. :Smile_glasses:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
295 posts
9,526 battles
3 minutes ago, dmckay said:

I went with the Murmansk. Comments here swayed me to her.  Also, she is, well, she is, hmmmm ya know,  hell I will just say it... SHE IS RUSSIAN!  Been with WG 4 years.  I know the slant.  It's that damn Stalinium. :Smile_glasses:

I think you will be satisfied with your choice. The Marblehead is a relic from the early days of the game when a gimped Omaha had a place, hell I even took it into a few ranked battles back in the day. Those days are long gone, there are too many deadly foes awaiting an unwary Marblehead driver these days....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,924 posts
2,492 battles

It was great in 2015 when I got it for free, nowadays... It's simply a collector's item. If you want a Marblehead, buy special camo for an Omaha and you're set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
599
[ARRGG]
Members
4,732 posts
7,572 battles
1 hour ago, dmckay said:

I went with the Murmansk. Comments here swayed me to her.  Also, she is, well, she is, hmmmm ya know,  hell I will just say it... SHE IS RUSSIAN!  Been with WG 4 years.  I know the slant.  It's that damn Stalinium. :Smile_glasses:

Run the spotter plane you get just over 17k range, great for campers not so great at hitting moving targets though , bit of a learning curve there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,330
[PVE]
Members
5,651 posts
18,236 battles
5 hours ago, Wolcott said:

Anything Marblehead can do, Murmansk can do better.

Marblehead is the worst of the Omahas in the game. I much prefer Murmansk and Omaha over her but I still like her. I have both the premiums and they are great for running in co-op to help level captains by farming their first win bonuses. I also use them in PvP play and PRAY that matchmaking is favorable. They do well when facing other tier 5's but suffer when there are lots of tier 7's in the match. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×