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

Kronshtadt is just the new Duke of York

39 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,493
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,788 posts

There are a lot of people up in arms that the Battlecruiser Kronshtadt is being classified as a cruiser.  Isn't this pretty much exactly what they tried to do with Duke of York?  Take a battleship and make it play like a cruiser?  It was a terrible idea, but a lot of CCs thought it was great, because it was "different."

Now they're taking a battlecruiser, and making it a cruiser.  Which is what they should have done in the beginning.  That was how they were supposed to work.   To the people saying, "this makes all other cruisers obsolete."  Well, yes.  That was the intended function of battlecruisers.

To me, this seems a lot like the way things should have been from the start, instead of trying to lump battlecruisers in with battleships and doing wonky things to them to make them fit.

I say bring on the Kronshtadt!   . . . while we're at it, how about we get a couple split out lines of battlecruisers.   Or just a separate classification for them since they are mostly premiums.  No more repair parties for battlecruisers (Scharnhorst, Hood, etc), but cruiser-level accuracy. 

Perhaps a Tier 4 or 5 Kongo variant in original battlecruiser configuration.  Meanwhile, the versions that were supposedly upgraded to battleships (in-game Kongo, Gneisenau, etc.) remain in the battleship tree as is.  That would actually add a lot more diversity and interest to the game.

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,360 posts
3,915 battles

Well, no, not really.

First of all, DoY was always classified as a battleship, even if it had a different playstyle. Plus, it didn't make it live that way.

Second, this thing will be lined up against Ibukis and Neptunes. So, I draw a Neptune, and the enemy team draws this thing... or maybe two of these things. Fun.

Third, it represents POWER CREEP instead of POWER DIFFUSION. DoY would havem arguably, been weaker than other BBs (even if the CCs liked her as a pseudo-cruiser, I wasn't hearing any raving about her being OP). By contrast, this is a case of a battleship shoving its way violently into the cruiser tree. It's a wolf in sheep's clothing. 

Fourth - and related to the above point - cruisers are already arguably under-represented in the majority of games. Why is the apparent solution of this to hand them battlecruisers and give them a little pat on the head, rather than resolving the larger issue (that people apparently want to play BBs over CAs/CLs)?

  • Cool 4
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
309
[KRAB]
Members
615 posts
5,742 battles

The problem is that battlecruisers-as-cruisers would actually have trouble competing against heavy cruisers due to the mechanics put in place by WG. 

The Kronshtadt has essentially the size and mobility of a fast battleship - it will therefore be an easy target for literally anything. As the hit probability is generally proportional to the surface area of the ship, a larger hull needs to have significantly more HP or armor to maintain suitability. The belt armor is useless - it won't stop Battleship AP at ANY range without forcing a ricochet, and will be perforated even by most Heavy Cruisers at the ranges where they normally switch Ammo. 

Essentially, the "immunity zone" concept (where it still exists) does not apply to this type of cruiser - especially since 25mm plating is overmatched by the very shells which your larger hull and reduced mobility make you most vulnerable to. At tier 9, you need at least ~350mm of effective belt armor to shatter any battleship shells at the ranges you will be fighting at. The FDG has a 300mm belt and is notably squishy against AP - it has to angle to autobounce shells. The Kronsthtadt will not be able to do this with 25mm plating. Basically, this ship will have less effective armor than a Roon unless they decide to give it a turtleback scheme. The belt won't stop anything except light cruiser AP unless you are at extreme range, and will NEVER stop even shells from a Scharnhorst, the weakest BB AP you are likely to see. 

The guns are not much better as advertised. You will be better at penetrating lower-tier BBs at flat broadsides, but will still belt-shatter against most of your tier 9 and 10 competition unless WG gives the shells insane penetration. Even then, you do not have that much AP DPS (the same as Iowa) considering your role as a "cruiser." Your HE is also not much better - you have the same penetration as 203mm German shells, but with much worse dispersion. 

The dispersion is what kills it. Effectively, your firepower is DPS*Accuracy*Survival Time. The Kronshtadt will lose out on the first two compared to a normal heavy cruiser, and I don't think it will gain much survivability unless they do funny things with the firing angles AND armor scheme. Your HP just offsets your larger size, but since you can't easily dodge shells OR bounce them (based on that 25mm plating) you end up just eating more damage from the same salvos. 

Basically, the advantages this ship gets (HP and AP penetration) are exactly what you DON'T need in a cruiser role. A few extra belt penetrations on a FDG or Iowa won't help when they can lolpen you back from 20km, or when a silly little Hipper matches your AP AND HE DPS and pens your citadel belt inside of 12km while autobouncing your AP off its entire hull.  If it had a 32mm bow and 50mm deck/UB then it would be competitive in a Scharnhorst type role. 

Otherwise, it is a giant bag of HP with a few gimmicks. You will be sitting back bow-tanking a-la Moskva, with less effective DPS, similar or less survivability (even for the tier) and worse mobility. 

Maybe the armor scheme is not as advertised (25mm plating) - but if those stats remain roughly unchanged the ship will not be a problem. 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,493
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,788 posts

I don't know, I think there could be some opportunities here if properly exploited.

  • Split out battlecruisers as a sub-class of battleship.  Either officially or not, like the CL version of the battleship.
  • Differentiate CLs and CAs as well as BCs (CBs) and BBs.
  • CLs and BCs have a scouting/offence, support role.  CAs and BBs have a survivability and damage dealing role

What might this look like?

  • CLs and BCs get improved accuracy, shorter cool down on fires, abilities like radar, smoke etc.  Evading damage and spotting the enemy.
  • CAs and BBs get tougher, including repair party and bonus hit points, abilities like defensive fire, hydro, etc.  Surviving damage, and destroying the enemy.

It would be a major rework to the game.  But could offer a lot more opportunity for differentiation and specialization by role.  Just a spitball of an idea.  But I could see it going places if WG wanted to explore it as a concept.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
386
[POP]
Members
1,223 posts
7,991 battles

Let's say Clan wars is T9 next season with the same rules. 

One team takes a Lion for their BB and 3 of these for their "cruiser" (and something else for radar)

The other team takes a Lion and 4 normal cruisers. 

That would be nearly impossible for the other team to win. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
309
[KRAB]
Members
615 posts
5,742 battles
Just now, OgreMkV said:

Let's say Clan wars is T9 next season with the same rules. 

One team takes a Lion for their BB and 3 of these for their "cruiser" (and something else for radar)

The other team takes a Lion and 4 normal cruisers. 

That would be nearly impossible for the other team to win. 

How? They lose out on DPS and mobility. You will basically have to park them in formation next to an island and hope anything with higher arcs doesn't burn them down from behind another island while being spotted by something with better concealment. 

2 Baltimores and 2 Roons would probably beat these ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
309
[KRAB]
Members
615 posts
5,742 battles
4 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

I don't know, I think there could be some opportunities here if properly exploited.

  • Split out battlecruisers as a sub-class of battleship.  Either officially or not, like the CL version of the battleship.
  • Differentiate CLs and CAs as well as BCs (CBs) and BBs.
  • CLs and BCs have a scouting/offence, support role.  CAs and BBs have a survivability and damage dealing role

What might this look like?

  • CLs and BCs get improved accuracy, shorter cool down on fires, abilities like radar, smoke etc.  Evading damage and spotting the enemy.
  • CAs and BBs get tougher, including repair party and bonus hit points, abilities like defensive fire, hydro, etc.  Surviving damage, and destroying the enemy.

It would be a major rework to the game.  But could offer a lot more opportunity for differentiation and specialization by role.  Just a spitball of an idea.  But I could see it going places if WG wanted to explore it as a concept.

I would just keep BCs as normal battleships trading belt armor for mobility - right now the most important part of the ship is turtleback and plating thickness. 

 

A battleship (say Montana) with its entire hull 52mm thick with a 52mm main belt plus a 33mm turtleback (angled at ~70 degrees from vertical) and (flat) 33mm citadel deck would be better protected than the actual Montana is now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
386
[POP]
Members
1,223 posts
7,991 battles

So each of the cruisers is going to do nearly three times it's own HP in damage? 

Yes, it's been done. But not 3-4 times in the same game. 

This is a BB. It may not be a very good one. But it's a 33 knot BB. It's not that slow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,360 posts
3,915 battles
3 minutes ago, OgreMkV said:

So each of the cruisers is going to do nearly three times it's own HP in damage? 

Yes, it's been done. But not 3-4 times in the same game. 

This is a BB. It may not be a very good one. But it's a 33 knot BB. It's not that slow. 

Yeah, no, the way that's going down is they same way if you lined up 6 battleships against 3 cruisers and 3 battleships.

5ZS9yCa.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
507
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
4,949 posts
1,487 battles
4 minutes ago, OgreMkV said:

So each of the cruisers is going to do nearly three times it's own HP in damage? 

Yes, it's been done. But not 3-4 times in the same game. 

This is a BB. It may not be a very good one. But it's a 33 knot BB. It's not that slow. 

 

The cruiser cna bow tank these thing and sling HE at them till they go down, these have worse HE DPM and fire starting rates so they can;t win by doing the same back and they can't AP because they don't overmatch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,408
[5BS]
Members
4,427 posts

Yeah no, this is an overpowered mess of a ship with 0 downsides, the DoY was a series of bad decisions but no one would call it overpowered, in either state.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
386
[POP]
Members
1,223 posts
7,991 battles

And it's not a 1:1 duel. 

They just split up and focus fire. Heck, those are faster than a stock Baltimore (just barely, but they are). Just ram them. They have decent torp protection. 

Regardless, it will be a mess if it comes up in Clan Wars. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,360 posts
3,915 battles
2 minutes ago, OgreMkV said:

And it's not a 1:1 duel. 

They just split up and focus fire. Heck, those are faster than a stock Baltimore (just barely, but they are). Just ram them. They have decent torp protection. 

Regardless, it will be a mess if it comes up in Clan Wars. 

 

People saying "bow tank" as if these things won't be able to do the same thing. It's asinine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,052
[OPG]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,871 posts
10,411 battles

This thing can get 10.8 concealment. That's getting pretty close to Neptune's 10.1 concealment. You have enough hp to be able to effectively trade with bbs yet still can run down cruisers and force them into submission through exceptionally good armor for a cruiser and more hp and better torp protection than an iowa. This new Russian ship is going to be insane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
309
[KRAB]
Members
615 posts
5,742 battles

The concealment does seem low for a ship that size, but if the dispersion stays battleship level with 1.8 sigma I can't see this beating either a BB or a CA in open water, and only the CA if it is standing off at medium range and hoping not to take any hits which don't autobounce. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
507
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
4,949 posts
1,487 battles
7 minutes ago, Cruiser_Fiume said:

People saying "bow tank" as if these things won't be able to do the same thing. It's asinine. 

 

They can, but HE dosen;t care about bow tanking and they can't HE as well as a cruiser. What's so hard to understand about this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,360 posts
3,915 battles
3 minutes ago, Carl said:

 

They can, but HE dosen;t care about bow tanking and they can't HE as well as a cruiser. What's so hard to understand about this?

Well, for starters, because it's not going to be like that in a tier 9 ranked game. There will be objectives, and if it is a theoretical 3 BB + 3 Krons vs. 3 BB + 3 regular cruisers game, people will need to be capping. Sides will be exposed, people will take citadels, etc. This isn't a duel - it's a team match, and so the ultimate ideal isn't going to be realized. 

The point here is simple: which would you rather have 6 battleships, or 3 battleships and 3 cruisers? Most people are going to go with the former, because they know that folks are going to screw up, and screw ups are more catastrophic in traditional cruisers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
974 posts
1,871 battles
6 minutes ago, Carl said:

 

They can, but HE dosen;t care about bow tanking and they can't HE as well as a cruiser. What's so hard to understand about this?

nothing is hard to understand about it people don't like it because A) its russian and/or B)it's a cruiser with 12in guns they don't care that any battleship would wreck this thing and as you said it can't very well just HE them to death or use AP

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
507
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
4,949 posts
1,487 battles
3 minutes ago, Cruiser_Fiume said:

Well, for starters, because it's not going to be like that in a tier 9 ranked game. There will be objectives, and if it is a theoretical 3 BB + 3 Krons vs. 3 BB + 3 regular cruisers game, people will need to be capping. Sides will be exposed, people will take citadels, etc. This isn't a duel - it's a team match, and so the ultimate ideal isn't going to be realized. 

The point here is simple: which would you rather have 6 battleships, or 3 battleships and 3 cruisers? Most people are going to go with the former, because they know that folks are going to screw up, and screw ups are more catastrophic in traditional cruisers. 

 

I'd rather have 3 BB's and 3 normal cruisers than 3 BB's and 3 of this. The cruiser cna dodge the BB fire, this thing can;t, that means this goes pop and the cruisers don't. And thats before we bring DD's into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
974 posts
1,871 battles
3 minutes ago, Cruiser_Fiume said:

and screw ups are more catastrophic in traditional cruisers

and screw ups in this are still deadly because YOU HAVE NO ARMOR. some tier VI BBs can lol pen you and your citadel is huge. A large health pool means nothing if you can't stop most of the damage coming at you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
73
[5D]
Beta Testers
428 posts
7,557 battles

Battle Cruiser traits.. should really be that of cruisers.. and the original DOY outline...

Has ability to select options like DAAF, Radar, Hydro, Catapult plane       NO REPAIR PARTY, or at max 1.... but i really think the DOY idea works better here. This ensures that while they can fight it out with cruisers, they won't be able to tank and fight back with BB's head on. They would have to make a fighting retreat, and or come back with reinforcements, or really have to out play the BB.

 

I don't really think the DOY concept was bad.. it was just put onto the wrong ship and that's why it was so disliked.   Put the concept on an actual battle cruiser or large cruiser and I bet you it would be fine with the community as a whole.. save for exception ships like the Hood or the Graf Spee... one off ships that got a repair... but the main focus of the BC lines should be speed and gun power, or speed and and armor.   I say "or" because in my thought the RN ideas was less armor large caliber bb guns to get the speed, and the german idea is more armor smaller caliber main guns to gain their speed.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,360 posts
3,915 battles
2 minutes ago, Neighbor_Kid said:

Battle Cruiser traits.. should really be that of cruisers.. and the original DOY outline...

Has ability to select options like DAAF, Radar, Hydro, Catapult plane       NO REPAIR PARTY, or at max 1.... but i really think the DOY idea works better here. This ensures that while they can fight it out with cruisers, they won't be able to tank and fight back with BB's head on. They would have to make a fighting retreat, and or come back with reinforcements, or really have to out play the BB.

 

I don't really think the DOY concept was bad.. it was just put onto the wrong ship and that's why it was so disliked.   Put the concept on an actual battle cruiser or large cruiser and I bet you it would be fine with the community as a whole.. save for exception ships like the Hood or the Graf Spee... one off ships that got a repair... but the main focus of the BC lines should be speed and gun power, or speed and and armor.   I say "or" because in my thought the RN ideas was less armor large caliber bb guns to get the speed, and the german idea is more armor smaller caliber main guns to gain their speed.

I agree with this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,008
[OPG]
Members
3,866 posts
5,463 battles
1 hour ago, TheDreadnought said:

 To the people saying, "this makes all other cruisers obsolete." 

But how does it make cruises obsolete though?  You want a kiting HE spammer, the Kronshtadt is going to disappoint you.  You want a DD hunting support ship, well the Kronshtadt is not your gal.  You want a cruiser killer?  That in theory is where the Kronshtadt is supposed to shine, but she has Scharnhorst levels of dispersion, mediocre sigma and guns incapable of overmatching anything expect for RN CLs.  You might as well just go play a real BB if that is the case.

The Kronshtadt is basically a Tier 6/7 BB that takes the spot of a Tier 9 cruiser.  The ship itself looks underwhelming, but compensates for the fact it gets to abuse the MM system.

Edited by yashma
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
873
[SF-3]
Members
3,177 posts
8,169 battles
1 hour ago, MaxL_1023 said:

The problem is that battlecruisers-as-cruisers would actually have trouble competing against heavy cruisers due to the mechanics put in place by WG. 

The Kronshtadt has essentially the size and mobility of a fast battleship - it will therefore be an easy target for literally anything. As the hit probability is generally proportional to the surface area of the ship, a larger hull needs to have significantly more HP or armor to maintain suitability. The belt armor is useless - it won't stop Battleship AP at ANY range without forcing a ricochet, and will be perforated even by most Heavy Cruisers at the ranges where they normally switch Ammo. 

Essentially, the "immunity zone" concept (where it still exists) does not apply to this type of cruiser - especially since 25mm plating is overmatched by the very shells which your larger hull and reduced mobility make you most vulnerable to. At tier 9, you need at least ~350mm of effective belt armor to shatter any battleship shells at the ranges you will be fighting at. The FDG has a 300mm belt and is notably squishy against AP - it has to angle to autobounce shells. The Kronsthtadt will not be able to do this with 25mm plating. Basically, this ship will have less effective armor than a Roon unless they decide to give it a turtleback scheme. The belt won't stop anything except light cruiser AP unless you are at extreme range, and will NEVER stop even shells from a Scharnhorst, the weakest BB AP you are likely to see. 

The guns are not much better as advertised. You will be better at penetrating lower-tier BBs at flat broadsides, but will still belt-shatter against most of your tier 9 and 10 competition unless WG gives the shells insane penetration. Even then, you do not have that much AP DPS (the same as Iowa) considering your role as a "cruiser." Your HE is also not much better - you have the same penetration as 203mm German shells, but with much worse dispersion. 

The dispersion is what kills it. Effectively, your firepower is DPS*Accuracy*Survival Time. The Kronshtadt will lose out on the first two compared to a normal heavy cruiser, and I don't think it will gain much survivability unless they do funny things with the firing angles AND armor scheme. Your HP just offsets your larger size, but since you can't easily dodge shells OR bounce them (based on that 25mm plating) you end up just eating more damage from the same salvos. 

Basically, the advantages this ship gets (HP and AP penetration) are exactly what you DON'T need in a cruiser role. A few extra belt penetrations on a FDG or Iowa won't help when they can lolpen you back from 20km, or when a silly little Hipper matches your AP AND HE DPS and pens your citadel belt inside of 12km while autobouncing your AP off its entire hull.  If it had a 32mm bow and 50mm deck/UB then it would be competitive in a Scharnhorst type role. 

Otherwise, it is a giant bag of HP with a few gimmicks. You will be sitting back bow-tanking a-la Moskva, with less effective DPS, similar or less survivability (even for the tier) and worse mobility. 

Maybe the armor scheme is not as advertised (25mm plating) - but if those stats remain roughly unchanged the ship will not be a problem. 

This guy gets it. BBs will still be able to lolpen the bow and stern like any other cruiser. Other cruisers will be able to autobounce the 305mm AP off of their bows and sterns (minus RN CLs, but Henri can already do that too). Other cruisers are better fire starters, with better DPM. If this ship ends up one on one with an Ibuki (for example), the Ibuki just needs to bow in and rush to torpedo at point blank range. And let’s not forget the horrible dispersion compared to other cruisers.

Edited by Peregrinas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,062 posts
4,736 battles
2 hours ago, TheDreadnought said:

There are a lot of people up in arms that the Battlecruiser Kronshtadt is being classified as a cruiser.  Isn't this pretty much exactly what they tried to do with Duke of York?  Take a battleship and make it play like a cruiser?  It was a terrible idea, but a lot of CCs thought it was great, because it was "different."

Now they're taking a battlecruiser, and making it a cruiser.  Which is what they should have done in the beginning.  That was how they were supposed to work.   To the people saying, "this makes all other cruisers obsolete."  Well, yes.  That was the intended function of battlecruisers.

To me, this seems a lot like the way things should have been from the start, instead of trying to lump battlecruisers in with battleships and doing wonky things to them to make them fit.

I say bring on the Kronshtadt!   . . . while we're at it, how about we get a couple split out lines of battlecruisers.   Or just a separate classification for them since they are mostly premiums.  No more repair parties for battlecruisers (Scharnhorst, Hood, etc), but cruiser-level accuracy. 

Perhaps a Tier 4 or 5 Kongo variant in original battlecruiser configuration.  Meanwhile, the versions that were supposedly upgraded to battleships (in-game Kongo, Gneisenau, etc.) remain in the battleship tree as is.  That would actually add a lot more diversity and interest to the game.

Does it come with Cruiser dispersion or Battleship dispersion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×