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

Atlanta Buff/Adjustments

63 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

456
[LUCK]
Members
1,276 posts
19,097 battles

I'm not suggesting changing firing arcs or armor rather two things to complement it's playstyle.

First, it's concealment, relative to Belfast (I know bad example) is out of whack. Other than the superstructure, Atlanta is smaller but has a larger detection. I'm having trouble reconciling that.

Second, it's acceleration could use some attention. It's an island hugger/DD hunter so the faster it accelerates the better. Better to use an upgrade on the rudder shift as opposed to acceleration.

I don't think either of these are unreasonable.

  • Boring 1
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
394
[WOLF5]
Members
1,497 posts
2,069 battles

I have one, it's probably fine as is. The acceleration is OK, never had a problem. I wouldn't mind a concealment buff of 1km or so. Just to give a bit more comfort room. 10.7 is excessive IMO. 10km would be fine, allowing CE to bring it down to 9km. But even without, it's still a great ship.

 

You're right about the arcs. While I often wish it had Moskva's railguns, that would be OP as heck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,020
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,036 posts
11,539 battles
4 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

I have one, it's probably fine as is. The acceleration is OK, never had a problem. I wouldn't mind a concealment buff of 1km or so. Just to give a bit more comfort room. 10.7 is excessive IMO. 10km would be fine, allowing CE to bring it down to 9km. But even without, it's still a great ship.

 

You're right about the arcs. While I often wish it had Moskva's railguns, that would be OP as heck.

If it had moskva rail guns it would have to come out and fight because the shells would not  clear the islands.  it would not be as OP as you think.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[LUCK]
Members
1,276 posts
19,097 battles
38 minutes ago, Wolcott said:

 

as expected as least one useless response

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
607
[HYDRO]
Members
1,330 posts
3,669 battles

I think the most requested adjustment is to give Atlanta the same torpedoes as Flint and Benson, that have longer range at the expense of speed. It could be an interesting addition to such a devoted island hugger as Atlanta.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[LUCK]
Members
1,276 posts
19,097 battles
12 minutes ago, skull_122_steel said:

hey should give it smoke as well as radar:cap_haloween:

 

 

(P.S. if you couldn't tell I'm joking)

Agreed smoke would be silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,118
[NDA]
Supertester
3,896 posts
1,477 battles
50 minutes ago, hofmannsc said:

...  the faster it accelerates the better. Better to use an upgrade on the rudder shift as opposed to acceleration.

You answered your own point here.  There is an upgrade to improve acceleration, but you have to give up the rudder shift upgrade to get it.  You cannot have both.  The devs want you to make choices in how you set up your ship, rather than having one 'best' setup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[LUCK]
Members
1,276 posts
19,097 battles
Just now, 56th_Karma said:

literally just had an 85k damage match in it with over 300 shell hits....

 

its fine.

understood it is a "fine" ship as is however it would benefit from both of these. As mentioned some would like longer range torps but that would change the playstyle IMO- even if they were Sims sea mines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[LUCK]
Members
1,276 posts
19,097 battles
2 minutes ago, kerensky914 said:

You answered your own point here.  There is an upgrade to improve acceleration, but you have to give up the rudder shift upgrade to get it.  You cannot have both.  The devs want you to make choices in how you set up your ship, rather than having one 'best' setup.

I get that- relative to its size and purpose better base acceleration is warranted considering we have hyperfast BBs being introduced. Not DD like acceleration but better than it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[LUCK]
Members
1,276 posts
19,097 battles
4 minutes ago, enderland07 said:

Atlanta is OP in the right hands.

That's can be said for many, nothing new there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
841 posts
4,880 battles

The Atlanta doesn't need a buff, but if the Atlanta should get one - then I'd like to suggest a buff for my Gearing as well.  I could really use nuclear warheads on my torpedoes. Just a small one, let's say a killzone of 5km radius around the detonation site. Oh, and wings so my Gearing can fly. I'd really like that too.

So many ships legitimately on the list of needing buffs or deserving nerfs... Atlantas aren't on the buff list.

Edited by FleetAdmiral_Assassin
  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,602
[SALVO]
Members
16,660 posts
17,308 battles
40 minutes ago, hofmannsc said:

as expected as least one useless response

Oh come on!  Yuro videos are hilarious! :cap_haloween:  :cap_rambo:

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[LUCK]
Members
1,276 posts
19,097 battles
2 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Oh come on!  Yuro videos are hilarious! :cap_haloween:  :cap_rambo:

yes they are. I was referring to the useless poster.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,602
[SALVO]
Members
16,660 posts
17,308 battles
4 minutes ago, hofmannsc said:

yes they are. I was referring to the useless poster.

Oh maybe, but adding a bit of levity to this thread doesn't hurt, when it's a Yuro video!!!

 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[LUCK]
Members
1,276 posts
19,097 battles
21 minutes ago, FleetAdmiral_Assassin said:

The Atlanta doesn't need a buff, but if the Atlanta should get one - then I'd like to suggest a buff for my Gearing as well.  I could really use nuclear warheads on my torpedoes. Just a small one, let's say a killzone of 5km radius around the detonation site. Oh, and wings so my Gearing can fly. I'd really like that too.

So many ships legitimately on the list of needing buffs or deserving nerfs... Atlantas aren't on the buff list.

Gearing could use some love too. Pretty much all the original IJN and USN ships need a little attention. Nothing earthshattering but some tweaking here and there. They adjusted Iowa class and Montana citadel and the game didn't break.

I suggested Atlanta as hopefully WG will finally do right by the rest of USN cruiser line with the impending split. With it being a premium it is somewhat isolated from the rest.

And I do appreciate good sarcasm however you failed miserably.

 

Edited by hofmannsc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
175
[70]
Members
961 posts
3,695 battles
1 hour ago, hofmannsc said:

First, it's concealment, relative to Belfast (I know bad example) is out of whack. Other than the superstructure, Atlanta is smaller but has a larger detection. I'm having trouble reconciling that.

Which one of these two is more visible on the horizon?

1. A large forest (e.g. less tall but longer ship)

2. Ayers Rock or similar large mounds, with less overall cross-sectional area than the forest above when viewed from the horizon.

I guarantee the blobbier object will be more obvious, like how you can notice a car on the horizon before you notice the grass when coming out of say a dry wasteland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52
[BTH]
Beta Testers
198 posts
4,661 battles
1 hour ago, skull_122_steel said:

hey should give it smoke as well as radar:cap_haloween:

 

 

(P.S. if you couldn't tell I'm joking)

Doesn't the Flint have both?

Not like WG is above such idea's.(Black).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[LUCK]
Members
1,276 posts
19,097 battles
3 minutes ago, Guardian54 said:

Which one of these two is more visible on the horizon?

1. A large forest (e.g. less tall but longer ship)

2. Ayers Rock or similar large mounds, with less overall cross-sectional area than the forest above when viewed from the horizon.

I guarantee the blobbier object will be more obvious, like how you can notice a car on the horizon before you notice the grass when coming out of say a dry wasteland.

Another pseudo-intellectual post. The reason WG said Pensacola had awful detection was the mast height. Magically they were able to, eventually, alter that. Inasmuch as there is mathematical/physical basis for the game they can and do tailor it as they see fit. My suggestion is they do so for Atlanta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[LUCK]
Members
1,276 posts
19,097 battles
4 minutes ago, LukeV said:

Doesn't the Flint have both?

Not like WG is above such idea's.(Black).

Flint does not have radar to my knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×