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

Mobility > Brute Force

30 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
81 posts
459 battles

Is Warships like World of Tanks in that mobility is king? For example, do fast cruisers have a higher potential for damage and experience than battleships?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,716 posts
4,076 battles

Depends on how you play. Cruisers are pretty dominant in the lower and mid tiers. High tiers cruisers tend to be target #1 for everything and its cousin in tier 8+ matches. In most games DD's are the mobility ships, cruisers are support and BB's are the powerhouses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,102
[CHASE]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,960 posts
12,457 battles

Cruisers are at their strongest at t10, where it's easy to negate most incoming damage from bbs, and you have incredibly consistent damage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,770
[SALVO]
Members
24,198 posts
24,546 battles
31 minutes ago, cantgobacknow said:

Is Warships like World of Tanks in that mobility is king? For example, do fast cruisers have a higher potential for damage and experience than battleships?

Honestly, I think that that's what's ruined WoT.  The more they pushed faster and faster medium and then light tanks, the less interesting the game got, because it became less about outthinking your opponent and more about out-twitch responsing them.  WoT was a LOT more fun like 4-5 years ago or so when it was sort of a game of chess with tanks, rather than allowing the players with the fastest twitch responses to rule the battlefields.

As for your question, the answer is mostly no.  Cruisers simply don't have the durability that battleships do.  This isn't like WoT where you can aim perfectly at weak points at shortish ranges and have a very high probability of hitting weak spots like lower tank glacis's.  In WoWS, you want to aim for the citadels of BBs and CAs to get the highest damaging hits.  However, those are also the places with the strongest armor on any ship.  Of course, strong is a relative thing.  "Strong" on a cruiser largely only means against cruiser guns.  And often also only when well angled.  Also, unless you can get to close range, RNG and dispersion is a more significant factor in WoWS than at normal WoT engagement ranges.  In BB's 25% is a decent to good hit rate, and that includes all hits (i.e. bounces, shatters, regular pens, citadels, overpens), not just damaging hits.  Hit rates are usually higher with smaller guns, but the damage is commensurately less.

Also, not all battleships lack mobility.  Some are very mobile, if sometimes not as maneuverable as smaller ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,566
[REVY]
Members
6,456 posts
5,168 battles
43 minutes ago, cantgobacknow said:

Is Warships like World of Tanks in that mobility is king? For example, do fast cruisers have a higher potential for damage and experience than battleships?

I'm going to say no.  Fast cruisers are excellent for chasing down destroyers which don't have a lot of HP, so your damage will be low, but you'll earn high experience.

Or take this game I had today, I achieved it by more or less parking at a cap and using my smokescreen for cover while I murdered a bunch of cruisers trying to take it.  So I wasn't being terribly mobile, I even got flushed out by a Battleship.

P3hIf2x.jpg

Edited by Sventex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
532
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

Up To a point mobility is great, but only upto a point, it isn't like world of tanks where a ship can move across an entire map in a complete roundabout route in a couple of minutes or less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
155 posts
3,753 battles
1 hour ago, cantgobacknow said:

Is Warships like World of Tanks in that mobility is king? For example, do fast cruisers have a higher potential for damage and experience than battleships?

Ish? Cruisers generally have more potential for consistent damage, but they take time. Time for fires to burn, floods to go (though this one is more destroyers, who could be considered a light tank with a tank destroyer thingy strapped on). The real trouble is that most cruisers are pretty fragile compared to their battleship counterparts, and are generally fairly high on the priority target list, so most average players do better in the high alpha strike battleships, since they simply can't live long enough for DoT to rack up or the team just throws.

Spoiler

Disclaimer: I have this problem myself at times. Can't make the Dm. Donskoi work for the life of me.

 

Edited by DaryaKonstantin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,378 posts
14,155 battles

Mobility is indeed important but mobility alone won't save you / win games. Take Henri for instance. The ship is fast and it allows you to quickly engage / reposition yourself but Henri has floaty and slow shell, concealment is garbage and armor is garbage (unless you angle properly). A Montana for instance will probably outspot you and devastating strike you. Montana at the same time has better armor, good speed for a BB and concealment. 

 

If we're talking about damage on the short time, BB will win, however if we're talking about damage on the long time, cruiser will probably win. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
532
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

I think a lot of people are missing what the OP is asking about. In WoT Mediums are powerful because their mobility lets them drastically reposition every few shots if needed, late game where there's little spotting this can be incredibly powerful as it lets them get effectively free shots on a target that isn't in a position to respond until long after the timeframe in which the medium has dissappeared and moved off to relocate.

 

In WOWS this just isn't practical because mobility relative to map size, (and spotting distances), is so much lower that running entirely around the map border to reposition to the other flank is a once a game 5-10 minute job, not a 90 seconds to 2 minute thing it is in WoT. 

 

In addition average time to kill in oT's is much shorter, in effect each surprise pop up does a much bigger piece of the targets health in WoT than is usually the case in WoWS. Surprise stealth torps are about as close as it gets to this in WoWS. But they have some decent counterplays so it's rare to catch a target completely off guard with them, (it can happen on occasion, but it's far from as easy as surprise pop ups in WoT).

 

WoWS is a fundamentally slower paced game in which even the most bursty classes kill much more slowly.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,571 posts
6,979 battles

What @Carl said. :Smile_great:

There's a natural tendency to try to equate the ship classes in WoWs to the tank classes in WoT, but they don't really fit that neatly.  Cruisers are generally the best ship for beginning WoWs players (and the only ship for your first game or three) because they're the most flexible, with more speed and a higher rate of fire than a battleship and more hit points and survivability (at low tiers) than a destroyer.  Another nice thing about starting with cruisers is that you'll quickly get to make up your own mind about whether mobility or brute force works best for you: with the exception of the Japanese cruiser line, each nation's tech tree gives you a taste slow but heavily armed (and armored) cruisers as well as faster, more agile ones...all within the first 4-5 tiers.  And, just like Tanks, there are thousands of videos uploaded to YouTube which will allow you to see how each & every ship plays before you unlock them yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,497
Beta Testers
6,868 posts
4,189 battles
1 hour ago, Harv72b said:

What @Carl said. :Smile_great:

There's a natural tendency to try to equate the ship classes in WoWs to the tank classes in WoT, but they don't really fit that neatly.  Cruisers are generally the best ship for beginning WoWs players (and the only ship for your first game or three) because they're the most flexible, with more speed and a higher rate of fire than a battleship and more hit points and survivability (at low tiers) than a destroyer.  Another nice thing about starting with cruisers is that you'll quickly get to make up your own mind about whether mobility or brute force works best for you: with the exception of the Japanese cruiser line, each nation's tech tree gives you a taste slow but heavily armed (and armored) cruisers as well as faster, more agile ones...all within the first 4-5 tiers.  And, just like Tanks, there are thousands of videos uploaded to YouTube which will allow you to see how each & every ship plays before you unlock them yourself.

 

I disagree that starting with cruisers is a great idea.  At least, don't try to grind a CA line to T10 before you've got some time in DDs and BBs.  CA are probably the most challenging ship type to play, the other two have a survivability crutch either in either stealth or tons and tons of health.  Starting in the mid tiers you only really get one mistake in a CA.  That changes a little at T8 with the heal, but that won't save you from a mistake.  It just mitigates being chipped down.

It's easier to learn to maximize something with extreme strengths than it something that is just average at pretty much everything.  At higher tiers there's nothing average about cruiser dpm, but that's pretty much all they have going for them.  No armor, no stealth torping, and if you're shooting then nearly always someone is shooting back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,090
[KNMSU]
Members
7,086 posts
7,668 battles

Uh... sorta? I would prioritize mobility over brute force, but not enormously. This is why I think German battlecruisers will ultimately be my cup of tea - they're slightly less fast than their British counterparts, but just as tanky as contemporary British battleships. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
532
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles
1 hour ago, Harv72b said:

What @Carl said. :Smile_great:

There's a natural tendency to try to equate the ship classes in WoWs to the tank classes in WoT, but they don't really fit that neatly.  Cruisers are generally the best ship for beginning WoWs players (and the only ship for your first game or three) because they're the most flexible, with more speed and a higher rate of fire than a battleship and more hit points and survivability (at low tiers) than a destroyer.  Another nice thing about starting with cruisers is that you'll quickly get to make up your own mind about whether mobility or brute force works best for you: with the exception of the Japanese cruiser line, each nation's tech tree gives you a taste slow but heavily armed (and armored) cruisers as well as faster, more agile ones...all within the first 4-5 tiers.  And, just like Tanks, there are thousands of videos uploaded to YouTube which will allow you to see how each & every ship plays before you unlock them yourself.

 

I disagree, upto T4 cruisers are a very different beast to past T4 cruisers. And playing a mid to high tier cruiser well requires IMO the highest skill level, (in traditional warships terms, CV's are a whole other ballgame), of any class. A bad BB driver is much more effective than a bad cruiser driver. I'd argue the same is true to a much lesser degree of average skill, it's only when you push above average that i feel cruisers start to equal BB's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,571 posts
6,979 battles
32 minutes ago, Grizley said:

 

I disagree that starting with cruisers is a great idea.  At least, don't try to grind a CA line to T10 before you've got some time in DDs and BBs.  CA are probably the most challenging ship type to play, the other two have a survivability crutch either in either stealth or tons and tons of health.  Starting in the mid tiers you only really get one mistake in a CA.  That changes a little at T8 with the heal, but that won't save you from a mistake.  It just mitigates being chipped down.

It's easier to learn to maximize something with extreme strengths than it something that is just average at pretty much everything.  At higher tiers there's nothing average about cruiser dpm, but that's pretty much all they have going for them.  No armor, no stealth torping, and if you're shooting then nearly always someone is shooting back.

 

4 minutes ago, Carl said:

 

I disagree, upto T4 cruisers are a very different beast to past T4 cruisers. And playing a mid to high tier cruiser well requires IMO the highest skill level, (in traditional warships terms, CV's are a whole other ballgame), of any class. A bad BB driver is much more effective than a bad cruiser driver. I'd argue the same is true to a much lesser degree of average skill, it's only when you push above average that i feel cruisers start to equal BB's.

I should have specified that I meant up to the T5 level.  Of course, any ship can be deleted after one mistake at high tiers, even if not by one salvo, but cruisers will indeed tend to be punished more often for their errors.

I do disagree with @Grizley's wording, though.  While cruisers don't have the same level of stealth that a destroyer does, and they do have citadels which are generally easy to find at those tiers, they also have a bit more health to survive mistakes which don't involve showing their broadside to a battleship and a bit more firepower to come out on top should they stumble into a 1v1 encounter.  And while they don't have near the amount of hit points or armor that a battleship does, cruisers are much more agile when it becomes necessary to quickly re-position or to dodge the full spread of torpedoes bearing down on them.  So I don't know that "crutch" is the right word here...both ship types pay for their extremely good characteristic with an exceptionally poor counter, while cruisers straddle the middle with no huge advantage but no huge disadvantage either (once they've figured out protecting their citadels).  I will agree that it's easier to achieve "average" skills/stats in destroyers or battleships than it is in cruisers, at least at T6+.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
532
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles
14 minutes ago, Harv72b said:

 

I should have specified that I meant up to the T5 level.  Of course, any ship can be deleted after one mistake at high tiers, even if not by one salvo, but cruisers will indeed tend to be punished more often for their errors.

I do disagree with @Grizley's wording, though.  While cruisers don't have the same level of stealth that a destroyer does, and they do have citadels which are generally easy to find at those tiers, they also have a bit more health to survive mistakes which don't involve showing their broadside to a battleship and a bit more firepower to come out on top should they stumble into a 1v1 encounter.  And while they don't have near the amount of hit points or armor that a battleship does, cruisers are much more agile when it becomes necessary to quickly re-position or to dodge the full spread of torpedoes bearing down on them.  So I don't know that "crutch" is the right word here...both ship types pay for their extremely good characteristic with an exceptionally poor counter, while cruisers straddle the middle with no huge advantage but no huge disadvantage either (once they've figured out protecting their citadels).  I will agree that it's easier to achieve "average" skills/stats in destroyers or battleships than it is in cruisers, at least at T6+.

 

The problem is average and below players never do figure out to protect their citadels. If your not sailing full broadside whenever firing and maneuvering only when hit your above average. Battleships cna survive that. Cruisers are likely to pop very fast. And even at high skill levels, IMO cruisers are less durable than DD's in general. Against pure HE spam, yeah they're more durable, vs everything else, nope, and it;s everything else that tends to account for a big percentage of damage intake in a cruiser no matter how good you are. (in fact i;d say one of the biggest chunks is all my maneuvering carrying me into the path of drifts of unspotted torpedoes aimed at someone else entirely).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,600
[FML]
Members
3,656 posts
14,584 battles
6 hours ago, cantgobacknow said:

Is Warships like World of Tanks in that mobility is king? For example, do fast cruisers have a higher potential for damage and experience than battleships?

Not really, I think. In general, WoWS rewards: 

  • Agility
  • stealth
  • alpha strike
  • flex (as in strategic mobility rather than tactical) late game. 

Things like high DPM tend to be a bit more situational and requires a team to become truly effective - that HE spamming cruiser can get deleted across the map if it’s not careful, and by virtue of spamming becomes a higher priority target. 

Direct protection is also overrated as heavily armoured battleships are often burnt to the waterline (or flooded) where the extra armour just stops it from dodging better, at least much of the time. 

Thus game is a lot slower; more like chess than a pinball machine. Positioning well is OP and is one of the harder things to learn - precision aiming (such as to hit only the commander hatch) otoh is less important than in tanks (but obviously still matters). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
783 posts

Cruisers generally do really consistent damage.  BB tend to be feast or famine, due to longer reloads missed shots have much more impact on your score.  Part of the reason Yamato is higher in stats is that it has 18.1inch gun over match and highest accuracy making its shots much more consistent in ability to land and do damage.  DD vary, gunboat DD tend to be more consistent in their damage scores since they can land shells easy.  IJN DD are again feast or famine, due in large part to torpedos being much harder to hit consistently with then guns.

Mobility plays a part in all this, but main thing if your ability to land the shots.  Mobility is just a means of getting you in range in warships and tends to effect games less then tanks, the true winner in tanks mobility is capping and positioning.  In ships the true winner is detection + mobility, and DD are the best at that, which is why they are keys to winning more often in warships.  Their ability to spot, cap, and deal devastating damage make them invaluable to a match.  In tanks the terrain can often negate the need for scout tanks, like city maps, maps with lots of hills which cut view ranges, maps devoid of bushes. In warships terrain is less of an issue, we can shoot over small islands, and in open water there is no cover, anything we cant shoot over we can just go around or completely avoid.

Tanks is a diff animal where terrain is a very strong feature in every map, in ships its more just something to look at as you sail by.  Not saying it cant be used to effect it just has less of an effect on over all gameplay here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
532
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles
37 minutes ago, JToney3449 said:

and highest accuracy

 

I'm pretty sure that title belongs to Montana, and given what we know about vertical dispersion i suspect Conqueror is more acurratte too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
783 posts
1 minute ago, Carl said:

 

I'm pretty sure that title belongs to Montana, and given what we know about vertical dispersion i suspect Conqueror is more acurratte too.

Nope its Yamato.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
532
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles
2 minutes ago, JToney3449 said:

Nope its Yamato.

 

Nope it's not. Stop treating sigma as the be all and end all and look up how dispersion actually works.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
783 posts
9 minutes ago, Carl said:

 

Nope it's not. Stop treating sigma as the be all and end all and look up how dispersion actually works.

Id explain that I know how it works as best as we players can without being the guys who did the equations and that I wasnt referring to just sigma, or that the Montana has 3 additional guns to get a hit with by comparison of gun to gun performance. But being dickish to me about it, well this is all I care to bother with.

Edited by JToney3449

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,722
[USCC2]
Members
5,814 posts
9 hours ago, cantgobacknow said:

Is Warships like World of Tanks in that mobility is king? For example, do fast cruisers have a higher potential for damage and experience than battleships?

Just look at the stats tier V-X.

 

BBs and CVs are king....CAs feature around tier IX and X. DDs are pretty much at the bottom, so no, mobility is not king. :Smile_honoring:

Edited by _WaveRider_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
532
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles
2 hours ago, JToney3449 said:

Id explain that I know how it works as best as we players can without being the guys who did the equations and that I wasnt referring to just sigma, or that the Montana has 3 additional guns to get a hit with by comparison of gun to gun performance. But being dickish to me about it, well this is all I care to bother with.

 

Then if your not just referring to sigma how did you manage to get it so wrong? I'm not actually trying to be dickish, it's just there's a massive chunk of the forum community that has got it into it's head that "sigma is all" or "horizontal Dispersion is all". The fact is we don;t have the vertical dispersion values, so aside from mouses plot, (which we don't have for the relevant guns after a quick check, but do have some round about info on,. more i on a second ), the only info we have to go on is official WG'ing statements which indicate the brits have the best and the japanese the worst. But just because we don;t have exact data dosen;t mean you get to ignore somthing.

 

The inferreal from mouse come from her Roma and Hood reviews. Hood gives us a british vs IJn vs KM plot. From that we can see the Km get the same vertical dispersion as the IJN. Conversely in her Roma review, (Italians get KM dispersion patterns apparently), we know that the USN without accuracy modules have around two thirds the vertical dispersion, (based on the hood plots this suggest to me the RN advantage is small, but then RN also has a small horizontal boost too). Given the gap in horizontal before dispersion modules is nowhere near that great, (and at 20k they're nearing a dead heat with it), there really isn't any practical way yamato is going to have a more acurratte pattern. Conqueror is more open as she gets no accuracy module and a much bigger sigma drop, but i wouldn't rule it out either, the difference in vertical dispersion is considerable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×