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

Buff Low Tier Cruisers

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

940
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
1,332 posts
11,168 battles

Low tier British cruisers are terrible. At least give them HE to compensate for their terrible guns. Maybe give Danae smoke? Emerald forward armament..2 6" guns.....Kirov 6 7" guns, Emile Bertin 6 6", Konigsberg 3 6", Omaha 6 6", Furutaka 4 8"....Emerald, with no HE isn't even in the ballpark.  

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,822
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
3,547 posts
12,260 battles

Yeah, I think the mid-tier cruisers need it the most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,125 posts
20,552 battles
31 minutes ago, KalishniKat said:

Low tier British cruisers are terrible.

I don't think you meant to say "Low," but rather "Mid"....

rvs8mx6.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
940
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
1,332 posts
11,168 battles

Arethusa class would have been a far better choice for Tier 5 than Emerald, at least Arethusa would be competitive with other T5s. Plus they had a better war history than Emerald class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,144
[HINON]
Privateers
6,266 posts
3,278 battles
8 minutes ago, theLaalaa said:

I don't think you meant to say "Low," but rather "Mid"....

rvs8mx6.jpg

 

Your having played an ungodly amount of one ship doesn't change what another person is saying about their opinion of said ship. 

As it is, low tiers typically is considered to be from tier 1 to 5. Mid tier doesn't start till tier 6, while high tier is 8 and above. When Kalishni says that low tier cruisers suck, I'm assuming he's talking about some number of them between tiers 1 and 5, not that they all suck. (Just most of them.) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,125 posts
20,552 battles
7 minutes ago, RivertheRoyal said:

Your having played an ungodly amount of one ship doesn't change what another person is saying about their opinion of said ship. 

As it is, low tiers typically is considered to be from tier 1 to 5. Mid tier doesn't start till tier 6, while high tier is 8 and above. When Kalishni says that low tier cruisers suck, I'm assuming he's talking about some number of them between tiers 1 and 5, not that they all suck. (Just most of them.) 

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
336
[CZS]
Members
842 posts
8,005 battles

Nah, things are just fine, with one exception:

Matchmaker needs to protect T5 from T7.  There's a severe power gap right between T6 and T7, and the T5s simply can't keep up.  No T5 should see a T7, ever.

 

Individual ships might need some tweaking (and, yeah, the Emerald does need a little help, as it has just the wrong amount of armor:  too much to avoid overpens, too little to stop ANYTHING from Citadeling it). 

 

If you think the Fiji is garbage, I suggest you go find another game to play, as you're insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
940
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
1,332 posts
11,168 battles
22 hours ago, EAnybody said:

Nah, things are just fine, with one exception:

Matchmaker needs to protect T5 from T7.  There's a severe power gap right between T6 and T7, and the T5s simply can't keep up.  No T5 should see a T7, ever.

 

Individual ships might need some tweaking (and, yeah, the Emerald does need a little help, as it has just the wrong amount of armor:  too much to avoid overpens, too little to stop ANYTHING from Citadeling it). 

 

If you think the Fiji is garbage, I suggest you go find another game to play, as you're insane.

I handle T7s just fine with most of my T5 ships...Emerald being the exception as she's little more than a dressed up T3 ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
336
[CZS]
Members
842 posts
8,005 battles
1 hour ago, KalishniKat said:

I handle T7s just fine with most of my T5 ships...Emerald being the exception as she's little more than a dressed up T3 ship.

Extremely experienced folks can cope with a T5 in a T7 match.  But even there, it can be overwhelming.  Taken a New York or Kongo into such a battle recently?  What about a Nicholas or T-22? Or an Omaha, Kirov, or even FurryTaco?

Let alone the poor T5 CV stuck trying to fight T7 AA - even the crappier T7 CAs and BBs have more than sufficient AA to drive off a T5 strike, and the Pensacola, Sharnhorst, Yorck, Myoko, Fiji, are incredibly deadly, let alone what an AA Gneisenau or (lord forbid) Atlanta can do.  The reality for CVs is that if you're a T5, you cannot strike any T7 except DDs. Not "can't be effective against", but "can't approach within 5km of". If you're a T5 CV up against more than just one T7 BB or CA, it's entirely possible the virtually the entire enemy team is untouchable.  And the converse:  wanna see how long a T5 non-CV lasts against a T7 airstrike? 

They all get pummeled quickly by any T7 they might find themselves against, and they have no effective ability to fight back.  Every single T5-7 matchup, the T5s die virtually instantly, as they're quickly focused fired and eliminated. Everyone recognizes they're the weak ones, so sinking them first makes all the sense.   That's not fun for anyone. 

There are a few T5 ships that can make the uptiering work (Konigsberg, Konig, all the T5 IJN DDs, and a handfull of others), but the other reality is that the average T5 player is going to be SIGNIFICANTLY less experienced than the average T7 one.  We've got sufficient player population to have T4-6 play all the time, so there's no reason for T5 ships to be shoved in with the far superior T7.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
940
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
1,332 posts
11,168 battles

New York is awesome even in aT7 battle...have a 54% WR, Kongo is lower at 50%, Iron Duke 56%, Kirov 50% Konigsberg 60%, T22, with high point captain and concealment rivals Kamikaze for sneak attacks....T5 Cvs never face above T6, and yes, you need to avoid certain ships, but still playable. I play almost exclusivley T5, with T4 and T6 mixed in. I don't mind the upteiring at all...more XP for me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,201
[SALT]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
3,660 posts
2,992 battles
On 2/21/2018 at 12:32 PM, EAnybody said:

Extremely experienced folks can cope with a T5 in a T7 match.  But even there, it can be overwhelming.  Taken a New York or Kongo into such a battle recently?  What about a Nicholas or T-22? Or an Omaha, Kirov, or even FurryTaco?

Let alone the poor T5 CV stuck trying to fight T7 AA - even the crappier T7 CAs and BBs have more than sufficient AA to drive off a T5 strike, and the Pensacola, Sharnhorst, Yorck, Myoko, Fiji, are incredibly deadly, let alone what an AA Gneisenau or (lord forbid) Atlanta can do.  The reality for CVs is that if you're a T5, you cannot strike any T7 except DDs. Not "can't be effective against", but "can't approach within 5km of". If you're a T5 CV up against more than just one T7 BB or CA, it's entirely possible the virtually the entire enemy team is untouchable.  And the converse:  wanna see how long a T5 non-CV lasts against a T7 airstrike? 

They all get pummeled quickly by any T7 they might find themselves against, and they have no effective ability to fight back.  Every single T5-7 matchup, the T5s die virtually instantly, as they're quickly focused fired and eliminated. Everyone recognizes they're the weak ones, so sinking them first makes all the sense.   That's not fun for anyone. 

There are a few T5 ships that can make the uptiering work (Konigsberg, Konig, all the T5 IJN DDs, and a handfull of others), but the other reality is that the average T5 player is going to be SIGNIFICANTLY less experienced than the average T7 one.  We've got sufficient player population to have T4-6 play all the time, so there's no reason for T5 ships to be shoved in with the far superior T7.

 

Emerald honestly should be replaced with Arethusa as a 6x6'' gun ship with 3 turrets. It was a reduced sized Leander to reduce costs much like how York was a reduced County class for cost reasons. In reality, the Emerald should have been a tier 4 premium at best.

As for the Kongo, I've taken Hiei and curb stomped some tier 6 and 7 ships. She's an extremely good ship uptiered due to her armor bow and ability to angle tank very well against enemy 14'' and 15'' guns. She also has good range and good dispersion mid range. New York is a different story for me and I don't even enjoy Texas anymore due to overmatch on the bow when trying to push in with her. Nicholas is still great at tier 5 and my alt account on EU has a 1600 WTR with her as of December of last year. Abuse smoke and rip up enemy DD's with stock hull with those flat firing 5'' guns. Furytaco is still good thanks in part to it's torpedo placement allowing you to abuse islands well and with good range. Omaha I hated due to her floating shells which had more range than Cleveland and I honestly wasn't used to it when I was playing her recently.

Edit: Actually, I stand corrected on Nicholas on my Alt

4JEIbZ0.jpg

Make that a 1739 WTR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,895
[ARGSY]
Members
15,765 posts
10,628 battles
On 2/23/2018 at 4:23 AM, Azumazi said:

Emerald honestly should be replaced with Arethusa as a 6x6'' gun ship with 3 turrets.

I doubt that they will do this now that the Arethusa class is (sort-of) in-game as the Pan-Asian premium Huang He. Yes, I know, they've given her Russian guns and I think they did things to the torpedoes... but she is still basically an Arethusa and I can imagine the howls of protest going up from Huang He buyers who paid for something that T5 tech tree players would be getting for free. That being said, IIRC the Huang He has access to HE shells and a Perth-style smoke generator, and the Arethusa would have to be clearly announced as a very nerfed version of that.

As a torpedo platform she is very nerfed compared to the Emerald - that being said, with the exception of (I think) the Minotaur, I think the Emerald is still the OP torpedo monster of the RN line and will remain so until high tier British mainline destroyers arrive (and even then, her ability to spit eight out each side is pretty much unparalleled; if they were anything except short-range, she'd be hideously overpowered for her tier).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,980
[PVE]
Members
10,253 posts
18,930 battles

Low tier BRN CL's are fine as is and they teach you early on how to play the line higher up. They are ALL armored with tin foil. Even the Mighty Minotaur is one mistaken WASD from oblivion.

While the general consensus is the line gets good starting at T6 with Leander I think the line on the whole is pretty good and I have made it to T10. They are all at least decent/ok with 1 exception and it isn't Emerald.

  1. Black Swan = Best T1 hands down. Borderline OP. 
  2. Weymouth = Typical T2 Cruiser. None of them stand out or are better than the others. Most boring Tier in the entire game.
  3. Caledon = Excellent little CL that is more like a DD on roids. One of my favorite ships in the game. It is a terror at T3.
  4. Danea = The one truly BAD ship in the BRN CL line. Hated this thing with a passion. A bigger, worse, Caledon.
  5. Emerald = Squishy as all get out but excellent torpedoes, hydro, and smoke. A very good ambush predator and DD hunter. I actually didn't hate it.
  6. Leander = A great little CL. Limited gun range but still a very good ship and actually has some toughness.
  7. Fiji = Might be the best ship in the entire line with all respect to Minotaur. Easily in my top 5 of all ships in the game.
  8. Edinburgh = An ok ship but seems to be a step backwards from Fiji even with some improvements over Fiji. Not bad by any stretch but never clicked with me.
  9. Neptune = A really good CL that is better than Edinburgh but again doesn't feel as good as Fiji. Still a real powerhouse when played right.
  10. Minotaur = Rivals Fiji for best in the line. Only 1 game so far but absolutely love the ship. 

IMO the whole line overall is really good and needs no buffs. The only really bad ship in the whole line, IMO, is Danae at T4. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
361
[TDG]
Members
1,736 posts
10,048 battles

@AdmiralThunder Good summary that I mostly agree with.

I just got Minotaur and am still learning how to be effective with her.

Currently, my best RN CL is Edinburgh.  Neptune is close, but very challenging to play.  However, Neptune is great preparation for Minotaur.

I enjoyed the entire line as I was working my way up.  I was grinding everything at once, but I decided I would focus on this line for my first Tier 10.  I have no complaints.  (The buff to the smoke activation fixed the biggest issue.)

This line has been fun for me from the beginning.  I agree with you on the Black Swan.  The Pan Asian Chengan is my best Tier 1, but that is clearly related to it being the last one I played, and that after nearly a year of playing.

I will make a point of playing Emerald this weekend as a tribute to that being the ship I was grinding a year ago as much as anything.

My quibble is Danae.  I found that ship a step from Caledon and Emerald is a step up from there.  As in all things, YMMV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,895
[ARGSY]
Members
15,765 posts
10,628 battles

@AdmiralThunder 

I found the Danae a better ship than the Caledon. More guns, more torpedoes, heal and hydro, and Tier IV matchmaking seemed to treat me better. I kept her long after I ought to have got rid of her, for that reason alone, and having her to swap to in between Emerald sinkings made winning the Vampire somewhat easier. I actually played the last game I needed to score the Vampire in her.

I did not at the time find the Emerald any better when I changed up to that ship, and the Tier V matchmaking was a brutal shock. But that was then and this is now.

Mine has gone now, at last; I have Tier V to VIII British cruisers to cycle through if I need to grind for some task or other, plus quite a few other Tier IV to VI ships in various categories, and she has become superfluous to requirement.

I am tempted to concur on Fiji - certainly for the effort one has to put into getting her, compared to the extra grind to get Minotaur, she is immensely flexible and powerful, and I really can't see what else I gained when I moved up to the Edinburgh. I really ought to take the Edinburgh out with radar to see what the fuss is about, but first I need a few games in the Fiji with the spotting a/c or catapult fighter mounted in order to get re-acclimatised to not having smoke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
336
[CZS]
Members
842 posts
8,005 battles

I really don't get why people like the Neptune.  It seems to be to be a straight up downgrade from the Edinburgh.

Sure, you get lots more torps. And a non-trivial ROF bump.

But you have to trade three of your biggest advantages to get them:

  1. Concealment
  2. Maneuverability
  3. Size

The Neptune turns like a brick, because it's ludicrously huge.  Bad turning circle, bad rudder shift, and can't dodge incoming shells well at all. Speaking of which, it's almost 150%  the size of the Edinburgh, and since it has NO armor, it's far, far, far easier to get hit in.

The Concealment is terrible.  Nearly the worst of any T9 CA, and easily 2km+ worse than the Edinburgh.  The smoke firing detection is awful, too. And you can't stealth torp, while the Edinburgh can.

Basically, you're reduced to hiding behind islands, because the minute you're spotted (and you get spotted quite easily), you're dead meat, since everything citadels you from any direction, and you drive like a Mac truck.  You can't hide well in your smoke, since the DDs have no problem sneaking inside the 6.2km detection range, which is FAR outside your hydro.

I can't in any way see this as an improvement over the Edinburgh. 


Oh, and the one thing you do get from the Fiji->Edinburgh is the superheal. Edinburgh's heal is FAR better than the Fiji's.  It's a little bit less maneuverable than the Fiji, but I didn't find that anywhere near consequential, whereas the Edinburgh->Neptune change is radical.  Oh, and the Edinburgh can stealth torp, unlike the Fiji.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
24 posts
2,237 battles
On 2/20/2018 at 1:25 PM, abyssofthetriffid said:

The emrald is an amazing ship as is.

Low tier cruisers need no buffs.

Buy cambletown.

Fiji is garbage mind.

Leander is awesome.

I have to agree.  HMS Emerald is at the top of my list.  What no HE ammo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×