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

T8 Cleveland Revealed

177 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

533
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,071 posts
1,501 battles

 

 

No idea how to do the fancy in post link.

 

TLDR: It's worse than the current top hull cleveland, and it's 2 tiers higher. I'm sure we'll see the IRL reload on the top hull, but honestly, totally not worth it given every other stat. In fact it's just the T6 cleveland copied up now i double check stuff. Yeah. That is not going to work.

 

Also how the [edited] do you make a facebook link embed? (found it, it's tricky).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,077
[SPTR]
Members
26,753 posts
13,512 battles

Hopefully that's the T8 Cleveland in stock configuration and has gun and hull upgrade modules to do something about it's dog's breakfast stats 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
126
[RNF]
Beta Testers
419 posts
6,350 battles

Those numbers defo look like stock.. 13.3km range and 30k health?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,984
[O_O]
Members
5,325 posts
12,239 battles

I absolutely love my current Clevelend.  I really, truly hope there is still a ship that plays exactly the same after the split.  I rely on Cleveland heavily for several missions:

  • get X number of fires - Cleveland's fire chance, number of guns and ROF make her a fire hose.
  • get X number of main gun hits - again, number of guns and ROF means x200 hits in a game isn't hard to get.
  • shoot down X number of planes - spec'd for AA with DefAA consumable, only foolish CV captains fly near a Cleveland.  If they do, 20 plane kills is easy.
  • sink X number of destroyers - stay near caps, battleships, or carriers and let the DD's come to you.  Then mop them up.  This tactic made the infamous "sink DD's" task of the ARP Myoko mission much less frustrating.

The current Cleveland is very, very good at several things.  She is the shining star of the current US cruiser line (haven't tried Des Moines, yet).  I don't care what name it has, but I really want this ship to stay in the game.  She is my most played cruiser with 205 battles, and second most played ship overall.  Since I don't like anyone messing with something I really like, I want it to stay at T6, as well.  So, basically, keep my current T6 Cleveland, just give her another name.

Edited by desmo_2
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,046
[PVE]
Members
9,314 posts
16,538 battles

Ugh :Smile_sceptic:

I sure as heck hope it has a couple hull upgrades and gun upgrades cause that just looks AWFUL for a T8.

From what I have seen so far all they are doing is changing the tiers and consumables/upgrade modules overall with maybe a slight HP change here or there. That helps the CA's but man is Cleveland going to be BAD at T8 unless they do a lot of buffs.

Edited by AdmiralThunder
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,977
[HYDRO]
Members
3,560 posts
5,062 battles

Inb4 thats our punishment for getting a free T8 ship, getting a crappy one. On a more serious note,  New Orleans stock has 30500 HP and Charles Martel 30800, so those are almost certainly stock stats. I think we are just being toyed with. :Smile_child:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,509
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
9,066 posts

The stats are within a smidgen of a stock Cleveland but for the addition of a radar choice. The Cleveland is a fine ship at tier VI and can hold its own versus tier VIII ships. However, put it up against tier X ships as specified here and it will be the poorest light cruiser in the game at its tier. Perhaps this is Wargaming's intent. The USN cruiser line, with the exception of three ships (Cleveland included) is already mediocre. The USN CV line was mediocre and now, unless you purchase premiums or advance to tier IX, is even worse, unless you purchase the Saipan. Maybe WG is going to positionally nerf the Cleveland then offer a premium replacement for sale.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,977
[HYDRO]
Members
3,560 posts
5,062 battles
25 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

The stats are within a smidgen of a stock Cleveland but for the addition of a radar choice. The Cleveland is a fine ship at tier VI and can hold its own versus tier VIII ships. However, put it up against tier X ships as specified here and it will be the poorest light cruiser in the game at its tier. Perhaps this is Wargaming's intent. The USN cruiser line, with the exception of three ships (Cleveland included) is already mediocre. The USN CV line was mediocre and now, unless you purchase premiums or advance to tier IX, is even worse, unless you purchase the Saipan. Maybe WG is going to positionally nerf the Cleveland then offer a premium replacement for sale.

Personally I believe it will all depend on what the bonus rof will be for the upgraded hull. I would like it to be around 10 rof. You would not have the Soviet railguns or the Mogamis 155mm strikes, but at situations within 11-12km you would be king, provided you abuse cover. I feel this could be an interesting spot for the Cleveland to land in, but we will see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
533
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,071 posts
1,501 battles

Right now it definitely looks like they're just re-tiering with module and consumable changes only.

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

Okay, I know that's the stock hull in all, but tier 8 Cruiser with 16mm hull plating.

U WUT M8!!!??

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
533
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,071 posts
1,501 battles
1 minute ago, Azumazi said:

Okay, I know that's the stock hull in all, but tier 8 Cruiser with 16mm hull plating.

U WUT M8!!!??

 

Light cruiser. Edinburgh is the same.

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
1 minute ago, Carl said:

 

Light cruiser. Edinburgh is the same.

Edinburgh also gets Smoke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
533
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,071 posts
1,501 battles
Just now, Azumazi said:

Edinburgh also gets Smoke

 

Shrug, they seem to be setting the standard that CL#s have the lighter plating, i wouldn't completely surprised to see the re-jig the VMF cruisers someday and downrate the Chapayev and the like.

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
Just now, Carl said:

 

Shrug, they seem to be setting the standard that CL#s have the lighter plating, i wouldn't completely surprised to see the re-jig the VMF cruisers someday and downrate the Chapayev and the like.

I personally would rather they up the hull plating. The RN Cruisers can get away with it a bit due to the smoke and meta. The US and Russian cruisers are open water fighters excluding Kutuzov.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
533
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,071 posts
1,501 battles
5 minutes ago, Azumazi said:

I personally would rather they up the hull plating. The RN Cruisers can get away with it a bit due to the smoke and meta. The US and Russian cruisers are open water fighters excluding Kutuzov.

 

Bear in mind atlanta has the same RN stye plating and has ahd for a long time.

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
1 minute ago, Carl said:

 

Bear in mind atlanta has the same RN stye plating and has ahd for a long time.

Yeah, but Atlanta has always been sort of the Odd-ball/Red-headed step-child haha

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
533
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,071 posts
1,501 battles
Just now, Azumazi said:

Yeah, but Atlanta has always been sort of the Odd-ball/Red-headed step-child haha

 

True enough to be fair, but i think it makes the point they seem to have clear idea of CL= lower extremity armour.

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
1 minute ago, Carl said:

 

True enough to be fair, but i think it makes the point they seem to have clear idea of CL= lower extremity armour.

I mean, I sort of get why it was done with Atlanta. Atlanta is literally a Destroyer Hunter in everyway with it's rapid fire guns. The lower extremity armor makes it easier for DD's at lower tiers with say, 105mm and 120mm guns to effectively use HE against it without IFHE; however, at tier 8 it seems like a kick in the groin. The RN CL's it feels like a balance for their smoke to be extremely open to HE fire. So I hope during testing most of the supertesters all agree it needs to at least be enough to shrug off non-IFHE 127mm in certain areas.

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
1 minute ago, Jazzyblaster said:

Hi everyone, thanks for providing your feedback, it's greatly appreciated. 

Not a problem Jazzy :cap_cool:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,878
[HINON]
Modder, Privateers
6,796 posts
4,616 battles
20 minutes ago, Carl said:

 

Light cruiser. Edinburgh is the same.

But not Chappy and Kutuzov, which are also light cruisers. This is odd to me, and I need to see the ship in person before I start passing judgment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
3,666 posts
7,467 battles
1 hour ago, Carl said:

 

 

No idea how to do the fancy in post link.

 

TLDR: It's worse than the current top hull cleveland, and it's 2 tiers higher. I'm sure we'll see the IRL reload on the top hull, but honestly, totally not worth it given every other stat. In fact it's just the T6 cleveland copied up now i double check stuff. Yeah. That is not going to work.

 

Also how the [edited] do you make a facebook link embed? (found it, it's tricky).

It is far too early to jump to conclusions, remember the community has long felt that the Beta test Cleavland should have been tier VIII, Wargaming is probably fiddling with that idea using the current stock Cleavland as a base since the old Cleavland was an absolute monster. I would not be surprised if there are major changes during testing, so I'm taking the "Wait and See" approach to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×