Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Cit_the_bed

Hermes shows how weak the Indianapolis is right now.

37 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

296
[ARP3]
Members
420 posts
10,517 battles

The indy really need some attention. The AA is meh, so even with DFAA it's still pitiful. The radar is so short you get only two salvos within the time limit.

Shells are super slow and the AP when uptiered is super situational, you need that perfect superstructure hit or else it's a 1.9k shatter. Rudder shift is slow, so

you can't dodge shells well either.

 

You can rack up 130K+ dmg with almost no effort in other ships, with the Indy, half of the time the targeted ship is dead before your shells even arrive.

If Indy could slot fighter or spotter in addition to the short radar, it wouldn't be so bad. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Cit_the_bed
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
519 posts
3,437 battles

It's a premium and doesn't need to add to the power creep more than we already have..

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 4
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
835 posts
4,633 battles

I agree that the AP is only powerful against broadside targets, and when facing ship bows it shatters very often. It doesn't have particular strengths in AA, agility, speed, armour or rate of fire, and the HE is abysmal. However, the shots are not that slow, it's comparable to other USN cruisers. It's not slower than everyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
56 posts
6,996 battles
14 hours ago, khorender_1 said:

It's a premium and doesn't need to add to the power creep more than we already have..

That's the wrong premise. It needs to stay balanced against the newer gimmick ships. 

WG has power creeped the USN cruisers to the point that they struggle to compete. 

You know what? The USN was the best Navy afloat in 1945. It put many of the world's best light and heavy cruiser designs to sea and their in-game representations should at least be balanced. 

  • Cool 3
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
519 posts
3,437 battles
3 hours ago, mkcp40 said:

You know what? The USN was the best Navy afloat in 1945. It put many of the world's best light and heavy cruiser designs to sea and their in-game representations should at least be balanced. 

It's an arcade game man I hate " my history" arguments and you think buffing a premium is a good thing ? if you don't think power creep is a problem then how do you ever get BALANCE ?

  • Bad 3
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
149
[S0L0]
Beta Testers
501 posts
3,672 battles

Common knowledge that Indy could use a buff to ROF but Hermès has nothing to do with that.  Almost every Operation so far has screamed for CLs.  I don’t know why anyone would bring a 8in cruiser into one unless they had no other choice

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
56 posts
6,996 battles
5 hours ago, khorender_1 said:

It's an arcade game man I hate " my history" arguments and you think buffing a premium is a good thing ? if you don't think power creep is a problem then how do you ever get BALANCE ?

If it was strictly an arcade game, then there would be no point in making the ships look real.

You're misunderstanding. I think power creep is a problem. Look, every time something new comes out they add a gimmick. Germans got the same AA that was supposed to be American-centric on top of good armor. The French got ludicrous speed. The Brits have smoke, which I would argue is the worst thing for good gameplay.  

There was evidently recognition that American cruisers needed a fix. They reduced Pensacola's crazy spotting range and buffed NO and Baltimore ROFs into something competitive. 

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
519 posts
3,437 battles
59 minutes ago, mkcp40 said:

If it was strictly an arcade game, then there would be no point in making the ships look real.

You're misunderstanding. I think power creep is a problem. Look, every time something new comes out they add a gimmick. Germans got the same AA that was supposed to be American-centric on top of good armor. The French got ludicrous speed. The Brits have smoke, which I would argue is the worst thing for good gameplay.  

There was evidently recognition that American cruisers needed a fix. They reduced Pensacola's crazy spotting range and buffed NO and Baltimore ROFs into something competitive. 

Yet it's still an arcade game, radar through terrain , shooting over islands, if they want to buff Indy fine, I just don't believe in buffing a Premium that's been out awhile..

  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32
[-OF-]
Members
58 posts
3,151 battles

If it's an arcade game, then there really should be no qualms over balancing regardless of what nation type premium or not. The American cruisers are fairly obsolete and boring compared to everything else. Their guns are "situational", they dont have torps, Their AA, which was once their specialty and what balanced them is no longer that special, and with so few CVs even relevant. The Indy is pretty much just a slightly better pensicola in my opinion, and the pensicola is crap at tier 7. So much so they're bumping it down a tier. The Indianapolis that should happen to the Indy as well, or buff it a bit.
Power creep is an issue in many games but an easy solution to it is just to buff whatever has been creeped, regardless of what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KNTAI]
Members
173 posts
4,932 battles

If the Indy had better armor and a faster reload, it would be slightly more viable. It just has no chances in the event it's ever uptiered. It's basically a Pensacola with radar and better AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,551 posts
8,274 battles
On 3/4/2018 at 6:07 AM, Cruiser_ChoukaiKaiNi said:

If the Indy had better armor and a faster reload, it would be slightly more viable. It just has no chances in the event it's ever uptiered. It's basically a Pensacola with radar and better AA.

Hey

I completely agree, the radar gimmick is no offset for the really garbage armour and the very slow reload (for the number of guns you have) hurts it even against other cruiser.  I had a fight yesterday with a smoke up edinburgh, popped radar, got him moving, even a citadel but couldn't kill him because of an island.  He came around the island while I was engaged with a BB and he killed me.  Had I had a faster reload of about 10-12 seconds, I probably could have killed him with AP.  I also hate the fact it has less HP than a Pensacola and it needs SE and still falls short of Pensacola.  It needs love for sure.

 

Pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
327 posts
9,525 battles

I had a blast playing the Indianapolis in Hermes, got 5 stars and a pile of kills/damage

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
183 posts

Glad someone else has noticed this. I take my Atlanta in and have no problem shredding planes, and wrecking face with over 120k damage in each match, also using the Atlanta's Radar to help keep enemy DDs spotted when they shift in and out during the thunderstorm front. I try doing that in my Indy and I struggle to break even 90k due to reload issues, shell travel time, and the Radar doesn't give me more than MAYBE 3 salvos if i fire almost the moment it's activated. About the only thing she did partially good was AA defense, but that's only because i'm using my NOLA captain who has both BFT and AFT. Which when I put him in my Atlanta, the Lolanta absolutely shreds enemy aircraft from further out than the Indy can. And out of all the Hermes missions i've done, the only one I've died in was with my Indy. My Lolanta has come close once or twice, but has never died. Mostly due to her superior AA, vastly superior firepower, and much better agility.

The Indy has been powercreeped to high heaven. If she was given the Baltimore's reload buff from 15sec down to 12, that would go soooooo far in helping her along. They could literally leave the rest of it alone. Just a reload buff would be good. They could even leave the armor and AA alone. But the reload speed is terrible.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,071
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,193 posts
11,707 battles
On 3/3/2018 at 1:54 PM, khorender_1 said:

It's an arcade game man I hate " my history" arguments and you think buffing a premium is a good thing ? if you don't think power creep is a problem then how do you ever get BALANCE ?

Buffing Indy is not going to lead to power creep.  It may make it competitive, but won't lead to power creep.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
294 posts
3,783 battles
On 3/3/2018 at 10:14 AM, mkcp40 said:

That's the wrong premise. It needs to stay balanced against the newer gimmick ships. 

WG has power creeped the USN cruisers to the point that they struggle to compete. 

You know what? The USN was the best Navy afloat in 1945. It put many of the world's best light and heavy cruiser designs to sea and their in-game representations should at least be balanced. 

As another poster pointed out, this game isn't intended to be 100% historically accurate ... simply accurate enough to make the game enjoyable and CHALLENGING.  Bear in mind, USS Indianapolis was a Treaty Cruiser and during the war she and her sisters faced ships designed with BETTER weapons and heavier armor.  Even with all of the wartime refits, refinements and upgrades all of the USN treaty heavy cruisers were at a decided disadvantage against heavy cruisers with 20% to 50% greater displacement.

Agree, the USN built and commissioned some of the best cruisers in the world AFTER the end of the Washington Naval Treaty, but while the RN and USN tried to adhere to treaty restrictions both the Germans and Japanese frankly cheated, "fudging" and simply misreporting the actual statistics of ships built during those years by up to 20%.  The Deutschland and Hipper classes are prime examples, reported as heavy cruisers displacing 10k tons of water but actually displacing much more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,481
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,865 posts
7,179 battles
On 03/03/2018 at 12:58 AM, Cit_the_bed said:

The indy really need some attention. The AA is meh, so even with DFAA it's still pitiful. The radar is so short you get only two salvos within the time limit.

Shells are super slow and the AP when uptiered is super situational, you need that perfect superstructure hit or else it's a 1.9k shatter. Rudder shift is slow, so

you can't dodge shells well either.

 

You can rack up 130K+ dmg with almost no effort in other ships, with the Indy, half of the time the targeted ship is dead before your shells even arrive.

If Indy could slot fighter or spotter in addition to the short radar, it wouldn't be so bad. 

 

 

 

 

Show us your Indy upgrade slots and your captain specs. I have run hermés with a full AA build, and have had no issues, either in blapping planes or dds. Agreed, it isn't the best ship for wracking up dmg counts, which relies on dmg dealt to the battleships in the scenario, but it is very capable at sinking dds and cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,071
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,193 posts
11,707 battles

The problem with Indy's AA is that the long-range AA aura, the 5"/25's are pretty bad.  Once planes get to the inner-aura, she's good to go, but other ships with better heavy AA batteries tend to do better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,249
[WOLF3]
Members
6,490 posts
2,439 battles
On 3/2/2018 at 5:58 PM, Cit_the_bed said:

You can rack up 130K+ dmg with almost no effort in other ships, with the Indy, half of the time the targeted ship is dead before your shells even arrive.

If Indy could slot fighter or spotter in addition to the short radar, it wouldn't be so bad.

I get the same thing in Hermes.  When I solo I do *much* more damage.  You and I need to stop playing on such good teams.  :)

But hey, at least you got radar.

 

On 3/3/2018 at 1:55 PM, missile742 said:

 Almost every Operation so far has screamed for CLs.  I don’t know why anyone would bring a 8in cruiser into one unless they had no other choice

Literally don't have another choice (with Hermes). 

But I'm intrigued by this observation.  Why not a CA?  Rate of fire?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
149
[S0L0]
Beta Testers
501 posts
3,672 battles
3 hours ago, iDuckman said:

Literally don't have another choice (with Hermes). 

But I'm intrigued by this observation.  Why not a CA?  Rate of fire?

 

 

Yes ROF mostly....Large number of targets plus plethora of DDs in most OPs.   I rarely saw anything but Cleve, Atlanta or Brit CLs in the OPs I played.  Rather my team go all CLs over any other class

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,071
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,193 posts
11,707 battles
13 hours ago, iDuckman said:

I get the same thing in Hermes.  When I solo I do *much* more damage.  You and I need to stop playing on such good teams.  :)

But hey, at least you got radar.

 

Literally don't have another choice (with Hermes). 

But I'm intrigued by this observation.  Why not a CA?  Rate of fire?

 

 

8-inch cruisers are /good/ for very little except killing other cruisers.  6-inch cruisers are more versatile; they are adept at killing everything.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
339
[RKN]
Beta Testers
1,017 posts
9,102 battles

Indy and Pensacola are at their best when they are kept at range. Their shell flight times are comparable to Jap 8” shells. Between 10-15 km they have a decisive advantage over Fiji or Atlanta because their guns have better ballistics than those CLs. Most ops have a lot of close range combat where Atlanta's and Fiji’s ballistic inferiority doesn’t affect their hit percentage and they can take advantage of their superior DPM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
348
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
4,796 battles
On 3/3/2018 at 9:14 AM, mkcp40 said:

That's the wrong premise. It needs to stay balanced against the newer gimmick ships. 

WG has power creeped the USN cruisers to the point that they struggle to compete. 

You know what? The USN was the best Navy afloat in 1945. It put many of the world's best light and heavy cruiser designs to sea and their in-game representations should at least be balanced. 

That is entirely debatable. First USN cruisers suffered heavily from treaty limitations. German and Japanese cruisers were arguably much better as both countries cheated on their treaty designs and their ship were heavier than allowed. The UK and French cruisers were weak because they needed more of them than other countries and their cruiser doctrines revolved around far reaching commerce protection not fighting other warships that was a job for battleships and destroyers. The USN for its part actually honored the treaty limits in fact the Northampton class was so far under tonnage they ended up modifying some of them into the New Orlean class because they had realized they could give them much better protection and still come under the treaty limit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
56 posts
6,996 battles
6 hours ago, GreyFox78659 said:

That is entirely debatable. First USN cruisers suffered heavily from treaty limitations. German and Japanese cruisers were arguably much better as both countries cheated on their treaty designs and their ship were heavier than allowed. The UK and French cruisers were weak because they needed more of them than other countries and their cruiser doctrines revolved around far reaching commerce protection not fighting other warships that was a job for battleships and destroyers. The USN for its part actually honored the treaty limits in fact the Northampton class was so far under tonnage they ended up modifying some of them into the New Orlean class because they had realized they could give them much better protection and still come under the treaty limit.

 

Sure, everything is debatable. Mogami, for example, blatantly violated the treaties yet it still suffered from bursting welds due to the fragility of the ship. The Japanese heavy cruisers were top heavy and hits to the torpedo battery could be catastrophic (Chokai). 

You are correct in pointing out that the early US ships suffered due to actually honoring the treaty. American cruisers  started off with inferior size, protection, and throw weight. The lack of a torpedo battery proved to be a handicap when they had to fight on Japanese terms. The Baltimore-class, however, ended up being almost equal in displacement to the Hipper and Takao-class ships. She possessed an excellent main battery firing ammunition superior to that in Axis service, guided by the finest fire control in the world. She also packed a superior dual purpose secondary battery. I've read that some historians consider this class of 14 to be the best heavy cruisers of WWII.  

The Brooklyns could deliver a volume of fire that stunned the Japanese. They were also quite sturdy: Savannah took a 3000lb guided bomb that blew through her keel and she still managed to limp to Malta on her own power. 

The Des Moines class delivered the 8-inch equivalent. While too late for the war, did actually go to sea unlike most of the other high-tier cruisers in game. 

I'm comfortable with the current iterations of Pensacola and New Orleans but I do think some of the US ships haven't been given their due. Cleveland got nerfed because BB players threw a fit. Des Moines is fragile and short ranged. Meanwhile, the unbuilt ships like Hindenburg and Zao sport ludicrous muzzle velocities, strong AA stats, and torpedoes. 

Note that I left out Baltimore. Ironically, I do better with her than with the Des Moines. The reduced citadel vulnerability and better concealment make a huge difference for me and I find that the AP is highly lethal to cruisers and BBs alike. 

Edited by mkcp40
More thoughts
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
56 posts
6,996 battles
33 minutes ago, GreyFox78659 said:

Baltimore wasn’t a treaty cruiser

Nowhere did I state that it was. You seemed to be taking issue with my statement that the world's best Navy put some of the best ships to sea. By 1945, it possessed the best heavy and light cruisers in the world. I acknowledged that the Treaty Cruisers suffered. However, WG isn't content with just having the Treaty Cruisers as inferior. They make the hardest hitting heavy cruiser ever put to sea considerably weaker than her in-game counterparts. 

Let's examine Indianapolis specifically. The real ship did suffer from design limitations, but not to the point that she should suffer so heavily in the game. Portland-class CAs had 3.25-5 inch belt armor, whereas Myoko had 3.9 inch. Yet Indianapolis seems to be much squishier. Both could carry aircraft, but Indianapolis doesn't get any. 

She did have superior radar and AA fire control, but that doesn't really show in game, does it? The in-game radar consumable is myopic and doesn't last nearly long enough to do much. The AA gimmick has long since spread to other nations when it was supposed to be the American "flavor." 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×