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

Line Split..Your first impressions?

39 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

540
[WOLF9]
Members
3,700 posts

  Currently, Baltimore is my favorite cruiser to play, with Pepsi  right along behind it.

 I'm cautiously optimistic on Pensacola- after all it isn't going to be seeing any ships it doesn't already see, it's just not going to have to deal with tier 9's.  Thus it probably won't need to be nerfed much.   Don't forget, the other tier 6 CA  gets torpedoes and is far tankier- plus it gets IJN HE.   Pepsi will have more barrels, better maneuverability, and no torpedoes.  - And the two regularly fight each other already. (as does every other ship it will see)

  Balti stands to lose a ton.   The heal, the extra tier 9 upgrade, and probably some Rof.   It'll just be a somewhat better armored New Orleans, with better AA (possibly) and secondaries.

THAT, I'm absolutely NOT looking forward to.

  New Orleans, I'm ambivalent about.  The loss of radar will take away much of it's character and utility, but the tier 7 matchmaking is a sweet spot, and kinder than the current tier 8 mm.  It all depends on how (badly) much they nerf it.    It actually did pretty well in this past tier 8 season of Ranked.

  I don't know what to think about the CL line.   High tier CL's are VERY squishy- esp to French BB's with their small (for a BB) caliber guns.  (and that's without considering everyone's favorite Clubber of CL's: Scharnhorst- which haunts every cruiser from tier 5 to tier 9)  Without the gimmicks of the other CL lines, I don't see them having much survivability.

  On the other hand, a dedicated USN CL line- with HE AND the CL RoF,  will be an obnoxious monster to deal with for any ship that catches fire easily, not to mention great DD killers.  Plus it's a US CL line- of course I will try it!    CV players will of course hate them with an undying passion, lol.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
115
[C-1]
[C-1]
Members
437 posts
7,510 battles

Considering the Cleveland was shown so much distain from MM as to constantly be placed into high-tier matches long ago (you know, before they made permanent tiers groups for MM), I don't think it will be that bad off. A few (<as in give that damn thing some range please) buff's to the range of it's guns, and better concealment; it will likely not lose its place as a permanent ship in my harbor. But I also expect it's health pool or armor to get a boost. Without it, it will be a floating powder keg waiting to go off from a stray round. Almost have a slight vision of it being similar to a Atlanta minus the torpedoes. Rapid fire, flame throwers and able to disappear but not designed to go running up to a BB.

 

Don't have it in my harbor anymore but the Pensacola will probably do well in a lower tier. Simply put, it's not really losing much and if kept the way it is, it would still be a glass cannon... albeit a far stronger cannon compared to the other ships of the tier. Probably have a better chance of survivability too.

 

The New Orleans too would not do too bad. I will woefully miss the concealment and nerfing the armor would almost be mandatory as the frontal armor of that ship has bounced battleship rounds at point blank range before. But as long as it keep the radar, it will still be a threat. If they nerf it too bad though, it will not hold up to any high-tier matches. A nerfed tier 7 New Orleans would stand zero chance against any straight tier 9. Poor thing barely holds out against tier 9's as it is already.

 

Baltimore... not sure. I've got it, but have yet to play much in it or upgraded anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
924
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,075 posts
4,926 battles

Honestly I have one real thought nagging at me with the Pensacola getting demoted: Will it get a little nerf if any and that'll be the end of it, or will it get a larger nerf BUT get the torps it historically mounted as compensation? If the latter option is chosen, might they be something like an A hull only thing since they were removed in 1941, similar to the difference between the Nurnberg B and C hull?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,935
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
8,146 posts
14,252 battles
On 3/5/2018 at 10:18 AM, AVR_Project said:

I have enough doubloons in my account to return the captains to where they belong, after they are randomly tossed all over the new ship tree.

Put any Captain(s) you don't want reassigned into the reserves the night before the patch and assign a no cost 0 point Capt to the ship(s). This "should" in theory have the 0 point Capt get reassigned and the Capt in the reserves maintain it's assignment to the ship you want it on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,492
[GWG]
[GWG]
Members
5,992 posts
1 hour ago, AdmiralThunder said:

Put any Captain(s) you don't want reassigned into the reserves the night before the patch and assign a no cost 0 point Capt to the ship(s). This "should" in theory have the 0 point Capt get reassigned and the Capt in the reserves maintain it's assignment to the ship you want it on.

When they did the IJN DD Split, they assigned a 12 point captain to a ship I didn't even have (Mutsuki) and put a new 6 point captain where that captain belonged (Minekaze)

And for the Russian split, the Ognevoi captain went to the Gnevny and the Kiev captain went onto the Minsk (useless buckets I sold right away).  I needed the captains at the top tier ships, but noooooo.....

And those ships that went to tier 8 came out STOCK..  and at tier 8, the grind for hulls and modules is a very lengthy process.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
519
[CVA16]
Members
3,148 posts
11,000 battles

I assume at the very least WG will allow a free respec for US cruiser captains. A Cleveland capt with IFHE won't be much good on a Pepsi. Hiding him is probably the better option.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5 posts
3,698 battles

I'm fine with every thing except the T9 Buffalo. That thing isn't a USN Cruiser, instead its another WG original with four triple turrets arranged in a ABXY configuration and Torpedoes. They could have easily added the Oregon City class at T9 instead or buffed the Baltimore and added the Wichita at T8. Instead they decided to just be lazy and add a carbon copy of the Zao or Hindendurg, and completely ignore the entire design history of the USN when designing their new top tire USN Cruiser.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
96
[DOG]
Members
567 posts
7,178 battles

What I'm wondering is if there are plans to do something similar with other navies.  It would require more paper ships, except for maybe the British.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,329
[NGAGE]
Supertester
2,088 posts
11,598 battles
19 minutes ago, midorigreen said:

I'm fine with every thing except the T9 Buffalo. That thing isn't a USN Cruiser, instead its another WG original with four triple turrets arranged in a ABXY configuration and Torpedoes. They could have easily added the Oregon City class at T9 instead or buffed the Baltimore and added the Wichita at T8. Instead they decided to just be lazy and add a carbon copy of the Zao or Hindendurg, and completely ignore the entire design history of the USN when designing their new top tire USN Cruiser.

 

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,935
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
8,146 posts
14,252 battles
2 hours ago, midorigreen said:

I'm fine with every thing except the T9 Buffalo. That thing isn't a USN Cruiser, instead its another WG original with four triple turrets arranged in a ABXY configuration and Torpedoes. They could have easily added the Oregon City class at T9 instead or buffed the Baltimore and added the Wichita at T8. Instead they decided to just be lazy and add a carbon copy of the Zao or Hindendurg, and completely ignore the entire design history of the USN when designing their new top tire USN Cruiser.

 

If you look at the photos on the Dev blog you will see they removed the torps. Personally I wish they had kept them. I think the US Cruisers T6+ suffer greatly without them "in game". IRL the US Cruisers in these classes didn't have torps so I get it but lots of fantasy in game. Was looking forward to Buffalo with torps.

There was a USS Buffalo (CL-99) planned for the Cleveland class but it was converted to the USS Bataan Light Carrier (CVL-29). They were going to do another USS Buffalo (CL-110) in the Fargo class that replaced the Cleveland's but only the hull was laid down before it was cancelled and eventually scrapped.

So the Buffalo at least existed sort of. The only thing is, both of the WW2 planned ones were Light Cruisers with 152MM's not Heavy cruisers with 203MM's like it is being put in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,638
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,380 posts
12,733 battles
On 3/5/2018 at 10:30 AM, andarragh21 said:

Huh. Hadn't seen that anywhere (in fact, I saw people complaining it SHOULD have torpedos based on the original design). If they gave it torps, it would be a very interesting ship for the USN.

The real design (CA-B) did /not/ have torpedoes.  The original ship as created by WG /did/ have torpedoes, and they were removed because torpedoes is not consistent with USN design doctrine.  The original ship was an old Alpha test ship, and that's why it had torpedoes.  They do not fit on a USN cruiser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[PVE]
Members
339 posts

Wouldn't the Brooklyn make more sense at tier VI ? anyway, I hope the Dallas is very "Cleveland like" as that ship rips up Operations .... I miss it already 

1200px-USS_Phoenix_(CL-46)_at_anchor,_circa_in_1939_(NH_68326).jpg

Edited by commando_brian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
96
[DOG]
Members
567 posts
7,178 battles

Yeah, the Brooklyns were real ships that actually saw some action.  They could put so many RPM downrange the Japanese initially thought their main guns were actually some sort of high caliber machine gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,638
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,380 posts
12,733 battles

Brooklyn is far too powerful for T6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×