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

ST Seattle initial stats

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,718
[PVE]
Members
14,935 posts
9,477 battles

I got this from Tracks-up.com. Anyone know how reliable they are? I think the DP AA is 4x3, I believe and is a typo below. How good is this AA at high tier?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tier IX American cruiser Seattle show up on the World of Warships Supertest.

All stats are listed without crew and upgrade modifiers but with best available modules. The stats are subject to change during the testing.

Statistics are as follows:
 
Survivability:
Hit points – 43600
Plating - 25 mm
Armor belt – 102 mm
Torpedo damage reduction – 4%

Firepower:
Main battery - 4х3 152 mm
Firing range – 14.7 km
Maximum HE shell damage – 2200 (Chance to cause fire – 12%.) 
Maximum AP shell damage - 3200
Reload time - 7 s
180 degree turn time - 22.5 s
Maximum dispersion - 134 m
HE initial velocity - 812 m/s
AP initial velocity - 762 m/s
Sigma value – 2.0.


AA defense:
24x1 20 mm, range - 2.0 km, damage per second - 86
12x4 40 mm, range - 3.5 km, damage per second - 191
4x2 152 mm, range - 6.0 km, damage per second - 52


Maneuverability: 
Maximum speed - 33 kt
Turning circle radius - 750 m
Rudder shift time – 11.4 s

Detectability:
Surface detectability – 12.2 km
Air detectability – 8.8 km
Detectability after firing main guns in smoke – 5.9 km.


Available consumables:
Slot 1 - Damage Control Party

Slot 2 - Hydroacoustic Search/Surveillance Radar Data
Slot 3 - Defensive AA Fire
Slot 4 - Repair Party
 
 
EDIT2: Here is the FB Dev Blog link and it has the same AA error 
Edited by Kizarvexis
added link where I found it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,011 posts
4,356 battles

lol, if those are the stats, they either have to tweak them quite a bit or the ship is holding onto some surprise, because those are lackluster to say the least.

Edited by BattlecruiserOperational

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,129
[TBW]
Members
7,438 posts
13,600 battles

When released, see what it really is, we will.

untitled.png.2d0b325c238051f2360753dbafe4d055.png

Edited by Sovereigndawg
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,129
[TBW]
Members
7,438 posts
13,600 battles
15 minutes ago, AviationBattleship_Hyuga said:

I think it's sad to see a truly cool city and name like Seattle tacked onto this fake thing.  

There used to be a show you know?

The theme Song.

Edited by Sovereigndawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,665
[DAKI]
Privateers, Members
8,252 posts
7,214 battles

AA of the T9 Cruisers:

Donskoi: 117dps @ 5km (585)

Baltimore: 91dps @ 5km (455)

Roon: 100dps @ 4.5km (450)

Ibuki: 83dps @ 5km (415)

Saint Louis: 103dps @ 5km (515)

Neptune: 106dps @ 5km & 86dps @ 6km (1046)

Multiplying the range with the dps, you can get those numbers that I have in the brackets and use them to compare the AA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,235
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,995 posts
9,304 battles

Doubt they are real, though, even if AA is lower than Baltimore it has a slightly greater rage. You figure typical USN AA build at tier 9 (where it should have 5 or 6 modernization's I'm pretty sure)

20% DPS from BFT

25% from the mod

Range mod and aft

possibly 10% from the flag

2x damage on the 152 mm guns for a selected target

30% DPS boost against a focus target in general

 

That's 202.8 damage without the flag or using your DF AA at 8.6 km. Once in 40 mm range, add another 372 damage add about 5 km. Taiho's TB's max out at 2354/2355 with all the HP you can add, and are the highest HP planes in the tier. So at 8 km with the typical AA build sans flag your looking at 202/2355 at the worst case scenario 8.5% chance every second you down a plane at 8 km, 24% at about 5 km. But, you have the magic "destroy all planes button" that makes it 3x damage for cruisers. meaning 606 at 8 km and add 1116 at about 5 km. meaning, at 8.6 km you have a 25.7% chance to down a plane every second/tick/whatever, 73% at about 5 km. 

 

Might be a case if the AA is accurate stats wise they are changing it up that the light cruisers have slightly lower AA DPS, but greater range to make up for it, while the heavier cruisers have a bit more DPS but a shorter range. Keeps the flavour of AA, even if USN has fallen behind in those tiers (I know at top tiers I'm actually more afraid of UK cruisers and BB's than USN because they have all their DPS really at long/med while a good chunk of USN's is in short range), but makes how they do it and work a bit different so there's some variety beyond bigger guns or faster firing guns, maybe armour. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,011 posts
4,356 battles

why do people make such a big deal over a stat that's mostly irrelevant now? AA has been passively nerfed into oblivion because there hardly are anymore CVs to begin with. 14km range seems legit, as it's a short range flamethrower type a ship much like the Atlanta in archetype. But the 12 guns with 7s reload are disappointing and will probably have to get buffed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,210
[WOLF3]
Members
19,332 posts
17,670 battles
2 hours ago, Taichunger said:

Those have to be fake. 14.7 range at T9? 

It wouldn't matter.  Cleveland shells have trouble hitting targets past 11km.  All these new USN CLs share Cleveland shells.  FFS, the stats?  All the shells are identical to Tier VI Cleveland's shells.

 

With that in mind, you could give Cleveland 30km gun range, but it doesn't mean she's reliable in hitting things past 11km.  These new CLs will be the same way.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
191
[R-R-R]
Members
1,019 posts
7,827 battles

The biggest problem for these USN CLs is the rudder shift time.

11.4s is similar to Roon's rudder shift time. Designed as a close-range ship, rudder shift is quite important so that you can angle and dodge torpedoes reliably. With 11.4s base value, you will be required to use steering mod 3 to have decent agility, which sacrifices concealment.

IMHO, all the USN CLs rudder shift time should be reduced to below 10s. e.g. Cleveland 7.x  Seattle 8.x  Worcester 9.x

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,048
[INTEL]
Members
9,822 posts
27,863 battles
17 hours ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

It wouldn't matter.  Cleveland shells have trouble hitting targets past 11km.  All these new USN CLs share Cleveland shells.  FFS, the stats?  All the shells are identical to Tier VI Cleveland's shells.

 

With that in mind, you could give Cleveland 30km gun range, but it doesn't mean she's reliable in hitting things past 11km.  These new CLs will be the same way.

This sounds wonderful. Can't wait to have one of these ships luff up 11 kms from me in Alsace or Montana. Heck, in Alsace it will be under my secondaries....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
189
[WOLFB]
Beta Testers
1,456 posts
8,158 battles
3 hours ago, AviationBattleship_Hyuga said:

I think it's sad to see a truly cool city and name like Seattle tacked onto this fake thing.  

Rains a lot ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,718
[PVE]
Members
14,935 posts
9,477 battles
4 hours ago, Taichunger said:

Those have to be fake. 14.7 range at T9? 

30 minutes ago, Taichunger said:

This sounds wonderful. Can't wait to have one of these ships luff up 11 kms from me in Alsace or Montana. Heck, in Alsace it will be under my secondaries....

I believe that range is stock as the current Baltimore starts with a similar stock range.

 

1 hour ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

It wouldn't matter.  Cleveland shells have trouble hitting targets past 11km.  All these new USN CLs share Cleveland shells.  FFS, the stats?  All the shells are identical to Tier VI Cleveland's shells.

 

With that in mind, you could give Cleveland 30km gun range, but it doesn't mean she's reliable in hitting things past 11km.  These new CLs will be the same way.

 

The guns on Seattle appear to be Cleveland's guns, but DP.  Does the fire control upgrade ever lower dispersion?

 

3 hours ago, SireneRacker said:

AA of the T9 Cruisers:

Donskoi: 117dps @ 5km (585)

Baltimore: 91dps @ 5km (455)

Roon: 100dps @ 4.5km (450)

Ibuki: 83dps @ 5km (415)

Saint Louis: 103dps @ 5km (515)

Neptune: 106dps @ 5km & 86dps @ 6km (1046)

Multiplying the range with the dps, you can get those numbers that I have in the brackets and use them to compare the AA. 

 

Seattle would have 52@6km (312) which would be poor AA stock. The AA was listed as 4x2 -52 which is 6.5 dps per barrel. If you run 4x3 at 6.5 dps per barrel, you get the following;

 

78@6km (468) would be more in line with the other T9s using your formula @SireneRacker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,578
[KNMSU]
Members
5,330 posts
5,553 battles
39 minutes ago, Crusin_Custard said:

Rains a lot ?

It actually doesn't. It rains more in Boston than it does Seattle. It's just that in Boston and other normal places, you have a big, rainy day and then it clears up. In Seattle, it spits on you for days on end. Less cumulative moisture, more grey days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,718
[PVE]
Members
14,935 posts
9,477 battles
1 minute ago, AviationBattleship_Hyuga said:

It actually doesn't. It rains more in Boston than it does Seattle. It's just that in Boston and other normal places, you have a big, rainy day and then it clears up. In Seattle, it spits on you for days on end. Less cumulative moisture, more grey days.

 

Portland, OR is similar. I worked 6 weeks in the field there in the spring one year and saw 1.5 sunny days in that time. Big change from Florida where you have the reverse 1.5 not sunny days in the same time frame (Mar/Apr). It barely ever got to what we would call rain in Florida, mostly the sky ever so slowly weeped on you and was just as depressing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,810
[NSF]
Beta Testers
5,217 posts
7,785 battles

Pretty much all of these have been disappointing so far, but god forbid you say anything about it since it has WiP slapped on.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,326
[CUTE]
Members
5,202 posts
3,461 battles
30 minutes ago, Big_Spud said:

Pretty much all of these have been disappointing so far, but god forbid you say anything about it since it has WiP slapped on.

It's funny because you have the rabid detractors and then the rabid WG fanbois that defend against them. They both need each other. 

The ships are fine, but I think the average player will not be satisfied with the performance. These cruisers are going to be in the same vein as the Atlanta and you either love it or hate it. I don't think these will be much different. I'll probably play them, but I also enjoy Atlanta. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,578
[KNMSU]
Members
5,330 posts
5,553 battles
1 hour ago, Canadatron said:

It's funny because you have the rabid detractors and then the rabid WG fanbois that defend against them. They both need each other. 

The ships are fine, but I think the average player will not be satisfied with the performance. These cruisers are going to be in the same vein as the Atlanta and you either love it or hate it. I don't think these will be much different. I'll probably play them, but I also enjoy Atlanta. 

I'm fine with the line other than the paper ships. It's when boats existed that could be tuned to fit a role, and instead we get made up junk that I get pissed. Dallas, for example, doesn't irk me quite the same way, because the U.S. made a bit leap between the Omahas and the Brooklyns in terms of power. But the tier 9 ships for both the CLs and CAs are fiction where there could have been real. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
589
[SYN]
Members
2,775 posts
9,201 battles
11 minutes ago, AviationBattleship_Hyuga said:

I'm fine with the line other than the paper ships. It's when boats existed that could be tuned to fit a role, and instead we get made up junk that I get pissed. Dallas, for example, doesn't irk me quite the same way, because the U.S. made a bit leap between the Omahas and the Brooklyns in terms of power. But the tier 9 ships for both the CLs and CAs are fiction where there could have been real. 

No, you couldnt make the T9 US CA real without having a massive power gap in between the T9 and 10. DM is just way way to far ahead of any other USN CA in terms of firepower, and the only way to give existing USN CA's enough firepower to be a worthy T9 is to give them very very fake reload times.

As for the CL's, either the T9 or the T10 was going to have to be paper. Worchester under her historical stats is really only a T9 ship at best with T10 AA, and the only US cruiser that even comes close to being T9 worthy is the 1939 st Louis with historical reload of 6-7 seconds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,578
[KNMSU]
Members
5,330 posts
5,553 battles
4 minutes ago, ryuukei8569 said:

No, you couldnt make the T9 US CA real without having a massive power gap in between the T9 and 10. DM is just way way to far ahead of any other USN CA in terms of firepower, and the only way to give existing USN CA's enough firepower to be a worthy T9 is to give them very very fake reload times.

As for the CL's, either the T9 or the T10 was going to have to be paper. Worchester under her historical stats is really only a T9 ship at best with T10 AA, and the only US cruiser that even comes close to being T9 worthy is the 1939 st Louis with historical reload of 6-7 seconds.

It's a video game. If Baltimore could be balanced for tier 9, so could Fargo and Oregon City. Do not tell me something cannot be done when it obviously can, you just don't want it to be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
589
[SYN]
Members
2,775 posts
9,201 battles
3 minutes ago, AviationBattleship_Hyuga said:

It's a video game. If Baltimore could be balanced for tier 9, so could Fargo and Oregon City. Do not tell me something cannot be done when it obviously can, you just don't want it to be done.

There would literally be no difference between Fargo/Cleveland and Baltimore/Oregon city from a gameplay standpoint. So the only way to put them in at different tiers is to give them very Ahistoical stats, but then you have basically repeats leading to very stale gameplay. You want to be an utter purist in regards to what ships are put into the game and yet are perfectly willing to give them complete ahistorical makeovers in order to fit, despite the fact that when wargaming has attempted to do this, it results in mediocre ships. Its one of the major reasons why the IJN DD line is such a disaster, because shoving a bunch of repeat designs in at different tiers doesn't work that well. So hypocrisy much. Quit being such a purist, you don't like the paper ships, then don't keep them.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
575
[KP]
Members
2,066 posts
19,899 battles
11 hours ago, AviationBattleship_Hyuga said:

It actually doesn't. It rains more in Boston than it does Seattle. It's just that in Boston and other normal places, you have a big, rainy day and then it clears up. In Seattle, it spits on you for days on end. Less cumulative moisture, more grey days.

Are you in Seattle? I live in Auburn it snowed 2 nights ago. I grew up here but the hardest rain I have seen in my life was in either Panama or Texas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×