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

C-Hull buff

25 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
173 posts
2,981 battles

I dont really see anyone that uses C hulls on any US dds. The removal of 20% of your dpm isnt worth a negligible AA increase and DFAA isnt really all that useful for actually taking out squads. In this meta people dont play carriers much anyway, but if they do: BB players dont push up, so cruiser players play super defensive, and you generally wont need DFAA for self defense. I think the C hull would be more viable if you gave it the reload of the normal guns with BFT, or just take a full half second off the reload time. It would at least offset the dpm decrease.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,283 battles

It might depend on how worried you are about being attacked by carrier planes.  But the fact is that DefAA can be a life saver, not so much because of all the planes you might take out so much as panicking the attacking planes, thus widening the torp spreads so that it's easier for you to evade the torps and reducing DB accuracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
184 posts
20,130 battles
2 hours ago, CouchlockSupreme said:

I dont really see anyone that uses C hulls on any US dds. The removal of 20% of your dpm isnt worth a negligible AA increase and DFAA isnt really all that useful for actually taking out squads. In this meta people dont play carriers much anyway, but if they do: BB players dont push up, so cruiser players play super defensive, and you generally wont need DFAA for self defense. I think the C hull would be more viable if you gave it the reload of the normal guns with BFT, or just take a full half second off the reload time. It would at least offset the dpm decrease.

Yes, in non-carrier games, I agree that the C hull loses out to the B hull, but I think it's closer than you are suggesting. I previously made it to rank 1 in C hull Benson. You don't lose 20% of your overall dpm - you lose 20% of your gun dpm. But most of the time more of your damage is done by your torpedoes, so you are really losing 8-10% of your overall dpm. You gain position flexibility because you know you can get out of being plane spotted.

In carrier games, you can get back that dpm for your team and more with your air defense saving yourself and / or your teammates. And your position flexibility becomes even more useful. That said, I don't think the C hulls for Farragut or Mahan are all that great even AA specced. Nicholas, Benson, and Fletcher are though. And Benson is the only one of that group where you lose a gun for the top hull.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
173 posts
2,981 battles
20 hours ago, BoraHorzaGobuchul said:

Yes, in non-carrier games, I agree that the C hull loses out to the B hull, but I think it's closer than you are suggesting. I previously made it to rank 1 in C hull Benson. You don't lose 20% of your overall dpm - you lose 20% of your gun dpm. But most of the time more of your damage is done by your torpedoes, so you are really losing 8-10% of your overall dpm. You gain position flexibility because you know you can get out of being plane spotted.

In carrier games, you can get back that dpm for your team and more with your air defense saving yourself and / or your teammates. And your position flexibility becomes even more useful. That said, I don't think the C hulls for Farragut or Mahan are all that great even AA specced. Nicholas, Benson, and Fletcher are though. And Benson is the only one of that group where you lose a gun for the top hull.
 

Maybe Benson and Fletcher most of your damage is coming from your torps, but the Nicholas Farragut and Mahan have garbage torpedoes. Mahans the only one of the 3 that can stealth torp, but on average your torps will most likely only be hitting for 5-6k. Some of the BBs with better torpedo belts you only hit for 4k. Not to mention they move at the speed of fart, and the ships detection range is 7km with CE and a camo. I run BFT on my US dd captain, just because its dual purpose. Also, you do lose a gun on the Nicholas for the B hull. The Nicholas isnt even really fair to the argument, because the stock hull has completely different guns. You lose ~200m/s velocity and 100 AP alpha to gain 1% fire chance and 2.5 seconds shaved off your reload.

Edited by CouchlockSupreme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
184 posts
20,130 battles
24 minutes ago, CouchlockSupreme said:

Maybe Benson and Fletcher most of your damage is coming from your torps, but the Nicholas Farragut and Mahan have garbage torpedoes. Mahans the only one of the 3 that can stealth torp, but on average your torps will most likely only be hitting for 5-6k. Some of the BBs with better torpedo belts you only hit for 4k. Not to mention they move at the speed of fart, and the ships detection range is 7km with CE and a camo. I run BFT on my US dd captain, just because its dual purpose. Also, you do lose a gun on the Nicholas for the B hull. The Nicholas isnt even really fair to the argument, because the stock hull has completely different guns. You lose ~200m/s velocity and 100 AP alpha to gain 1% fire chance and 2.5 seconds shaved off your reload.

They don't have garbage torpedoes. Their torpedoes are fine for their tier. You can stealth torp with Nicholas and Farragut on ships that are closing the range on you. Minimum detection ranges are: Nicholas 5.8km, Farragut 6.6km, and Mahan 6.9km. No US DD is doomed to a detection of >6.9km.

Next 10 Nicholas / Farragut games I play I will track torpedo and gun damage and see how they match up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
173 posts
2,981 battles
10 minutes ago, BoraHorzaGobuchul said:

They don't have garbage torpedoes. Their torpedoes are fine for their tier. You can stealth torp with Nicholas and Farragut on ships that are closing the range on you. Minimum detection ranges are: Nicholas 5.8km, Farragut 6.6km, and Mahan 6.9km. No US DD is doomed to a detection of >6.9km.

Next 10 Nicholas / Farragut games I play I will track torpedo and gun damage and see how they match up.

Sure if people are rushing your smoke I guess, but thats not REALLY stealth torping. I rounded 6.9 to 7, because 100m makes practically no difference. You may as well not have torps until the Mahan. You can say theyre fine for their tier, but they compare unfavorably against the Russian DD torps, barring the Mahan. The Russian ones are 4km instead of 5.5 or 6.4, but theyre much faster and do more damage. Theyre better in the vast majority of scenarios you use these torps, ambush or yolotorping. The Japanese DDs obviously have way better torps, as they should. But even the German dds have much better torps.

 

Edited by CouchlockSupreme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
173 posts
2,981 battles
22 hours ago, Crucis said:

It might depend on how worried you are about being attacked by carrier planes.  But the fact is that DefAA can be a life saver, not so much because of all the planes you might take out so much as panicking the attacking planes, thus widening the torp spreads so that it's easier for you to evade the torps and reducing DB accuracy.

This is why I said ACTUALLY taking out squads. Sure the one out of 20 games you run into a carrier you can break up squads for a friendly battleship or cruiser, but how often are battleships going to push up close enough that you can protect them anyway? Most cruisers have DFAA to break up squads for themselves as well and DDs dont usually run in packs. You dont really need it for yourself, its generally easy enough to avoid carrier damage in a destroyer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
239
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
1,312 posts
9,399 battles

As I understand it, the AA hulls were more something for competitive play than something you take for ranked or random.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,283 battles
11 minutes ago, CouchlockSupreme said:

This is why I said ACTUALLY taking out squads. Sure the one out of 20 games you run into a carrier you can break up squads for a friendly battleship or cruiser, but how often are battleships going to push up close enough that you can protect them anyway? Most cruisers have DFAA to break up squads for themselves as well and DDs dont usually run in packs. You dont really need it for yourself, its generally easy enough to avoid carrier damage in a destroyer.

Oh really?  I suggest that you try to avoid the torps from a tier 10 CV's TBs with a carrier player who has a clue.  It's next to impossible even in a DD when they're cross dropping you.  I've been deleted in very healthy high tier DDs twice in the last week by tier 10 CVs, and I'm a good DD player who is usually quite good at avoiding torps when they're from a single TB squadron.

Furthermore, when I'm in a DD and working a cap in a battle with CVs, I tend to try to stay close enough to my team's heavies so that if I see enemy carrier planes heading my way, I high tail it back to those friendlies so that I'm a) further from the enemy ships and b) I can get under the AA umbrella of those friendlies.  And if by chance I happen to have DfAA, I'll use it just to help out.  Furthermore, if I'm in a DD that has DfAA, I'm more than willing to race back to those friendlies to help them out with AA, even if I don't think that my DD is threatened by the planes.  It's all about reading the minimap and having situational awareness.  And if you have a team that's relative close to the cap and one is a cautious DD player like I am, you can  absolutely help out with the AA, heck, even if you don't have DfAA, though DfAA makes you more valuable in that role.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
229
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
1,485 posts
8,034 battles
On ‎3‎/‎31‎/‎2018 at 6:26 PM, CouchlockSupreme said:

I dont really see anyone that uses C hulls on any US dds. The removal of 20% of your dpm isnt worth a negligible AA increase and DFAA isnt really all that useful for actually taking out squads. In this meta people dont play carriers much anyway, but if they do: BB players dont push up, so cruiser players play super defensive, and you generally wont need DFAA for self defense. I think the C hull would be more viable if you gave it the reload of the normal guns with BFT, or just take a full half second off the reload time. It would at least offset the dpm decrease.

the problem with removing things is that it eliminates options that certain people (including myself) not only enjoy but exploit. Having DFAA on a low-mid tier DD is a privilege when there is a semi-competent CV on the enemy team that knows his job and you are his job. Eliminations also make gameplay allot less interesting from both an aesthetic and competitive field of view. In randoms CVs are rare: yes. but in ranked especially low tiers CVs are everywhere as the number of squadrons a cv driver has to manage at T6 is allot less than say t8-10. If you don't want a DFAA capable DD don't use it; why ruin something everyone else enjoys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
173 posts
2,981 battles
18 minutes ago, Crokodone said:

the problem with removing things is that it eliminates options that certain people (including myself) not only enjoy but exploit. Having DFAA on a low-mid tier DD is a privilege when there is a semi-competent CV on the enemy team that knows his job and you are his job. Eliminations also make gameplay allot less interesting from both an aesthetic and competitive field of view. In randoms CVs are rare: yes. but in ranked especially low tiers CVs are everywhere as the number of squadrons a cv driver has to manage at T6 is allot less than say t8-10. If you don't want a DFAA capable DD don't use it; why ruin something everyone else enjoys.

I never said anything about removing it.... I said buff the reload to BFT level because the gain is not worth the loss IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
173 posts
2,981 battles
31 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Oh really?  I suggest that you try to avoid the torps from a tier 10 CV's TBs with a carrier player who has a clue.  It's next to impossible even in a DD when they're cross dropping you.  I've been deleted in very healthy high tier DDs twice in the last week by tier 10 CVs, and I'm a good DD player who is usually quite good at avoiding torps when they're from a single TB squadron.

Furthermore, when I'm in a DD and working a cap in a battle with CVs, I tend to try to stay close enough to my team's heavies so that if I see enemy carrier planes heading my way, I high tail it back to those friendlies so that I'm a) further from the enemy ships and b) I can get under the AA umbrella of those friendlies.  And if by chance I happen to have DfAA, I'll use it just to help out.  Furthermore, if I'm in a DD that has DfAA, I'm more than willing to race back to those friendlies to help them out with AA, even if I don't think that my DD is threatened by the planes.  It's all about reading the minimap and having situational awareness.  And if you have a team that's relative close to the cap and one is a cautious DD player like I am, you can  absolutely help out with the AA, heck, even if you don't have DfAA, though DfAA makes you more valuable in that role.

 

I guess, I dont have any high tier DDs yet. Cant really judge off the April fools event either given how potato people are (I mean seriously, why are you in a Minotaur sailing full broadside and not maneuvering when a Moskva just hit you with 7 citadels in a row?(on a side note this discussion fits well in the Moskva vs DM discussion, I love 2 things: Dakka Dakka, or the ability to trash anything with AP in my cruisers. Im currently working on the Des Moines, but again, as with seemingly most of the US ships, its INCREDIBLY situationally viable. If theres a carrier in the game, you can wreak havoc on its planes. If there isnt, you have your dpm and AP, which I think the Moskva does better because its more reliable. You also dont have the downside of getting cit from any angle by any battleship in the Moskva, therefore you dont have to rely on smokes/islands)) and CBs dont have carriers. Generally the only ships I turn around to rush and provide DFAA support for are my teams carriers, because I refuse to help the vast majority of battleship players who contribute nothing to the game other than random citadels on ships 20km away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
842 posts
22 minutes ago, CouchlockSupreme said:

I never said anything about removing it.... I said buff the reload to BFT level because the gain is not worth the loss IMO.

Then don't take the C Hull. 
This is the point:  it's a tradeoff - you aren't forced to mount it.  If you find the tradeoff good, then mount it, otherwise, don't.

This kind of thing happens in the tech tree - not all "upgrades" are worth taking, from individual's point of view. I, for instance, don't take the 203mm gun upgrade on the Mogami.

Nor the C Hull upgrade on the Nurnberg (for much the same reason as not on US DDs - you swap half your torps for better AA, and I don't find that useful in a Nurn).

 

The C Hulls aren't commonly used, but that doesn't mean they're useless for some people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,582
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,283 battles
50 minutes ago, CouchlockSupreme said:

I guess, I dont have any high tier DDs yet. Cant really judge off the April fools event either given how potato people are (I mean seriously, why are you in a Minotaur sailing full broadside and not maneuvering when a Moskva just hit you with 7 citadels in a row?(on a side note this discussion fits well in the Moskva vs DM discussion, I love 2 things: Dakka Dakka, or the ability to trash anything with AP in my cruisers. Im currently working on the Des Moines, but again, as with seemingly most of the US ships, its INCREDIBLY situationally viable. If theres a carrier in the game, you can wreak havoc on its planes. If there isnt, you have your dpm and AP, which I think the Moskva does better because its more reliable. You also dont have the downside of getting cit from any angle by any battleship in the Moskva, therefore you dont have to rely on smokes/islands)) and CBs dont have carriers. Generally the only ships I turn around to rush and provide DFAA support for are my teams carriers, because I refuse to help the vast majority of battleship players who contribute nothing to the game other than random citadels on ships 20km away.

Well, IMHO, then you're not really being much of a team player if you won't help out friendly BBs when you're in a strong AA cruiser and you're relatively nearby.  After all, I'm not talking about crossing half the map to do it.  I'm talking about getting my cruiser (or DD) into AA range, maybe getting it in a good position to perhaps intercept the enemy planes or at least have then inside my AA bubble for as long as possible.  After all, you're not only protecting a team mate, but you're whittling away the enemy CV's supply of planes, which if he loses enough of them will cause him to run out of said planes. 

Mind you, this is all situational.  But I have to say that when I'm in my Atlanta in a CV game, I'm always looking for chances to beat the snot out of the enemy CV's planes, probably more so than any other cruiser, because it really is an outstanding anti-air cruiser.  And it's probably one of the best things an Atlanta can do for its team in a CV battle, given half a chance.  Of course, smart CV players try to avoid Atlantas.  But that doesn't mean that you can't do your best to hide from them a little bit.  Like maybe turning off your AA to let them close on you (unwittingly) until they do detect you, then you turn on the AA and the DefAA and crush them.  You can also do this kind of thing in a Kidd, and in some ways, even better, since you're that much harder to detect by air.

I disagree about the DM being situationally viable.  It's an excellent cruiser.  it just needs to be handled differently than a Moskva, because the Moskva has rail guns and the DM doesn't.  But the DM has a beastly RoF and really nasty AP that can shred enemy ships like crazy given half a chance.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
173 posts
2,981 battles
1 hour ago, Crucis said:

Well, IMHO, then you're not really being much of a team player if you won't help out friendly BBs when you're in a strong AA cruiser and you're relatively nearby.  After all, I'm not talking about crossing half the map to do it.  I'm talking about getting my cruiser (or DD) into AA range, maybe getting it in a good position to perhaps intercept the enemy planes or at least have then inside my AA bubble for as long as possible.  After all, you're not only protecting a team mate, but you're whittling away the enemy CV's supply of planes, which if he loses enough of them will cause him to run out of said planes. 

Mind you, this is all situational.  But I have to say that when I'm in my Atlanta in a CV game, I'm always looking for chances to beat the snot out of the enemy CV's planes, probably more so than any other cruiser, because it really is an outstanding anti-air cruiser.  And it's probably one of the best things an Atlanta can do for its team in a CV battle, given half a chance.  Of course, smart CV players try to avoid Atlantas.  But that doesn't mean that you can't do your best to hide from them a little bit.  Like maybe turning off your AA to let them close on you (unwittingly) until they do detect you, then you turn on the AA and the DefAA and crush them.  You can also do this kind of thing in a Kidd, and in some ways, even better, since you're that much harder to detect by air.

I disagree about the DM being situationally viable.  It's an excellent cruiser.  it just needs to be handled differently than a Moskva, because the Moskva has rail guns and the DM doesn't.  But the DM has a beastly RoF and really nasty AP that can shred enemy ships like crazy given half a chance.

 

The Moskvas AP is better 99% of the time though. The ROF is nice, but you cant sit in the open and use it, and limiting yourself to smokes or hiding behind islands is going to affect your dpm. Youre probably not going to be citting cruisers  18km away in the Des Moines, but its easy in the Moskva. The Moskva still does the same if not better damage AP spamming BBs and cruisers, just slower and more reliably. And it doesnt get decimated by everything from anywhere on the map. You get targeted just for being a Des Moines. I mean for real, you can dodge DM shells in a Kurfurst at range, and up close you can one shot them.

And I cant give BBs AA cover because 99% of the time theyre 15km away from the rest of the team. Im not gonna sit in spawn to cover a battleship thats not doing anything anyway. The Atlanta is different, your AA is actually capable of shredding planes. The DDs may be able to take out lower tier squads, but thats about it.

Edited by CouchlockSupreme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
184 posts
20,130 battles
40 minutes ago, CouchlockSupreme said:

The DDs may be able to take out lower tier squads, but thats about it.


They can do more than that.
 

Anyway, I ran 5 games of Nicholas and 5 games of Farragut and totaled up my damage. It turned out to be 60% gun damage and 40% torpedo damage. There was only one rush of a battleship in the 10 games. I expected it to be flipped, but even this split changes the dpm drop to 12% instead of 20%.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
173 posts
2,981 battles
55 minutes ago, BoraHorzaGobuchul said:


They can do more than that.
 

Anyway, I ran 5 games of Nicholas and 5 games of Farragut and totaled up my damage. It turned out to be 60% gun damage and 40% torpedo damage. There was only one rush of a battleship in the 10 games. I expected it to be flipped, but even this split changes the dpm drop to 12% instead of 20%.

 

You cant compare the Kidd and Sims to tech tree ships though, they both have better AA than their base counterpart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
184 posts
20,130 battles
17 hours ago, CouchlockSupreme said:

You cant compare the Kidd and Sims to tech tree ships though, they both have better AA than their base counterpart.

True. But they also have even lower dpm than their C hull counterpart. Kidd is -50% torpedo dpm +20% gun dpm compared to Benson C hull (if the 60/40 split holds then that would be +12-20 = -8% to overall dpm.) Sims would be less straightforward to calculate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
173 posts
2,981 battles
2 hours ago, BoraHorzaGobuchul said:

True. But they also have even lower dpm than their C hull counterpart. Kidd is -50% torpedo dpm +20% gun dpm compared to Benson C hull (if the 60/40 split holds then that would be +12-20 = -8% to overall dpm.) Sims would be less straightforward to calculate.

I was talking purely AA. Because of the tech tree US DDs Ive played (up to the Mahan), the C hull provides no noticable benefit to AA other than DFAA breaking up drops. Thats with BFT as well, Ive had it since the Nicholas. Idk what your damage at the end of that game was,  but by the end of the video you only have 25k. I still argue that until probably the Benson, US DDs are FAR more gun focused than torpedo focused. All of the torpedoes are anemic. Weak damage, short range, slow speed. Meanwhile they get great guns with fast rate of fire and traverse speed, long duration smokes, and maneuverability that allows cap contesting and knife fights.

Edited by CouchlockSupreme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
173 posts
2,981 battles

Yeah, I just played a game in my Mahan with the C hull. The CV on the other team was an Independence. I shot down 9 planes total, I think I shot down 2 without DFAA up. It took me a solid 30-40 seconds to shoot down 1 squad of DBs that was hovering over my smoke. This is all with BFT as well, with focus firing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
110
[GLF]
Members
767 posts
9,001 battles

Farragut C and Mahan C are both junk as far as AA.  They aren't that far ahead of nicholas as far as aa effectiveness goes, but at least Nich squares off against T4-5 planes most often.  Benson C is absolultey fine for AA performance in comparison to the mahan and farragut junk aa performance.   Its obviously not the Kidd or the Aki though. 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
184 posts
20,130 battles

It's true that Farragut and Mahan AA aren't that great. But losing the one gun isn't that bad either. I took out Mahan C-hull with an AA spec captain and got a match without a CV and did just fine. 20k gun damage, 12k torpedo damage, took a cap, second on the team. IMO the only necessary skills on USN DDs are last stand, BFT, and concealment expert.

oYgCBJc.jpg 

VTvPIcS.jpg

uCXZEsL.jpg

The C hull is just an optional sidegrade. I don't think it needs a buff.

Edited by BoraHorzaGobuchul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
173 posts
2,981 battles
On 4/3/2018 at 6:48 PM, BoraHorzaGobuchul said:

It's true that Farragut and Mahan AA aren't that great. But losing the one gun isn't that bad either. I took out Mahan C-hull with an AA spec captain and got a match without a CV and did just fine. 20k gun damage, 12k torpedo damage, took a cap, second on the team. IMO the only necessary skills on USN DDs are last stand, BFT, and concealment expert.

 

 

The C hull is just an optional sidegrade. I don't think it needs a buff.

To be fair though, thats not even a great match. Thats a pretty meh match. 12k damage in 2 torp hits is just not good. Thats averaging 6k damage per torp, thats ~1/10th of an equal tier bbs health. If you need 10 torps to kill an equal tier BB, your guns only have 5% base fire chance, and you only have 4 of them, it doesnt really matter that they reload fast.  Plus if you pick the C hull, youre running DFAA. You dont run into a carrier, thats a completely wasted consumable slot. I just dont think the AA that you get is enough to offset the gun you lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
184 posts
20,130 battles
19 hours ago, CouchlockSupreme said:

To be fair though, thats not even a great match. Thats a pretty meh match. 12k damage in 2 torp hits is just not good. Thats averaging 6k damage per torp, thats ~1/10th of an equal tier bbs health. If you need 10 torps to kill an equal tier BB, your guns only have 5% base fire chance, and you only have 4 of them, it doesnt really matter that they reload fast.  Plus if you pick the C hull, youre running DFAA. You dont run into a carrier, thats a completely wasted consumable slot. I just dont think the AA that you get is enough to offset the gun you lose.

It's a sidegrade where you trade some of your damage output capability for additional AA capability. If there is no carrier you will definitely be worse off.

Damage isn't everything. Spotting and putting friendly cruisers in smoke is big, thwarting enemy destroyers is big, capping and defending points is big. I value win rate over damage rate.

Mahan overall is not doing well, dead last in win rate among T7 destroyers over the last 2 weeks on NA with only a 21k average damage:

5eiEPax.png

All I'm saying is that the C hull isn't 20% worse off. You can still do quite a bit while missing that one gun even in matches without carriers. In matches with carriers, I would prefer to have the C hull.

Overall in 274 battles in Mahan I have a 65% win rate with 33k average damage. *shrug*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
173 posts
2,981 battles
2 hours ago, BoraHorzaGobuchul said:

It's a sidegrade where you trade some of your damage output capability for additional AA capability. If there is no carrier you will definitely be worse off.

Damage isn't everything. Spotting and putting friendly cruisers in smoke is big, thwarting enemy destroyers is big, capping and defending points is big. I value win rate over damage rate.

Mahan overall is not doing well, dead last in win rate among T7 destroyers over the last 2 weeks on NA with only a 21k average damage:
All I'm saying is that the C hull isn't 20% worse off. You can still do quite a bit while missing that one gun even in matches without carriers. In matches with carriers, I would prefer to have the C hull.

Overall in 274 battles in Mahan I have a 65% win rate with 33k average damage. *shrug*

You can spot and put friendly cruisers in smoke just as well without the C hull though. Even better, given you can wall smoke a larger area with speed boost.

I would only rather have the C hull in matches with lower tier carriers. 

I never said I didnt do well in the Mahan. Im sitting on 63% WR with 46k average damage (albeit not with as many battles as you but I dont plan on keeping it). That doesnt make it a good ship though, and Id argue that its probably on the lower end of the tier 7s statistically. Youll almost never have the gunboat power of a Russian DD (unless other DDs are dumb enough to get close to you), youll never have better torpedoes than anything other than a Russian torpedo. I believe you have the best AA, but its only worth anything every what, 3 minutes? Too situational in its strength.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×