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

Ideas for the Massachusetts

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

483
[NGA]
Members
1,739 posts
9,291 battles

As we all know, wargaming is trying to make Massachusetts into a unique BB compared to her sister the Alabama. So far this has taken the form of pigeon-holing her into a role that is going to make as much sense as giving George McClellan a battlefield command. At the present, the only good trait of her secondaries is their range. And yet their RoF is the same as the main battery of the Test!Cleveland. When combined with an armor scheme ill-suited to close-in battles, she definitely isn't looking all that appealing. Personally, I just wanted to throw out a couple suggestions and see what y'all think of them.

A) Buff her secondaries to an extreme degree, giving them improvements to fire chance, damage, RoF, and accuracy. If you want this thing to be a secondary-heavy US ship then make sure that it's dishing out enough damage to make getting close-in worth it.

B) Another possibility is that you could manipulate the armor, give it increased plating all around to hamper HE spam (and to see the look on a Musashi captain's face when you bounce his LOL!pen shells), but then decrease the armor belt. So she'd be more vulnerable to critical hits, but she'd be tougher all around.

C) A final possibility is to give her secondaries a few minor buffs, restore her original accuracy, but then decrease her plating. Overall, she'd then be a somewhat fragile ship, but good at all ranges.

Just giving secondaries increased range isn't going to be enough to get people to buy her, when she's still rather ill-suited for close engagements. You've got to make her something new and interesting, especially since we've already had a number of BBs added to the game lately (Roma and the French).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
421
[DLC]
Members
1,193 posts
4,563 battles

Or:

 

Scrap the idea of trying to create a whole new ship that is different enough from her sister premium to warrant her purchase while still retaining the general characteristics of South Dakota Class.

 

Instead, turn the Massachusetts into a $20-$35 premium camo for the Alabama, that changes the appearance of the Alabama to the Massachusetts (i.e. # of dual purpose guns, bofors, etc), modify some of the ships parameters to match the change in design (i.e. Mid and Long range AA), and when dropping into a match the ships shows up as the Massachusetts 

 

The way the Alabama, and even the North Carolina, are designed leaves little to no room for further variation. Trying to do so just resorts in a ship that is inferior to either of these

 

And if you ask "well what about those who don't have the Alabama?" Ok well, instead of putting the Alabama on sale again and potentially flooding the MM with more BBs while also forcing Massachusetts lovers to fork over the cash for a Alabama and the skin, do this:

 

Have a limited run of "Alabama Crates" which act like the Christmas crates. They have an increased chance of a supercontainer which only gives the Alabama. Should they get the Alabama supercontainer, they also receive a coupon which can be redeemed after completing a campaign. This provides those players with a free Massachusetts skin. 

The distribution of these crates can either be through selling in the premium shop so that its acts more as a roll of the dice stopgap that prevents Alabama flooding the mm or the month prior introduce missions which reward these crates in advance prior to the campaign itself. 

This event can be run as a lead up to 4th of July or a yearly anniversary, or something of the sort. Its good PR, people have a chance of Massachusetts and a "free" (depending on the distribution method) premium VIII, and you solve the issue of how to design the Massachusetts 

 

(for those who "downvote" this, at least explain why...)

Edited by Combined_Fleet_HQ
  • Cool 1
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,923
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
4,504 posts
6,152 battles
19 hours ago, JediMasterDraco said:

As we all know, wargaming is trying to make Massachusetts into a unique BB compared to her sister the Alabama. So far this has taken the form of pigeon-holing her into a role that is going to make as much sense as giving George McClellan a battlefield command. At the present, the only good trait of her secondaries is their range. And yet their RoF is the same as the main battery of the Test!Cleveland. When combined with an armor scheme ill-suited to close-in battles, she definitely isn't looking all that appealing. Personally, I just wanted to throw out a couple suggestions and see what y'all think of them.

A) Buff her secondaries to an extreme degree, giving them improvements to fire chance, damage, RoF, and accuracy. If you want this thing to be a secondary-heavy US ship then make sure that it's dishing out enough damage to make getting close-in worth it.

B) Another possibility is that you could manipulate the armor, give it increased plating all around to hamper HE spam (and to see the look on a Musashi captain's face when you bounce his LOL!pen shells), but then decrease the armor belt. So she'd be more vulnerable to critical hits, but she'd be tougher all around.

C) A final possibility is to give her secondaries a few minor buffs, restore her original accuracy, but then decrease her plating. Overall, she'd then be a somewhat fragile ship, but good at all ranges.

Just giving secondaries increased range isn't going to be enough to get people to buy her, when she's still rather ill-suited for close engagements. You've got to make her something new and interesting, especially since we've already had a number of BBs added to the game lately (Roma and the French).

I'm all for Option A.  But the proposed changes to secondaries are enough I think.  I will certainly buy her as currently described.  It would be nice if they rolled back the Sigma to 1.8. . though.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,304
[SIM]
Members
3,568 posts
5,702 battles

Changing her guns won’t make her a viable brawler, she needs a different armor scheme. If WG can’t make that work then they need to abandon the concept and release her as a slightly gimped Alabama with a radar consumable or something.

(You can downvote me for saying the R word, I forgive you)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
654
[LUCK]
Members
1,684 posts
23,286 battles
19 hours ago, Combined_Fleet_HQ said:

Or:

 

Scrap the idea of trying to create a whole new ship that is different enough from her sister premium to warrant her purchase while still retaining the general characteristics of South Dakota Class.

 

Instead, turn the Massachusetts into a $20-$35 premium camo for the Alabama, that changes the appearance of the Alabama to the Massachusetts (i.e. # of dual purpose guns, bofors, etc), modify some of the ships parameters to match the change in design (i.e. Mid and Long range AA), and when dropping into a match the ships shows up as the Massachusetts 

 

The way the Alabama, and even the North Carolina, are designed leaves little to no room for further variation. Trying to do so just resorts in a ship that is inferior to either of these

 

And if you ask "well what about those who don't have the Alabama?" Ok well, instead of putting the Alabama on sale again and potentially flooding the MM with more BBs while also forcing Massachusetts lovers to fork over the cash for a Alabama and the skin, do this:

 

Have a limited run of "Alabama Crates" which act like the Christmas crates. They have an increased chance of a supercontainer which only gives the Alabama. Should they get the Alabama supercontainer, they also receive a coupon which can be redeemed after completing a campaign. This provides those players with a free Massachusetts skin. 

The distribution of these crates can either be through selling in the premium shop so that its acts more as a roll of the dice stopgap that prevents Alabama flooding the mm or the month prior introduce missions which reward these crates in advance prior to the campaign itself. 

This event can be run as a lead up to 4th of July or a yearly anniversary, or something of the sort. Its good PR, people have a chance of Massachusetts and a "free" (depending on the distribution method) premium VIII, and you solve the issue of how to design the Massachusetts 

...or just drop it a tier, it's worked so well with Musashi. :Smile_facepalm:

The Mass. skin is a good idea instead of messing with the ships.

They could also sell it as a clone of Bama just named USS Massachusetts, not change the sigma, keep the secondary buff and give it a commander XP boost.

The gimmicks are getting gimmicky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
421
[DLC]
Members
1,193 posts
4,563 battles
19 hours ago, Wye_So_Serious said:

...or just drop it a tier, it's worked so well with Musashi. :Smile_facepalm:

Nah mate, can't do that. That's the IJN's flavor for premiums: stock ships at a tier lower.

 

Mutsu

Ashitaka

Musashi

(possibly even the Kii if you argue its original design)

 

 

As for the gimmicks statement, can't agree with you more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
582 posts
699 battles
19 hours ago, SkaerKrow said:

Changing her guns won’t make her a viable brawler, she needs a different armor scheme. If WG can’t make that work then they need to abandon the concept and release her as a slightly gimped Alabama with a radar consumable or something.

(You can downvote me for saying the R word, I forgive you)

That'd work, actually.  Knock her down to Tier 7 with the appropriate armor and maybe a small HP reduction to give Colorado a solid advantage in armor and HP. Then give her Colorado gun characteristics, just with an extra gun, and a small nerf to her AA in favor of boosted secondaries and either a radar or hydro consumable, since the SoDaks had both anyway.

A 30$-40$ tier 7 premium that would also give US BB players a way of whetting their fast(er) battleship chops before stepping into Tier 10 fodd- I mean Tier 8.

 

Controversial Edit: Or make Massachusetts a non-premium Alabama with some improvements, and insert her into the tech tree as an alternate to the North Carolina. >_>

Edited by Highlord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,623
[AHOY_]
Beta Testers
6,780 posts
3,937 battles

Massachusetts will be fine for the most part. Better speed retention on a turn means she turns faster than Alabama, allowing her to run circles or torpedobeat better than Alabama or some German rivals. Her TDS is still pretty high by game standards, at a generous 46% (50% on Alabama and 43% on Amagi).

And then there's her revised DC consumable. Her new DC means longer uptime and shorter downtime. Pair it with the Damage Control Duration+ Module and the appropriate CD reduction skills (at least the -10%), and one would have no need to worry about fires or flooding for almost a minute (if I'm remembering someone else's math correctly).

The only buff she needs is having access to the T9/T10 module slot. That gives her access to the USN -11% Dispersion Aiming Module, which would improve her low accuracy for the players who prefer to play her at mid-range, or the +20% Secondary RoF boost, which directly buffs the secondary guns (add BFT for even faster reloads).

Massachusetts has potential in her current form; she just requires a bit more specialization in terms of modules/captain skills than Alabama, and if WG would give her the T9/T10 module slot, fully rounds her out without needing any further changes.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
672 posts
2,346 battles

I still find it questionable that the BB most known for long range gunnery engagements is being shoehorned in to close range fighting with more derpy main guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
290
[NNC]
Members
2,088 posts
9,716 battles
19 minutes ago, YamatoA150 said:

Massachusetts will be fine for the most part. Better speed retention on a turn means she turns faster than Alabama, allowing her to run circles or torpedobeat better than Alabama or some German rivals. Her TDS is still pretty high by game standards, at a generous 46% (50% on Alabama and 43% on Amagi).

And then there's her revised DC consumable. Her new DC means longer uptime and shorter downtime. Pair it with the Damage Control Duration+ Module and the appropriate CD reduction skills (at least the -10%), and one would have no need to worry about fires or flooding for almost a minute (if I'm remembering someone else's math correctly).

The only buff she needs is having access to the T9/T10 module slot. That gives her access to the USN -11% Dispersion Aiming Module, which would improve her low accuracy for the players who prefer to play her at mid-range, or the +20% Secondary RoF boost, which directly buffs the secondary guns (add BFT for even faster reloads).

Massachusetts has potential in her current form; she just requires a bit more specialization in terms of modules/captain skills than Alabama, and if WG would give her the T9/T10 module slot, fully rounds her out without needing any further changes.

Agreed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
220
[VIKES]
[VIKES]
Members
560 posts
12,454 battles

Massachusetts would be fine with the better rate of fire/distance on secondaries, 1.8 sigma and the dispersion T9/10 module.   

She's already been partially 'nerfed' since they reduced the sigma from Bama's, and her AA is weaker at short ranges (she is better farther out tho for balance) than the existing Bama.

After all this time to "just make a skin" is just a terrible, almost offensive idea, the fans of the ship would much prefer a decent Mamie and not merely a skin.   It's an appalling idea frankly and one I don't think WG would consider after all the work already sunk into her.

I love the idea of a T8 USN Bismarck equivalent and hope that WG sees this as a good thing.  If they make this ship known as a Bismarck-like ship for the USN, they will sell (yes premium) a TON of them.

 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
261
Members
686 posts
3,819 battles

They could just make it a campaign ship that Alabama owners get a head start or coupon towards. There is literally no reason to make 2 cash premiums out of basically the same boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,923
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
4,504 posts
6,152 battles
2 hours ago, ksix said:

They could just make it a campaign ship that Alabama owners get a head start or coupon towards. There is literally no reason to make 2 cash premiums out of basically the same boat.

I disagree.  The South Dakota has always been my favorite class of US battleship.  I’ll take as many as they give us... and will probably make Segal my dedicated MA captain, now that another American commander is inbound.

I’m super excited about the direction they are going, and can’t wait for the release!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
220
[VIKES]
[VIKES]
Members
560 posts
12,454 battles
On 4/27/2018 at 12:14 PM, SCygnus said:

I still find it questionable that the BB most known for long range gunnery engagements is being shoehorned in to close range fighting with more derpy main guns.

That's a fair criticism.   However, since WG has been accused of "just making another clone" I think they are striving to avoid that label in this case.

Making the T8 Mass a brawler frankly has a LOT of appeal, at least selfishly to me.  The USN BB line doesn't currently really have a true brawler in the tree, in fact in my experience that ironically it is the sister SoDak Alabama that comes closest to a brawler.  It seems WG is going to fine tune that for the Mass, the concern is that they may not go far enough.   

I mean seriously...wouldn't it be nice for all NA USN BB drivers to be able to have a secondary fight with a T8 Bismarck, and actually have a chance of winning?

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,923
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
4,504 posts
6,152 battles
1 hour ago, nagasakee said:

That's a fair criticism.   However, since WG has been accused of "just making another clone" I think they are striving to avoid that label in this case.

Making the T8 Mass a brawler frankly has a LOT of appeal, at least selfishly to me.  The USN BB line doesn't currently really have a true brawler in the tree, in fact in my experience that ironically it is the sister SoDak Alabama that comes closest to a brawler.  It seems WG is going to fine tune that for the Mass, the concern is that they may not go far enough.   

I mean seriously...wouldn't it be nice for all NA USN BB drivers to be able to have a secondary fight with a T8 Bismarck, and actually have a chance of winning?

 

Exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
211
[QAPLA]
Beta Testers
1,186 posts
3,669 battles
On 4/25/2018 at 6:16 PM, Combined_Fleet_HQ said:

Or:

 

Scrap the idea of trying to create a whole new ship that is different enough from her sister premium to warrant her purchase while still retaining the general characteristics of South Dakota Class.

 

Instead, turn the Massachusetts into a $20-$35 premium camo for the Alabama, that changes the appearance of the Alabama to the Massachusetts (i.e. # of dual purpose guns, bofors, etc), modify some of the ships parameters to match the change in design (i.e. Mid and Long range AA), and when dropping into a match the ships shows up as the Massachusetts 

 

The way the Alabama, and even the North Carolina, are designed leaves little to no room for further variation. Trying to do so just resorts in a ship that is inferior to either of these

 

And if you ask "well what about those who don't have the Alabama?" Ok well, instead of putting the Alabama on sale again and potentially flooding the MM with more BBs while also forcing Massachusetts lovers to fork over the cash for a Alabama and the skin, do this:

 

Have a limited run of "Alabama Crates" which act like the Christmas crates. They have an increased chance of a supercontainer which only gives the Alabama. Should they get the Alabama supercontainer, they also receive a coupon which can be redeemed after completing a campaign. This provides those players with a free Massachusetts skin. 

The distribution of these crates can either be through selling in the premium shop so that its acts more as a roll of the dice stopgap that prevents Alabama flooding the mm or the month prior introduce missions which reward these crates in advance prior to the campaign itself. 

This event can be run as a lead up to 4th of July or a yearly anniversary, or something of the sort. Its good PR, people have a chance of Massachusetts and a "free" (depending on the distribution method) premium VIII, and you solve the issue of how to design the Massachusetts 

This is actually a great idea.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
672 posts
2,346 battles
15 hours ago, nagasakee said:

That's a fair criticism.   However, since WG has been accused of "just making another clone" I think they are striving to avoid that label in this case.

Making the T8 Mass a brawler frankly has a LOT of appeal, at least selfishly to me.  The USN BB line doesn't currently really have a true brawler in the tree, in fact in my experience that ironically it is the sister SoDak Alabama that comes closest to a brawler.  It seems WG is going to fine tune that for the Mass, the concern is that they may not go far enough.   

I mean seriously...wouldn't it be nice for all NA USN BB drivers to be able to have a secondary fight with a T8 Bismarck, and actually have a chance of winning?

 

Of course, variety would be nice for sure.  They could do that with SoDak or Washington though since they actually engaged in a Battleship v Battleship brawl and actually used their secondaries on surface targets.  Just a minor quibble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,074
[LEGIO]
Members
3,260 posts
6,035 battles

I'd rather the 5"/38 secondaries be buffed on all USN ships with them. The 5"/51 and 5"/54 could use better range as well.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×