Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Avenge_December_7

Suggestion: USS Washington (BB-56) Premium Ship

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

779
[STW-M]
Members
2,051 posts
5,861 battles

Some of the best premium ships, IMO, are those that allow a whole different play-style without being utterly broken (Saipan/Belfast, I'm looking at you).

For instance:

  • Leningrad allows for stealth torpedoing as well as typical Soviet gunboat style
  • Atlanta is a welcome change from the heavy cruiser style of Pensacola with her rapid-fire high-arc guns
  • Scharnhorst plays more like a heavy cruiser than a battleship
  • Nelson is an interesting contradiction of poor armor and AA combined with excellent guns and a superb heal

So how about a USN battleship that is designed to brawl?

My preliminary suggestions, trying to make a North Carolina that's a better brawler while not suddenly making it overpowered:

  • thicker armor on the areas between the bow and belt armor to allow for more forgiving angling (but same belt armor so that broadsiding will still be punished)
  • somewhat nerfed accuracy on the guns (but maybe allow for tier 9 upgrade slot for further customization) to punish back-line sniping
  • massively improved secondaries (typical of any brawler)
  • some AA nerf (but not too nerfed though; Washington is a NC-class and a USN BB, after all)
  • some method of reducing fire chance (less superstructure, thicker deck armor, etc.)
  • higher penetration on guns but slightly lower velocity to reward those who can aim (and maybe hit waterline citadels more—not too clear about this one)
  • hydro consumable that replaces the spotter/catapult (at the 3rd Battle of Guadalcanal, Washington dodged a lot of torpedoes after nuking Kirishima); maybe tier 8 range with tier 10 duration?
  • increased module survivability (secondaries, turrets, etc.)
  • increased maneuverability (faster turn and smaller radius) and higher torpedo protection (maybe something between North Carolina and Arizona, like 30-35%), though the torpedo protection is up for debate (since I do think that a BB who uses hydro and still regularly gets hit by torpedoes while hydro is active shouldn't be given too much of a cushion, if at all)

Thoughts/Critiques?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
439
[YAN]
Members
1,640 posts
7,467 battles
5 minutes ago, Avenge_December_7 said:

without being utterly broken (Saipan/Belfast, I'm looking at you).

Both of those ships are broken.

  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
779
[STW-M]
Members
2,051 posts
5,861 battles
Just now, Akeno017 said:

Both of those ships are broken.

Err, yes, that's what I meant when I said "Saipan, Belfast, I'm looking at you". They were meant to be examples of cancerous/broken ships.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
723
[HYDRO]
Members
1,563 posts
3,751 battles

Well, Massachusetts is already planned to be a "brawler" USN BB, though no idea how it will work out.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
439
[YAN]
Members
1,640 posts
7,467 battles
3 minutes ago, Avenge_December_7 said:

Err, yes, that's what I meant when I said "Saipan, Belfast, I'm looking at you". They were meant to be examples of cancerous/broken ships.

Aaaah.

I understand now.

In response to a brawling USN BB, Massachusetts is being setup to be one I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
779
[STW-M]
Members
2,051 posts
5,861 battles
Just now, Akeno017 said:

Aaaah.

I understand now.

In response to a brawling USN BB, Massachusetts is being setup to be one I think.

Looking at the wiki page for it, what exactly distinguishes it from NC?

http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Massachusetts

In other words, please help my illiteracy regarding the stats on the sidebar on the right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
439
[YAN]
Members
1,640 posts
7,467 battles
9 minutes ago, Avenge_December_7 said:

Looking at the wiki page for it, what exactly distinguishes it from NC?

http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Massachusetts

In other words, please help my illiteracy regarding the stats on the sidebar on the right.

Same as Alabama does, they are essentially the same class. WG is currently trying to make Massa have her own identity.

Don't see why, cloneships are fine with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
160
[AWP]
Members
782 posts
3,007 battles
1 hour ago, Avenge_December_7 said:

Looking at the wiki page for it, what exactly distinguishes it from NC?

http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Massachusetts

In other words, please help my illiteracy regarding the stats on the sidebar on the right.

Click on the ST link @warheart1992 posted. They changed a good bit to make it a brawler. Honestly not sure if/how it will work but they are trying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,874
[HINON]
Supertester
19,205 posts
12,732 battles
1 hour ago, Avenge_December_7 said:
  • thicker armor on the areas between the bow and belt armor to allow for more forgiving angling (but same belt armor so that broadsiding will still be punished) (T8+ BBs already have 32mm plating, thickest extremity-plating in the game, will reliable bounce everything but Yamato / Musashi AP when properly angled. What, do you want it 33mm, so it'll bounce 18.1" AP when properly angled too?)
  • somewhat nerfed accuracy on the guns (but maybe allow for tier 9 upgrade slot for further customization) to punish back-line sniping (sure, why not)
  • massively improved secondaries (typical of any brawler) (Ok ... )
  • some AA nerf (but not too nerfed though; Washington is a NC-class and a USN BB, after all) (The ship, especially when premium, is limited to historical AA mounts in this regard, and they have a set DPS and range. Maybe Washington as-built had a smaller AA complement than she finished the war with, I don't know. But WG is fairly limited here.)
  • some method of reducing fire chance (less superstructure, thicker deck armor, etc.) (No. The ship is of a certain design with a certain amount of superstructure and a certain amount of armor thickness for the deck, etc. Might just give it a higher flat fire reduction, but I think that's based on tier / type? I'm not sure tbh.)
  • higher penetration on guns but slightly lower velocity to reward those who can aim (and maybe hit waterline citadels more—not too clear about this one) (How would that work? The ship fired an shell of X design weighing Y pounds at Z velocity. Either you fire the standard Mk 8 Superheavy, or - what? You can't just invent shell weights / velocities out of wholecloth for historical guns with a prominent presence already in the game.)
  • hydro consumable that replaces the spotter/catapult (at the 3rd Battle of Guadalcanal, Washington dodged a lot of torpedoes after nuking Kirishima); maybe tier 8 range with tier 10 duration? (Sure.)
  • increased module survivability (secondaries, turrets, etc.) (Sure.)
  • increased maneuverability (faster turn and smaller radius) and higher torpedo protection (maybe something between North Carolina and Arizona, like 30-35%), though the torpedo protection is up for debate (since I do think that a BB who uses hydro and still regularly gets hit by torpedoes while hydro is active shouldn't be given too much of a cushion, if at all) (Iffy on this one. Agility is a national trait, and USN Fast BBs just aren't very agile, SoDak examples notwithstanding. Plus, making it very agile on par with Alabama would encroach on Alabama's niche, which is standard-type agility on a 'fast' BB hull. Maybe agility values somewhere in between Alabama and North Carolina? The introduction of a 'brawling' Washington shouldn't make ships like Alabama superfluous.)

My responses in pumpkin. Which is different from red, mr self-appointed forum police man.

Another thing to keep in mind is that we already have one T8 premium USN BB in the game with another in the pipeline to be released 'soon'. Do we really need a third? I'm not against it, not against the idea of a brawling Washington, I'm just looking at it from multiple viewpoints. What niche would it fill? What ships would it compete with? How much fudging needs to be done to fit a square peg into a round hole? (USN BBs are just not brawlers, like German BBs are - USN BBs are more midrange ships.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,787 posts
5,663 battles

War Gaming is not in the lets invent a ship and come up with custom items. They take a ship that has established parameters and tweak it to have is own flavor. There are some paper ships in the game but they adhere to norms of the nation it represents. Don't confuse balance for making up Stat's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,206
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,615 posts
9,014 battles

It is nice to see a well thought out suggestion. I would love to see the Washington, the ship that showed the Japanese that the night was not their safe place anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,792
[SALVO]
Members
17,053 posts
17,692 battles

How about the USS Saratoga, as a tier 7 USN battlecruiser, using the 1920's Lexington class battlecruiser?  This is better than yet another tier 8 USN BB, and is something new, rather than yet another clone.  And it's at a tier where the USN doesn't have a premium BB.

Edited by Crucis
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
779
[STW-M]
Members
2,051 posts
5,861 battles
10 hours ago, Crucis said:

How about the USS Saratoga, as a tier 7 USN battlecruiser, using the 1920's Lexington class battlecruiser?  This is better than yet another tier 8 USN BB, and is something new, rather than yet another clone.  And it's at a tier where the USN doesn't have a premium BB.

I think it would be a nice transition ship between Colorado and North Carolina, maybe helping some USN BB captains learn the new speed and concealment tactics of North Carolina and above.

Edited by Avenge_December_7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,792
[SALVO]
Members
17,053 posts
17,692 battles
16 minutes ago, Avenge_December_7 said:

I think it would be a nice transition ship between Colorado and New Mexico, maybe helping some USN BB captains learn the new speed and concealment tactics of North Carolina and above.

I think that you mean a transition ship between the Colorado and the North Carolina.  There's not a lot of transition between the Colorado and the New Mex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
779
[STW-M]
Members
2,051 posts
5,861 battles
9 minutes ago, Crucis said:

I think that you mean a transition ship between the Colorado and the North Carolina.  There's not a lot of transition between the Colorado and the New Mex.

Oops, fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54
[MOH]
Members
237 posts
1,252 battles

I know Wargaming has been testing the idea of using the USS Massachusetts as a brawling ship, but I still think the USS South Dakota 1920 would be better suited for that T8 role.  It is a paper ship, albeit a real one, and fulfills a role without having to make a fast battleship something it's not.  It's also sufficiently different than the North Carolina and Alabama to give better "flavor" for the tier.  Additionally, one of the defining features of the US fast BBs, it's excellent AA, is becoming less relevant with fewer CV players at the higher tiers.  This could be a potentially fun alternative.  Heck, as sad as it is, even I spec'd my North Carolina with a Secondary Build, as I just don't encounter CV's...ever.

+12x 16/50cal Mark 2 cannons that fire the same AP shell as the Colorado.  This would actually give the South Dakota 1920 greater shell velocity, flatter trajectory, and more broadside weight than the NC or Alabama (24,300 vs 25,320lbs), but could be balanced through other factors like reload times, sigma, and dispersion.  Still, this would be a brutal display of American freedom.

+16x 6"/53cal and 4x 3"/50 cal guns for a powerful and hard hitting secondary battery. 

+An untapered 13.5" armor belt and thick deck armor would make it pretty tough, and you'd have the usual excellent American TDS.  This would not make it invincible though.

+Torps!  2x 533mm for up close and personal

+The usual excellent American Standard tight turning radius and fast rudder shift.

-Very slow at 23knots, especially for T8.  Although the Colorado is the same speed as the rest of the Standards, it really starts hurting most at T7 due to average speeds of enemy ships increasing the higher the tier you go.  The same would be true for the South Dakota 1920.  At T8 potentially facing T10 ships, you would have to be super careful to position yourself correctly.  Once caught over-extended, there would be no getting away.

-Not the AA beast of other T8+ US BB's.

For US Standard lovers wanting a true brawling ship at the higher tiers, the South Dakota 1920 would be the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
87 posts
4,061 battles

I think it would be interesting to see the post-refit USS West Virginia as a tier 7 or 8 premium. The refit upgraded most aspects of the ship to the standards of the South Dakota class (1942), but it still retained its 21knot speed and couldn't handle the super-heavy shells. If it was tier 8, a lot of fudging would have to be done to make it balanced. 

Edited by neworleanssaintsfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×