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

USS Buffalo $3,000,000 upgrade choice?

21 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

224
[CHASE]
[CHASE]
Beta Testers
379 posts
11,616 battles

I used reload mod on old baltimore and find it very good. I use range mod on Des Moines

I only played 1 battle on PTS with Buffalo and used reload mod, I did relatively ok with 117K damage, but it's only 1 game. 

15.6 km range is a bit low, but with the floaty arcs, it will be hard to hit stuff farther than that anyway. I think both would work, you just have to adjust your style a bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,528
[PVE]
Members
19,797 posts
11,994 battles
1 minute ago, USSRichardNixon said:

shall I choose Gun Range or Firing Rate?

I remember in the old times, people use gun range on T9 Baltimore but firing rate on T10 Des Moines.

I tried firing rate, but it made the turrets slower than I would like. I thought about gun range and figured, if someone is out of the upgrade range, I should go stealth. I went for AA Guns Mod 3 to swat more planes. High tier planes love clubbing me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
313
[STW]
Members
828 posts
6,939 battles

I put reload on it as that's what I ran with the Balti and 13s reload seemed excessive for what it is.  That being said, I run range on my DM and may end up switching if reload isn't comfortable to play with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,288
[WOLF3]
Members
24,789 posts
21,840 battles

When old IX Baltimore's gun reload was buffed to go to 10 seconds, MBM3 for faster reload was a valid choice, which brought it down to 8.8 seconds.  A major concern for Baltimore prior to her buff was her very anemic reload which is very slow considering they are 203mm guns.

 

I haven't dived into the game yet, but looking at the wiki, IX Buffalo has 13 second base reload.  Old, pre-buff IX Baltimore used to have 15 and that was terrible.  Consider also that there may very well be periods where Buffalo should not show all her guns.  If it were me I'd slot MBM3 and play her just like IX Baltimore and X DM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48
[ARRR]
Members
129 posts
3,579 battles

Probably comes down to play style. I chose reload on both, will likely take it on Buffalo as well. US arcs make long range use hit or miss anyway. If they are out of range, I go silent and reposition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,564
[REVY]
Members
6,435 posts
5,168 battles
47 minutes ago, USSRichardNixon said:

shall I choose Gun Range or Firing Rate?

I remember in the old times, people use gun range on T9 Baltimore but firing rate on T10 Des Moines.

Increasing your gun range also increases your detectability when firing, so there's that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
244
[HOT]
[HOT]
Members
562 posts
15,745 battles

Eh the ship sucks so bad it really doesnt matter what you do at that slot. None of them help in any significant way. I dont know why they made the Buffalo completely different from what the old Baltimore was. All they had to do was copy paste the stats to Buffalo and it would have been great. Now new players will try to play the DM like a Buffalo and suck. lol

Reload is Meh because it goes down to 11.4. Still terribad for tier 9

AA is okay because US AA is never bad. Buffalo seems much more of a longer ranged playstyle so AA mod helps keep the torp planes from deleting you.

Range is not great with the crazy arcs

Secondary mod is only good if the secondaries are great and they arent on Buffalo.

So your real choices are AA and reload honestly.

The one positive i can give the ship is the super heavy AP does great damage to broadside battleship decks. 5 and 6k per salvo easily.

Edited by MackDye
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
313
[STW]
Members
828 posts
6,939 battles
15 minutes ago, Shenennigans said:

Probably comes down to play style. I chose reload on both, will likely take it on Buffalo as well. US arcs make long range use hit or miss anyway. If they are out of range, I go silent and reposition.

Range for me is more about being able to punish BB's or semi-sedentary cruisers that won't get close enough for me to otherwise engage without having to get out on open water and getting wrecked, and some high tier maps are a travesty when you rely on island humping to do your work.  That being said, I don't remember drawing the amount of attention in a Baltimore that I do in a DM, and Buffalo should mimic the Balti and be a bit tankier than the DM (judging by the way the citadels sit under the front and back turrets).  All I can do is play it and see how it works in the meta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,288
[WOLF3]
Members
24,789 posts
21,840 battles

Wow are Buffalo's guns slow loading, even with MBM3.  These are terrible.  The ship depends on firing all those guns to make up for the slow reload, but there are many circumstances you shouldn't.  You're looking at often relying at 2 turrets with very slow reloads.

Sorry, give me back my IX Baltimore with 8.8 second reloads.  F--k this.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
23 posts
4,100 battles

Yeah, I'm really disappointed with the Buffalo. It really feels like a downgrade. Anyway, I took MAM1, DCS1, AAG2 because underwhelming-for-US-AA needs all the help it can get, DCSM2, DCS2 (though I think rudder or acceleration are valid choices for this lackluster cruiser), Concealment mod and main battery mod 3

Aside from that I don't see many upgrade choices being all that relevant. The Buffalo is a fat, wallowing slow-firing pig of a cruiser, utterly reliant on all-or-nothing AP strikes. It's an absolute chore to play, and must be meant as some kind of sacrificial step one must take before getting to the Des Moines.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,924 posts
7,591 battles

Remember if you wait until Friday, upgrades are 1/2 off. 

I took range. I don't find hitting things with the Buffalo difficult, and having the range to rain fire on reversing yamatos and iowas from behind an island is preferable to me than slight reload buff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,381
[WOLF9]
Privateers
12,503 posts
4,602 battles

I bought both mods during the sale.  Haven't played enough to tell which is better, but I have reload on it now.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertester
343 posts
9,341 battles

Main Battery Modification 3 since the -13% to the main battery traverse speed. Doesn't hurt that bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,504
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
5,031 posts
17,617 battles

I go range on Buffalo. The guns fire so slowly that I'd rather re-stealth and play it like a heavy broadside cruiser with a long-range option, than any kind of sustained damage dealer.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,732
[SIDE]
Members
3,599 posts
On 5/30/2018 at 12:53 PM, Sventex said:

Increasing your gun range also increases your detectability when firing, so there's that.

It’s a US cruiser so any non-bot is going to be hyper paranoid about taking a curve ball to the taters. You generally have one eye on the sniper scope, one eye on the minimap and both eyes on the delete-o-meter anytime you are spotted. Given those prerequisite self preservation instincts I would not let an extra 1.x km of bloom dissuade me from range mod.

The thing is, as mentioned previously, the shells are floaty and slow. Hitting targets further out is less likely. The range is a nice buffer but your damage will suffer. If you more than 15km from enemy target then you might not be escorting B.B. or supporting DD like you could be.

The reload boost is more useful to US cruisers IMO. It helps get more AP into other cruisers, more HE into bow on B.B. and more of whatever is loaded into DD when they lose concealment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×