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

holy crap seattle sucks

151 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
12 posts
13 battles
On 23.7.2018 at 4:41 AM, Guardian54 said:

Go in armor viewer

ogle that HUGE citadel

And mouse over the 102mm citadel armour compared to Cleveland 127mm.

But the Cleveland's citadel deck armor is only 51mm thick compared to the Seattle's 89mm, which means the Seattle has a better protected citadel against plunging fire, which should be the majority of damage you take if you play USN CLs "correctly" (hugging islands like a mad man).
In addition, parts of the Seattle's deck armor are 51mm instead of 25mm, which also makes it more durable against HE spam and against plunging AP shells (that's probably why Carl_the_Cuttlefish got the impression that the Seattle is a fairly tanky ship).

Yes, the weaker side citadel armor makes it more vulnerable when brawling, but you shouldn't be brawling in USN CLs anyways.

In addition to the better protection against plunging fire, the Seattle has about 30-80% more HP (depending on how efficiently you can use the heals), so overall, she is way more durable than the Cleveland.
And that means, she can stay longer in battles and make more use of her DPM, which is increased with the t9 mod. I know, you like to compare the base stats, but you have to factor the mod in just like with every other mod. It's no use to say that the Gadjah Mada has better concealment than the Hsienyang when in game, every Hsienyang will use the concealment mod and have a better concealment than every Gadjah Mada.

So yes, having access to the t9 upgrade basically means, the Seattle has a better DPM than the Cleveland. Unless you really want to push the Seattle's AA to the absolut max, using the AA upgrade instead. The range upgrade isn't really an options because of the shells' travel times.
 

On 26.7.2018 at 3:19 PM, Guardian54 said:

Which makes the turret traverse battleship level.

Only the Neptune has a better turret traverse speed than the Seattle (of all t9 cruisers). All other t9 cruisers have either the same turret traverse speed or worse, and all other t9 cruisers have the same issue with the reload mod. And even with the reload mod and without Expert Marksman (or the traverse speed mod), the turret traverse speed of the Seattle is still better than many t9 cruisers with Expert Marksman and without the reload mod.

Oh, yeah, i almost forgot: The Seattle also gets a longer radar duration. 5 seconds base and 12 seconds with the radar mod (that isn't usable at t8). That can also be a huge difference.


Overall, i don't think the Seattle is a bad ship, and in my opinion, it's better than the Cleveland in all aspects with the exception of brawling, which, as i said, you shouldn't do in USN CLs anyways.

Edited by Sidian42

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
205
[70]
Members
1,096 posts
5,643 battles
1 hour ago, Sidian42 said:

Seattle has about 30-80% more HP (depending on how efficiently you can use the heals)

This usually translates into "dead before the first heal even finishes trying to repair" as half the enemy team focuses on pummelling you for a pinata and incredibly easy citadels. Getting more than one citadel in a salvo against a Cleveland sailing unawares in a straight line with a USN heavy cruiser aiming for the shots to hit waterline amidships at 12 km is a minor miracle. Failing to get at least two on a Seattle at that range is also a minor miracle.

1 hour ago, Sidian42 said:

it's better than the Cleveland in all aspects with the exception of brawling

At a mere 15.7 kilometers, plunging fire isn't going through Cleveland's deck nearly often enough to be as big a deal as Seattle's sluggishness + horrid turret arcs + worse armour at optimum angling.

Calling it an unworthy successor would be grossly optimistic compared to what it actually is.

And ability to brawl is essential when you don't have torpedoes and thus are prone to being bumrushed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
266
[KNTAI]
[KNTAI]
Members
806 posts
7,007 battles

The Seattle is an annoying ship to play. The moment you have to angle AT ALL, you lose half of your DPM. The only real unique advantages she has over the Cleveland are the superior AA, and the 51 mm deck armor towards the rear half of the ship.

Personally, I just skipped the researchable range module and bought the slot 6 range upgrade instead while it was on sale. I've put on all the +EXP camos/flags on this ship just so I can grind through and escape this tier as fast as possible.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2
[R-F]
Members
21 posts
8,075 battles

I hated Seattle the entire way through, it's such an awkward ship to play with the gun angles and horrid acceleration. But then I looked at my stats in her once I got Worcester and found myself having a 76% WR :cap_popcorn: God I hate her... Worcester is an entirely different beast and I love it. Keep up the grind! :cap_like:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
88 posts
2,447 battles
On 6/28/2018 at 2:32 AM, iPrefontaine said:

Seattle is a strong ship

The Seattle is pathetic compared to even the Boise.  I own both the Boise and Neuve de Julio and they can take a pounding compared to my Seattle.  The Seattle I think needs either higher damage rolls for the HE or needs a slight quicker reload time.  Its really reallly bad.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
88 posts
2,447 battles
On 8/8/2018 at 11:03 AM, 0806sung said:

Is Seattle any better now with the range bug fixed?

Nope.  I just had a battle in my Seattle 92 hits only 20k damage with IFHE.  Not impressed with this garbage Tier 9 Cruiser.  My buffalo is just as bad.  So many worthless ships in this game.   And yet we idiots keep paying and playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
88 posts
2,447 battles
On 8/10/2018 at 3:34 PM, TechSgt said:

Nope.  I just had a battle in my Seattle 92 hits only 20k damage with IFHE.  Not impressed with this garbage Tier 9 Cruiser.  My buffalo is just as bad.  So many worthless ships in this game.   And yet we idiots keep paying and playing.

I agree.  The Seattle is just terrible.  I dont think we, as players, should be forced to play the ship as an island hugger.  Because ive found more than one time in my Seattle that im hugging islands and bam out of nowhere there is 3 cruisers and 2 battleships under 13km from me.  All these ships of which can make me hurt really bad.  For instance I was island hugging and I was hitting ships for little to no damage.  524 damage per full salvo, with demolition expert and IFHE, with all 12 shots hitting their target.  Yes 524 damage for 12 shells.  Either Wargaming needs to buff the guns damage or give us more armor, something.  Its pretty terrible.  I dont know why we as players put up with this [edited] that wargaming puts us through.  

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
88 posts
2,447 battles
On 8/10/2018 at 3:34 PM, TechSgt said:

Nope.  I just had a battle in my Seattle 92 hits only 20k damage with IFHE.  Not impressed with this garbage Tier 9 Cruiser.  My buffalo is just as bad.  So many worthless ships in this game.   And yet we idiots keep paying and playing.

You guys giving my post a thumbsdown are idiots.  You need realize just because you have "awesome" games.  Doesnt mean were all having them.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3
[PIZZA]
Members
9 posts
12,329 battles

Cant agree more with the hate in this thread.  IFHE and DE don't even help this ship.  It does nothing well.  It HAS to get a Buff next patch or no one will be playing it.  Cant count the number of times I've he with 12 shells and done less than 1K damage.  Or 7 out of 7 shatter.  Crap ship.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13
[-TD-]
Members
80 posts
8,907 battles

Oh  my ask I was looking around on how effective the Seattle was in battle., I noticed there were 2 Seattle's one between 1903 and 1905 which was actually a support ship; 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Washington_(ACR-11 A WW1 ship;  And it did have torps, but god it would suck at tier IX

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Seattle_(AOE-3) And of course this;  Which is just a support ship following the fleet around to resupply it...

 

Wow, WG... You could of at least changed the seattle into A Lighter version of the  Worcester  with better speed & rudder shift to actually go DD Hunting and the ability to actually out run a BB and keep up with a fleeing DD..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
60
[WHB]
Beta Testers
278 posts
3,490 battles

Seattle is a pay wall. I payed to get over and I am glad I did. I am keeping her though, in hopes of some buffs and sentimental value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
12 posts
13 battles
On 30.7.2018 at 7:04 PM, Guardian54 said:

Calling it an unworthy successor would be grossly optimistic compared to what it actually is.

Got the Seattle myself now. 

Yes, the turret angles are horrible. Yes, she's a bit more squishy when caught broadside or even a bit angled. But her better reload (thanks to the upgrade - you don't need the range upgrade at all) and the heal are kinda making up for it.

However, the thing that's annoying me the most is the dispersion. It's weird. Can't really hit DDs at 8km or more distance, because most of the shells fall short or fly over the ship. Sometimes they even land right in front of the DD or behind it, while it's going broadside.
My hit rate is actually higher than what i got with my Cleveland, but that is probably i had to shoot BBs most of the time because i can't hit DDs with it.
I'm using the AA range upgrade instead of the dispersion upgrade, and i used the same upgrade on the cleveland as well.

But as i already anticipated, the Seattle is not a bad ship nor worse than the cleveland. Thanks to her higher firing rate from the upgrade, she's really good at burning down battleships. I'm sitting at 104k average damage after 10 matches with the Seattle, and i've broken my personal damage record with her. I also noticed the 50mm deck armor when i was fighting a Worcester (her HE didn't pen there) and when i was sailing away from battleships (never took a citadel hit from the back, when i took a citadel, it was always from shells that hit the side armor, and i bounced a good amount of BB shells, too).
AA is also better thanks to the higher range. In one of the matches with carriers, i completely denied the enemy carrier 2 of 3 cap zones. And he said something about "f*cking OP AA".

It just feels really awkward to fight DDs with her, or to get citadel hits on emeny cruisers, because the shells seem to avoid the area i want them to land in at any cost.

Edited by Sidian42

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16
[TF77V]
[TF77V]
Members
76 posts
2,675 battles

I am not impressed with the Seattle and stopped my grind toward the Worcester (for now) to concentrate on other ships. I have done well in the Atlanta and thought the play style would be similar but to me it is not. Before I reached the Des Moines, I couldn't do crap in the Buffalo, same with the Roon before the Hindenburg. Perhaps I don't fair well in T9's. The range is ridiculously short, the ship is big and turns like a bus. Just my opinion though. The Cleveland is a good ship that i have had success with and I am considering falling back and checking out the Dallas and Helena as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9
[WOLF6]
Members
78 posts
4,779 battles

I sold my Seattle the second I could buy the Worcester. I would play a few games in her then back to all my ships with 19 point commanders. I have enough to now get the Buffalo on the way to DM but I’m really hating to start that grind. It brings back memories of the Seattle grind. There’s nothing worse then playing a ship you don’t enjoy but have to to get to the next ship that you really want. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
14 posts
1,595 battles

I am grinding through the Seattle right now and I came here to see if there were any tricks to make it better or if I was just missing something...….nope general consensus here is it sucks.  

What is surprising me is how bad it is at using islands for protection.  It turns and accelerates so weakly that it just can't maneuver if it gets close to an island.  So then you try and stay at range and kite and you find out that your citadel is really easy to hit.  Maneuvering is ok but when a BB gets a weak hit on you and still knocks off 12k it shows a clear problem.  The guns have a weird dispersion too past 8km, I think it is because it comes down at such a steep angle that the shots spread out over a larger area than normally you would see when shots come in at a flatter angle.  I do seem to recall getting multiple detonations on DDs over time.  I have been wondering if that plunging angle combined with a large volume of fire is contributing too that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
78
[KRAK]
Members
1,047 posts
12,234 battles
On ‎10‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 6:29 PM, Sidian42 said:

Got the Seattle myself now. 

Yes, the turret angles are horrible. Yes, she's a bit more squishy when caught broadside or even a bit angled. But her better reload (thanks to the upgrade - you don't need the range upgrade at all) and the heal are kinda making up for it.

However, the thing that's annoying me the most is the dispersion. It's weird. Can't really hit DDs at 8km or more distance, because most of the shells fall short or fly over the ship. Sometimes they even land right in front of the DD or behind it, while it's going broadside.
My hit rate is actually higher than what i got with my Cleveland, but that is probably i had to shoot BBs most of the time because i can't hit DDs with it.
I'm using the AA range upgrade instead of the dispersion upgrade, and i used the same upgrade on the cleveland as well.

But as i already anticipated, the Seattle is not a bad ship nor worse than the cleveland. Thanks to her higher firing rate from the upgrade, she's really good at burning down battleships. I'm sitting at 104k average damage after 10 matches with the Seattle, and i've broken my personal damage record with her. I also noticed the 50mm deck armor when i was fighting a Worcester (her HE didn't pen there) and when i was sailing away from battleships (never took a citadel hit from the back, when i took a citadel, it was always from shells that hit the side armor, and i bounced a good amount of BB shells, too).
AA is also better thanks to the higher range. In one of the matches with carriers, i completely denied the enemy carrier 2 of 3 cap zones. And he said something about "f*cking OP AA".

It just feels really awkward to fight DDs with her, or to get citadel hits on emeny cruisers, because the shells seem to avoid the area i want them to land in at any cost.

I just researched the Seattle. My Helena average damage is 40K, and 26K on my T8 Cleveland. You will like Helena a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
78
[KRAK]
Members
1,047 posts
12,234 battles
On ‎8‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 6:13 PM, TechSgt said:

I agree.  The Seattle is just terrible.  I dont think we, as players, should be forced to play the ship as an island hugger.  Because ive found more than one time in my Seattle that im hugging islands and bam out of nowhere there is 3 cruisers and 2 battleships under 13km from me.  All these ships of which can make me hurt really bad.  For instance I was island hugging and I was hitting ships for little to no damage.  524 damage per full salvo, with demolition expert and IFHE, with all 12 shots hitting their target.  Yes 524 damage for 12 shells.  Either Wargaming needs to buff the guns damage or give us more armor, something.  Its pretty terrible.  I dont know why we as players put up with this [edited] that wargaming puts us through.  

I have seen almost the same thing with the Cleveland in T8-10 battles, 16 IFHE hits, 1 K damage, then removed from game. This is without DE. I run DE and IFHE on the Helena, and it works at T6-8 games fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,836
[WOLF3]
Members
20,363 posts
18,644 battles

It doesn't help that Seattle's Radar got nerfed somewhat recently.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
205
[70]
Members
1,096 posts
5,643 battles

The Seattle has exactly one upside: Enough HP to be a good XP pinata.

Everything else is terrible. Everything. It's costing me a lot of Type 59 and other high-end camos to deal with, ugh.

Edited by Guardian54

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55
[_EASY]
Members
168 posts
8,956 battles

Completely skipped the Seattle and went from Cleveland to Worcester.

 

Other than a few more HP's and Repair Party the Cleveland is a far better bote than the Seattle....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
994
[C-CA]
[C-CA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,189 posts
4,996 battles

Okay, so I got Seattle back recently when the rework hit so that I get get the steel for blowing a snowflake off of her. Then I said "screw it", dropped a spare Dasha in her, and tried her out in Ranked a couple of times. She's still not a fun ship, but when you're not grinding her at least she goes from "the definition of the word pain" to "mediocre". Maybe that's because literally the VERY last battle I played in her before unlocking Worcester she finally clicked with me, maybe it's the changing meta, maybe it's dumb luck, iDunno. The point is that she doesn't seem to be quite as bad as before. She can stay in port this time. Still not gonna take her out that often though, if I need a tier 9 cruiser that's what I've got Roon for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
205
[70]
Members
1,096 posts
5,643 battles

I now have Neptune and my conclusions are that Seattle was a ballet dancer compared to the Neptune.

Sure, pre-buff Buffalo is still godly compared to Sea Cattle, but at least Neptune is worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×