Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Hanger_18

Alaska "gimmick" idea

50 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

793
[MIA-P]
Beta Testers
3,342 posts
5,411 battles

Just curious as to what the rest of the community thought of this idea.

How about giving Alaska the USN BB upgrades, artillery plotting room 1/2, as it's "gimmick" (removing the mods they replace is debatable). 

using the assumed range of 18.05km (this is the expected number based off RF height) . I would also assume a sigma of, or between 2.05 or 1.9, and a dispersion between 142M and 293M ( based off 3 mount USN battleship and cruisers)

for those who don't know what they do off hand

Quote
Icon_modernization_PCM028_FireControl_Mod_I_US.png

Artillery Plotting Room Modification 1

500000Credits
  • +16% to main battery maximum firing range.
  • +5% to secondary battery maximum firing range.
  • -5% to maximum dispersion of secondary battery shells.

slot 3

Icon_modernization_PCM029_FireControl_Mod_II_US.png

Artillery Plotting Room Modification 2

3000000Credits Increases the firing accuracy of the main battery:
  • -11% to maximum dispersion of main battery.

slot 6

I believe this is something that a lot of people can be happy about for a few reasons.

  1. It's very flavorful, the USN named her after a territory to signify her middle ground between battleships and cruisers. This reinforces that further.
  2. Would compliment the guns well, as they only get better as range increases. This just helps the guns achieve the plunging fire they were designed for.
  3. increasing the range would play well with the armor scheme (the deck in particular). 
  4. This would help differentiate it from the kronstadt. The ships are close in a lot a ways with some subtle differences. Highlighting the guns would help get away from that, especially with kronstadts poor dispersion as a contrast.
  5. It's not a very outlandish gimmick, it makes sense, it's not going to be some new wild concept. It's neither to hot or to cold.
  6. everyone likes consistent guns.
  7. offsets the awful concealment value of 16.9/13.9 giving the ship a little more breathing space. 1km of stealth fire room is really tight and uncomfortable.
  8. It allows for player choice. it opens up room for a lot more builds (especially if you dont remove the mods that that the plotting rooms replace) all of the following are mods i would expect players to use as alternatives, or in tandem with.
Quote
Icon_modernization_PCM011_AirDefense_Mod_II.png

AA Guns Modification 2

500000Credits Extends firing range of AA mounts:
  • +20% to AA mounts maximum firing range

slot 3, theres always someone who hates CVs more than the next guy, and giving up the range APRM1 provides is certainly viable since 18km its already good. before considering a spotter consumable.

Wows_icon_modernization_PCM013_MainGun_Mod_III.png

Main Battery Modification 3

3000000Credits Decreases main battery loading time:
  • -12% to main battery loading time.
  • -13% to the main battery traverse speed.

slot 6, DPM is good. the Alaska turret rotation is already bad at 5* a second. reducing it by half a second and losing a chance at 11% dispersion in an exchange for accuracy by volume is a choice im sure some will be willing to make.

Icon_modernization_PCM018_AirDefense_Mod_III.png

AA Guns Modification 3

3000000Credits Increases AA effectiveness:
  • +25% to average damage per second of AA mounts.

slot 6, dispersion for AA isn't a good trade to me, but some of you out there living with CVPTSD out there might take it.


Optionally if you entertain the idea of not removing the mods that the plotting rooms replace, the following are a few i could see getting used. this option to me seems over powered, or overly stupid, but for thoroughness i have included it.

Wows_icon_modernization_PCM033_Guidance_Mod_I.png

Aiming Systems Modification 1

500000Credits Increases the firing accuracy of the main battery and secondary battery, accelerates the traverse speed of torpedo tubes, and extends the firing range of the secondary battery:
  • -7% to maximum dispersion of main battery shells.
  • +20% to torpedo tubes traverse speed.
  • +5% to secondary battery maximum firing range.
  • -5% to maximum dispersion of secondary shells.

slot 3, with accuracy stacking, this would be a strong choice with APRM2, although you give up some capacity for plunging fire, if you want to play more aggressively, this would be excellent.

Icon_modernization_PCM015_FireControl_Mod_II.png

Gun Fire Control System Modification 2

3000000Credits Extends the firing range of the main battery:
  • +16% to main battery maximum firing range.

slot 6, seems dumb to take this but, you could take this and APRM1 and have a range of 23.8km, if you have a screen large enough to lead that shot...in theory you could also grab spotter plane for a range of over 27km, at which point i am not only impressed that you can hit the target but also impressed that in the 1 hour the shell took to get there, the target hasnt dabbed WASD....i mean i guess torps will take about the same amount of time to reach the target so....? if its AP at that range its actually probable you will land a citadel if you hit. undoubtedly someone will try this and sit behind an island in spawn lobbing shells across the map for the game before blaming their team for the loss. degeneracy at its finest.

 

Thoughts everyone? thanks for making it this far.

Credit where its due because i stole some numbers from here-

Spoiler

 

 

  • Cool 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
793
[MIA-P]
Beta Testers
3,342 posts
5,411 battles
Just now, torpsRus said:

It will come when it comes stop asking thanks.

I didn't ask for it... im 100% sure you didnt actually read anything.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,176
[KWF]
Members
3,821 posts
5,577 battles

Not a bad idea, but we haven't seen or heard anything at all, so everything is speculation. As for the concealment I take it it's based on mast height? If so, WG has shown with Pensacola and various new BBs that height and detection don't always go hand to hand when balance is involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
793
[MIA-P]
Beta Testers
3,342 posts
5,411 battles
24 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

Not a bad idea, but we haven't seen or heard anything at all, so everything is speculation. As for the concealment I take it it's based on mast height? If so, WG has shown with Pensacola and various new BBs that height and detection don't always go hand to hand when balance is involved.

Yes yes and more yes. WG use mast as a base number then blananz as needed. It is a tall ship and with that fat concealment number it will have around the same visibility as an Iowa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
589
[SHOOT]
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
3,303 posts
10,955 battles
11 hours ago, Hanger_18 said:

Just curious as to what the rest of the community thought of this idea.

How about giving Alaska the USN BB upgrades, artillery plotting room 1/2, as it's "gimmick" (removing the mods they replace is debatable). 

using the assumed range of 18.05km (this is the expected number based off RF height) . I would also assume a sigma of, or between 2.05 or 1.9, and a dispersion between 142M and 293M ( based off 3 mount USN battleship and cruisers)

for those who don't know what they do off hand

I believe this is something that a lot of people can be happy about for a few reasons.

  1. It's very flavorful, the USN named her after a territory to signify her middle ground between battleships and cruisers. This reinforces that further.
  2. Would compliment the guns well, as they only get better as range increases. This just helps the guns achieve the plunging fire they were designed for.
  3. increasing the range would play well with the armor scheme (the deck in particular). 
  4. This would help differentiate it from the kronstadt. The ships are close in a lot a ways with some subtle differences. Highlighting the guns would help get away from that, especially with kronstadts poor dispersion as a contrast.
  5. It's not a very outlandish gimmick, it makes sense, it's not going to be some new wild concept. It's neither to hot or to cold.
  6. everyone likes consistent guns.
  7. offsets the awful concealment value of 16.9/13.9 giving the ship a little more breathing space. 1km of stealth fire room is really tight and uncomfortable.
  8. It allows for player choice. it opens up room for a lot more builds (especially if you dont remove the mods that that the plotting rooms replace) all of the following are mods i would expect players to use as alternatives, or in tandem with.

Thoughts everyone? thanks for making it this far.

Credit where its due because i stole some numbers from here-

  Hide contents
 

 

I dont know where the 25mm plating comes from when 27mm plating is the new norm for usn heavy cruisers; of whuch Alaska is one of them.

Edited by Crokodone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,100
[BBICT]
Members
3,586 posts
3,720 battles

Well, I do see her as a long range ship, not a brawler....but was I was hoping for a little better stealth...But we are gonna have to wait till we get closer before we can talk builds... *runs off to horde XP* 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,776 posts
6,729 battles

Wouldn’t this make the Alaska extremely powerfull vs broadside ships? A ship that can reliable punish broadside cruisers, and eat chunks from broadside BBs more reliable than BBs themselves?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
589
[SHOOT]
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
3,303 posts
10,955 battles
1 minute ago, LemonadeWarrior said:

Wouldn’t this make the Alaska extremely powerfull vs broadside ships? A ship that can reliable punish broadside cruisers, and eat chunks from broadside BBs more reliable than BBs themselves?

How so? Explain if you pls...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,776 posts
6,729 battles
2 minutes ago, Crokodone said:

How so? Explain if you pls...

 I might be totally off, but I think because it are low caliber “BB” guns they tend to overpen less frequently compared to Yamato, while being very accurate. Mainly when those AP shells do 9k damage.

Possibly completely off, but I like to learn so please explain to help me out :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
793
[MIA-P]
Beta Testers
3,342 posts
5,411 battles
24 minutes ago, Crokodone said:

I dont know where the 25mm plating comes from wheb 27mm plating is the new norm for usn heavy cruisers; of whuch Alaska is one of them.

Your most likely correct. But I had to cite my sources. Although I never brought plating into it.

14 minutes ago, Sir_Davos_Seaworth said:

Well, I do see her as a long range ship, not a brawler....but was I was hoping for a little better stealth...But we are gonna have to wait till we get closer before we can talk builds... *runs off to horde XP* 

Like another poster said, WG will likely alter that. This isn't about her overall stats, just using the upgrades as a gimmick.

9 minutes ago, LemonadeWarrior said:

Wouldn’t this make the Alaska extremely powerfull vs broadside ships? A ship that can reliable punish broadside cruisers, and eat chunks from broadside BBs more reliable than BBs themselves?

Not really.most of the t9 cruisers are very accurate and usually have more guns . Kronsh would be less accurate but have better lead times and vertical pen. The accuracy increase is a few %, not huge, unless you would consider aiming system with plotting room. Either way the lead time is still longer than any other CA at tier, as far as I'm aware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
793
[MIA-P]
Beta Testers
3,342 posts
5,411 battles
31 minutes ago, LemonadeWarrior said:

 I might be totally off, but I think because it are low caliber “BB” guns they tend to overpen less frequently compared to Yamato, while being very accurate. Mainly when those AP shells do 9k damage.

Possibly completely off, but I like to learn so please explain to help me out :)

Over pens are not usually the result of gun caliber, the only place in that check as far as caliber is armor thickness to arm the shell. Usually over pens are from the shell going through before the fuse can arm at short range. Fuse length is not caliber dependent.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,776 posts
6,729 battles
2 minutes ago, Hanger_18 said:

Over pens are not usually the result of gun caliber, the only place in that check as far as caliber is armor thickness to arm the shell. Usually over pens are from the shell going through before the fuse can arm at short range. Fuse length is not caliber dependent.

Ah, I forgot that one! Thanks Hanger! Think it would be great indeed that she gets the US niches as you suggested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,215 posts
3,177 battles

Anything that increases range ususally encourages camping. It would be sad to see 2 or 3 alaskas per team sitting 20+km away all game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,737
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,363 posts
672 battles
13 minutes ago, CarbonButtprint said:

Anything that increases range ususally encourages camping. It would be sad to see 2 or 3 alaskas per team sitting 20+km away all game. 

 

Given that it's probably going to be firing superheavies and they're probably going to be floaty like the rest of the US cruiser shells, I don't really see this being an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,215 posts
3,177 battles
2 minutes ago, ramp4ge said:

Given that it's probably going to be firing superheavies and they're probably going to be floaty like the rest of the US cruiser shells, I don't really see this being an issue.

You might be surprised. I've seen people run AFT and range mod on Gearing and stay at max range all game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
408
[SVF]
Members
1,362 posts
1,821 battles
1 hour ago, CarbonButtprint said:

You might be surprised. I've seen people run AFT and range mod on Gearing and stay at max range all game. 

I don't even want to know how many ticks' worth of lead you'd need to give with 127mm/38 guns at 15.45km.  Would you even be able to see what you're shooting at in max zoom?

Edited by landcollector

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
793
[MIA-P]
Beta Testers
3,342 posts
5,411 battles
23 minutes ago, CarbonButtprint said:

You might be surprised. I've seen people run AFT and range mod on Gearing and stay at max range all game. 

but those are people who are going to do that no matter what ship theyre in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
312
[RBMK]
Members
2,130 posts
13,349 battles
22 minutes ago, CarbonButtprint said:

You might be surprised. I've seen people run AFT and range mod on Gearing and stay at max range all game. 

 

8 minutes ago, landcollector said:

I don't even want to know how many ticks' worth of lead you'd need to give with 127mm/38 guns at 15.45km.  Would you even be able to see what you're shooting at in max zoom?

I run aft on gearing when i just lauched torps and im able to engage a radar ship or BB meanwhile still staying safe and capping. 

Also sure aft increases the gun arc. This just makes it easier to hit targets. Also to lead a full speed monty would probably be around 15-20 ticks at max range with roughly 15ish second air time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
228
[VIKES]
[VIKES]
Members
572 posts
14,759 battles

I like what you propose.  However I *do* think @LittleWhiteMouse's REFRIGERATOR rating would be off the charts with this build...because you know...Alaska. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
793
[MIA-P]
Beta Testers
3,342 posts
5,411 battles
38 minutes ago, nagasakee said:

I like what you propose.  However I *do* think @LittleWhiteMouse's REFRIGERATOR rating would be off the charts with this build...because you know...Alaska. :)

so if youll put the gun on the table over there out of reach...unpopular opinion. Alaska shouldnt get radar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
793
[MIA-P]
Beta Testers
3,342 posts
5,411 battles
1 hour ago, JessieTheKitty said:

 

I run aft on gearing when i just lauched torps and im able to engage a radar ship or BB meanwhile still staying safe and capping. 

Also sure aft increases the gun arc. This just makes it easier to hit targets. Also to lead a full speed monty would probably be around 15-20 ticks at max range with roughly 15ish second air time

how does a longer flight time make it easier?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
312
[RBMK]
Members
2,130 posts
13,349 battles
4 minutes ago, Hanger_18 said:

how does a longer flight time make it easier?

Sorry. I type to fast.... but not fast enough to keep up with my head..... what i meamt was easier to hit targets while behind islands or enemy is behind the island. Considering the arc is larger that gives you a little bigger chance at being able to fire over those massive cliffs in the game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,967
[BASIN]
[BASIN]
Members
3,513 posts
16 minutes ago, MasterDiggs said:

Alaska being Alaska (big with big guns) is gimmick enough since they would likely put it in a cruiser slot

Slow,Clumsy,Awkward  and slow firing  NTY

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×