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

Poll: Which Tier 8 battleship is the strongest for a secondary build?

Which Tier 8 battleship(s) is the strongest for a secondary build?  

90 members have voted

  1. 1. Which T8 BB is the strongest for a secondary build?

    • USN - Massachusetts (BB-59)
    • USN - Alabama (BB-60)
      0
    • USN - North Carolina (BB-55)
      0
    • KM - Bismarck
    • KM - Tirpitz
    • MN - Richelieu
    • MN - Gascogne
    • RM - Roma
      0
    • IJN - Amagi
      0
    • IJN - Kii
    • RN - Monarch (Design 15C)
      0
    • I haven't played battleships with a secondary build

29 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

87
[1-]
Members
578 posts
3,350 battles

Nowadays almost every Bismarck I see in random matches are secondary build and they push aggressively.:Smile_teethhappy: Meanwhile only some Massachusetts's are secondary build, probably because some players are new and haven't realized how much fun there is once you go secondary.

According to some articles I have read (quoted below), Massachusetts has more powerful and accurate secondaries than German T8s, and I do buy into the theory that Mamie is currently the strongest T8 for a secondary build. What's your take? Vote, discuss!

On 7/4/2018 at 10:02 AM, TheDreadnought said:

Secondary Hit Rate: 34%
My full secondary spec Tirpitz averages 24%.  Massachusetts' number is also lower than it would be otherwise because the accuracy of the guns changed my behavior.  I began shooting a lot more at DDs at 10+km because I knew I could get reliable hits.  In Tirpitz, I'd concentrate on targets that were closer because although the secondaries reach out that far, against small targets they weren't very effective at landing hits at that range.  The built in accuracy on Massachusetts is a HUGE game changer.

Average Damage Per Hit:  202
This is a BIG number.   Tirpitz without IFHE averages only 92 damage per secondary hit (total damage/total hits).  This is due to the fact that most of your hits come from the small 105mm secondaries, which have a tough time penetrating.  When you put IFHE on Tirpitz to help out those 105s, the average damage per secondary hit rises to 130.  Much better, but still far short of Massachusetts.

 

worldofwarships 2018-08-23 14-21-20-43.jpg

worldofwarships 2018-08-23 14-22-10-39.jpg

worldofwarships 2018-08-23 14-23-38-17.jpg

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
469
[QNA]
[QNA]
Members
1,838 posts
5,879 battles

Nine 152mm HE Guns on the rear hurts anything they see. When you got something chasing you, you can count on them to annoy them while you focus on what is in front of you.

Edited by Vangm94

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
360
[ARP2]
Members
1,223 posts
3,566 battles

I love my secondary Amagi, but Mass is where it's at.  Accept no substitute.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,062 posts
4,736 battles

Mass hands down.  It has improved accuracy on its secondaries and tears DD's apart at range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
87
[1-]
Members
578 posts
3,350 battles

I really hope WG buffs Roma and extends her secondary range. 5 km base secondary range on the Roma does not measure up to Tier 8 battles.

 

worldofwarships 2018-08-23 14-37-59-06.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
318
[SYJ]
[SYJ]
Members
917 posts
2,119 battles

Its a feature on the Bismark and Tirpitz

Its an oddity on the Massachusetts

Its an accessory for the Richlieu

 

The only ship thats wrong to NOT spec for secondaries is the Bismark/Tirp. Richlieu doesnt have super insane secondaries, and Massachusetts functions for many as a crew trainer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,669
[TBW]
Members
6,319 posts
11,878 battles
7 minutes ago, _Marines said:

I really hope WG buffs Roma and extends her secondary range. 5 km base secondary range on the Roma does not measure up to Tier 8 battles.

 

worldofwarships 2018-08-23 14-37-59-06.jpg

I think it's the only purchasable Premium I don't have. Partly because it seemed weak, but mostly because the credit collecting Camo was so awful.

High tier French have pretty good range but The Germans and the Massachusetts are a bit better.

Edited by Sovereigndawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,493
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,793 posts
19 minutes ago, _1204_ said:

Its a feature on the Bismark and Tirpitz

Its an oddity on the Massachusetts

Its an accessory for the Richlieu

 

The only ship thats wrong to NOT spec for secondaries is the Bismark/Tirp. Richlieu doesnt have super insane secondaries, and Massachusetts functions for many as a crew trainer

Disagree.

If you own Massachusetts. . .you MUST spec for secondaries with a dedicated captain.  If you bought her as a crew trainer, you made a mistake.  You should have bought Alabama instead,

There's no reason to own Massachusetts vs. Alabama unless you are going full secondary build.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,965
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,728 posts
7,354 battles
14 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

Disagree.

If you own Massachusetts. . .you MUST spec for secondaries with a dedicated captain.  If you bought her as a crew trainer, you made a mistake.  You should have bought Alabama instead,

There's no reason to own Massachusetts vs. Alabama unless you are going full secondary build.

This.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,585
[E-E]
[E-E]
Members
15,590 posts
14,010 battles

Tirpitz is the most dangerous Secondaries Build candidate of the VIII BBs.  Giving her the full Secondaries works will let her do extra damage and fires in the brawl via Secondaries.  And when she gets close enough, torpedoes.  If the target survives the torpedo salvo, they may have popped their DCP already a while ago due to the fires caused by Secondaries, so the chance of the target flooding are higher.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
781
[MIA-I]
[MIA-I]
Supertester
2,712 posts
4,689 battles

I'm a German player, full secondary spec Bismarck and Tirpitz, even Scharnhorst.  I switch back and forth sometimes between secondary and stealth builds.  I don't own the Massachusetts.  I did get to play it during the Pirate event and went as full secondary as I could with the 10 point captain supplied. 

Don't let my German ships hear this...

Massachusetts secondaries are so much fun that I'm honestly fighting the urge to buy it right now.  If I did buy it?  well my Tirpitz and Bismarck would be locked into stealth builds from then on because they're just not as impressive as the Mass. 

 

My 2 cents. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
159
[AWP]
Members
780 posts
2,950 battles

I think it depends on two things:

1) Do you have an 18+ point captain? 

2) Do you want to go full secondary + IFHE?

If you said yes to both, the Massachusetts is the best. If you said no to one, Bismarck/Tirpitz will be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
507
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
4,950 posts
1,487 battles

Tirpitz. Not because of automatic uber numbers. But just because the rest of the ship compliments getting into a position to use them. Massachusetts has the more destructive secondaries, but she has the innate man gun accuracy and serious lack of good brawling armour that make pushing into range of them much less desirable. Conversely Tirpitz has made in german armour scheme coupled with torpedoes. No one with any ounce of sense wants to get into a sub 6km brawl with a tirpitz because there is no way your coming out of that the winner unless the tirpitz driver screws up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
600
[HYDRO]
Members
1,316 posts
3,662 battles

On advantage that I noticed seeing lots of Mass in battle, is how the high shell arcs of the 127mm's means they land on the superstructures more often than not, therefore not necessitating IFHE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
173
[SIDE]
Members
714 posts
3,135 battles

Tirpitz while weaker in 2nd guns than the Massachussets. Is much better at dealing with close range targets. it's got that amazing KM turtleback which makes fighting this thing close range a nightmare, the 6km torpedoes which gives it an insane edge vs any BB wanting to charge it. Also the main guns reload faster so that does help...

That's why I gotta go with Tirpitz for 2nd guns. If you are planning to be that close. you gotta prep for when the enemy wants to go even closer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
276
[LHG]
Members
1,190 posts
4,924 battles
51 minutes ago, _Marines said:

I really hope WG buffs Roma and extends her secondary range. 5 km base secondary range on the Roma does not measure up to Tier 8 battles.

 

worldofwarships 2018-08-23 14-37-59-06.jpg

Roma is just one or two tweaks away from being a decent ship instead of a meh ship. Secondaries would be a good flavor for her, because at least it would dissuade smaller boats from engaging in one of the areas she struggles in most, close combat.

 

As for OP's question, I think Bismarck, Tirpitz, and Massachusetts are all tied. Bismarck and Tirpitz share secondary capabilities, but one can make safer approaches while the other can make deadlier approaches. Massachusetts has arguably better secondaries, but she requires a completely specialized build requiring a lot of points and her durability isn't that high.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6
[SAVAG]
[SAVAG]
Members
35 posts

I would love to see Roma have the equivalent in secondary power as the Bismark/Tirpitz . Hell I'd take a secondary build like the Riche. T8 Frenchie it's decent and can help on a fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,042 posts
1,915 battles
1 hour ago, Flashtirade said:

Roma is just one or two tweaks away from being a decent ship instead of a meh ship. Secondaries would be a good flavor for her, because at least it would dissuade smaller boats from engaging in one of the areas she struggles in most, close combat.

 

As for OP's question, I think Bismarck, Tirpitz, and Massachusetts are all tied. Bismarck and Tirpitz share secondary capabilities, but one can make safer approaches while the other can make deadlier approaches. Massachusetts has arguably better secondaries, but she requires a completely specialized build requiring a lot of points and her durability isn't that high.

127 mm/38 twin-mountings in this game are also not known for their durability, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,078
[SIM]
Members
2,432 posts
4,060 battles

Pure secondaries? Big Mamie runs away with it, but I find that Tirpitz pulls a bit ahead when you also factor in her torpedoes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
318
[SYJ]
[SYJ]
Members
917 posts
2,119 battles
6 hours ago, TheDreadnought said:

Disagree.

If you own Massachusetts. . .you MUST spec for secondaries with a dedicated captain.  If you bought her as a crew trainer, you made a mistake.  You should have bought Alabama instead,

There's no reason to own Massachusetts vs. Alabama unless you are going full secondary build.

Yeah but you can still use her as a crew trainer... No ship is reliant on secondaries. That would be stupid. But to use her to her full potential, yes. Full secondary speced captain all the way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
230
[NGA-B]
Members
1,205 posts
7,621 battles

There are various factors in defining the "best" secondary ship. Obviously the two main contenders are Mass and Bismarck/Tirpitz. The later has a broadside of 10 127mm guns in 5 turrets with an RoF of 15 shots per minute, 600 damage per shot (assuming there's a penetration), a 5% fire chance, and penetration of up to 21mm. While this is good, the shells themselves aren't all that fantastic. What makes Massachusetts shine is her secondaries' accuracy. However, this is countered at range by the fact that these are American 127mm guns which means long flight times and a hard-maneuvering enemy (especially a DD, the main prey of secondaries) will be able to throw off the predictive aiming. In contrast, Bismarck and Tirpitz have two sets of secondaries: 6 150mm and 8 105mm per side all in double turrets (so 3 and 4 respectively). The former have Rof of 8 per minute, 566 damage, 8% fire chance, penetration of 37mm while the later have about 18 per minute, 400 damage, 5% fire chance, and penetration of 25mm. They also have much better initial velocity and arcs than the 127mm. So while the US shells may hit more often and deal more damage when they penetrate, the Germans are more likely to penetrate and do damage to certain targets (namely cruisers and battleships) and have a bit more weight of fire. Both can of course get IFHE to improve their penetration, though this has a stronger negative impact on German ships due to the higher penalty to HE rounds above 139mm. Still, even with this bonus, the Mass's secondaries are only capable of dealing damage to the superstructure of enemy BBs tier VIII+ (an important thing to consider given the current matchmaking) while German secondaries can penetrate the standardized 32mm plating of tier VIII+ BBs. In summary, the Mass is better suited for dealing with DDs, and CLs/CAs (with heavy captain skill investment), but the German ships are better for fire setting and dealing with heavier enemy ships i.e. CLs/CAs and fellow BBs.

One more item that NEEDS to be considered is their armor scheme since secondaries require getting close to the enemy. And it's here that the US ship falls to Germania. While suited for bow-tanking, in order to take advantage of its secondaries, the Massachusetts will need to show its side and this can result in a lot of pain via a somewhat exposed citadel. By contrast, the Germans have "turtleback armor" and while they seem to take penetrating damage more easily, at close range, their cits are much more protected than their US counterparts.

Overall, if you plan to brawl, especially with BBs, take the Bismarck or Tirpitz since both those ships come with a further bonus of either Hydro Acoustic Search (Bismarck, useful for dodging torps) or torpedoes (Tirpitz, an excellent close range weapon that can really ruin someone's day if they've used their Damage Control to reduce your fires).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
47 posts
5,635 battles

I have the Tirpitz, but not the Massachusetts (yet), but I seen how they both play.  (At least when done correctly.)  Even though they both almost demand secondary builds there is a fundamental difference between the two.  The Tirpitz keeps getting more dangerous as it gets closer, but not the Massachusetts.  That doesn't mean the Tirpitz is the better ship, it means their play styles are slightly different.  So I discount any talk about which ship is the better brawler, it's the Tirpitz hands down.  If you're close to point blank range with the Mass; especially against the Tirpitz but even again other BB's, you're not playing it right.  You want to stand off just a bit.  After that you can analyze secondary range, DPM, penetration differences, shell arcs and fire starting capability.  I haven't done that, and I think I'll leave it to someone else.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
507
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
4,950 posts
1,487 battles
3 hours ago, JediMasterDraco said:

There are various factors in defining the "best" secondary ship. Obviously the two main contenders are Mass and Bismarck/Tirpitz. The later has a broadside of 10 127mm guns in 5 turrets with an RoF of 15 shots per minute, 600 damage per shot (assuming there's a penetration), a 5% fire chance, and penetration of up to 21mm. While this is good, the shells themselves aren't all that fantastic. What makes Massachusetts shine is her secondaries' accuracy. However, this is countered at range by the fact that these are American 127mm guns which means long flight times and a hard-maneuvering enemy (especially a DD, the main prey of secondaries) will be able to throw off the predictive aiming. In contrast, Bismarck and Tirpitz have two sets of secondaries: 6 150mm and 8 105mm per side all in double turrets (so 3 and 4 respectively). The former have Rof of 8 per minute, 566 damage, 8% fire chance, penetration of 37mm while the later have about 18 per minute, 400 damage, 5% fire chance, and penetration of 25mm. They also have much better initial velocity and arcs than the 127mm. So while the US shells may hit more often and deal more damage when they penetrate, the Germans are more likely to penetrate and do damage to certain targets (namely cruisers and battleships) and have a bit more weight of fire. Both can of course get IFHE to improve their penetration, though this has a stronger negative impact on German ships due to the higher penalty to HE rounds above 139mm. Still, even with this bonus, the Mass's secondaries are only capable of dealing damage to the superstructure of enemy BBs tier VIII+ (an important thing to consider given the current matchmaking) while German secondaries can penetrate the standardized 32mm plating of tier VIII+ BBs. In summary, the Mass is better suited for dealing with DDs, and CLs/CAs (with heavy captain skill investment), but the German ships are better for fire setting and dealing with heavier enemy ships i.e. CLs/CAs and fellow BBs.

One more item that NEEDS to be considered is their armor scheme since secondaries require getting close to the enemy. And it's here that the US ship falls to Germania. While suited for bow-tanking, in order to take advantage of its secondaries, the Massachusetts will need to show its side and this can result in a lot of pain via a somewhat exposed citadel. By contrast, the Germans have "turtleback armor" and while they seem to take penetrating damage more easily, at close range, their cits are much more protected than their US counterparts.

Overall, if you plan to brawl, especially with BBs, take the Bismarck or Tirpitz since both those ships come with a further bonus of either Hydro Acoustic Search (Bismarck, useful for dodging torps) or torpedoes (Tirpitz, an excellent close range weapon that can really ruin someone's day if they've used their Damage Control to reduce your fires).

 

KM 105mm secondaries do not get 1/4 pen so they only have 18mm of HE Pen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
140
[2347]
Members
178 posts
4,717 battles

Tirpitz, because her torpedoes make her the best close-in brawler and therefore the strongest overall platform for a secondary build. Her armor scheme doesn't hurt either. If the question had been which ship has the best secondary armament, my choice would probably be different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
109 posts
2,416 battles
15 hours ago, TheDreadnought said:

Disagree.

If you own Massachusetts. . .you MUST spec for secondaries with a dedicated captain.  If you bought her as a crew trainer, you made a mistake.  You should have bought Alabama instead,

There's no reason to own Massachusetts vs. Alabama unless you are going full secondary build.

I have my Mass setup for full secondaries with a 19 point captain and it’s great.

However, I’ve had plenty of games in it where things never really got into secondary range and the ship still does extremely well because its a slightly less accurate NC with a crazy fast heal. The heal is so good, I actually think you could spec it out normally and train a BB captain on it if you wanted.

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.

×