Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
bubbleboy264

Acasta is just a worse Nicholas

37 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

316
[WOLF4]
Members
403 posts
5,410 battles

Seriously, what’s even the point of this ship. The Nicholas is better in almost every way. If the torps has like 8km range then it wouldn’t be half bad but they have an awful 6 km. The guns are just worse versions of the Nicholas guns, it has worse AA, terrible smoke, and it isn’t tough at all. The only nice thing about it is the acceleration and maneuverability but that definitely doesn’t make up for all the crappy things on this ship. Hopefully I’ll get the bonus missions for the other British DDs and they won’t suck as much as this thing does.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,967
[ARGSY]
Members
6,258 posts
4,207 battles
14 minutes ago, bubbleboy264 said:

Seriously, what’s even the point of this ship. The Nicholas is better in almost every way. If the torps has like 8km range then it wouldn’t be half bad but they have an awful 6 km. The guns are just worse versions of the Nicholas guns, it has worse AA, terrible smoke, and it isn’t tough at all. The only nice thing about it is the acceleration and maneuverability but that definitely doesn’t make up for all the crappy things on this ship. Hopefully I’ll get the bonus missions for the other British DDs and they won’t suck as much as this thing does.

I expect that at some stage in the future they will buff it to have the same torps as the Emerald, at 7km. Until then, does the Nicholas do any better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
773
[SF-A]
Members
2,892 posts
5,682 battles

Assuming there isn't something that's being overlooked or added soon, it's not all bad. Look at it as something that isn't powercreeping the game further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
358
[CUTER]
[CUTER]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,619 posts
8,871 battles

You don’t play the RNDD like USN DDs... the RN DDs are much more for holding areas and not pushing... the single torps are useful for that... as for the smoke it’s not meant for you to stop and fire in it’s meant for you to drop spotting pure defense.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
844
[SBS]
Members
2,462 posts
2,253 battles

I'll be a broken record on this until it get fixed, its the turret rotation.  There is no justification for these DDs to have that rotation with the bad shell arcs, short ranged torps, poor smoke, and no hydro or speed boost.  I'll be very surprised if the low/mid tier RN DDs aren't at the bottom of pretty much every stat.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
220
[PIZZA]
Supertester
918 posts
18,477 battles

The smoke is not something you sit in to fire guns....the smoke mechanic is a pop and run escape smoke, that is why you have a lot of them with fast reload times.  The torp range works just fine once you learn how to use the smoke mechanic.  Guns are pretty good too.   Accel/Decel/maneuverability is the best of the dd's...a definite island hopper.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,695
Members
18,195 posts
5,196 battles
49 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

I expect that at some stage in the future they will buff it to have the same torps as the Emerald, at 7km. Until then, does the Nicholas do any better?

Little Nicky is a wonderful T5 DD.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
302
[SIDE]
Members
1,247 posts
8,868 battles
5 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

Little Nicky is a wonderful T5 DD.....

Until it goes against a Gremyaschy, then it isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
620
[TF57]
Members
1,264 posts
3,933 battles
Quote

You don’t play the RNDD like USN DDs... the RN DDs are much more for holding areas and not pushing... the single torps are useful for that... as for the smoke it’s not meant for you to stop and fire in it’s meant for you to drop spotting pure defense.

I've heard this line about RN DD a few times.
"It's good for defence"  like it is a virtue. Like playing defensively and holding areas is something only RN DD can do.

"Wow, now I have RD DD I can defend now! In the past I could only play offensively!"

It doesn't refute the OP's argument.

If it's worse than another DD, then it's worse.

the single torps are useful = this is the only coherent point I've seen so far in favour. Do single fire torpedoes compensate for everything else?

 

  • Cool 3
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,695
Members
18,195 posts
5,196 battles
5 minutes ago, _Rumple_ said:

Until it goes against a Gremyaschy, then it isn't.

What is though? Although, I still like Nicky better in a knife fight.

Edited by Skpstr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,967
[ARGSY]
Members
6,258 posts
4,207 battles
14 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

Little Nicky is a wonderful T5 DD.....

I agree, all round; however, I was talking about the torpedo range. My bad for not being clearer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,695
Members
18,195 posts
5,196 battles
5 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

I agree, all round; however, I was talking about the torpedo range. My bad for not being clearer.

Lol no worries, I was just sticking up for my lil' devil!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
844
[SBS]
Members
2,462 posts
2,253 battles
15 minutes ago, evilleMonkeigh said:

the single torps are useful = this is the only coherent point I've seen so far in favour. Do single fire torpedoes compensate for everything else?

We'll see if that actually pans out to be an advantage.  I can see it being a big nothing burger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
429
[WOLF9]
Members
3,239 posts
2 hours ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

I agree, all round; however, I was talking about the torpedo range. My bad for not being clearer.

  I haven't earned mine yet, but does the Acasta get centre line tubes or sidemount?

  Imo, Nicky's quad sidemounts are a real life saver, as you merely have to turn the other cheek to get two more sets of loaded tubes ready for action.   Occasionally, you can also do epic things with em- like drive between 2 ships and dump a full broadside into each!   I can live with the short range, as Nicky is a knife fighter anyway.   (and your accuracy vs a target as difficult as a DD drops off very badly at range with the 5"38's moonshot arcs.)

  When I'm in my Russians, I find myself missing that second set frequently!  Esp when a bot pulls off another impossible dodge, and my entire broadside misses...   (and then I'm glad for the stupidly short range- as I'm not crapping my pants for the next couple of minutes hoping no ally drives into them)

  I have to say though- nothing I've seen posted so far about these RN DD's makes them look enticing to play- or contradicts the RN ships as the weird gimmick line.   So far it's looking like a hard pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
796
[ICE9]
Members
811 posts
3 hours ago, Slimeball91 said:

I'll be a broken record on this until it get fixed, its the turret rotation.  There is no justification for these DDs to have that rotation with the bad shell arcs, short ranged torps, poor smoke, and no hydro or speed boost.  I'll be very surprised if the low/mid tier RN DDs aren't at the bottom of pretty much every stat.

Seems to be a chronic RN DD thing. I've had Gallant for quite awhile now, and she's a good bushwacker with max concealment, but that's about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,187
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,799 posts
10,299 battles

A-cant-sta - can't stealth torp, still not a great gunboat. Stealth is middling. No engine boost and no compensating hydro.

A terrible ship, terribly designed. No niche. No capability. No point.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
620
[HEROS]
Members
1,426 posts
11,973 battles

*blinks in amazement*

I drive IJN DD's and I happen to like this ship.  Your expecting a "I win" button ship for whats is temporarily a premium but is going to be a main line tech tree ship?  Yea right.  Think again,  and actually think this time!

For my Acosta I assigned Jack Dunkirk (the other Dunkirk brother) with 10 points...put 6 points into the 3 skills he gets bonuses with, and gave em BFT for his 3 point (after using some elite commander XP to give him another 2 points).  So yea, no overboost for the engines but that's ok.  Firse both HE and AP from the guns.. decent rate of fire, with buffs a decent turret traverse.  Guns are pin point accurate with low arcs so if you are a good shot she'll treat you well.   Typical torpedo launch option for RN ships, single torps or narrow spread.  Only 6 Km on the torps so they're all about the ambush.  Many many many charges of smoke but it doesn't lay but 2 puff and it dissipates quickly, do defense break line of sight and run away, not sit in and hide..  (you do that you die! strait up simple get it figured now)

The guns hit decently hard ( I've gotten one kill minimum in every mission I've run in the ship) Fairly nimble.  Solid performer.. How solid depends on your skill at running the ship.. she will not carry potato play at all.  Drive her wrong you die but her stats reflect royal navy DD doctrine  (go do a little reading, it'll be worth the effort)

She is primarily  gun boat and she's also a rather small target.   If you not all that good in DD's your still going to perform poorly in this ship. Learn to shoot well, learn when not to shoot.  Learn when to break off, pop smoke, and get some distance then turn about and come back at them from a different direction.  In and out, in and out, in and out.  This is what you do to do well.  Ships move, tactics are real.  Flat thinkers not rewarded!   Drive aggressively but learn when to back off and quickly.. she's only a DD and if you stay when you should have bugged out you'll die.

Always understand a ship is just a tool.. YOU are the weapon.  She's most certainly not an american DD.  She's better in some ways, worse in others and differences are tiny but there.  It's up to you to make the differences work for you.  I see a lot of players doing well in the ship, and I see just as many doing poorly.  There's nothing mystical here. The ship is going to perform only as well as you are capable of making perform.  

And as for the poor sods that had the misfortune of running into me driving her over the last 2 days..sorry.. I may be a "potato" when you looks at my stats, but I'm a DD specialist who's been playing for 3 years which translates to I am going to be much much better then my stats will lead you to believe..  The longer someones been playing the less reflective of a players skills those stats are.  

Edited by TL_Warlord_Roff
I typo there fore I are
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
2,983 posts
4,374 battles

their "gimmick" is maneuverability, so WG show us a ship line that is mediocre at everything else.

WOW

COLOR ME SURPRISED.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
92
[BLAZE]
Beta Testers
122 posts
3,601 battles

I mean, looking at the stats, it is historically accurate. 

35kts top speed according to historical data. "March, Edgar J. (1966). British Destroyers: A History of Development, 1892–1953; Drawn by Admiralty Permission From Official Records & Returns, Ships' Covers & Building Plans. London: Seeley Service."

Armed with 4.7 inch QF Mark IX & XII which has a rate of fire of 12 per minute. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4.7_inch_QF_Mark_IX_%26_XII

Yeah sounds about right, we are just gonna have to play the ship to her strength. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,291
[SYN]
-Members-
6,873 posts
7,383 battles
1 hour ago, TL_Warlord_Roff said:

 

And as for the poor sods that had the misfortune of running into me driving her over the last 2 days..sorry.. I may be a "potato" when you looks at my stats, but I'm a DD specialist who's been playing for 3 years which translates to I am going to be much much better then my stats will lead you to believe..  The longer someones been playing the less reflective of a players skills those stats are.  

You have 12k average damage in Acasta. Get out of here,  Get some help for the Dunning Krueger on your way out, please.

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
634
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Members
2,830 posts
1,327 battles
6 hours ago, _Rumple_ said:

Until it goes against a Gremyaschy, then it isn't.

Gremy's a bit OP at T5.  Gremy's the gunboat, and Kamikaze's the torpboat...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,481 posts
2,334 battles
6 hours ago, evilleMonkeigh said:

I've heard this line about RN DD a few times.
"It's good for defence"  like it is a virtue. Like playing defensively and holding areas is something only RN DD can do.

"Wow, now I have RD DD I can defend now! In the past I could only play offensively!"

It doesn't refute the OP's argument.

If it's worse than another DD, then it's worse.

the single torps are useful = this is the only coherent point I've seen so far in favour. Do single fire torpedoes compensate for everything else?

 

1 hour ago, Cruxdei said:

their "gimmick" is maneuverability, so WG show us a ship line that is mediocre at everything else.

WOW

COLOR ME SURPRISED.

 

Watch them get a gimmick as a buff, faster fire rate or more accuracy when firing at lower speeds. 

Edited by Yoshiblue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
620
[TF57]
Members
1,264 posts
3,933 battles
Quote

And as for the poor sods that had the misfortune of running into me driving her over the last 2 days..sorry.. I may be a "potato" when you looks at my stats, but I'm a DD specialist who's been playing for 3 years which translates to I am going to be much much better then my stats will lead you to believe..  The longer someones been playing the less reflective of a players skills those stats are.  

Actually that's the opposite of how stats work.

The more games you play (bigger sample size), the more accurate the stats.

I.e. you win 4 of 10 games, (40% win rate) it could be a bad run of teams.  You win 4000 of 10,000 games, you are an undeniably awful player.

Quote

And as for the poor sods that had the misfortune of running into me driving her over the last 2 days..sorry..

:Smile_facepalm:  I suspect most "poor sods" would love to run into a T5 DD who is captained to a 42% win rate and 12k average damage.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,187
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,799 posts
10,299 battles
43 minutes ago, evilleMonkeigh said:

I.e. you win 4 of 10 games, (40% win rate) it could be a bad run of teams.  You win 4000 of 10,000 games, you are an undeniably awful player.

There is another effect.

If you play 100 games and get a 50% win rate, then increase your win rate to 70% for another 10 games your overall WR increases to 51.8%

If you play 1000 games and get a 50% win rate, then increase your win rate to 70% for another 10 games your overall WR increases to 50.2%.

In this particular case I don't believe it's what's happening, and I still think Acasta sucks, and I do about 40k average damage in it so far.

1 hour ago, LancasterOne said:

I mean, looking at the stats, it is historically accurate. 

 

Some very critical stats - including stealth, and which torpedoes are used are however set more by WG than by history. WG could readily give Acasta reasonable best-case stealth of 5.7 (let alone Kamikaze's 5.4km) for instance, or as contemporary ships get 7 or 8km torpedoes equip those. It's also WG's choice to give her a pretty garbage smoke option compared to other destroyers.

If that's not enough the Acasta should be removed or down-tiered (personally I think it would work) and a more capable vessel substituted. Historic inability should not be a reason to have an underperforming ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
92
[BLAZE]
Beta Testers
122 posts
3,601 battles
30 minutes ago, mofton said:

Some very critical stats - including stealth, and which torpedoes are used are however set more by WG than by history. WG could readily give Acasta reasonable best-case stealth of 5.7 (let alone Kamikaze's 5.4km) for instance, or as contemporary ships get 7 or 8km torpedoes equip those. It's also WG's choice to give her a pretty garbage smoke option compared to other destroyers.

If that's not enough the Acasta should be removed or down-tiered (personally I think it would work) and a more capable vessel substituted. Historic inability should not be a reason to have an underperforming ship.

 

I mean.... when you look at the stats in-game and historical data, the Mk IX torps that were fitted to "A" destroyers like the Acasta are already massively overperforming. 
Check this out.
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WTBR_WWII.php

 

Ship Class Used On Leander and later cruisers, "A" and later destroyer classes
Also replaced the old Mark VII in some 8" (20.3 cm) cruisers during the war
Date Of Design 1928
Date In Service 1930
Weight 3,732 lbs. (1,693 kg)
Overall Length 23 ft 10.5 in (7.277 m)
Negative Buoyancy 732 lbs. (332 kg)
Explosive Charge Mark IX and IX*:
750 lbs. (340 kg) TNT
Mark IX**:
Originally: 722 lbs. (327 kg) TNT
Later: 805 lbs. (365 kg) Torpex
Range / Speed Mark IX:
10,500 yards (9,600 m) / 36 knots
13,500 yards (12,350 m) / 30 knots
Mark IX*:
11,000 yards (10,050 m) / 36 knots
14,000 yards (12,800 m) / 30 knots Mark IX**:
11,000 yards (10,050 m) / 41 knots
15,000 yards (13,700 m) / 35 knots
Power Burner-cycle, 264 hp @ 41 knots

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×