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

What's the Attraction of the Free XP Large Cruisers?

67 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
305 posts
4,617 battles

Hey all

I'm curious about the free XP large Cruisers, I don't get the attraction- I"m not questioning those that do like them, I'm just wondering 'Why" and if I'm missing something.

LIke the Alaska, I know people have been asking for it since Beta, and it's certainly a great looking ship (which does count for a lot) but the ship itself seems..."meh" from a game standpoint.

It's the size of a BB, with the armor of a cruiser, it doesn't have the alpha of a BB, nor the dakka of a cruiser. It's not really fast or maneuverable, nor particularly stealthy.

It doesn't (to me, but I'm not really a good, let alone great player) seem to have a particular great blend of all the strengths of cruisers or BBs either.

Not trying to trash talk it, as I said I'm really just wondering if I'm missing something about the ship considering how many people seem interested in it (and the IJN T10 one) I even citadelled them both with my Hipper the past weekend, again not claiming anything by that, but paying a million free xp for something that can be citadelled by a hipper from 14Km or so seems odd.  Complete honesty says I don't pay a lot of attention to hte game mechanics- it's perfectly possible that people get lucky citadels vs Yamatos and Montana's with T8 203's- so I'm not really bashing the Alaska or the IJN T10.

Really just wondering if people want the ships for the history/for the looks/ or if these cruisers are actually incredibly powerful and I'm just not seeing it.

 

Thanks!.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
333
[-K-]
Members
1,149 posts
8,136 battles

For Alaska especially, and to a lesser extent the Azuma, I think it's a reflection of their historical nature (real in Alaska's case, planned in Azuma's).

From a gameplay perspective, I think they are envisioned to be fun to play because they appear to hit a bit harder than most cruisers, yet maintain a higher ROF and have more maneuverability and stealth than most battleships.  I think a lot of players envision them to be a bit of a Goldilocks ship.  Whether they turn out to be that, or an insufferable compromise, we'll have to wait to see.

Edited by RightYouAreKen
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27,194
[HINON]
Supertester
21,483 posts
15,244 battles

Plus, it's the rarity. You can't get similar game play for free in the tech tree.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,015
[HYDRO]
Members
3,608 posts
5,131 battles

Alaska and in general these types of large cruisers often tend to have better accuracy than battleships, yet worse than cruisers. So they are at a nice compromise where you can get damage approaching BB levels and at a higher RoF but with a bit of the cruiser accuracy good sauce.

In addition having elements of both ship types makes them appealing to crowds that normally wouldn't touch a cruiser, or wouldn't play a battleship. All that on top of historical reasons of course.

Edited by warheart1992
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
666
[LUCK]
Members
1,700 posts
23,947 battles
Just now, Capt_PepsiHolic said:

Some folks have all the ships and more Free XP than they know what to do with. Might as well use it on something.

Exactly. What the heck else am I going to do with 1M FreeXP? Got all the others. I'll have another mill by the time the next one rolls around.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
222
[WOLFB]
Members
853 posts
28,032 battles

I have all the free xp ships. What else is there to do with so much free XP. (still sitting on 3 million free)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
647
[TOG]
Members
3,743 posts
19,935 battles
6 minutes ago, Wye_So_Serious said:

Exactly. What the heck else am I going to do with 1M FreeXP? Got all the others. I'll have another mill by the time the next one rolls around.

Or use dinero to get free Xp. works either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,631
[GWG]
[GWG]
Members
6,318 posts

If Germany had produced the Graf Spee as much as it did U-boats, the US would have needed a fleet of the Alaska class to hunt them all down, especially if we had lost Great Britain to the Axis. In those times of the dawning 1940s, history could have gone many ways. That being said, the mission of the Alaska was to kill oversized cruisers. Where the like armed Dunkerque was the French answer, the Alaska was the US response. I was hoping the Alaska was going to be a T6 Battleship... but NoooooOOOooooOooooo !!!. .. So there it is, advertised at 1M FXP. .. I often wonder what price the Missouri would ask, given the credit earning potential.. maybe 1.5M FXP ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,507
[TBW]
Members
8,132 posts
14,856 battles

Free, Tier 9, I want all of the ships good or bad. Will I play it? I have 254 ships, it will get it's turn.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
592
[NGA]
Members
1,863 posts
9,719 battles
1 minute ago, AVR_Project said:

If Germany had produced the Graf Spee as much as it did U-boats, the US would have needed a fleet of the Alaska class to hunt them all down, especially if we had lost Great Britain to the Axis. In those times of the dawning 1940s, history could have gone many ways. That being said, the mission of the Alaska was to kill oversized cruisers. Where the like armed Dunkerque was the French answer, the Alaska was the US response. I was hoping the Alaska was going to be a T6 Battleship... but NoooooOOOooooOooooo !!!. .. So there it is, advertised at 1M FXP. .. I often wonder what price the Missouri would ask, given the credit earning potential.. maybe 1.5M FXP ??

Snort. With what resources? U-boats were relatively cheap and didn't require near as much steel to build, that was their main strength. Even the most modern U-boats (the type 21) was only about 1,600 tons. Graf Spee was nearly ten times that at 15,000 tons. Furthermore, raiding ships like Graf Spee, especially operating alone would be highly vulnerable to aircraft. And as the battle of the River Platte showed, they weren't proof against cruiser-level firepower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
206
[DIEBL]
Members
568 posts
6,791 battles

They soak up a cruiser slot, so it is possible to be Alaska/Kron matched against a Seattle/Donskoi.

The hit like a truck and have larger health pools and still maintain a degree of utility.

And they’re awesome, like being an OG Hummer at an offroad convention.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,233
[CRMSN]
Members
8,527 posts
9,191 battles
23 minutes ago, Fog_Battlecruiser_Haruna said:

You get to use ap at range

And repeatedly devstrike cruisers while not in a BB or a DD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,547
[WOLF3]
Members
21,685 posts
19,928 battles

These 305mm armed "Cruisers" take a little of two things from Battleships:

1.  Large guns, BB-like power at the cost of some accuracy.  But you don't have Full BB Style DIspersion.  You do have to pay with that RNG though.  However, the Tier X ones stand apart:  Stalingrad has 2.65 Sigma which is simply ridiculous and B-65 / Azuma seems to have great accuracy.  Alaska and Kronshtadt less ambitious in their accuracy.  But the power is present in all.  Go ahead and show a broadside in your Cruiser or Battleship to any of these 305mm armed Super Cruisers.  They live for punishing ships like this.

 

2.  Drawing on more HP to survive.  71k or so HP for a "Cruiser" is a big deal.

 

And they take a Cruiser slot and not a Battleship.  Notser in a recent Azuma video actually speaks of his concern that these "Large Cruisers" are the ideal replacement for Cruisers.  Anyways, the contest doesn't even look fair:

Dmitri Donskoi or Kronshtadt.

Buffalo / Seattle (This POS was just recently nerfed, too!:Smile_teethhappy:) or Alaska.

Moskva or Stalingrad.

Is this even a contest?  The strengths of these "Large Cruisers" is noticeable as they have BB-like firepower and BB-like HP, and aren't easy to delete like a real Cruiser.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
137
[DOG]
Members
698 posts
8,421 battles

I wonder what logic WG uses when deciding whether to classify one of these things as a large cruiser vs. a BB.  Might be better to just go ahead and create a BC class, in order to have some place to put them, along with Prinz Eitel Friedrich.  Hood and Kongo were classed as BCs at one point.  You could make an argument that Graf Spee belongs there also.  (Sorta kinda).  And the U.S. had plans for a Lexington class with 8 x 16" guns.  I think they all got converted to CVs, IIRC. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,076
[ARGSY]
Members
13,523 posts
8,727 battles
1 hour ago, Lert said:

You can't get similar game play for free in the tech tree.

Scharnhorst? Sure, they are 11-inch instead of 12-inch, but it's still 3 x 3 (relatively) major calibre guns on a fast hull. 

The difference is that the T9 battlecruisers (for want of a better word) are immune to Asashio torps.

No, they are not cruisers with the armament of contemporary battleships (that would take 15 inch guns or better, i.e. Gneisenau as she is in game), but their anti-cruiser role is how the type was first envisaged and IMO makes them deserving of the name.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,547
[WOLF3]
Members
21,685 posts
19,928 battles
2 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

Scharnhorst? Sure, they are 11-inch instead of 12-inch, but it's still 3 x 3 (relatively) major calibre guns on a fast hull. 

The difference is that the T9 battlecruisers (for want of a better word) are immune to Asashio torps.

No, they are not cruisers with the armament of contemporary battleships (that would take 15 inch guns or better, i.e. Gneisenau as she is in game), but their anti-cruiser role is how the type was first envisaged and IMO makes them deserving of the name.

Scharnhorst isn't a tech tree ship where you can acquire it for free via Credits like Gneisenau, Bismarck, Bayern.  These "Large Cruisers" or whatever term people like to use, are pretty exclusive.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
888
[MIA-I]
Supertester
2,888 posts
5,527 battles

Personally, reason I'm looking forward to them, they're harder hitting cruisers that have the longevity advantage over other cruisers.  Not quite BB guns, not quite BB armor, and guns that can reach out and hurt even battleships if they find themselves in the wrong position.  I fell in love with the style when I got the Graf Spee really. 

Edited by vonKaiser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,143
[XBRTC]
Members
2,888 posts
9,194 battles
3 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

Scharnhorst? Sure, they are 11-inch instead of 12-inch, but it's still 3 x 3 (relatively) major calibre guns on a fast hull. 

The difference is that the T9 battlecruisers (for want of a better word) are immune to Asashio torps.

No, they are not cruisers with the armament of contemporary battleships (that would take 15 inch guns or better, i.e. Gneisenau as she is in game), but their anti-cruiser role is how the type was first envisaged and IMO makes them deserving of the name.

Scharnhorst is a premium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,076
[ARGSY]
Members
13,523 posts
8,727 battles
1 minute ago, LT_Rusty_SWO said:

Scharnhorst is a premium.

Oops. DERP. Misread that as "non-free-XP"

Edited by Ensign_Cthulhu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,193
[WOLF1]
Members
4,327 posts
1,975 battles
1 hour ago, Lert said:

Plus, it's the rarity. You can't get similar game play for free in the tech tree.

Variety is the reason  I play WoWS.  If you're a min/maxer, your first question is "Why would you play this ship?".  I'm a collector.  Why wouldn't I play this ship?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×