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

Worchester or Des Moines?

which?  

101 members have voted

  1. 1. which?


49 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

508
[FAE]
Members
2,365 posts
2,900 battles

Which cruiser should I grind for? Which one is stronger? 

I was a YueYang main, and then the fire nation attacked. Also played lot of Chung Mu, Fletcher, Harugumo, Gearing. Have Musashi, GK, Tirp/Bis, and Mass, but my aim is kinda not that great. 

I really like Helena, Takao and Aoba. Meh on Cleveland. Yuck on Dallas and Pensa.

Does the 1km less radar on rooster matter a lot? (Or is rooster allowed to get closer?) 

Which has more consistent damage? 

Does either ship have more skill ceiling and more ways to outplay bad situations? 

Is DM very very good against Rooster? Or not really? Since they can rock-fire? 

Is one noticably more mobile in a useful way? 

Questions of bad-times: 
Do they both die about the same amount? 
Have you ever had moments where you wished you were one or the other? 
Are there moments that really suck for one but not the other? 
Are there more moments where one is better? 

 

Edited by BlailBlerg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40
[DDCO]
[DDCO]
Members
132 posts
9,363 battles

I voted DM.....

I play it a lot...in random, rank and clan

Radar + good HE and good AP + good concealment = sunk ships

just don't broadside...of course

 

Edited by Renuz
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,061
[WOLFB]
Members
2,918 posts
12,198 battles

Both play quite the same: staying behind cover and hammer ship with high DPM guns.

 

But they don't really perform the same role :

-DM has that juicy AP pen angle on 203mm guns which is really good against CL / CA /BB. It's also very good against DD with HE.

I would rate ++ against CA / CL and BB and + against DD. Also you can bounce 381mm guns which is pretty usefull against T8 and some T9 BB.

 

-Worcester is more of a utility CL. It's really good against DD, good against CA / CL and decent against BB. Also since it's a CL, it also has very strong AA. You have tons of consummable so you don't have to fear DD torps nor CV strike. However unlike DM you're covered with 25mm armor which means every BB you face will overmatch it. 

I would rate ++ against DD and CV + against CA/CL and BB. 

 

Both can be quite stealthy so they can blap other ship with AP however DM will have higher chance of surprise blapping cruiser thanks to her 203mm while Worcester is better at surprise blap DD around corner and to some extent, CL. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
780
[-ZF-]
Beta Testers
3,280 posts
4,907 battles
13 minutes ago, BlailBlerg said:

Which cruiser should I grind for? Which one is stronger? 

I was a YueYang main, and then the fire nation attacked. Also played lot of Chung Mu, Fletcher, Harugumo, Gearing. Have Musashi, GK, Tirp/Bis, and Mass, but my aim is kinda not that great. 

I really like Helena, Takao and Aoba. Meh on Cleveland. Yuck on Dallas and Pensa.

Does the 1km less radar on rooster matter a lot? (Or is rooster allowed to get closer?) 

Which has more consistent damage? 

Does either ship have more skill ceiling and more ways to outplay bad situations? 

Is DM very very good against Rooster? Or not really? Since they can rock-fire? 

Is one noticably more mobile in a useful way? 

Questions of bad-times: 
Do they both die about the same amount? 
Have you ever had moments where you wished you were one or the other? 
Are there moments that really suck for one but not the other? 
Are there more moments where one is better? 

 

The worcester is undoubtedly OP, but you should still grind for the DM

yes 1km on the radar matter, even as a DM, you will find yourself reaching sometimes to get a few extra meters.

pretty even....Worcester is reliant on RNG a bit more, but the raw HE damage is still solid.

DM...you can shoot your way out of some really bad spots with AP.

The DM is tailor made to absolutely murderize Worcesters and Minotaurs. the can only shoot 2 guns each, unless they show side to get the rest working. DM has improved AP autobounce angles, a perfect recipe for killing an entire ship in seconds. Even if they dont show side, youl win the HE DPM race.

worcester is more resiliant towards citadels overall, but the DM can bully some battleships that cant overmatch her bow.

never wished i had a worcester...but i play DM for the AP so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,011 posts
4,386 battles

I pick the Worcester, but for the general public I would recommend the Des Moines.

Higher skill ceiling on the Worcester.

DM hard-counters the Worcester.

DM can pseudo bow tank to an extent; gets deleted harder when caught sideways though.

The radar range difference IS noticeable.

I do more consistent damage in the Worcester. DM has the AP deletion power though.

I don't have the legendary module for my DM yet, but I heard it makes her quite mobile.

 

Edited by BattlecruiserOperational

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
797
[PSV]
Privateers, Supertester
5,523 posts
5,886 battles

Des Moines is a much more punishing ship to play than Worcester simply due to her relatively high citadel and relatively thin armor compared to most other Tier X cruisers - she can't bow-tank like Moskva, she can't get away with going broadside like Zao's troll armor, she can't speed-tank like Henri, and she can't just run around in the open until she finds a destroyer to kill like Minotaur. She also doesn't have access to Defensive AA Fire and Hydroacoustic Search simultaneously - she must choose one or the other. Furthermore, she doesn't have the best stealth - she has the fourth best concealment of all Tier X cruisers at 10.6km.  And on top of all this, she has extremely floaty shell arcs for 203mm shells, although they are the USN SHS shells (I'll get into the pros later). 

However, her best traits are her rate of fire (best out of all heavy cruisers), best short-range penetration (including normalization, she pens at really odd angles much better than all the other CAs), and great anti-air defense (second only to Worcester). This means that at 12km and under, theoretically, she can easily out damage other cruisers (provided the player is utilising all 9 guns).

Worcester, on the other hand, has a low citadel, extremely thin armor (much like Des Moines), the best anti-air defense of any ship, great rate of fire (4.6 second reload per turret), great turret traverse, great concealment on par with Zao (0.2km less than Zao), and has access to Defensive Fire and Hydroacoustic Search simultaneously. Most of the time you will be able to get away with going broadside to battleships unlike Minotaur or Des Moines simply due to how low the citadel is (only at close ranges). Ships with high shell velocity will have a higher chance of overpenetrating your citadel the closer they get to you, meaning that you can technically and theoretically "tank" by going broadside. Although doing this requires a certain degree of experience and understanding of game mechanics. You can also just let out a constant stream of fire at a higher range than Des Moines, and combined with your shell caliber, this means you can easily hit enemy ships hiding behind islands much better than Des Moines simply due to the shell arc. It also works on straight-lining, slow enemy battleships such as Yamato.

 

Overall, Worcester is far more noob-friendly than Des Moines.

Edited by Personator
Correction by Kaga
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,105
[N-W-T]
Members
1,841 posts
7,285 battles

DM by far more competitive.  Worcester arguably more fun.  DM AP has power to delete any cruisers that show broadside, while still having good HE and DPM. The Worcester has been badly nerfed with both its radar reduction to 9.0, as well as the global CE nerf in 8.0.  It used to be a great destroyer hunter, but DDs now have a safe buffer zone to keep you spotted so everyone else can blap you.  DM is by far a better DD hunter with its superior radar range. 

Edited by DouglasMacAwful

Share this post


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

Personally, with her older 9.9km Radar and great stealth, Worcester was better in the utility department, which is very important to me since I do quite a bit of Radar Cruisers.  I hunted DDs quite well with that.  But with the nerf, DM is back to rule that roost for me.  Worcester still has unrivaled AA.

 

For now.

 

Also, Des Moines is cheaper to run on captain points than Worcester.  Simply because DM is a 203mm armed CA and you can tell IFHE to go f--k itself and use those 4 precious points into something else.  With 14pts a DM player can have CE + AFT, which covers the core of what DM needs to bring out the strengths of the ship.  But Worcester?  She demands points.  14pts means you skip out one of the 3 key tier 4 skills:  CE, IFHE, AFT.  One of those has to go for Worcester.  Really, 18pts is what you need to bring the key strengths out of that ship.

 

But to give a different perspective, you could go for Worcester and get Arsenal Ship Salem in place of DM.  Salem is the same class as DM.  Same gun and lots of other characteristics but her Radar and AA is worse.  But she does get Super Heal and is a bit cheaper to run, as well as being a Premium Ship.

 

Another important quirk with Worcester and DM-class is Worcester has to show a lot of sides to get her max firepower.  DM doesn't need to do that.  She has fast firing 203mm auto-loaders and she can fight in a more protective bow on, sharply angled profile if need be.  In such a profile, DM-class still presents 6 out of 9 of their hard hitting 203mm guns with 5.5 second base reload time.  In taking advantage of some island cover, that's all DM-class needs to do

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
98
[ARMDG]
[ARMDG]
Members
786 posts
3,289 battles

I'd say go for Des Moines. Worcester has a more limited role when compared to Des Moines's versatility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,057 posts
5,618 battles

I never bothered to grind t9+ usn cruisers... but fight them quite often... my zao and hindy eat them both for breakfast. Mino is rough depending on radar cd and torp situation. My dds avoid them both like the plague. What gets weird is fighting them in a bb... bow tanking dm is a pain to deal with... but doable. wooster takes the cake though... wooster will give full broadside and instead of being devstruck will eat 100% overpens rather than citadels. Its wild. Tanking bbs by having less armor rather than more. A mino can only dream of that. The raw dpm of either makes them dangerous if that first salvo fails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
93
[WWJWD]
Beta Testers
104 posts
6,362 battles

There is no  'h' in Worcester.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,589 posts
9,247 battles

Both have their pros and cons.  The DM with 27mm bow armor and with the improved AP, make it far better close up than the wooster.(bow tanking tier german bbs, and tier 8 and 9 FR BBs)  With that said, the DM eats lots of raw full pen damage, and as others have pointed out, a easy to hit cit.  The wooster on the other hand can be a pain to be punish, thanks to its low cit.  You can get away with a lot of dumb moves it in for that reason. 

 

The Wooster has more utility, but the DM has the more radar range, and harder hitting guns.(it can fire further out without too much issue as well)  If the Wooster can be in a spot where all its guns can fire, its DPM is something to be feared in any opposing ship.  Its low concealment gives it plenty of room to sneak around without being seen. 

 

just please dont be one of those players who sails around spamming HE shells at 18km in the wooster.   You aren't making effective use of your tools, and you just look dumb.  You aren't hitting anyone but AFKs or straight liners.  Somewhat similar with the DM with spotter planes.(i dont have a problem with a DM shooting people 18km away while using the range mod, but generally you want to be hitting people closer than that)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
246
[QQ7]
Members
375 posts
4,706 battles

Both have extremely high skill ceilings.  Island camping is the easiest way to play, and if you do so I think DM is more noob friendly as you can just bow in and use the front guns, whereas the wooster needs to have its entire broadside firing for good dpm.

I love wooster, and I play open water wooster at that.  It is a great ambusher where if I catch anything by surprise under 10km they literally melt to no health before they can get their turret rotated to me.  That takes a bit more experience and is a relatively high risk play style however.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
827
[VCRUZ]
Members
3,303 posts
8,136 battles

I dont have either, but im grinding DM right now, currently at Buffallo. And thats is manly due to the great AP. IMO, DM is better at punishing enemy ships with that great AP. Worcester is great at farming cheap HE damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,174
Members
1,643 posts
3,656 battles

when i play DD and see a worchester i run. Even at max range with Russian DD's the amount of firepower they can bear on you will get some hits and those hits add up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,031 posts
6,485 battles

Rooster's shells travel into the upper stratosphere before coming back, outside 15km the ship can't hit even a BB that's maneuvering.

DM is deadly at all ranges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
307
[-S-R-]
Beta Testers
531 posts
3,300 battles

If you're going to grind the legendary, DM is pretty much better in most ways other than it has a magnetic citadel.  If not, I'd probably choose Worcester first to farm CV tears in 8.0.  Worcester isn't bad, in fact the IFHE dpm is nuts, but the firing angles are pretty bad and it pales in maneuverability to legendary DM.  With the pending CL/CA rebalance, IFHE rework and the like, I kind of think the CLs are going to be hit with an effective dpm nerf bat after they have AA relevance again in 8.0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,133
[WOLF7]
Members
12,224 posts

Have to love the responses....

Everyone chimes in, and they all seem to have a completely different opinion....:Smile-_tongue:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
508
[FAE]
Members
2,365 posts
2,900 battles

They seem to be really strong cruisers. And it’s the year of cruisers and radar 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
714
[90TH]
Members
1,724 posts
10,757 battles
2 hours ago, Croda said:

There is no  'h' in Worcester.

There is no 'w' in orcester brohan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,344
[DRACS]
Members
4,734 posts

Des Moines for sure.

Worcester *depends* on IFHE to be effective. And it's only because of IFHE that it is capable of badly hurting high tier anything. Des Moines doesn't need it, freeing up 4 points to be used elsewhere. And during a recent Waterline episode (I believe), the Phils stated that they are not happy with IFHE and feel that high rate of fire and high dpm ships are supposed to be balanced out by their inability to do penetration damage to most parts of heavier ships other than the superstructure, which is certainly not the case now and the reason why Worcester and Harugumo are so overwhelmingly monstrous right now.

Also, I simply prefer DM because of it's 27mm bow, it's forward focused firepower, and it's heavy reliable shells that utterly wreck other cruisers and can still do severe damage to battleships.

Share this post


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

Both are worth grinding for, but personally, I feel like I feel like I have more carrying potential in a Worcester than a Des Moines.

The shorter range radar does matter, but it's not the end of the world for the Worcester. Your radar to concealment buffer of 0.53 km is still better than the Des Moines' 0.78 km. You'll still get the jump on a DD quicker than a Des Moines can, albeit at a closer distance. Although if you're going to be hiding behind an island a lot, the shorter radar range is a definite downside compared to the Des Moines.

The Worcester with IFHE has more consistent damage than the Des Moines, but the latter can pump out more burst damage if an opportunity to use her AP shells pops up. Worcester AP generally needs to be shot at a flat broadside within 10 km to deal considerable damage.

The Worcester has a higher skill ceiling than the Des Moines. Although the latter probably has more outplay potential.

At closer ranges, the Des Moines should smash the Worcester. The Worcester could theoretically win if she does a drive by on the Des Moines and out-turns their turrets. At further distances the outcome is decided by who has the better aim.  

The Worcester is very slightly more agile than the Des Moines. The Worcester's considerably faster turret traverse means that she can react quickly to unexpected situations, and there's also very little downtime between you needing to traverse the guns and continuously firing off a withering volume of IFHE.

Against 16" BB guns and up, the Worcester is arguably more durable simply because she sits lower in the water and has a shorter citadel than the Des Moines. Against 15" BB guns, the Des Moines is more survivable without question. 

Sometimes when I play the Des Moines, I wish I was in a Worcester.

Trying to brawl and bow-tank other ships is a terrible situation for the Worcester but a favorable one for the Des Moines.

On the open water - advantage to Worcester, don't try to duel ships like the Henri IV and Zao at long range though

Hugging your island waifu and only sticking out the front 6 guns - advantage to Des Moines

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×