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

Russian/Soviet BB line possible gameplay characteristics

25 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
5,159 posts
60 battles

I just came back from a year of on hiatus status & I probably missed something went on a few months back. Anyway, I hope you guys don't mind me to bring this up on the table to discuss.

It looks like the Russian/Soviet BB line has been announced. As far as I know based on my findings in the past:-

Tier III - Knyaz Suvorov (the first dreadnought BB design preceding Gangut/Sevastopol)
Tier IV - Gangut/Sevastopol
Tier V - Pyotr Veliky (possibly a pre-Izmail design that someone mentioned it in the past)
Tier VI - Izmail (unsurprisingly treated as a BB, a tad too slow to be a proper battlecruiser [BC/CB])
Tier VII - Sinop (Kostenko's Project GUK Battleship 1917 design! YES!!!)
Tier VIII - Vladivostok (based on the Ansaldo BB project schematics the Soviet naval architects bought from the Italian OTO shipbuilding company for their Type-A BB project)
Tier IX - Project 23 Sovetsky Soyuz
Tier X - Project 24 Kreml (ultimately made as the Soviet Yamato with 457mm main batteries) 

Compared with other factions:-

  • They will possibly be having the highest HP that any other factions in general.
  • Armor compositions may not be as good as the German counterpart for earlier ships, but will get better when getting into the last three Soviet BBs - Vladivostok, Sovetsky Soyuz & Kreml.
  • Given their highest HP, they could possibly be better at torpedo protection, but even more so for both Vladivostok, Sovetsky Soyuz & Kreml, which its torpedo protection values could be having the highest due to the application of Pugiliese torpedo defense system & later American-type TDS.
  • Unfortunately, most Soviet/Russian BBs' main guns will be struggling hard in terms of max. range. It was said that it supposed to be having the longest range, but reduced to be in the margin of German main gun range. Possible reason being is that a max. effective (acceptable) ranges are given instead, because beyond the given in-game gun range parameter, dispersion would get abysmally worse that it is deem unacceptable.
  • But, their main guns' AP firepower are actually pretty decent, it matches the American firepower & then has the strongest firepower with Kreml (rivals Yamato)
  • Their secondary firepower in overall may not be as dakka-ish as the Germans nor the French, but their total DPS are actually pretty good & wouldn't perform as bad as the Americans, British & Japanese combined.
  • AA firepower may not be performing well on earlier ships, but gets better down the line. At least not worse than Japanese counterparts. But with Kreml, her AA firepower comes close second to Montana's.
  • Maneuverability aren't their strength due to having the largest turn radius, but they got the fastest rudder turn speed to make it up.
  • Top speeds are good & consistently improves down the line.
  • Strangely, they aren't as big as the German counterparts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,403
[POP]
Beta Testers
4,288 posts
6,102 battles

they are true brawlers without the baby mode of turtleback armor.

their accuracy at medium range(below 15km) is monstrous,maybe the best in game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,943
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
7,411 posts
10,956 battles

im looking forward to the Kreml, that thing looks beastly if played right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
513
[LEGIT]
Members
2,219 posts
30,429 battles

I really want to see how they compare to Massachusetts.  If they can best that ship I'll be impressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
678
[UFFA]
Members
2,068 posts
75 battles

Purchased from OTO or Ansaldo? The two companies were big rivals it would seem odd for Ansaldo to give OTO a cut. 

Pugliese TDS is only going to be on Soyuz, no? My understanding was Vladivostok was one of the Soviet designs and Soyuz is the evolution of UP.41. The other battleship design offered was a much lighter 28k ship with 343mm rifles. Vladivostok has a rather unique appearance as well as using the older 406mm rifles of Imperial vintage.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,924
[DOTM]
Beta Testers
1,628 posts
10,646 battles

So fake Russian ships are shaping up to potentially be overpowered? I am so shocked. /s

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,579
[INTEL]
Members
12,355 posts
34,353 battles

I dont think the high citadels will matter. It doesnt stop ships like Yammy, Vanguard, or N Carolina from being effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,646
[WOLF3]
Members
25,289 posts
22,304 battles

Any BB player that brawls without the luxury of mega secondaries nor German Turtlebacks will find themselves at home with this line.  I like to brawl with my USN BBs, particularly High Tier even against "Mega Secondaries" BBs and come out on top.  Watching these things in action, it's exactly how I'd like to fight with my USN BBs.

 

Looking forward to them.

 

However, I see DDs and especially CVs cutting these ships apart.  Their TDS isn't exactly grand and will be a weakness to all torpedo sources, surface ship launched or from bombers.  The typical build tends to focus on ASM1 and Main Battery, so these things aren't exactly getting AA Builds, either so I see them eating a lot of CV damage.

 

The tall citadel such as on IX Sovetsky Soyuz won't be an issue for decent BB players that know how to protect their citadels.  Yamato, Musashi have tall citadels but do well.  Roma has a tall citadel, yet there's that core of her players that still do well despite that issue.  Etc.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,159 posts
60 battles
1 hour ago, Sparviero said:

Purchased from OTO or Ansaldo? The two companies were big rivals it would seem odd for Ansaldo to give OTO a cut. 

Pugliese TDS is only going to be on Soyuz, no? My understanding was Vladivostok was one of the Soviet designs and Soyuz is the evolution of UP.41. The other battleship design offered was a much lighter 28k ship with 343mm rifles. Vladivostok has a rather unique appearance as well as using the older 406mm rifles of Imperial vintage.

 

Ah, my bad. From Ansaldo, if I'm not mistaken.

Yeah, both Vladivostok & Sovetsky Soyuz will have Pugliese TDS, as the latter (Pr. 23 Sovetsky Soyuz) was a direct evolution from Pr. UP.41. Thanks for the clarification, by the way.

Though, I'm under an impression that the hull upgrade for Sovetsky Soyuz could as well upgrade to the American-type TDS for better torpedo protection.

Nevertheless, hopefully the VMF BBs stand out at tanking torps better than other factions, since Moskva could tank torps slightly better than other CAs.

Edited by Xero_Snake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,159 posts
60 battles

You know, by the name Kreml, people automatically tend to associate it with the Moscow Kremlin - the central government complex of the USSR & the modern Russian Federation. But if anyone understands Russian, the word Kreml is, in fact, stands for fortress complex since the medieval times. There were other oblasts could have its own Kremlsky besides Moscow alone.

Henceforth, this Tier X Soviet Leviathan is, unironically, a cruising fortress literally for being the most resilient BB of all.

Edited by Xero_Snake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,725 posts
7 hours ago, Zaydin said:

So fake Russian ships are shaping up to potentially be overpowered? I am so shocked. /s

 

Ehh, the Germans are really the only ones that can complain.

Conqueror, Minotaur and Daring aren't exactly weak

Montana, Des Moines and Gearing have been staples of competitive play forever and now they have the Worcester.

Yamato, Zao and Harugumo are all formidable.

GK, Hindenburg and Z-52? Pretty much port queens these days.

 

 

Edited by CaptainTeddybear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,175
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
11 hours ago, Cruxdei said:

they are true brawlers without the baby mode of turtleback armor.

Why do people keep spouting this? They are definitely NOT brawlers; they are mid range harassers. Their armor is WORSE at close range (above water citadel that is the outside of the ship) where penetration is highest, thus negating even angling their thick belts. Their secondaries are piss poor; default ranges in the 6 km at T10, 5 km at T9, and 4 km at T6; and while RoF is on the higher side (equal to the Monty at the high end), their lower HP per gun, and awful placement (especially the fore and rear turrets) means they will still be putting less out than say USN BB's or even IJN BB's. Likewise their lack of any torpedo defense system (topping out at 29% and covering almost none of the ship's length) and no sonar or DD-spotting radar makes them VERY weak against DD's up close, as does their anemic (topping out at *6600*) HE Damage (that means against a DD, their best HE damage per shell will do a mere 2100, compared to say, Conq's 7200 w/ 419's and 8200 w/ 457's), their high MV which frankly leads me to believe they will be incapable of citadel most ships at rangers under 8 km, and finally, their low Base RoF makes them VERY poor brawlers.

People keep saying this, hoping against hope, but with what evidence I do not know, as no feature, not their armour layout, secondaries, consumables, main battery performance, to say nothing of their horrid turn radius, none of it makes them brawlers. They are mid range harrassers; the other side of the coin of the RN BB's.

For what it's worth, it do you (and others) to know that with Soviet BB's added, there are 2 versions of the 3 types of BB's in game: brawlers, mid range harassers, and long range snipers; each with a variation on that theme:

Brawlers (Ranges from 0 km to 10 km): KM and MN; the KM maximizes outlasting your opponent with superior armour and armour layout, sonar to spot torps and ships in smoke, surprising agility, and typically the highest HP at tier; hoping to remain in secondary range for as long as possible to burn down the opponent and chip away with fast, but weak, main battery guns. The French on the other hand focus on charging the opponent as fast as possible, with gun layouts that typically maximizes forward firing arcs, to close the range to where their weaker, but more numerous secondaries can start to whittle away enemy health and to get their main battery in a position to do huge damage (which they are very capable of doing) and with massive AA power to be the first line of defense against enemy CV's.

Mid-Range Harassers (10 km to 18 km): RN and RU; RN uses a combo of above average stealth, awesome heal, funky AP (in a good way) and overused (but useful) HE to get into mid-ranges, let off a few bursts of AP or HE, tank any HE spam happening at those range by healing through it largely unaffected, and stealthing away as needed. Their long lengths, poor TDS, and lower on average health renders them very weak to concerted AP attacks (where spike damage will blow out their citadels) and need to remain far enough away to let dispersion make that more difficult, and likewise need range to keep torpedo threats to a minimum. RU (appears to be) the other side of this coin, less stealthy but laser accurate and quick to react, being able to switch their guns from one side to the other with cruiser speeds, and with SUPER AA to act as a screen for the second line better than most cruisers. Likewise their radar allows them to spot enemy BB ambushes and any CV's that stray too close to the front line. Their lack of unlimited heals would render them kindling up close but at mid ranges means that they can defeat HE spam (with aid to their thicker on average plating) and Torps that get through on faster order than other BB's. Both will be bad at sniping cits however: the RN because of fast fuses and the RU because of high velocity.

Long Range Snipers (18 km and up): USN and IJN; IJN are the 'snipers' with great accuracy, and somewhat floaty shells to blow out cits at most ranges, with above average calibers at most tiers, but poor maneuverability and terrible gun handling (bad arcs and slow turrets). The USN has very floaty, but MASSIVELY damaging shells that will cit almost anything at long range with ease. And their great AA gives them more leway to do the famous stop-n-bowtank while presenting slender targets for torps. And their fast speed and nominally fast turrets allows them to reposition more readily than the IJN. They too typically get higher caliber guns earlier. Their lower armour, higher cits (shared with IJN), and high volume of plating makes them poor brawlers and middling mid range harrassers.

That's the breakdown of BB's in WoWs and RU BB's will fit nicly. What is curious is how RM BB's will fit into this. And none of this means they CANNOT brawl, just like IJN BB's CAN brawl as can USN and the Conq can snipe and the GK can snipe, but it IS NOT playing to their strengths and players forcing a square peg in a round hole are handicapping themselves by using an unoptimized ship in a role it doesn't fit; just because you CAN doesn't mean you should; you CAN brawl with the USN, but they are much better served sniping. You CAN snipe with the GK but you are much better served brawling. You may do 'well' brawling with the USN, but if you played the same match over with a GK you'd have done that much better.

 

Edited by _RC1138
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
678
[UFFA]
Members
2,068 posts
75 battles

I imagine thanks to the scaling accuracy and high potential of VMF HE shells switching ammo types and using HE will probably result in the same damage potential as secondaries memes.

 


I just double checked Vladivostok and Soyuz are both at 21% TDS so it appears Lesta is using this as part of the balance. One thing is it seems the decks have a bit more fidelity as I think Roma kind of suffers from bombs sometimes arming later than they should due to game mechanics. This was the layout for the UP.41 project as drawn by Tzoli in Sappino's book.

ex6cn1X.png

vs Ukraine hull as examined by the Italians.

odBI15e.png

The armor belt definitely seems to go much higher on Vladivostok and Soyuz as compared to Roma or UP.41 layout. One thing I found interesting it seems to indicate that the main belt was made up of up to four pieces of laminated armor in sections.

250 x 100 x 10 x 16 high resistance steel
220 x 75 - 0.5/1.0 NiCr

How many pieces of laminate armor were needed for the 425mm piece?

 

gTpm40o.png

Vladivostok secondary arrangement funnel uptake and other things seem rather far off from UP.41 as well.

2eqgz2e.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,551
[PVE]
Members
19,836 posts
12,005 battles
11 hours ago, Xero_Snake said:

I just came back from a year of on hiatus status & I probably missed something went on a few months back. Anyway, I hope you guys don't mind me to bring this up on the table to discuss.

It looks like the Russian/Soviet BB line has been announced. As far as I know based on my findings in the past:-

Tier III - Knyaz Suvorov (the first dreadnought BB design preceding Gangut/Sevastopol)
Tier IV - Gangut/Sevastopol
Tier V - Pyotr Veliky (possibly a pre-Izmail design that someone mentioned it in the past)
Tier VI - Izmail (unsurprisingly treated as a BB, a tad too slow to be a proper battlecruiser [BC/CB])
Tier VII - Sinop (Kostenko's Project GUK Battleship 1917 design! YES!!!)
Tier VIII - Vladivostok (based on the Ansaldo BB project schematics the Soviet naval architects bought from the Italian OTO shipbuilding company for their Type-A BB project)
Tier IX - Project 23 Sovetsky Soyuz
Tier X - Project 24 Kreml (ultimately made as the Soviet Yamato with 457mm main batteries) 

Compared with other factions:-

  • They will possibly be having the highest HP that any other factions in general.
  • Armor compositions may not be as good as the German counterpart for earlier ships, but will get better when getting into the last three Soviet BBs - Vladivostok, Sovetsky Soyuz & Kreml.
  • Given their highest HP, they could possibly be better at torpedo protection, but even more so for both Vladivostok, Sovetsky Soyuz & Kreml, which its torpedo protection values could be having the highest due to the application of Pugiliese torpedo defense system & later American-type TDS.
  • Unfortunately, most Soviet/Russian BBs' main guns will be struggling hard in terms of max. range. It was said that it supposed to be having the longest range, but reduced to be in the margin of German main gun range. Possible reason being is that a max. effective (acceptable) ranges are given instead, because beyond the given in-game gun range parameter, dispersion would get abysmally worse that it is deem unacceptable.
  • But, their main guns' AP firepower are actually pretty decent, it matches the American firepower & then has the strongest firepower with Kreml (rivals Yamato)
  • Their secondary firepower in overall may not be as dakka-ish as the Germans nor the French, but their total DPS are actually pretty good & wouldn't perform as bad as the Americans, British & Japanese combined.
  • AA firepower may not be performing well on earlier ships, but gets better down the line. At least not worse than Japanese counterparts. But with Kreml, her AA firepower comes close second to Montana's.
  • Maneuverability aren't their strength due to having the largest turn radius, but they got the fastest rudder turn speed to make it up.
  • Top speeds are good & consistently improves down the line.
  • Strangely, they aren't as big as the German counterparts.

Welcome back. Definitely been some changes in the last year.

 

The Dev Corner is a new sub-forum where the Dev blogs are posted. There have been RU BB tweaks already with the biggest being that there *may* be two tech tree T10's, Slava with 406mm guns and Kreml with 457mm guns. So far, there have been tweaks all the way down to the T3s based on initial testing.

 

Per the 8.3 Dev blog, early access RU BBs, T5 Pyotr Celikiy, T6 Izmail, T7 Sinop, and T8 Vladivostok will be rare drops in containers for the Victory event (tweaked Go Navy).  If that planning holds, then the full line should likely drop with 8.4. Right now, 8.3 looks to be scheduled for Wed, April 24th and 8.4 looks to be Wed, May 22nd, if nothing slips.

 

Dev Corner

https://forum.worldofwarships.com/forum/303-developers-corner/

 

https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/public-test/bulletin-083/

 

Edit: Forgot that Lenin will be a premium T8 BB.

 

Edited by Kizarvexis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,159 posts
60 battles
1 hour ago, Sparviero said:

I imagine thanks to the scaling accuracy and high potential of VMF HE shells switching ammo types and using HE will probably result in the same damage potential as secondaries memes.

 


I just double checked Vladivostok and Soyuz are both at 21% TDS so it appears Lesta is using this as part of the balance. One thing is it seems the decks have a bit more fidelity as I think Roma kind of suffers from bombs sometimes arming later than they should due to game mechanics. This was the layout for the UP.41 project as drawn by Tzoli in Sappino's book.

ex6cn1X.png

vs Ukraine hull as examined by the Italians.

odBI15e.png

The armor belt definitely seems to go much higher on Vladivostok and Soyuz as compared to Roma or UP.41 layout. One thing I found interesting it seems to indicate that the main belt was made up of up to four pieces of laminated armor in sections.

250 x 100 x 10 x 16 high resistance steel
220 x 75 - 0.5/1.0 NiCr

How many pieces of laminate armor were needed for the 425mm piece?

 

gTpm40o.png

Vladivostok secondary arrangement funnel uptake and other things seem rather far off from UP.41 as well.

2eqgz2e.jpg

 

 

Do you have the link for this particular Sappino's book? I could take my time to read through. Please & thank you. :)

So both Vladivostok & Sovetsky Soyuz TDS might not be working well in resisting torpedoes as was initially expected in-game?

57 minutes ago, Kizarvexis said:

Welcome back. Definitely been some changes in the last year.

 

The Dev Corner is a new sub-forum where the Dev blogs are posted. There have been RU BB tweaks already with the biggest being that there *may* be two tech tree T10's, Slava with 406mm guns and Kreml with 457mm guns. So far, there have been tweaks all the way down to the T3s based on initial testing.

 

Per the 8.3 Dev blog, early access RU BBs, T5 Pyotr Celikiy, T6 Izmail, T7 Sinop, and T8 Vladivostok will be rare drops in containers for the Victory event (tweaked Go Navy).  If that planning holds, then the full line should likely drop with 8.4. Right now, 8.3 looks to be scheduled for Wed, April 24th and 8.4 looks to be Wed, May 22nd, if nothing slips.

 

Dev Corner

https://forum.worldofwarships.com/forum/303-developers-corner/

 

https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/public-test/bulletin-083/

 

Edit: Forgot that Lenin will be a premium T8 BB.

 

Dude... I really thank you very much for showing me the dev dairy video. Much appreciated.

God damn, it only just took a single design engineer to burn a midnight oil to compile all fragments of all project battleship schematics, TTZ parameter specs & any related data left in the state archive, and then redraw & recreate a ship model from scratch. Now I can understand the pain & stress of a single man doing such a crucial tasks that probably took him years to finally get it done.

Man, how wrong we were about the Sovetsky Soyuz when it appeared that some key information & schematics were, ironically, "decaying" & almost lost within the naval archive. Despite the fact that Sovetsky Soyuz seemed to be well-documented in a book.

You know, I feel the same as well, about how it feels to do what I'm compassionate about just by myself. Since the late 2015, I've been doing my part to outline & contribute for the Russian/Soviet Navy tech tree, alone. Of which most navy enthusiasts in the WoWs were reluctant to take part to contribute it, because none of them were willing to take the VMF tech tree seriously just by putting up themselves as a self-styled naval history armchair experts.

And now, I'm happy that even my somewhat "insignificant" activities & contributions have not all been for naught at all, but instead made some degree of impact within the community, regardless how small or big it is. Sorry if this sounds like I'm self-inserting my ego, but put it simply, I'm just a simple guy enjoy doing what I like, even though I found myself at the wrong place to begin with.

BTW, do you have any idea of how Slava could look like?

Edited by Xero_Snake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
678
[UFFA]
Members
2,068 posts
75 battles

I used the extended tech tree viewer. Both ships still show 21%. Maybe it is being kept in reserve for balance. Im kind of curious how heavy these ships would have sat in water. As I had failed to appreciate how massive that armor belt actually was in practice. Seems like the first crew to experience an arctic storm would have hated life.

https://www.amazon.com/Aircraft-Carrier-Impero-Carrying-Capital/dp/1781556776

The title is a bit grandiose. The tidbits are fascinating as they expand on some of the things stefsap had posted. We probably would have Italian tech trees if WGEU had not pissed him off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[_I_]
Members
92 posts
3 hours ago, Sparviero said:

I imagine thanks to the scaling accuracy and high potential of VMF HE shells switching ammo types and using HE will probably result in the same damage potential as secondaries memes.

 


I just double checked Vladivostok and Soyuz are both at 21% TDS so it appears Lesta is using this as part of the balance. One thing is it seems the decks have a bit more fidelity as I think Roma kind of suffers from bombs sometimes arming later than they should due to game mechanics. This was the layout for the UP.41 project as drawn by Tzoli in Sappino's book.

ex6cn1X.png

vs Ukraine hull as examined by the Italians.

odBI15e.png

The armor belt definitely seems to go much higher on Vladivostok and Soyuz as compared to Roma or UP.41 layout. One thing I found interesting it seems to indicate that the main belt was made up of up to four pieces of laminated armor in sections.

250 x 100 x 10 x 16 high resistance steel
220 x 75 - 0.5/1.0 NiCr

How many pieces of laminate armor were needed for the 425mm piece?

 

gTpm40o.png

Vladivostok secondary arrangement funnel uptake and other things seem rather far off from UP.41 as well.

2eqgz2e.jpg

 

 

Extremely informative. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
437
[UN1]
Members
1,022 posts
3,353 battles
3 hours ago, _RC1138 said:

/good stuff

This is a very good assessment, but I disagree with some (not all) of the roles you placed each nation in.  I'd rate each nation like this:

  • Close-Quarter Combat
    • Germany - Spot on with your assessment, but in my opinion the German tech-tree suffers from a contradictory design philosophy.
    • Russia - This is where I disagree.  As per the devs, Russian battleships were intentionally designed for the aggressive playstyle of the RU player base.  Compared to German battleships though, Russian battleships have superior forward-facing armor, better firing angles, and are designed to have accurate close-rage main battery performance.  Compared to German battleships though, Russian battleships are more vulnerable from the sides, and lack hydro.
  • Mid-Range Positional Specialists
    • USA - American battleships are generally strong across the board, but the mid-range giveaway is in their artillery performance.  Lower tier US battleships have very high penetration, but lack the accuracy or sometimes range of their Japanese rivals.  High tier US battleships starting with T7/8 begin to trade relative penetration performance for accuracy.  Looking at the Montana as an example, it's plenty accurate to hit targets at long range, but it lacks the penetration and muzzle velocity to consistently perform like the Yamato and Republique have.  In fact, the Montana has the 2nd lowest penetration of the T10 tech tree BB's.  Otherwise US battleships have good firing angles, fast ruddershift, and very strong turret protection to perform well in the mid range.
    • Britain - Britain is a bit of an oddball because they're designed for micro-decision making - allowing players to choose when to strike and what shell to strike with - but yes I agree they fit nicely in the mid range.
    • Britain v2 - Warspite, Hood, and Vanguard (AP) fit here with their normalized AP.  They're unique 'cause they're on special dispersion table specifically designed to be accurate and effective with a 4x2 turret configuration. 
  • Long Range Snipers
    • Japan - 'Nuff said, and we both agree.
  • Versatile Role
    • France - You don't see this in its complete form until T8+, but French battleships are designed to perform well in all three major combat sectors - close, medium, and long range - but they're not so strong in each category that they overshadow the other nations in their specialized role.  This is why such a broad variety of players enjoy the French line so much, because the ships can be catered to a number of different playstyles.  Using the Republique as an example, she can be effectively played well as a brawler, AA specialist, or long range support.  Some ships lean a little more towards mid/long range, but in general you can play French battleships however you want, and they'll perform pretty well. 

Contrary to popular belief, US battleships are not "Jacks of All Trades".  That was a term coined when it was just the IJN/USA lines, but with the introduction of other lines, it's become more apparent that the USA was intended for the mid-range.  The real "Jack of All Trades" tech tree is actually the French BB's.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,175
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts
42 minutes ago, Ranari said:

Contrary to popular belief, US battleships are not "Jacks of All Trades".

If you play cruisers a lot you learn very rapidly that USN BB's are DEFINITELY long range snipers; when I play my Mino the two ships I fear the most are DM's and Missouri's; with Monty's as a close third. Their floaty shells mean that they will cit at most ranges and are all but guaranteed at ranges over 15 km. On the flip side USN ships do HORRIBLY (compared to say German or French) in brawls: the have weak side armour so whatever doesn't cit, does at least 33% pen (whereas the French either take 33% or shatters, close range cits are rare due to turtle backs); their secondaries are anemic with essentially 0 firestarting, terrible pen, and bad base RoF/sigma (the Mass is the exception, not the rule). They also are on the slow end of RoF; default of 30 sec reload whereas KM and French BB's are all faster reloading or when the French are not faster, have way more barrels for a higher effective RoF on a per shell basis. Likewise the French prioritize forward firing arcs (not just with the Rich class) and speed (boost) to get into brawling range rapidly. And the the US have the same problem the IJN has: poor accuracy up close; comparatively at ranges =>12 km the Germans and French are more accurate. By far the USN are a sniper class, just a different version than the IJN (flexibility to move/shift fire where the IJN prioritize sitting like a fart at 24 km). But the French are brawlers and a well played Republic can be one of the most dangerous BB's in the game.

The Russian BB's are not brawlers. No and if but's about it. And those that try to use them as such will do so at both their own handicap and the detriment of their team: they have too low of a RoF (default of 34 sec reload across almost the entire line) for brawling; even though the guns can react fast, they are less likely to have a shell in the barrel. They also have terrible turning circles; so they will shift sides fast, but they will continue running in the track of torps much longer; a huge problem in a brawl. They also lack any appreciable vision control that is vital for Brawls; the French have speed to close distances when spotted fast (or run from a losing fight) and the German's have sonar. The Russians have the CV/BB radar but it's long enough range to render brawls less useful. They also have poor brawling armour; above water Cits is super dangerous, and if you want a taste, don't try brawling with a Missouri or Monty or Alabama; Try it with North Carolina. That above water cit makes it very vulnerable in a brawl; at ranges <10km, everything can pen everything. Unless you reach autobounce angles, any BB facing a Kreml will cit it if you aim at the water line, as up close most BB's at TX have upwards of 500mm of pen. And that thick armour will work against it: no overpens. See whereas facing a German BB up close in say a Mino, is okay, because all his shells overpen you since your plating/armour is too thin, the same situation while in say a DM is a problem as you have enough armour to get the shells to arm. The same is true for the Kreml; it is thick enough to force shells to arm, but up close, still not thick enough to provide immunity.

Their secondaries are not a brawler's secondaries; low caliber and low pen, low RoF, very low range (only the USN is as low) and bad firing angles, where baring a 90 degree broadside, they typically can only have ~75% of their secondaries talking (vs. even the US which can have 100% of them talking even at 60 degrees). Put another way: if the Kreml is a brawler, so is the Monty, as their secondaries are about equal with the Monty's a LITTLE better with more health per mount and better firing angles at all angles.

And finally, they lack the speed of a brawler. At most tiers they are the slowest BB, with a few low tier exceptions. And they lack the USN Energy retention, RN startup, and the French stopping, all of which matter in a brawl.

AND that forget's the line's general issue with Damage control; see up close in a brawl you *will* take damage. Period. You're gona burn. You're gona take 33% hits. You're not coming out clean. And the RU BB's are geared in the OPPOSITE direction: quick reaction to random fire, but will melt under concerted firepower (low staying power; one more reason they are the inverse of the RN: they fail in quick spike damage but can outlast any opponent if not brought down). Basically if you want to break a Kreml, get it to pop DC's as often as possible early match and then it's free fires by mid game. The RU BB's should be your FIRST target every match, because if you can get them to drop DC's, combined with their [edited] long range accuracy/dispersion/simgma, mid to late game they will find themselves easy kindling with no recourse: get close burn, sit at range and can't hit a thing.  Remember, all that health means nothing to DoT's, which are flat%'s. A fire on a Missouri is just as damaging as a fire on the Kreml from a %Health standpoint; the difference is that the Missouri can long term put out more fires and heal more of them; Kremls cannot risk brawling because of how susceptible they are to fire damage. (Read: Also applies to floods)

*BUT* at mid range everything changes: they have great accuracy right in that pocket, have fast reacting DCP's that maximize the random fire that happens at mid range (people shifting fire to you temporarily as that close DD/CL comes in and out of cover) and large health reserves to resist 33% pens that are more common at medium range. Likewise that top tier AA power works best at mid range: CV's not using rockets like to overfly the front line and happen onto the mid line, where these BB's will be sitting putting up impenetrable fire. Close range in a brawl most of those guns will be knocked out and likewise, will be easier for CV's to avoid to get to easier targets behind them. Everything about them make a great Mid Range harasser; get in, take a few heavy shots, once the enemy turns towards you beg off using your thicker deck armour (which only works at mid range btw; in a brawl those 50mm decks might as well be 1mm as nothing will be able to hit it, but at mid range, where most CL's sit, they will find themselves unable to reliable damage even with IFHE) to resist following fire and great AA to keep aircraft looking for a predictable retreat at bay. Likewise at mid range you have greater control of the engagement; you can decide when you are shot at and thus, avoid cits, whereas in a brawl you have almost no control (only the ones you are dancing with, but that Monty at 20 km may get a free shot). But at 15 km, you can drop in and out of concealment, and do so with predictability, and thus can hold fire till you are about to start a turn, and thus reduce what you show.

They may CLAIM these are brawlers but the stats suggest anything but; they are basically a 180 of the RN BB's in regard to features but those same features are nearly identical in practical outcome.

 

Edited by _RC1138

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
678
[UFFA]
Members
2,068 posts
75 battles

And in a probably interesting to only me bit. If I understand both the USN and Italian systems incorporated a form of triple hull. Yet it seems like the Soyuz didn't adopt this, was that the case with the project that inspired Kreml?

Example from James Jordon book on the development of ships between the wars. Warships after Washington.

tds.png.da148726b5e37290501663ec087c59aa.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,159 posts
60 battles

Just as I expected, with the TDS buff on both Soyuz & Kreml, they can effectively tank torps better as a tanker. And with it, they both can serve as a valuable assets for defending CVs, supporting a vanguard flotilla/battle group, as well as leading the charge to break through the main fleet.

I think these two BBs can go well with a variety of fleet compositions & can never go wrong with both fortification & offensive maneuvers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,159 posts
60 battles
1 minute ago, Sparviero said:

Now we just wait to see how long until they add it to Vladivostok and Lenin. :Smile-_tongue:

You seem to asking for Vladivostok to perform better than Roma in most aspects, eh? :cap_look:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
678
[UFFA]
Members
2,068 posts
75 battles
1 minute ago, Xero_Snake said:

You seem to asking for Vladivostok to perform better than Roma in most aspects, eh? :cap_look:

I just expect the inevitable. The home team loves to brawl. I imagine right now the CIS forums are clamoring for the tier VIII to have the same treatment and not be considered a freexp wall. If I’m wrong I’m wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,069
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
4,701 posts
On 4/13/2019 at 9:32 PM, slokill_1 said:

I really want to see how they compare to Massachusetts.  If they can best that ship I'll be impressed.

Nobody beats Massachusetts.   I'm top player on my team even in Tier 10 games on a regular basis, and I'm only a 55%'er.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×