Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Ossiuum

A look back at the Slava

21 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

564
[R-F]
Members
333 posts
11,686 battles

Now a little while removed from testing and intense public scrutiny, let's take a stroll down memory lane at the dreaded Slava that the community, spearheaded by a CC who I personally really enjoy, advocated never be released. I am going to list a few of its attributes below and their ramifications.

1. The guns. The guns are something else, we are talking possible the best set of battleship armaments in the entire game. Incredibly accurate, quick reload. These guns are the primary reason the ship was so contested, and though their caliber left something to be desired in the overmatch department, they were dreaded nonetheless. Additionally, the blistering muzzle velocity made long range shots incredibly simple.

2. The hull. The ship itself was incredibly soft, being down to three normal heals at the end of its testing. It was the same size as a Kremlin but with much worse survivability and armor scheme in every measurable way, while having a normal damage control party. This ship was huge and soft, very prone to being punished for making positioning mistakes.

3. The AA. This was very strong at the time. All AA in the game is too weak now so this probably wouldn't cut it anyway.

 

The Slava was a glass cannon as far as battleships go, with its main complaint being that it was too easily able to deal damage at extreme range without risking its own hull.

 

Where is this post going?

 

Wargaming recently released the Thunderer. Let's take a look at the Thunderer as compared to all of the things that we so vehemently argued against regarding the Slava. Barring Ohio because I haven't seen a dispersion test for that, the Thunderer has the second most accurate battleship guns in the entire game, behind only the Georgia. It also reloads in under 23 seconds. And has excellent Royal Navy HE shells. And has the missing 30mm overmatch that the Slava never had. These are in my opinion the best battleship guns in the game. The Thunderer has a very soft hull, less HP but two extra heals over the Slava. If played properly the Thunderer will be able to weather more fire over the course of a match, not insignificantly helped by being MUCH smaller than its Soviet counterpart. As with the Slava, the AA isn't good enough. The Thunderer has a number of advantages over the Slava and is missing only shell velocity. I'll take 30mm overmatch and faster reload over shell velocity every time.

The point of this post is that the community did frankly an egregious amount of whining about the Slava, and I saw little to none over the Thunderer when it does the same thing (but even better in some cases!). This post isn't asking for Slava to be released or Thunderer removed or anything like that, I just want to bring to peoples attention that we were really sort of silly in the way that we complained about this and that I hope we can take a more objective look at test ships going forward.

 

Thanks for reading - Ossiuum

  • Cool 2
  • Confused 5
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
9,159 posts
11,172 battles

Lol, AA is very not weak, not at all. AA is actually a bit too strong. When DDs with little AA can shred air groups, yeah, AA is too strong. And this is from a guy who hates CVs.

 

Also, the reason Slava was really received the way she was is entirely due to her being yet another fake Russian ship, there is a clear and present bias towards anything Russian from most players born and raised in "Western" nations. When said fake Russian ship is also often very over powered, that bias only becomes stronger. The fact that some of the worst ships in the game are also Russian is missed, players being unable to see the forest for the trees.

 

Thunderer is strong, no getting around that, however, I worry far more about facing an Ohio than I do a Thunderer.

 

What many of us continually miss is that this is a game, nothing more, nothing less. The point is to play, compete, and have fun, and as long as the vast majority can achieve the same goals within the game, I personally don't give one dang about any nation being more or less powerful than any other. Every ship can sink other ships. Every ship has its own weaknesses. Focus on how to beat it it, rather than whining about it all the time. My two cents. Peace, out.

  • Cool 4
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
267
[NFJF]
Members
653 posts
9,850 battles

I guess the "smoke n farm" Smolensk is okay, but god forbid we could get a BB that didn't get screwed by rng every couple of salvos. Im quite disappointed, as I knew that eventually the damage on the Kremlins guns would be nerfed, "which they were," because some no skill snowflakes would be crying about it, and I was hoping to get the Slava so I would have another t10 Russian BB to play. Frankly, when we have things like Smolensk, Stalingrad, and Alaska in game, I don't think "OP BBs with accurate guns" are something anyone should be concerned about crying over.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
330
[R-F2]
Members
727 posts
9,869 battles
37 minutes ago, admiralsexybeast said:

god forbid we could get a BB that didn't get screwed by rng every couple of salvos

You did, it was the Thunderer. That was the whole point of the OP.

 

Anyway have fun complaining about the Kremlin being slightly nerfed because of "no skill snowflakes" in the same post where you complain that the Stalingrad is op.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
547
[UN1]
Members
1,209 posts
3,633 battles

Slava was overpowered as heck, and everyone knew it. 

You see that penetration curve at the top?  That's the Slava's 16" guns.  You see those battleship penetration curves below it?  Those are all battleships sporting 18" guns (17" for Republique).  The Slava had absolutely monstrous penetration.

Add to that, it has stupidly low flight time, which makes it very easy to lead and hit targets, especially at range.  It was also ridiculously accurate.  The Thunderer is also a very, very accurate ship, and the Slava is even more accurate.

The ship was a sharpshooter's dream and overpowered beyond comprehension.  It's a very good thing it wasn't released.

image.thumb.png.9304cf08980fe1f74f05a417ef665e38.png

Edited by Ranari
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
759
[-TDF-]
Beta Testers
1,226 posts
4,464 battles

Thunderer's gun velocity is awful compared to Slava's. Accuracy doesn't matter if the enemy has time to just adjust and dodge your shots. Also it's AP is nowhere near as good, plus it's super squishy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
564
[R-F]
Members
333 posts
11,686 battles
55 minutes ago, Ranari said:

Add to that, it has stupidly low flight time, which makes it very easy to lead and hit targets, especially at range.  It was also ridiculously accurate.  The Thunderer is also a very, very accurate ship, and the Slava is even more accurate.

This right here is what I had pegged as the main reason that people had such a hard time accepting the Slava. I found the accuracy of the two battleships comparable but the flight time made playing Slava easier. That being said because of caliber and HE I'm taking those 457s any day of the week. 

 

7 minutes ago, Stand_Alone97 said:

Also it's AP is nowhere near as good, plus it's super squishy.

This is really subjective, Slava might have easier to land AP but saying that shell for shell it is better feels disingenuous to me. One major point of the OP in this thread is that Slava should be even softer than Thunderer is, so I don't know where you're going with that last point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,371
[-KIA-]
Members
3,465 posts
14,782 battles

Slava AP was quite stupid. Those 406mm guns have absurd penetration power at long range, enough to let you citadel BB at range, but at the same time guns being 406mm, it doesn't overpen that much vs cruiser.

 

Velocity is a nice QoL improvement especially for a sniper. Yamato for instance is also a sniper and gets high accuracy and overmatch but her shell are fairly slow making long range shot much more easy to dodge.

 

It's not a balancing factor at all but thinking that only a very very small % of the playerbase will be able to turn this ship into a monster is pretty reassuring

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,095
[KNMSU]
Members
7,086 posts
7,668 battles

If it never gets released, that's fine. I've really cooled on Russian BBs overall - from tier 7 onwards, they're incredibly OP, and I'd frankly rather be winning in something like a Gascogne, N. Carolina, or Roma. I really dislike fantasy ships, and the line is so laughably fictional starting with Sinop (special shout out to Lenin "we can do Nelson better than the British"). The game would have been better off if the entire tree had never seen the light of day.

Edited by Battlecruiser_PrncsRoyal
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
2,855 posts
9,043 battles

The only problem with the Slava was the penetration. At T10 BBs can maintain a good distance and be safe thanks to having thick armour that provides immunity zones for their citsdels, but not against the Slava.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,645
[BASIN]
[BASIN]
Members
4,071 posts
1 hour ago, NeoRussia said:

The only problem with the Slava was the penetration. At T10 BBs can maintain a good distance and be safe thanks to having thick armour that provides immunity zones for their citsdels, but not against the Slava.

Slava's armor was even easier to penetrate by other  BB's  and methinks even cruisers could do so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
560
[-N-]
Members
2,217 posts
14,703 battles
4 hours ago, shadowsrmine said:

Slava's armor was even easier to penetrate by other  BB's  and methinks even cruisers could do so

Yeah what I had seen of it from Notser and other CCs, Slava had armor like the Vanguard, very squishy.  But when you can drop say a full health DM with 1 salvo at 24km range or citadel a BB at that range.  Yeah the guns were a bit OP.  Slave was a pure Sniper complete opposite of the Kremlin.  Slava wasn't going to be in the middle of fire fights unless absolutely necessary and you were going to pay a heavy price getting that close.  She had a hit point pool similar to the Monty I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,645
[BASIN]
[BASIN]
Members
4,071 posts
46 minutes ago, GrimmeReaper said:

Yeah what I had seen of it from Notser and other CCs, Slava had armor like the Vanguard, very squishy.  But when you can drop say a full health DM with 1 salvo at 24km range or citadel a BB at that range.  Yeah the guns were a bit OP.  Slave was a pure Sniper complete opposite of the Kremlin.  Slava wasn't going to be in the middle of fire fights unless absolutely necessary and you were going to pay a heavy price getting that close.  She had a hit point pool similar to the Monty I think.

Oh and I believe there are several that can do that and name one right off the oldest BB  in the game  Yamato  and she isn't near as squishy

Edited by shadowsrmine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,922
[KSC]
Clan Supertest Coordinator
5,120 posts
7,955 battles
13 minutes ago, enderland07 said:

Slava as proposed is way more busted than the Thunderer in random games.

The final version of the Slava wasn't so much overpowered as it was gimmicked to such a polarizing extreme it would be extremely unhealthy for the game.  The main reason I don't want the Slava put in game isn't because I fear fighting it....it's because I fear having it played by potatoes on my team.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,357
[BFBTW]
Members
4,181 posts
9,556 battles
Just now, yashma said:

The final version of the Slava wasn't so much overpowered as it was gimmicked to such a polarizing extreme it would be extremely unhealthy for the game.  The main reason I don't want the Slava put in game isn't because I fear fighting it....it's because I fear having it played by potatoes on my team.  

What's not to love about a super accurate battleship that literally gets worse the closer you go starting at about 20km?

...

ooh. Yeah...

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,922
[KSC]
Clan Supertest Coordinator
5,120 posts
7,955 battles
3 minutes ago, enderland07 said:

What's not to love about a super accurate battleship that literally gets worse the closer you go starting at about 20km?

...

ooh. Yeah...

The Slava actually could have been a really fun battleship if they didn't make it so extremely gimmicky. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
85
[BASIN]
[BASIN]
Members
110 posts
1 hour ago, GrimmeReaper said:

Yeah what I had seen of it from Notser and other CCs, Slava had armor like the Vanguard, very squishy.  But when you can drop say a full health DM with 1 salvo at 24km range or citadel a BB at that range.  Yeah the guns were a bit OP.  Slave was a pure Sniper complete opposite of the Kremlin.  Slava wasn't going to be in the middle of fire fights unless absolutely necessary and you were going to pay a heavy price getting that close.  She had a hit point pool similar to the Monty I think.

 

1 hour ago, shadowsrmine said:

Oh and I believe there are several that can do that and name one right off the oldest BB  in the game  Yamato  and she isn't near as squishy

Like shadow said you saying yamato and several others can't?And again yamato isn't nearly as easy to remove from the game nor are the others

Edited by TheGreyDeath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
294
[-TKS-]
Members
819 posts
14,493 battles

the slava always seemed like a more accurate  bourgone to me . wish they did release it so i could bypass the french baguette 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×