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

sooo why is worchester not hated as much as smolensk and colbert?

91 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,043
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
11,429 posts
15,926 battles

Because feels.

It is not a logical concern.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,486
[CAST]
Members
4,998 posts
3,513 battles

Colbert is not hated that much. She's also a very very rare ship.

The reason people really hate on Smolensk is due to the smoke generator and sheer volume of shells in the air. With Worcester, there's actual skill involved as you need to camp behind an island at all times. Worcester also does not have torpedoes. Although Worcester with IFHE can pen BB plating whereas Smolensk cannot.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
799
[HELLS]
Members
2,666 posts
27,231 battles

No smoke concealment for one, and she is a big cruiser compared to the other two, so easier to counter from range. On top of that she is not as manuverable as the two smaller ships despite her speed. I had her (currently doing an RB reset of the USN CL line), and am aiming for Colbert, which was a real live ship, not a paper one. Need another 20,000 RB tokens and it is a done deal. No hurry, no worry. Play and have fun...

Edited by GrandAdmiral_2016
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,763
[SALVO]
Members
2,026 posts
6,201 battles
6 minutes ago, TriHard_DodgeDealership said:

The ship is just as good at starting fires as Smolensk and Colbert and it has good consumables. Why does nobody ever complain about this ship?

Well personally I see nothing wrong with Smolensk .  But it seems to me that the smoke screen upsets a lot of folks. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
305
[PROJX]
Beta Testers
729 posts
4,671 battles

She has lazy arcs, slow shells, no smoke, and no torpedoes.

She also isn't as selfish, having more team utility in the form of radar.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,640
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
8,666 posts
14,787 battles

I sense an agenda to some of these threads...

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
759
[-TDF-]
Beta Testers
1,226 posts
4,464 battles
  • Handles Like a Bus.
  • Slow Shells arcs, easily evaded even by a BB.
  • Terrible Turret layout.
  • AA is a joke now.
  • Slow.
  • Long ship. So if your not perfectly broadside you eat massive full pen damage.
  • Radar was Nerfed along side concealment. No longer able to stealth radar.
  • Awful at brawling.
  • No Torps.
  • Radar Mino can do everything better except farm fire damage.
  • Cool 2
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,794
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,214 posts
9,367 battles

Smolensk has smoke. Colbert doesn't seem to get much forum hate.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,302
[SALVO]
Members
24,851 posts
25,947 battles
5 minutes ago, PotatoMD said:

She has lazy arcs, slow shells, no smoke, and no torpedoes.

She also isn't as selfish, having more team utility in the form of radar.

Oh, please.  A ship isn't "selfish" just because it has radar.  Are IJN cruisers "selfish" because they don't have radar?  Frankly, saying "yes" is utter nonsense.  A ship added to the game without radar doesn't suddenly become selfish.  If anything, any argument about selfishness and radar would make a ton more sense if a radar mounting ship chose to fight far outside of their radar range.  Or perhaps you have a Des Moines but choose to mount the spotter plane rather than radar.  That would seem to be a selfish decision. 

But calling the Smolensk "selfish" simply because it doesn't mount radar (because WG didn't GIVE the Smolensk radar) is utter nonsense.

Hell, one could argue that because the Smolensk mounts smoke that it could share with other ships, it's NOT a selfish ship and is more team oriented.  And that argument would make more sense than yours.

Regardless, I think that most people who dislike the Smolensk dislike her for being an HE spammer that can mount smoke, and because it can fire 16 shells down range with every volley, meaning 16 potential chances to start a fire. 

Also, if you're in a DD and you're spotted close enough to a Smolensk for it to start lobbing shells at you (let's say 10-15 km), it starts to feel down right impossible to avoid the Smolensk's shells because there are SIXTEEN of them, compared to other ships that may only be lobbing 9-10 shells your way, if that.  I've been on the receiving end of a Smolensk volley in a DD and it feels like you're getting carpet bombed, there are so dang many shells.  With other ships shooting smaller volleys at you, sometimes you can watch those shells incoming and wiggle your ship into the spaces between the shells.  But against the Smolensk, there are just too many shells coming at you to do this.  And all you can hope to do is outrun that enemy's aim and/or dodge the entire grouping of shells.

As for the Colbert, I don't think that it's the target of the same level of saltiness because it lacks smoke, but also because there are fewer Colberts out there because it's only available through the research bureau.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,123
[CVA16]
Members
5,392 posts
16,221 battles
12 minutes ago, KaptainKaybe said:

The reason people really hate on Smolensk is due to the smoke generator

I think this is probably the biggest factor. The Wooster has to set up shop behind an island. Only certain islands/parts of islands will work. Targets have the option of moving away or getting close so the island blocks everything. If Wooster is caught out of cover,  it can be killed.

Smollensk can set up shop behind islands and pretty much anywhere it won't get radared. If caught out, it can smoke up. WG decide long ago it was bad for a cruiser to have smoke and HE (Belfast) but somehow decided it was OK if the ship flew the Hammer and Sickle.

Things like volume of fire, torpedoes and sides so squishy they result in mostly overpens are just icing on the cake.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,763
[SALVO]
Members
2,026 posts
6,201 battles
4 minutes ago, TriHard_DodgeDealership said:

Ok so if the argument is "smoke and torps" why does nobody complain about Harugumo anymore?

Gets outplayed by other DDs and you don't see it a lot at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
255
[FG]
Members
566 posts
4,799 battles

I think one of the (many) reasons Smolensk is complained about so much is due to being available for coal, and therefore any player can obtain it eventually. I've seen that many people with the Smolensk as their only Tier 10 ship. The Wooster at least requires a player to grind through a ship line at least. 

Though frankly, there should be more hate for the Wooster, as it is a ship that is annoying to fight no matter what ship you're in.  

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,363 posts
1,286 battles

A player in a Worcester has to be strategic and tactical in its position and can't just plop itself down anywhere on the map and mindlessly spam away in smoke. If another ship decides to push the Worcesters position, it can't respond by torping its pursuer. If a BB shoots its broadside with AP, the shells don't just pass through out three other side of the ship. Hope that clears things up for you. 

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,225 posts
5,930 battles

Worchester was hated at release though, it's older though so most of the hate has died off. I remember people putting an H after the W and an E after the R for quite some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
237
[CHASE]
[CHASE]
Beta Testers
391 posts
11,775 battles

have you tried to hit anything with Worcester at 16+ km? If you have, you would not be asking this question.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
441
[K0]
Members
1,755 posts
8,159 battles

Worcester got plenty of hate after her release. Smolensk is just worse because she has greater effective range and isn't tied to islands.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,043
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
11,429 posts
15,926 battles

Interestingly I had a battle recently where I killed two Smolensks in a Worchester.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,852
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,638 posts
35 minutes ago, TriHard_DodgeDealership said:

Ok so if the argument is "smoke and torps" why does nobody complain about Harugumo anymore?

Time.

If you read these forums when the Asashio was/had just come out, it was thread after thread after thread about how it was going to destroy the game, everyone was going to quit, noone would ever play a BB again, blah blah blah on and on and on.

They changed nothing about the ship.  You ever hear anyone complain about the Asashio now?  You ever even see an Asashio much anymore?

People on this forum are not happy unless there is drama.  When it doesn't exist, they create it.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×