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

ST 0.9.7, changes to test ships

59 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,664
[-K-]
Members
8,491 posts
14,883 battles

Vermont gets some nice survivability buffs here, which is nice.  Better sigma too.  Thinking Minnesota and Kansas may need a deck armor buff too, but we'll see how the testers feel about it.

As for Paolo Emilio, was it always a T9 ship?  For some reason, I thought it used to be a T10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
566
[WOLF5]
Members
1,485 posts
11,047 battles

Pleased to see the improvements to the Vermont in terms of increased armor and sigma and I look forward to eventually seeing an incremental increase in speed (or a speed boost option) and a decrease in the reload time (or a reload boost option???), which I think will become necessary for release.

I still think that speed will need to be a minimum of 25 knots (actually 25.2) and with a reload of 35 seconds (maximum) and more likely 33.5....

Edited by DJC_499
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
833
[--V--]
Members
1,538 posts
14,255 battles
28 minutes ago, DJC_499 said:

Please to see the improvements to the Vermont in terms of increased armor and sigma and I look forward to eventually seeing an incremental increase in speed (or a speed boost option) and a decrease in the reload time (or a reload boost option???), which I think will become necessary for release.

I still think that speed will need to be a minimum of 25 knots (actually 25.2) and with a reload of 35 seconds (maximum) and more likely 33.5....

Totally agree.  As they are right now, with their speed, Sigma and reload speed,,, the new US BBs are DOA for me.   I have California,,,, mostly see T9 matches.  It is so painful to be that slow, with a 33 second reload.  I can only imagine how impossible it will be to enjoy a 40 second reload.  Much less compete.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
151 posts
4,371 battles

The nerf to the heal of the USN BBs is hilariously sad, but at least they're getting a tiny bit of armor to compensate and their guns might actually be mildly reliable with the sigma increases.

I'm also kinda sad they're butchering Anchorage's AP. I can understand how the ship was probably way too strong but losing even more DPM and penetration is going to seriously hurt. After Odin's massive HP nerf I'm incredibly wary of them nerfing Dockyard ships because while I don't expect Anchorage to be Belfast levels of broken I would at least like it to be genuinely good rather than have the Dockyard be a place to offload mediocre T8 premiums.

 

36 minutes ago, Ace_04 said:

Vermont gets some nice survivability buffs here, which is nice.  Better sigma too.  Thinking Minnesota and Kansas may need a deck armor buff too, but we'll see how the testers feel about it.

As for Paolo Emilio, was it always a T9 ship?  For some reason, I thought it used to be a T10.

Paolo Emilio was originally announced as a T10 Italian DD but they were completely unable to balance it at that tier so it got lowered to T9 (also possibly so it'd be cheaper and more accessible as a fxp/coal ship, if that's the route they go with it)

Unfortunately they're still having a very rough time balancing it at T9. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,978
Members
2,000 posts
28,681 battles
2 minutes ago, ComradeTsushima said:

I'm also kinda sad they're butchering Anchorage's AP. I can understand how the ship was probably way too strong but losing even more DPM and penetration is going to seriously hurt. After Odin's massive HP nerf I'm incredibly wary of them nerfing Dockyard ships because while I don't expect Anchorage to be Belfast levels of broken I would at least like it to be genuinely good rather than have the Dockyard be a place to offload mediocre T8 premiums. 

I saved my doubloons and passed on Odin, and I may have a chance to save my doubloons again with this nerf to Anchorage. Dockyards could become a bittersweet experience at this rate, running through lvl 18 and stalling because the prize isn't worth even the smaller real-money infusion.

  • Cool 2
  • Haha 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,692
[WOLFG]
Members
12,612 posts
11,708 battles

I don't particularly like gimped guns, no matter how much they twerk the other stuff.  Guess I'm working towards 100K FXP next event.

Will someone at WG just start over on the Paolo.

While extra speed would be nice on the new US BBs, I think slow is going to be the "thing" about this line from WGs viewpoint.  I'm not interested either.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
574
[-N-]
Members
2,251 posts
15,323 battles

What interest I had in Anchorage, is gone...  Wichita is currently a better ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
748
[USN]
Members
1,632 posts
21,092 battles

Paolo: Still garbage

Anchorage: RIP, guess no premium US heavy cruiser can have SHS. Ship probably needed that nerf though

Munches: why do you nerf balanced ships that need no changes?

Florida: yeah, comparing this to California, how could you say they are both T7 ships. Still, Florida is better than Cali

US BBs: Kansas gets nerfed (?) Minnesota and Vermont get net buffs. Ok. Guess we’ll have to see how this goes before those two get a slight speed buff to about 25knts

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19
[-UCS-]
Members
88 posts
9,108 battles

I cant belive that the one new US BB(Florida) that actually looked good got nerfed.. wait what am I saying, of course I can believe it, because its not russian so it must be nerfed(its ok though, WG you are just saving me money).  As for the other monstrosities you are calling US BB's, you nerf the heal(can't figure out why you would nerf the heal on these damage pinatas, oh wait its because they are not russian) on them and then apply basic buffs to armor and a minor buff to sigma and think that will be good enough?  Everytime I see one of these new ships in game I just laugh and say free xp!  Hell I fought a vermont lastnight in the smolensk and he did actually land a salvo on me but he didnt kill me lol.. WG if you release these totally REAL US BB's in this state they will be DOA. 

  • Cool 5
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,073
[SALVO]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,352 posts
6,951 battles

Florida made California look bad, so instead of fixing California, they gimped Florida. 

*working as intended* 

  • Cool 3
  • Sad 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,031
[HINON]
Members
8,986 posts
13,140 battles

well, Minnesota and Vermont are looking MUCH better now, though the 51mm deck seems like a strangely specific number instead of just 50mm, maybe a typo and its meant to be 50mm? and with that sigma buff they might be able to do the sniping thing WG seems to have in mind for them, not sure why, we really dont need more BBs that encourage sniping from max range

Edited by tcbaker777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
382
[XXX]
Members
663 posts
1,658 battles
2 hours ago, landcollector said:

*Looks at Florida nerfs*

I have a bad feeling about this.

She's still got 204mm max dispersion on her guns and a 31 second reload, she'll be fine. It's if they nerf the reload to 34 seconds I'd be very worried.

Edited by Yandere_Roon
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
62
[YOU]
Beta Testers
402 posts
6,349 battles

Ok, so, my thoughts. 

Really happy to see the deck and side plating buffs to the 9 and 10 of the new branch. They really needed it in my view. The bump in sigma is nice too, but more minor. Now Kansas desperately needs these changes coming to her, she was already the more comparable entry and getting nerfs over the buffs her sisters are getting is dreadful to see. As for the heal nerf though, I suppose if they aren't taking the same HE damage as they would be, that's kinda understandable, but it would've been fine without the nerf.

As for Florida, I would really want too know the numbers of the ballistic changes done. If she has the same playlist of Champaign and Slava, then that nerf is kinda a big deal. The reload nerf is also quite worrying. Not bad, yet, but reminds me of the incremental reload nerfs California got and that does not sit well. It would be tragic to see her nerfed to the sea floor over time when she started so promising.

Also sad on the Anchorage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
121
[WHEE]
Members
150 posts
3,958 battles

I’m all for parity/balance between California and Florida, but I think a lot of people would’ve rather seen California fixed/buffed instead of Florida nerfed. 

Please be careful and don’t ruin another US BB. The way the dev team nerfed the fun out of California still hurts. 

Although if you buff Cali after these changes to Florida, I’ll stop complaining, pinky promise :)

Edited by celticboy27
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
52 posts
808 battles

I will only buy Anchorage if lots of CCs say it's a good ship, I didn't believed them when they said Odin was painfully average and got burned with it, also Munchen wasn't looking good before, now with the nerf is a definite no buy for me. Doesn't matter how hard you buff the armor on the new BBs their slow speed and poor gun perfomance means they are just XP piñatas for every cruiser and destroyer in the game, not even gonna talk about the dirty things carriers are going to do to them, BIg Sad D: .

Edited by NuclearEmperor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,038 posts
4,513 battles

Anchorage needed the nerf. It was way too strong and wasn't weak at anything.

Minnesota and Vermont nice buffs although the reload will still not be fun to play. Maybe test them with Pommern's reload as they're not as fast, tough or heavily armed as that outside main battery.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
759 posts
10,621 battles

Not sure I like the Vermont changes. The 457 mm guns don't trade off damage output (in spite of the 40 second reload it has good damage per minute) or accuracy since the buff, and now it also gets good plating and better than Montana ballistics. It still won't be fun to play because 23 knots, but it's like the ship gets 30 mm overmatch for free. Kansas also got nerfed where the other ships got buffed, suggesting that the only reason it was nerfed was for consistency with the tier 9 and 10 losing the improved heal (but consistency when you lose the heal going from Colorado to Kansas, lol).

Why not keep the plating weakness and heal, and test it with the accuracy buff and 27 knot speed first?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
916
[CAAT]
Members
1,659 posts
4,989 battles
5 hours ago, SeaborneSumo said:

It is so painful to be that slow, with a 33 second reload.

It's slower than that, it's actually 34.2s....

Seriously, I mean the California gets a 30s main battery reload in WoWs Legends, so why California in WoWs has a 4.2s longer reload I simply cannot comprehend. She NEEDS that 30s reload buff. Either that or an armor buff to 32mm, since they're buffing the armor of the new split line BBs. Might as well buff California too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
916
[CAAT]
Members
1,659 posts
4,989 battles
4 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Good to see the USN BBs get an armor upgrade...

*California cries in a corner*

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
935 posts
1,351 battles

Paolo Emilio seems very difficult to balance, it should be comparable to Kleber, with SAP and Italian torps.

Mogadors were the response to the Capitani Romaní superdestroyers.

I wanted them in game but not being unable to be played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×