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

I was wrong (California)

38 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,713
[SALVO]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,100 posts
6,069 battles

24 battles in with California I have begun to change my opinion about this ship. I keep finding out every game how wrong I was. Her armor is thick, her guns are obscenely accurate, and her AA is god tier. 

California Pros:

  1. Obscenely accurate main battery
  2. Erases cruisers, causes BB pain when not against the belt
  3. God tier AA - great clear skies farmers
  4. Sets more fires than a gender reveal party (demo build)
  5. Surprisingly a good turner
  6. Tanky when built as such (5 heals dawg)
  7. 11.6km detect 
  8. Spotter plane + plotting room = 27k range
  9. Oddly satisfying to listen to California Love whilst playing her
  10. Aesthetically pleasing, the THIC jokes don't get old
  11. Teaches you patience
  12. With 12 rifles you can hit a DD with either HE or AP - 2PACLIVZZZ!

California Cons:

image.png.4bc29b0c780a15637c744d623e657566.png

Everything about this ship is ridiculously slow and sometimes frustrating. The reload at 34 seconds...is just...bad....why....I mean it's not terrible when Adrenalin rush kicks in.

Oh yeah lets talk the secondaries:

T. Rex's tiny arms weren't meek after all -- new research says they were  meant for 'vicious slashing'

Just pretend they don't exist...they fire super slowly and are just...so so so short ranged. I imagine this will change when the BB secondaries get buffed.

In closing: 4eqibu.jpg

 

20200912_114508_PASB707-California_50_Gold_harbor.wowsreplay

20200912_032323_PASB707-California_53_Shoreside.wowsreplay

20200912_030429_PASB707-California_20_NE_two_brothers.wowsreplay

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
292
[NFJF]
Members
697 posts
10,564 battles

Cali is one of the hidden premium gems in the game. The only time she's really painful to play is in t9 games. I played against a Lexington one time and shot down 64 of her planes all by myself.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,326 posts
7,773 battles

I've always loved those Dead on Arrival threads.

People on here complain if the ship is dead or op before seeing it played or playing it for themselves, too bad we can't get rentals like their other game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,713
[SALVO]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,100 posts
6,069 battles
4 minutes ago, admiralsexybeast said:

Cali is one of the hidden premium gems in the game. The only time she's really painful to play is in t9 games. I played against a Lexington one time and shot down 64 of her planes all by myself.

The tier 9 games is where she is shockingly better. The massive range + fire chance is where you farm people. The issue is when she runs afowl of DD's and frankly the secondary buff will make her fantastic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,713
[SALVO]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,100 posts
6,069 battles
1 minute ago, khorender_1 said:

I've always loved those Dead on Arrival threads.

People on here complain if the ship is dead or op before seeing it played or playing it for themselves, too bad we can't get rentals like their other game.

I've been playing war blunder alot lately, and being able to test stuff before you grind it/buy it is INCREDIBLY helpful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,611
[KWF]
Members
5,185 posts
6,659 battles

I don't have an issue with California and in general I wouldn't mind much. 

My issue is that there's a ship a full tier lower that aside from AA has incredibly similar stats and comes at a lower price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,326 posts
7,773 battles
2 minutes ago, Dr_Venture said:

I've been playing war blunder alot lately, and being able to test stuff before you grind it/buy it is INCREDIBLY helpful. 

There are only a few buy's I regret or did the grinds for like Odin and Lazo, I would even go for the trade-in like WOT, as for [edited] after watching others play it, I'll stay with WG for awhile longer lol.

I love LWM reviews along with some other CC's, but I know their playstyle is totally different than my own and results greatly vary, why I would like to be able to try it before buying it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
291
[CAAT]
Members
502 posts
4,392 battles
56 minutes ago, Dr_Venture said:

24 battles in with California I have begun to change my opinion about this ship. I keep finding out every game how wrong I was. Her armor is thick, her guns are obscenely accurate, and her AA is god tier. 

California Pros:

  1. Obscenely accurate main battery
  2. Erases cruisers, causes BB pain when not against the belt
  3. God tier AA - great clear skies farmers
  4. Sets more fires than a gender reveal party (demo build)
  5. Surprisingly a good turner
  6. Tanky when built as such (5 heals dawg)
  7. 11.6km detect 
  8. Spotter plane + plotting room = 27k range
  9. Oddly satisfying to listen to California Love whilst playing her
  10. Aesthetically pleasing, the THIC jokes don't get old
  11. Teaches you patience
  12. With 12 rifles you can hit a DD with either HE or AP - 2PACLIVZZZ!

Ok, ok, I have a FEW things to say about this...I LOVE California to death honestly, but we can't really just say "SHE'S AMAZEBALLS" because she really isn't. She needs buffs. Now then, about what you're saying about her pros...

1. Decently accurate main battery, not obscenely. This isn't Yamato levels of accuracy here. it's 1.9 sigma, which is nice, though.

2. Same as any BB, really.

3. If a CV wants you dead, you WILL be, no matter how good your AA is supposed to be, in this current state of AA and CVs. Which is sad...btw, I don't think I've ever gotten Clear Skies in California. I DID get AA Defense Expert before though! And I still got sunk by the CV ultimately (there WERE two CVs though, so that DOES probably matter a bit)

4. If you're using HE, sure I guess? But then you lose out the higher potential damage of AP. Of course, against Tier 8s and 9s, well....HE is a LOT more reliable.

5. Decent turning circle, yes. But slow. You cannot disengage easily unless you're near an island.

6. If you can survive long enough to use STANDARD heals at say 76s cooldown times with only standard Tier 7 BB armor scheme against Tier 8s and 9s when uptiered....Then yep, "tanky"! Also, you're getting overmatched by 15in, 16in, and 18in guns. the former two are found even against Tier 6. Colorado overmatches you, while you cannot overmatch Colorado, as an example. Or Warspite. Or Wee Vee '41. Or Mutsu. Or Nagato. Or Nelson. Or Bayern even.

8. That IS a lot of range, but you don't need THAT much range imo. Personal preference, no biggie!

9. To each their own on this one : )

10. 100% Agreed! Love the aesthetic of the Tennessee-class battleships <3

11. This is VERY very true. With that 34.2s reload and sub-16 knot speed because of no speed retention during turns, you HAVE to be patient. Veeerrryy patient. But the gameplay can be quite rewarding when you do well! You CAN have very good matches in California.

12. True, but AP overpens against DDs still don't really do enough imo, unless they're already lower health, OR you get ALL shots to connect. Secondaries would be nice, but no one usually builds California for secondaries...

 

That all said, honestly all California REALLY needs is that main battery reload buff to 30s to become an actually "good" ship (I still question WHY WG nerfed it in the first place during testing...it's not like California's OP in ANY sense). It WILL make her gameplay a lot more fun and her gunnery far more comfortable at Tier 7. The problem is, she's so slow, fires even slower and really gets NOTHING to compensate for it. Also, she has BAD gun firing arcs, so you WILL be pretty much broadside if you want to fire your 12 guns. Yes, she's a Tier 6 Arizona with Tier 7 range and Tier 8+ AA. I wish the AA would mean more, but it's just not a selling point right now for ships...

(This honest assessment is coming from someone who's played California consistently in Randoms for over 260 matches, and now a fair few times in Asymmetrical Battles, just fyi.)

Edited by SaiIor_Moon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,645 posts
42,248 battles

She is always a good ship in the right hands. Some players shine in it, others meh in it. I am somewhere in that spectrum. 

I have a feeling that California is the foreshadowing of the new US BB line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,378
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,268 posts
29 minutes ago, khorender_1 said:

There are only a few buy's I regret or did the grinds for like Odin and Lazo, I would even go for the trade-in like WOT, as for [edited] after watching others play it, I'll stay with WG for awhile longer lol.

I love LWM reviews along with some other CC's, but I know their playstyle is totally different than my own and results greatly vary, why I would like to be able to try it before buying it.

Lazo is a fantastic premium Narai cruiser.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
627
[SVF]
Members
1,780 posts
2,335 battles
1 hour ago, SaiIor_Moon said:

11. This is VERY very true. With that 34.2s reload and sub-16 knot speed because of no speed retention during turns, you HAVE to be patient. Veeerrryy patient. But the gameplay can be quite rewarding when you do well! You CAN have very good matches in California.

Not in PvE.  She's a horrible ship for the very quick matches that can happen in that mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
291
[CAAT]
Members
502 posts
4,392 battles
4 minutes ago, landcollector said:

Not in PvE.  She's a horrible ship for the very quick matches that can happen in that mode.

I'm talking in regards to Random Battles, mainly...but you're correct. Co-Op play is VERY fast-paced usually, so it's definitely a bit of a struggle to perform well in California, due to her slowness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,705
[WOLF9]
Wiki Lead
15,133 posts
4,766 battles

For reference, LWM's review:

Not particularly favorable.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
291
[CAAT]
Members
502 posts
4,392 battles
Just now, iDuckman said:

For reference, LWM's review:

Not particularly favorable.

Honestly, her findings are pretty consistent with my own on this ship. You get that slightly better sigma, slightly better reload, slightly more AP damage,  basically super-small buffs that are immediately countered by the terrible gun arcs, so that's a wash. Remove the extended range and nerf the AA a tier or 2 and you've basically got a SLIGHTLY different version of Arizona. Now if California had the 30s reload, she'd have that, the extended range at 19.9km AND the "great" Tier8 AA... now that's actually fairly decent! Armor buff to 32 mm would be welcome, and make her actually UNIQUE to other BBs at her tier, but not absolutely necessary. Secondaries and armor are standard as all get out, save for the 35mm piece on the sides, which is somewhat nice...She's slow, but that's to be expected in a Standard-type USN battleship. But she can't mitigate that either because she doesn't have speed retention during turns. You CAN have good games in California, don't get me wrong. Is she a consistently "good" ship though, in comparison to the other T7 BBs? I'm not so sure about that one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,072
[CNO]
[CNO]
Members
6,165 posts
18,803 battles
1 hour ago, Dr_Venture said:

The tier 9 games is where she is shockingly better. The massive range + fire chance is where you farm people.

^^^this^^^

She is an extremely effective ship in T9 battles.  But don't underestimate her AP at range either.  Count the number of AP cits I get in this opening match.  Pay particular attention to the first one.  Max spotter range AP cit on a T9 BB.

 

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
710
[NUWES]
Members
3,283 posts
11,850 battles

Only issue I've had with her is when you spawn on a weak flank and are uptiered.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
172
[YARRR]
[YARRR]
Members
259 posts
5,471 battles

Just had my first match with her. Another really, really underrated US BB. Not terribly surprised.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
291
[CAAT]
Members
502 posts
4,392 battles
2 minutes ago, Epic_Baller said:

Just had my first match with her. Another really, really underrated US BB. Not terribly surprised.

With all due respect though, I'm sorry, but you cannot ACTUALLY just base her performance overall on just ONE single match. Just saying! Try playing her 100 more times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
172
[YARRR]
[YARRR]
Members
259 posts
5,471 battles
Just now, SaiIor_Moon said:

With all due respect though, I'm sorry, but you cannot ACTUALLY just base her performance overall on just ONE single match. Just saying! Try playing her 100 more times.

I'm basing my opinion of her on my one match plus more than 1150 matches in other US BBs (and about 500 of those being in 'Standards'). I don't really care about overall performance on global stats. She's tanky, she reliably hits hard, and her AA really is god-tier. She'll do work in skilled hands.

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
291
[CAAT]
Members
502 posts
4,392 battles
12 minutes ago, Epic_Baller said:

I'm basing my opinion of her on my one match plus more than 1150 matches in other US BBs (and about 500 of those being in 'Standards'). I don't really care about overall performance on global stats. She's tanky, she reliably hits hard, and her AA really is god-tier. She'll do work in skilled hands.

Again, you cannot rate the performance of California in ONE single match just because you've played like a dozen other USN BBs (so have I btw and it STILL has no bearing on California's INDIVIDUAL performance) and then claim that California's "good and yet another underrated BB" because....the other USN BBs are...fine? Uhhhhh....Ok....Not following that logic, honestly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
172
[YARRR]
[YARRR]
Members
259 posts
5,471 battles
14 minutes ago, SaiIor_Moon said:

Again, you cannot rate the performance of California in ONE single match just because you've played like a dozen other USN BBs (so have I btw and it STILL has no bearing on California's INDIVIDUAL performance) and then claim that California's "good and yet another underrated BB" because....the other USN BBs are...fine? Uhhhhh....Ok....Not following that logic, honestly.

Ok, ok, fine. I retract my one match review.

 

But I put forward my two match review, and yeah - underrated gudbote. Her strengths are better than people make out, her weaknesses are not as big a handicap. I don't need a sample size of 100 to make this claim, it's evident in playing her. She's a beast.

 

CA2.thumb.jpg.c6d96847aaefc56db7f0f19545ed1806.jpg

 

  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
291
[CAAT]
Members
502 posts
4,392 battles
3 minutes ago, Epic_Baller said:

Ok, ok, fine. I retract my one match review.

 

But I put forward my two match review, and yeah - underrated gudbote. Her strengths are better than people make out, her weaknesses are not as big a handicap. I don't need a sample size of 100 to make this claim, it's evident in playing her. She's a beast.

 

CA2.thumb.jpg.c6d96847aaefc56db7f0f19545ed1806.jpg

 

你走开,美少女战士,捂脸GIF - GoAway SailorMoon Facepalm - Discover & Share GIFs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×