Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Ralph090

How I would change the new American Battleships

45 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

43
[DOINK]
Members
21 posts
1,962 battles

What I would do is turn them into a sort of "advancing wall of doom" designed to slowly push forward and force the other team to gain an advantage before they got within effective range or find some way to stop them once they do.

The first change is that I'd improve the plating to 40mm (in some or most places, depending on the tier) so they'd be resistant to IFHE HE spam from light cruisers (and ensure that they have a good torpedo belt).

The second change is that I'd give them secondaries with range somewhere along the lines of the Germans (without the 1/4 caliber penetration) or Massachusetts (or perhaps a tad less) and a layout along the lines of the Standard class. The "A" hull of each ship (including the tier 10) would be in line with a ship designed in the 1920s, with large numbers of 6 inch guns at the expense of AA. The "B" hull would sacrifice some of the 6 inch guns for faster firing dual purpose 5 inch guns and more dedicated AA.

The third change is that I would give all of them the defensive AA consumable without nerfing their already bad sigma (to be honest I'd make defensive AA an American gimmick at this point, given power creep, America's historic "if there's free deck space, add AA" thing and their use of VT shells, how bad defensive AA already is, and the simple existence of Tillman Battleship Kremlin).

The fourth change is that I'd give them a unique form of radar called Fire Control Radar. It would have range somewhat less than the ship's surface detection range with a maximum concealment build (because stealth radar is cancer) and a duration equal to the ships' main battery reload plus five to ten seconds. In exchange, it would only cover a 30 degree cone which would rotate at the same speed as the main battery and would be unable to see through islands. The cone would be centered on the bearing of the main battery turrets and correlated with where the aiming reticle was located at the time the radar was activated (in the event the radar was switched on when the turrets weren't all perfectly aligned.

All of this would be offset by their abysmal speed of 23 knots, a complete inability to mount the spotter plane consumable to extend their range (catapult fighters only because AA), and their poor sigma and long reload. The ships would be so slow that they would have difficulty bringing their radar to bear early in the game and they would be totally unable to disengage from fights they can't win and would have significant difficulty dealing with kiting enemies. Additionally, they would still have a tricky time tracing DDs hunting them due to their radar having a limited arc with a slow traverse and terrain sensitive field of view instead of being an instant 360 degree "I see you" button, as well as the long reload and poor accuracy of their main guns.

So... what do you think? Would this make them overpowered, make them somewhat competitive, or just polish something that is inherently unpleasant?

Edit: I know they already have defensive AA. That was targeted specifically at Kansas, where they nerfed her sigma in exchange for access to it, which isn't at all worth it.

Edited by Ralph090
  • Cool 5
  • Confused 1
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
380
[PROJX]
Beta Testers
785 posts
4,952 battles

1. Aren't they getting buffed to 38mm in some places? That's enough to shatter even 180mm HE shells 

2. The usefulness of secondaries on a sloth of a ship is... limited to say the least. Besides, they can't just change the blueprints to fit more secondaries, they do adhere to a level of accuracy when it comes to models (or at least that's their excuse for not buffing GK turret firing angles...) 

3. I don't have any strong arguments for or against this, which probably highlights how weak of a consumable it is. 

4. More radar in this game, even if it's like a searchlight, is never good. 

Honestly, just buff the speed to 25/26 and lower the reload to 36 base and they'll be fine. 

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,852
Alpha Tester
7,170 posts
4,063 battles

Being slow isn't fun at Tier 7 in the Colorado.

Having shot guns for weapons isn't fun at Tier 4 in the New York.

This line is unplayable for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,605
[WOLF5]
Supertester
4,562 posts
4,223 battles
18 minutes ago, PotatoMD said:

1. Aren't they getting buffed to 38mm in some places? That's enough to shatter even 180mm HE shells 

Only Vermont has gotten this change as of right now.

18 minutes ago, PotatoMD said:

2. The usefulness of secondaries on a sloth of a ship is... limited to say the least. Besides, they can't just change the blueprints to fit more secondaries, they do adhere to a level of accuracy when it comes to models (or at least that's their excuse for not buffing GK turret firing angles...) 

This. Secondaries are situational, and you need speed to get in and out of situations. At 23 knots you'd be dead before you got into range.

18 minutes ago, PotatoMD said:

3. I don't have any strong arguments for or against this, which probably highlights how weak of a consumable it is. 

4. More radar in this game, even if it's like a searchlight, is never good. 

My opinion is if you have to gimmick the hell out of something to make it work, it shouldn't be in the game in the first place (see: Subs). We definitely don't need this gimmick radar.

Vermont already has 1.9 sigma, and Minnesota has 1.8. That's basically Montana values, and Monty isn't exactly inaccurate. Remember that BBs aren't the most accurate ships, and there's more to accuracy than dispersion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,391
[RLGN]
Members
15,137 posts
26,760 battles
17 minutes ago, Madwolf05 said:

Being slow isn't fun at Tier 7 in the Colorado.

Colorado is my highest wr battleship.

17 minutes ago, Madwolf05 said:

Having shot guns for weapons isn't fun at Tier 4 in the New York.

Wyoming?

Wyoming was my ‘Ole’ Reliable’ back in the day. I always used it for damage missions.

Things are different now, of course, but it still has better AA than others at T4.

17 minutes ago, Madwolf05 said:

This line is unplayable for me.

First line of BBs; effectively refused to play any of the others until the Daily Missions rework.

Only battleship I like more is Warspite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,044
[SALVO]
Members
25,789 posts
28,039 battles
2 hours ago, TaxDollarsAtWork said:

I would have preferred a battlecruiser line or other fast battleship concepts that didn't make the cut

A USN BC line would be nearly entirely paper designs, since the USN didn't go in for battlecruisers.  If any nations are going to have BC lines, it should be the British and Germans, who had legitimate battlecruiser lines.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,840
[AXANR]
Members
3,650 posts
23,193 battles

I *really* like the fire control radar idea, in concept. I've learned to play around radar, as any good DD main has, and I'm not someone that whines about it all the time like a lot of players, but the current implementation basically means the only differentiation is range and action time, and it's so game-changing that I really dislike the idea of it proliferating further. DD play in high-tiers is hard enough when you get 3-4 radar ships plus a CV negating your main advantage. 

 

The idea of having it work only in a given arc is interesting, though. It punishes the "smoke, sit, shoot" potatoes (like many Smolensk players) *and also* rewards skilled players who can anticipate DD maneuvers. Effective use requires either a good sense of when and where DDs will be, or for the red player to play stupid. I'm always in favor of tools that reward good play and punish bad play.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,358 posts
4,615 battles

I guess the work around to radar is giving them Enterprise fighters. A massive fighter squadron with an extra wide patrolling radius. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
139
[LSNB]
Members
200 posts
6,327 battles
5 hours ago, AJTP89 said:

Only Vermont has gotten this change as of right now.

 

Vermont has received 51mm deck. Minnesota has received 38mm deck. 

Only Kansas is unchanged at 32mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,390
[INTEL]
Members
13,459 posts
37,680 battles

I'm going to wait, I've decided. Quietly become more excited about them. Aside from Russian ships, the devs do an excellent job of balancing ships for the most part. I expect, though, the long waits between salvos will put most players off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
599
[GRAVE]
Members
1,407 posts
19,826 battles
8 hours ago, Ralph090 said:

The first change is that I'd improve the plating to 40mm (in some or most places, depending on the tier)

Minnesota is covered in 38mm plating, Vermont a mix of 38 and 50. Only Kansas has 32 everywhere

8 hours ago, Ralph090 said:

he second change is that I'd give them secondaries with range somewhere along the lines of the Germans (without the 1/4 caliber penetration) or M[edited]achusetts (or perhaps a tad less)

On a big barge going 23knts, only way these things will be effective is if the enemy is stupid enough to stay in that range or blunder into it

8 hours ago, Ralph090 said:

The third change is that I would give all of them the defensive AA consumable without nerfing their already bad sigma

Already have it. Also, Kansas has poor 1.5sigma, Minnesota average 1.8, and Vermont matches Monty’s 1.9. You might start noticing at this point Kansas looks like one giant turd sized Free XP sink at this point.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
766
[--V--]
Members
1,466 posts
13,786 battles

They need to learn some lessons from California and make these changes.

1. Speed - 25-27 kts.

2. Reload - 30 seconds.  35-40 seconds to reload main batteries is @#$%ing ridiculous and will not promote playing these ships unless they have the BEST accuracy in the game.

3. Secondaries - same as Massachusetts.

Otherwise folks,,,, these ships will be the least played tech tree ships in the game 2 weeks after going live.  You'll have a better chance of seeing an Arkansas than one of these guys.

 

  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,713
[SALVO]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,100 posts
6,069 battles

Having played ALOT of California and Colorado and the other slow USN ships I can point out a few things:

California has very accurate guns, the 34 seconds sucks...but when I know if I aim right I can score some damn good hits I'm comfortable. She's ACCURATELY tagged cruisers broadside at 27K as I did to one the other day. When people see that spotter plane go up, they think they are safe -THEY-ARE-NOT- California has that obscene torpedo belt which IMHO has prevented me from being citadel'd at range many a time. She can also absorb torp damage very very well. 

vs Rado

Rado has some of the best 16-inch rifles in the game, and they hit like trucks. She can put rounds on target at long range and people are still shocked by it. 

Their slow speed is made up for with long-range and accurate guns. Being able to hit targets at obscene range makes them fantastic in the right hands. 

I will admit it is annoying to clear a flank, and then be unable to effect the other. Yet also at the same time, you can't get everything. 

I will RARELY push into close quarters until late match with these guys, their secondaries are outright trash, and I do wish they would buff them to the historical levels of the dual 5-inch mount. As it stands, these ships are basically a free DD kill if caught off guard. A good DD player will know their reload times, like Cali...I shoot...you have 34 seconds to get in close and torp me before I dev strike you. The rest are what...40 seconds? You have plenty of time as the secondary battery is worthless. 

HOWEVER - this will change soon as wargaming has said they are buffing secondary battery ranges of all BB's. 

My only hope they don't get any silly ideas and put West Virginia 44 as a tier 8. Unless her guns are slava accurate she'll be tier 10 fodder. Mass ONLY does well because she has the speed to get outta trouble and keep people back with the rain of fire from her secondaries. This is what people forget when they clamor for WV44 to be a tier 8. Can she get away from a fight? Can she keep chargers back with a great secondary battery? The argument of the "BUT IT'S HP WILL BE X" is null when we have a Graff Spee at tier 6 with as much health as a tier 8 Mogami. 

Rado is also a gatekeeper to two lines, doesn't matter if WV44 powercreeps it at all. VK2801 in WoT gate kept two lines and it was trash. Rado has a stupid good turning radius and accurate main battery. It's AA is trash now, and it's torp belt is meh.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
604
[_I_]
Members
286 posts

From what I've read and watched so far, they might as well call them islands and paste them on the mini map as shore batteries.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
186
[_BDA_]
Members
427 posts
6,875 battles
9 hours ago, Crucis said:

A USN BC line would be nearly entirely paper designs, since the USN didn't go in for battlecruisers.  If any nations are going to have BC lines, it should be the British and Germans, who had legitimate battlecruiser lines.

I would start a line like this with the old armored cruisers culminating in the Alaska and Puerto Rico.  Those 12" guns have no place in a "cruiser" line and might fit into a line sporting the 10" guns of the Tennessee class (ACR-10 thru 13).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,595
[SALVO]
Members
5,901 posts
4,946 battles
13 hours ago, Ralph090 said:

So... what do you think?

I like the concept of the "Crawling wall of Doom", I think it would be interesting to play.

The "searchlight" radar is also an interesting concept, might be applied to some other stuff. 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43
[DOINK]
Members
21 posts
1,962 battles
12 hours ago, PotatoMD said:

1. Aren't they getting buffed to 38mm in some places? That's enough to shatter even 180mm HE shells 

2. The usefulness of secondaries on a sloth of a ship is... limited to say the least. Besides, they can't just change the blueprints to fit more secondaries, they do adhere to a level of accuracy when it comes to models (or at least that's their excuse for not buffing GK turret firing angles...) 

3. I don't have any strong arguments for or against this, which probably highlights how weak of a consumable it is. 

4. More radar in this game, even if it's like a searchlight, is never good. 

Honestly, just buff the speed to 25/26 and lower the reload to 36 base and they'll be fine. 

1: This is what I get for not double checking the patch notes before running my mouth.

2: They're supposed to be situational. It's not a "run you down and kill you with a death by a thousand cuts because my guns can't hit anything" affair like Grosse Kurfurst, it's more of a no-fun-zone kind of thing to keep enemy cruisers and destroyers at a distance. This is based off of my experience playing Colorado. One of the biggest things with Colorado is that if you're alone, your dead, since you can't disengage and if an enemy yolos you your secondaries won't save you. They are to make up for the inability to disengage by making getting close more dangerous. Also, WeeGee is absolutely changing the blueprints with the designs they're running with. Kansas has a speed of 23 knots, an armament of 12 16"/50 caliber guns in four triple turrets, and a 13.5 inch belt. That's the specs for the South Dakota class designed and laid down in the early 20s, which were canceled by the Washington Naval Treaty (effectively they're the Montana of the Standard class). Their secondaries were to be 16 6" guns in casemates (specifically, the exact same guns as on the Omaha), plus some 3" AA guns. Look at Kansas's superstructure and compare it to West Virginia's refit. These ships are literally an early-1920s design given the exact same refit as Wee Vee (despite being 60 feet longer and some 14,000 long tons heavier at full load).

3: Which raises the question of why WeeGee nerfed Kansas's sigma when they added it. That's what I was referencing with that point.

4: I know radar is problematic, but this version is much more situational. It can't see through islands so DDs can still hide from it and the cone rotates very slowly so it would be hard to use it as a search radar. It's not like the Russian miracle cruisers with their "I see you" buttons that can radar the instant they're detected and spot the DD hunting them no matter where it is. It would only be reliable when you already know roughly where a ship is, like if you were to sweep a contested cap circle or spot a ship hiding in a smoke screen (effectively a "hello Smolensk" button). Also, these ships have a speed of 23 knots. I'm trying to make them at least somewhat interesting.

I think you're right about buffing the speed and reload, but it would also make them a lot closer to the existing American BBs, which are already on the slow side (Iowa and Georgia excepted) but have overwhelming firepower. The slower speed makes them different. I'm trying to make the ships more viable with that in mind.

4 hours ago, tfcas119 said:

Minnesota is covered in 38mm plating, Vermont a mix of 38 and 50. Only Kansas has 32 everywhere

On a big barge going 23knts, only way these things will be effective is if the enemy is stupid enough to stay in that range or blunder into it

Already have it. Also, Kansas has poor 1.5sigma, Minnesota average 1.8, and Vermont matches Monty’s 1.9. You might start noticing at this point Kansas looks like one giant turd sized Free XP sink at this point.

 

1: This is what I get for not double checking the patch notes before running my mouth. Still, Kansas's plating should be improved I think.

2: That's the idea. They're supposed to be an anti-yolo no fun zone, not a primary weapon like on Grosse Kurfurst.

3: I should have been more clear about this. When they added defensive AA, they also nerfed Kansas's sigma. I believe it was originally 1.8. That's what I was referencing. I would undo the nerf to Kansas. And I absolutely agree that she looks like a giant XP Piñata at this point.
 

12 hours ago, AJTP89 said:

This. Secondaries are situational, and you need speed to get in and out of situations. At 23 knots you'd be dead before you got into range.

My opinion is if you have to gimmick the hell out of something to make it work, it shouldn't be in the game in the first place (see: Subs). We definitely don't need this gimmick radar.

Vermont already has 1.9 sigma, and Minnesota has 1.8. That's basically Montana values, and Monty isn't exactly inaccurate. Remember that BBs aren't the most accurate ships, and there's more to accuracy than dispersion.

1: The idea is that they're supposed to be anti-yolo no-fun-zones to compensate for the complete inability to disengage, not the main battery like on Grosse Kurfurst.

2: I mean, it worked for Georgia, so why not try it here? Also, a radar searchlight with a very slow traverse that can't see through islands is no where near as oppressive as the Russian Eye of Sauron I think. It would be a nice anti-Smolensk tool if nothing else.

3: I should have been clearer about this. I was specifically referring to how they nerfed Kansas's sigma when they added defensive AA. I'd undo that.

12 hours ago, Madwolf05 said:

Being slow isn't fun at Tier 7 in the Colorado.

Having shot guns for weapons isn't fun at Tier 4 in the New York.

1: That's what the gimmicks are for. The secondaries would allow you to more effectively fight back when you get caught out and can't disengage and would make yoloing more dangerous. The radar would give you a tool to push cap circles or fight back against DDs hunting you without being as oppressive as the Russian Eye of Sauron. It would also allow you to delete a Smolensk that thinks it's safe farming you from inside his smoke screen, which is always fun.

2: I kinda like Wyoming. It's hilarious to watch an Omaha vanish with shell splashes erupting all around her and then emerge with 3/4 of her health gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,713
[SALVO]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,100 posts
6,069 battles

I'd say Mass Secondaries are a good idea. Mass can run people down with a speed flag, these guys will need the secondaries to not be outright DD food. The issue is spotting said Loliboatm as detection ranges are probably gonna change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43
[DOINK]
Members
21 posts
1,962 battles
11 minutes ago, michael_zahnle said:

I would start a line like this with the old armored cruisers culminating in the Alaska and Puerto Rico.  Those 12" guns have no place in a "cruiser" line and might fit into a line sporting the 10" guns of the Tennessee class (ACR-10 thru 13).

That's a neat idea, although I wouldn't end it with Alaska and Puerto Rico since a Lexington class or especially a G3 class would be overwhelming against one of them. Even something like a modernized Ersatz Yorch or Hood would be able to really put the hurt on them in a fight. The 12 inch guns were part of an escalation in cruiser design that started when the interwar treaty system that formally defined what a cruiser was broke down in the late 1930s but never got off the ground due to the demands of World War II and the shift to aircraft carriers and submarines taking over all of the classic cruiser (and battleship for that matter) roles, like scouting and commerce warfare. Instead cruisers evolved into heavy escort units with rapid fire guns like Des Moines, or dual purpose guns like Worcester.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,690
[ARS]
Beta Testers
5,267 posts
5,775 battles

LOL.  Most of you just want grossly overpowered ships.  "Make it as fast as Yamato, with vastly better firepower, give it great sigma, vastly better AA, no citadel vulnerability, better plating and maybe even radar!"

Do you guys even pause to consider what you are asking for?

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
729 posts
10,104 battles
3 hours ago, SeaborneSumo said:

2. Reload - 30 seconds.  35-40 seconds to reload main batteries is @#$%ing ridiculous and will not promote playing these ships unless they have the BEST accuracy in the game.

On what planet is 12 457 mm guns with a 30 second reload and near best in game accuracy balanced? Ohio has 8 of the same guns with a 27.5 second reload and 0.05 more sigma. Montana has 12 406 mm guns with a 30 second reload and less sigma.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
186
[_BDA_]
Members
427 posts
6,875 battles
37 minutes ago, Ralph090 said:

That's a neat idea, although I wouldn't end it with Alaska and Puerto Rico since a Lexington class or especially a G3 class would be overwhelming against one of them. Even something like a modernized Ersatz Yorch or Hood would be able to really put the hurt on them in a fight. The 12 inch guns were part of an escalation in cruiser design that started when the interwar treaty system that formally defined what a cruiser was broke down in the late 1930s but never got off the ground due to the demands of World War II and the shift to aircraft carriers and submarines taking over all of the classic cruiser (and battleship for that matter) roles, like scouting and commerce warfare. Instead cruisers evolved into heavy escort units with rapid fire guns like Des Moines, or dual purpose guns like Worcester.

True, but those 2 ships are already in the game at Tiers IX and X.  Unless you nerf them down to, say, VIII and IX and culminate the line with CC-1 Lexington (4 16" and 14 6" guns as an A hull, with 4 16" and possibly 8 twin 5" on the B hull) coming in on Tier X.  Do that, though, and many Tier VIII ships would be hopelessly outmatched (Odin comes to mind... already a weak Tier VIII BB).  Of course, a cruiser's huge citadel might balance it off.  You might even add some of the earlier proposals... Design 150 had a 5” belt and eight 14” guns at 35 knots, and Design 259 mounted 10 14" at the same speed.

Edited by michael_zahnle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×