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

What's the deal with Seattle?

51 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
3,354 posts
17,100 battles

I think this might be my new worst ship ever. In my other worst ships at least they had one redeeming quality. They could do at least one thing somewhat well. 

Seattle doesn't seem to do anything well. Maybe I'm missing something since cruisers aren't my main ships.  It's sluggish, it doesn't turn well, it's not fast, it doesn't have good range, the fire arch is insane, horrible concealment, and paper armor. I can't even play it behind islands like other cruisers. No matter what I do I'm spotted after firing.

Is there a special trick to this ship or FXP to the Wooster? And if so, is Wooster better? 

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,887
Members
1,980 posts
52 battles

When I grinded the USN CL line Seattle felt like a downgrade to Cleveland indeed. The disadvantages it has compared Cleve (such as the atrocious firing angles) massively outweigh the few advantages imo.

Worcester is a far superior ship. If you enjoyed playing Cleve, you will definitely enjoy playing Worcester.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,415
[RLGN]
Members
15,173 posts
26,814 battles
3 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Worcester is a far superior ship. If you enjoyed playing Cleve, you will definitely enjoy playing Worcester.

I enjoyed playing T6 Cleveland; not so much the T8.

Rooster has been okay in Co-op, but since I can’t position worth a damn, and other player are normally not cooperatively stupid; it’s worthless to me in Randoms.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
565
[TIMT]
Members
1,124 posts
4,481 battles
17 minutes ago, STINKWEED_ said:

Seattle doesn't seem to do anything well. Maybe I'm missing something since cruisers aren't my main ships.  It's sluggish, it doesn't turn well, it's not fast, it doesn't have good range, the fire arch is insane, horrible concealment, and paper armor. I can't even play it behind islands like other cruisers. No matter what I do I'm spotted after firing.

well, the firing angles and armor are a straight downgrade. Compared to cleveland it seems like a straight downgrade, yet somehow I do OK in her where I did not in Cleveland. Don't know if that is straight luck or just perception as I don't expect anything from Seattle.

I think it all boils down to positioning, this ship punishes everything except being in cover / firing unspotted. The floaty shells are actually a positive thing as they allow you to lob shells the opponent cant so you can fire from behind islands. The biggest downside are just the firing angles, which means basically you always have to give broadside to have good DPM. So don't think about firing without hard cover between you and any ships that might shoot back.

I don't have Worcester yet, I don't know how long the grind through Seattle will take me but I try to see it as an important lesson on positioning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,618
[WOLF5]
Supertester
4,579 posts
4,223 battles

Pretty much my experience. It's made of paper like all other CLs, but to me it just felt sluggish and had terrible firing arcs, which made nearly impossible to shoot effectively without getting nuked. It has some scary firepower, but unless you you find just the right island spot you're going to struggle to do much without getting blapped. Definitely would rather play Cleveland.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
391
[PROJX]
Beta Testers
791 posts
4,957 battles

I don't know why but I actually liked the Seattle more than I liked Cleveland. Probably the heal. 

But Wooster is much better than both, so it's totally worth it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24
[WOLFA]
Beta Testers
76 posts
19,814 battles

I really despise the whole hide behind an island and lob fire play style. I may get nuked occasionally but I far prefer running an open water run and gun play style in these. Wiggle that butt and keep playing with the throttle and kite. May not always be great but it’s more fun for me than hiding behind a rock all match.

Share this post


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

The guns on the Seattle were a weird choice because they're so wide. Like I get that they're dual purpose turrets but its so weird seeing a small caliber take up the same width as a battleship turret but with so much negative spacing inbetween. I be interested to see the inner mechanics of it for why the turret was so large. 

I vaguely remember it being an art design error though? Maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,758
[--K--]
Members
5,399 posts
18,139 battles

The Seattle looks like you took a stock image of the Cleveland and stretcher it be a bit larger. Probably the ugliest USN Cruiser in the game. 

But as to the question asked in this post, the Seattle is a Free Exp sink to tax the player on the way to the Much Better Worchester. 

:cap_rambo::cap_rambo::cap_rambo::cap_cool::cap_rambo::cap_rambo::cap_rambo:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,098
[WOLFG]
Members
31,357 posts
9,649 battles
22 minutes ago, deadmeat2012 said:

I really despise the whole hide behind an island and lob fire play style. I may get nuked occasionally but I far prefer running an open water run and gun play style in these. Wiggle that butt and keep playing with the throttle and kite. May not always be great but it’s more fun for me than hiding behind a rock all match.

Yup, that's why I stopped at T6 for the CLs.

I stopped the CAs at NO, but then I ended up with a Baltimore at T8 instead. I don't mind the ship, but it's hard to play it the way I like, so I won't be continuing up the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
633
[UN1]
Members
1,293 posts
4,041 battles
59 minutes ago, STINKWEED_ said:

I think this might be my new worst ship ever. In my other worst ships at least they had one redeeming quality. They could do at least one thing somewhat well. 

Seattle doesn't seem to do anything well. Maybe I'm missing something since cruisers aren't my main ships.  It's sluggish, it doesn't turn well, it's not fast, it doesn't have good range, the fire arch is insane, horrible concealment, and paper armor. I can't even play it behind islands like other cruisers. No matter what I do I'm spotted after firing.

Is there a special trick to this ship or FXP to the Wooster? And if so, is Wooster better? 

The special trick is to run the range module in the 6th slot. She won't suddenly turn into a killing machine, but it gives her the range to stay further back where she needs to be and even operate behind islands and such. 

But yes, easily the weakest relative to it's tier of the US CL line. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,520
[WOLFC]
Members
3,197 posts

I also didn't mind playing the Seattle ... my first game in her is probably what gave me a positive attitude (it helps) ... yes, she has a lot of weaknesses, but can pump out a ton of shells; over 400 in one of my first CoOp battles, with 5 kills and 12 fires.  Once I started enjoying her it made the grind to Wochester faster. Typical CL captain build (original 14 point captain moved to Wochester) ... and the following modules.  Good luck!

 

 

 

seattle1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,144
[WOLFC]
Members
2,198 posts
10,553 battles

I had decent success with Seattle in the tier IX/X ranked sprint that ran a few months back when I was grinding through her. But then again, I’m also one of those crazy ones who is perfectly comfortable playing USN CLs as open-water gunboats when needed. The only things about the ship that really bother me are not only the worse firing angles relative to Cleveland, but also the turret traverse, which seems so slow compared to her predecessor, especially if you take the reload module (which you should).

I recently reset the line and am playing Helena right now. I won’t waste my free xp, but I am not really looking forward to playing Seattle again. She’s not really even that bad, IMO, she’s just stuck between two very solid ships in the tech tree.

Edited by Nevermore135

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,546
[WOLF3]
Members
28,813 posts
25,049 battles

If left unmolested she has better, faster firepower than Cleveland.

But her turret traverse sucks for a High Tier USN CL and her gun angles are atrocious, it gets her YEETED out of a match.

 

Long ago when the USN Cruiser Split was newer, she used to be a really good Radar Cruiser, but WG nerfed the Radar Range of Tier IX Seattle & Tier X Worcester to that of 9km of Tier VIII Cleveland.  The IX-X USN CLs have been garbage Radar Cruisers since then.  The justification of WG pulling USN CL Stealth Radar capability was that "Stealth Radar is Bad" but then they allow Chapayev to maintain that capability, and introduce it to several of the recently added RU Cruisers.

:Smile_unsure:

 

The only other redeeming quality Seattle has is Repair Party, and that is standard perk for all Cruisers starting Tier IX.  Cleveland in Tier VIII doesn't have RP access.

 

If these USN CLs can't be effective Radar Cruisers can they at least be effective Damage Dealers?  They aren't.  Not even Worcester is a good damage dealer.

 

USN CLs are Overrated.  They're not effective for the caps, they're not effective Radar Cruisers, and they sure as hell aren't effective Damage Dealers.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway
  • Cool 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
372
[VORTX]
Members
473 posts
6,844 battles
1 hour ago, STINKWEED_ said:

I think this might be my new worst ship ever. In my other worst ships at least they had one redeeming quality. They could do at least one thing somewhat well. 

Seattle doesn't seem to do anything well. Maybe I'm missing something since cruisers aren't my main ships.  It's sluggish, it doesn't turn well, it's not fast, it doesn't have good range, the fire arch is insane, horrible concealment, and paper armor. I can't even play it behind islands like other cruisers. No matter what I do I'm spotted after firing.

Is there a special trick to this ship or FXP to the Wooster? And if so, is Wooster better? 

I really disliked Seattle. I made it work and finished the grind to woostah with a good record. It was a tough grind but I made it through. Horrible firing angles, paper armor and everything you said. Woostah was also a disappointment for me. I was very excited to get it finally and even bought the camo. Disappointed I did. It’s an island hugger in all but the most desperate situations. The DPM is poor dispite the fast guns. Fires are very lacking thanks to IFHE. Kiting is very hard to do with the gun arcs. It’s hard to hit anything really. I am an okay player and the skill set required to be good consistently in woostah is far beyond me. I’ll try it out again in the future (50 games in it), but unfortunately it was a pretty miserable play minus a handful of spectacular games. I’ve heard the heavy cruiser line is more fun to grind but atm I’m burned out on American island humpers and am enjoying the stalanium line of cruisers quite a bit more.GL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,750
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Banned
16,985 posts

Looking at the Seattle's attributes, compared to Cleveland and Worcester... I skipped it with "Free "XP.

It's an anarchist ship anyway.  :Smile_smile::Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53
[WOLF1]
Members
119 posts
5,911 battles

I struggled with the Seattle until I started to play it at range and kitting.

Yes, the shell arcs are horrible, but you can get enough in the general area to put a BB on fire, while being far enough out to somewhat dodge incoming shells. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
69
[ABCD3]
Members
512 posts
13,831 battles

Sorry to say that the American CA's do not pan out compared to the other nations.   The USN made a bad decision not to have torps like the other nations.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,546
[WOLF3]
Members
28,813 posts
25,049 battles
7 minutes ago, RickPatton said:

Sorry to say that the American CA's do not pan out compared to the other nations.   The USN made a bad decision not to have torps like the other nations.  

Historically that's for the better.  We didn't have Cruisers exploding from small 127mm shell hits fired from a CVE's secondary battery, because it landed on the torpedo tubes (Chokai) or a bomb landing amidships, blasting the ship dead in the water because it hit the torpedoes (Mikuma).

1920px-Japanese_heavy_cruiser_Mikuma_sin

Veteran Heavy Cruiser Chokai, heavily armed CA of the Takao-class, Admiral Ozawa's flagship in the victory of Battle of Savo Island... Laid low by a 127mm shell to the torpedo tubes.  Fired from a CVE.

 

When HMS Hood went down and the Royal Navy were thinking about how such a thing happened, one of the leading theories was a hit to her torpedo tubes blasting her.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
565
[TIMT]
Members
1,124 posts
4,481 battles

Yeah people forget how much power is stored in those torpedoes and how fragile they actually are, especially the IJN long lance with the pure oxygen inside. That alone is an extreme fire hazard, in combination with the fuel this is the closest you have to a naval air-fuel bomb you can have. Add the TNT etc. on top of that you get fireworks deluxe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
173 posts
12,057 battles

Well, not sure, but it seems to me that the people that live there enjoy smashing and destroying other people's stuff. 

Wait... Wrong forum...

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
203
[CRUEL]
Members
496 posts
8,486 battles
3 hours ago, STINKWEED_ said:

I think this might be my new worst ship ever. In my other worst ships at least they had one redeeming quality. They could do at least one thing somewhat well. 

Seattle doesn't seem to do anything well. Maybe I'm missing something since cruisers aren't my main ships.  It's sluggish, it doesn't turn well, it's not fast, it doesn't have good range, the fire arch is insane, horrible concealment, and paper armor. I can't even play it behind islands like other cruisers. No matter what I do I'm spotted after firing.

Is there a special trick to this ship or FXP to the Wooster? And if so, is Wooster better? 

I've free xp'd it twice, once durring the initial grind and once on regrind. 2nd time I took it to about 130k xp before I'd had enough. You are right it's just a Jack of no trades. Would be a great ship at tier 8 but at 9 it struggles. Has no redeeming qualities. Aa is even meh now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,750
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Banned
16,985 posts
51 minutes ago, RickPatton said:

Sorry to say that the American CA's do not pan out compared to the other nations.   The USN made a bad decision not to have torps like the other nations.  

As an aside, Seattle is not a CA in this game, it's a CL.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
729 posts
10,104 battles
1 hour ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Not even Worcester is a good damage dealer.

tenor.gif?itemid=13259642

 

50 minutes ago, RickPatton said:

Sorry to say that the American CA's do not pan out compared to the other nations.   The USN made a bad decision not to have torps like the other nations.  

Torpedoes on cruisers are very situational anyway. Both US cruiser lines are very strong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×