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

When T7 play against T9

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
4,477 posts
4,779 battles

Came in expecting this to be a T9 California game. 

 

My disappointment is immeasurable, and my autumn is ruined. :Smile-_tongue:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,399
[BLNCE]
Members
13,459 posts
44,054 battles

I am with Yoshiblue. It's not even a California post. What's the point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
244
[ICEY]
Volunteer Moderator
485 posts

I find that a lot of tier 7 ships if played well can hold up pretty well in tier 9 games.

From what I played, here are some of them:

Fiji - I always seem to wreck Seattles with this thing for some reason... A Seattle opens fire on me but he ends up taking 10k damage from my AP (and that's with just regular pens!)

King George V : HE is good, AP is great for killing broadside cruisers of any tier plus the competitive reload

Myoko - that ridiculously high fire chance and HE damage

Nagato - I always seem to get ignored in tier 9 matches with this ship so I end up racking a ton of citadels without actually getting hit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
915
[--V--]
Members
1,602 posts
14,841 battles

Depends on the ship and the driver.   Some ships though, suck at T9.   Cough Cough, California,,,,,

KGV - I've had a lot of great games in her.  She has Speed, Fast reload, Excellent fire starter and good AP.   Not a surprise at all she did well this match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
899
[META_]
Members
1,963 posts
23,082 battles
6 hours ago, Soshi_Sone said:

...they do pretty damn good...

shot-20_10.05_23_29.56-0448.thumb.jpg.70bf3bd295350b9b4088df1dc99fe78b.jpg

1600 xp....good game but not GOOD GAME

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
806
[-NACL]
Members
1,035 posts
25,035 battles

That was a dumpster fire game. Look at the ships, your team rolled over the other. Plus the "Base Exp" is always higher on a lower tier ship fighting a higher tier ship.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
581
[-N-]
Members
2,288 posts
15,955 battles
6 hours ago, Soshi_Sone said:

...they do pretty damn good...

shot-20_10.05_23_29.56-0448.thumb.jpg.70bf3bd295350b9b4088df1dc99fe78b.jpg

Yes they can do very well...

2020-09-14_19-37-38.thumb.jpg.3e2f4e10325afe3ffc93cfa122519bf5.jpg

2020-09-14_19-38-06.thumb.jpg.b5d6e91ab31f0ec8ebccecc5f9a89c99.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16,890
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
37,607 posts
30,513 battles

Depends.  Some Tier VIIs scale well to a Tier IX game than others.

 

KGV will burn any of those Tier IX Battleships down, even Musashi.

New Orleans and Indianapolis, OTOH, pose no danger.

Tier VII Destroyers get ripped apart by High Tier DDs, most especially the powerhouse DDs in Tier IX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,910
[CNO]
Members
7,450 posts
23,087 battles
1 hour ago, SeaborneSumo said:

Depends on the ship and the driver.   Some ships though, suck at T9.   Cough Cough, California,,,,,

California does proportionately better at T9 than at T7.  In this regard, she shines at T9.  She likes slow drawn out contests, which tend to evolve in T9 much more than in T7.  I've had many T7 games where we're overrun before I can get into position to do much.  Never had that happen in T9.  It's bad enough sometimes that I HOPE I get a T9!    Also, her range opens up cross map engagements, which in the slow meta opens up flanking fire on cross map bow tankers and island huggers.  If you're going to get stuck in a T9 match, I find her one of the best T7 BBs to get stuck there. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,653
[CLUMP]
Members
2,861 posts
3,004 battles
6 hours ago, Yoshiblue said:

Came in expecting this to be a T9 California game. 

 

My disappointment is immeasurable, and my autumn is ruined. :Smile-_tongue:

I was also expecting another @Soshi_Sone  Califonia update :Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
456
[CHBK]
Members
1,129 posts
4,410 battles

WoWs isn't world of tanks.  You aren't completely useless against top tier when down two tiers.  I mean in T8 BB's or CA's I really don't give a crap if Im bottom or top tier.  I mean the only super annoying drawback is you are usually out ranged.  As far as dealing/taking damage it isn't that bad.

Edited by Taco_De_Moist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
915
[--V--]
Members
1,602 posts
14,841 battles
21 hours ago, Soshi_Sone said:

California does proportionately better at T9 than at T7.  In this regard, she shines at T9.  She likes slow drawn out contests, which tend to evolve in T9 much more than in T7.  I've had many T7 games where we're overrun before I can get into position to do much.  Never had that happen in T9.  It's bad enough sometimes that I HOPE I get a T9!    Also, her range opens up cross map engagements, which in the slow meta opens up flanking fire on cross map bow tankers and island huggers.  If you're going to get stuck in a T9 match, I find her one of the best T7 BBs to get stuck there. 

 

There are several measures of how well a ship performs, but the clearest indicator is 'how often do you see this ship in matches'.  I may see a Cali once per week since her initial introduction months ago.  This indicates no one likes her, she doesn't perform well, she has issues, problems, and is not balanced.  WG screwed the pooch with Cali by making her a T7.  She is 'at best' a T6.   Had this argument with LWM as well.  By the numbers, LWM argued she should do well at T7, but in practice Cali sucks.

I have one.  It is slow, plodding and does not perform well at T9, which is well over half the matches I've been placed in.  You may have some decent matches in her, I can't argue that.  Even a broken clock is correct twice a day.  But there are NOT many players who play or defend Cali.  It was a bust by WG.

Which is sad, it could've been a great ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,589
[TDRB]
Members
7,104 posts
15,888 battles
On 10/6/2020 at 1:56 AM, Soshi_Sone said:

...they do pretty damn good...

shot-20_10.05_23_29.56-0448.thumb.jpg.70bf3bd295350b9b4088df1dc99fe78b.jpg

It ain't the ship doing good, it's the players. A T7 ship driver having a good game will beat a T9 driver having a poor game every time.

The difference between a good player & a poor player is the good player makes less mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,910
[CNO]
Members
7,450 posts
23,087 battles
2 hours ago, SeaborneSumo said:

I have one.  It is slow, plodding and does not perform well at T9, which is well over half the matches I've been placed in.  You may have some decent matches in her, I can't argue that.  Even a broken clock is correct twice a day.  But there are NOT many players who play or defend Cali.  It was a bust by WG.

I won't argue she isn't played much.  Obviously, many folks have been turned off by her.  But keep in mind there is a difference between no one playing her because they have her and think she sucks and no one playing her because they think she sucks and therefore don't have her. 

I will say this much.  She does have a very unique play style.  If you don't like that style, you won't have fun even when you win.  But if you like the style, and know how to adapt the asymmetric game, she is an above par T7 BB in 12v12 PvP.   I've said this many times, and it's worth repeating.  She is not a good ranked ship.  Not a good clan battle ship.  Her asymmetric advantages increase with numbers.  She really does shine in 12v12.  And I look forward to every T9 match more than the T7. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×