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

What exactly is the identity of the new US BBs?

45 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,166
[DOTM]
Beta Testers
1,715 posts
12,188 battles

Because aside from being garbage, I'm not sure the alternate US BB line has an identity. AA? The North Carolina has a better AA rating than the Kansas when upgraded and isn't painfully slow and has decent reload alongside having superior AP shells and significantly better sigma. I doubt the Kansas Def AA is enough to make up for the poor speed and atrocious gunnery.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,452
[REVY]
Members
8,088 posts
6,118 battles

I suppose you could call them Super-Standard US Battleships over the Fast Battleships that the historical USN went with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,166
[DOTM]
Beta Testers
1,715 posts
12,188 battles
4 minutes ago, AdmiralQ said:

alpha damage. IF they hit

Not really. The Kansas AP shells do less damage than the North Carolinas by roughly 1.3k damage per shell. The Kansas only outperforms the North Carolina in number of shells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
466
[T-R-F]
Members
613 posts
18,311 battles
1 minute ago, Zaydin said:

Not really. The Kansas AP shells do less damage than the North Carolinas by roughly 1.3k damage per shell. The Kansas only outperforms the North Carolina in number of shells.

that's what they are goign for. note I think Wg dropped the ball here. these ships should be tanking and accurate with there guns to make up for the slow speed and reload.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,166
[DOTM]
Beta Testers
1,715 posts
12,188 battles
4 minutes ago, AdmiralQ said:

that's what they are goign for. note I think Wg dropped the ball here. these ships should be tanking and accurate with there guns to make up for the slow speed and reload.

I mean, if they had good secondaries it could have made them fun close range brawlers but they don't even have that. They really lack an identity of any sort.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
466
[T-R-F]
Members
613 posts
18,311 battles
3 minutes ago, Zaydin said:

I mean, if they had good secondaries it could have made them fun close range brawlers but they don't even have that. They really lack an identity of any sort.

I know. they are not very accurate, slow, freaking long reload and still not really tanky. Wg is full of morons to not think this line through

Edited by AdmiralQ
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
338
[WKY12]
Members
799 posts
12,900 battles
33 minutes ago, AdmiralQ said:

I know. they are not very accurate, slow, freaking long reload and still not really tanky. Wg is full of morons to not think this line through

The terrible thing is, they did think it through and it is exactly what THEY wanted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,166
[DOTM]
Beta Testers
1,715 posts
12,188 battles
28 minutes ago, AdmiralQ said:

I know. they are not very accurate, slow, freaking long reload and still not really tanky. Wg is full of morons to not think this line through

Their citadel might be hard to hit due to being basically submerged but because they are so wide they eat a lot of normal pens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
811
[SAINT]
[SAINT]
Members
1,450 posts
17,749 battles

I've only played one game in the Kansas but have played against them quite a bit. They take a lot of fire damage and are too slow to escape once in range. They are especially susceptible if they are forced to brawl against a ship with a good secondary loadout.  They are indeed slow, large, but have decent AA and hard hitting guns. The issue with the guns is well documented but the dispersion when fighting them is crazy; giving full broadside to get all of the guns on target and then missing has to be frustrating. 

Shooting Family Guy GIF by Cheezburger - Find & Share on GIPHY

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
335
[-TRM-]
[-TRM-]
Members
1,318 posts
4,906 battles

Kansas is a abomination.

It might have appeared to be the "Yammy" of the 1920's given the limitations of Armor Class Plate Steel... But I gave it a go this am working on the 300 xp for star in Naval Battle, it only got 264 one time and about 306 the second time leaving me with a total of 9 of 10 stars.

I hated to see those god awful big shells arrive at the enemy 25+ km with spotter airplane after 30 minutes waiting and see 1000 damage out of 12 shells. One or two hits.

I stripped the commander, sent to reserve, stripped the equiptment sold off at a loss and intend to sell the Kansas to get back the lost credits on equiptment wasted in learning just how bad that thing is in the game.

How did I play it? Very simple. Drove 500 feet, turned left and then stopped behind a small island. Started engaging oncoming ships at 25+ km sitting still. Eventually I was damaged down to more than half the hull points lost. I managed to a few sinkings of the enemy. But its unmotivating and not rewarding of the excessive efforts chipping 1000 points a time off the enemy ship.

 

I can rant more but frankly it's 4 damn am in the morning and I managed to be just over this Kansas episode. I managed to reclaim the Anchorage and had a go with it and performed VERY well in battle this past evening and morning. I adopted the cruiser as a welcome addition to the fleet. Provided I fight her like a Prinz Eugen with smoke and delete DDs near the objectives.

In the game world of Wows, there are a few ships that inspire a bit of fear when it's coming for YOU. Kansas shows up on the enemy side and I feel joyful at the prospect of farming damage off the damn thing or even deleting it right off with torps. You almost need a bus ticket and then a train commute trip to get around the damn thing. Its almost a SLAP in the entire so called alternative US BB Line. What a waste.

Edited by xHeavy
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,097
[4HIM]
Members
3,237 posts
13,851 battles

From what I've seen with Kansas, they're just damage piñatas for HE spammers.  Gosh this thing is awful.  

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
624
[UN1]
Members
1,280 posts
3,934 battles
2 hours ago, Zaydin said:

Because aside from being garbage, I'm not sure the alternate US BB line has an identity. AA? The North Carolina has a better AA rating than the Kansas when upgraded and isn't painfully slow and has decent reload alongside having superior AP shells and significantly better sigma. I doubt the Kansas Def AA is enough to make up for the poor speed and atrocious reload.

The standard American line is built around having a higher alpha, good DPM, but low efficiency model either due to poorer accuracy at the lower tiers or poor penetration at the high tiers, but never really both.  This limits the effectiveness of their artillery to the mid or mid-long ranges at best.

The new American tubbies are an exaggeration of the current American model in that they're built around having even greater alpha, but at the cost of reduced efficiency in delivery, or DPM.

  • Kansas has reduced penetration and accuracy compared to the NorCal, which is why everyone hates it.
  • Minnesota has reduced penetration compared to the Iowa.  Despite being slow, I actually think the Minnesota is pretty good.
  • The Vermont has superior alpha, accuracy, and penetration compared to the Montana, but at the cost of reduced DPM.  

So really to answer your question, the new American battleships are an exaggeration of the standard American model and are built around maximum alpha strike potential.

Edited by Ranari
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,192
[WOLF3]
Members
28,150 posts
24,510 battles
2 hours ago, AdmiralQ said:

that's what they are goign for. note I think Wg dropped the ball here. these ships should be tanking and accurate with there guns to make up for the slow speed and reload.

Bingo.

1 hour ago, T1mb3rWo1f said:

The terrible thing is, they did think it through and it is exactly what THEY wanted.

The FreeXP Sink.  The taxation to get Vermont.  Through the changes while testing, Vermont was getting buffed, got things unique only to her in this split:  50mm+ deck armor and 457mm x12 with high Sigma rivaling Montana.  Things that Kansas and Minnesota do not get.

 

The 40 second reload is a real stickler, but Minnesota and Vermont as Tier IX+ ships have access to Slot 6.  They can do APRM2 for 11% dispersion buff or MBM3 for reload buff.  MBM3 would take the 40 second reload down to 35.  Still slow as s***, but Kansas is royally screwed since she has no access to Slot 6, just like all the other Tier VIII ships.  So Kansas, like NC, Alabama, Mass, do not access APRM2 / MBM3.  Kansas is stuck forever dealing with her low Sigma and 40 seconds base reload with little means of mitigating those weaknesses.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,708
[1984]
Members
4,303 posts
21,105 battles

They are really bad. The dam thing is so slow 5 min at full speed you still havent left spawn. Then once you actually shoot at something the shells go all over the place, then you go outside have a smoke and a slash and comeback to see all targets are now gone/angled by the time you have reloaded. Heaven help you once youre spotted cause you cant outrun anything.

total waste of a line, this line isnt even worth the fxp for a supercontainer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
65
[PVE]
Members
376 posts
3,136 battles
3 hours ago, AdmiralQ said:

I know. they are not very accurate, slow, freaking long reload and still not really tanky. Wg is full of morons to not think this line through

One might say it was thought through.  Then we all watched the deliberate nerfs to their viability.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13,367
[ARGSY]
Members
21,589 posts
15,660 battles

Kansas = Super-Colorado

Minnesota = Mega-Colorado

Vermont = Giga-Colorado.

If WG missed anywhere, it's in looking at people like me who really, REALLY enjoyed the slow "Standard US BB" concept and extrapolated from there that the playerbase wanted more of the same. I think not all of the problem comes from any failings on the part of the ships; I suspect there's a fair proportion of anger and disappointment from those who extrapolated their desire for a line of fast brawlers into a belief that WG owed it to them.

  • Cool 4
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
731
[--V--]
Members
1,453 posts
13,765 battles

They're XP / Fire pinatas for EVERY other ship out there.

Had a Friesland burn me down from 5km away.   He popped out from behind an island late in the match.  I had maybe 80% HP.  My guns were aimed opposite direction.  Secondaries suck.  40 second turret traverse to aim.  1 shot, 12 shells, 5km, 1 overpen.   40 more seconds.   Never got there.  Burned down.

Kansas is a real winner.  LOL 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,415 posts
40,645 battles
26 minutes ago, SeaborneSumo said:

They're XP / Fire pinatas for EVERY other ship out there.

Had a Friesland burn me down from 5km away.   He popped out from behind an island late in the match.  I had maybe 80% HP.  My guns were aimed opposite direction.  Secondaries suck.  40 second turret traverse to aim.  1 shot, 12 shells, 5km, 1 overpen.   40 more seconds.   Never got there.  Burned down.

Kansas is a real winner.  LOL 

Did you ever try sequential fire or select fire? I can load HE and fire one at a time. By the time I finish the last shot, I have one loaded up again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13,367
[ARGSY]
Members
21,589 posts
15,660 battles
45 minutes ago, SeaborneSumo said:

He popped out from behind an island late in the match...  My guns were aimed opposite direction.... 5km...

He outplayed you and had the advantage of tactical surprise. It was only him being in a Friesland that even let you take the shot. Almost any other DD in your MM bracket (except a Pan-Euro) could have one-shot you with torpedoes before you could fire, in a Kansas or anything else.

Edited by Ensign_Cthulhu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
845
[HELLS]
Members
2,727 posts
28,842 battles

These are modified slow Tillmans according to Friedman's U.S. Battleships:An Illustrated Design History (see page 193 or thereabouts-I have a copy). basically Colorado on steroids as https://forum.worldofwarships.com/profile/1027465866-ensign_cthulhu/ makes clear above. If they had been done properly as a standard BB line extension with better gunnery stats at each tier, I would have bought the concept. As it is, Kansas will be a loner in my port. I have zero desire to be a large floating target in high tier play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,110
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
2,747 battles

As a carrier captain, I love facing these.

Just make sure Im out of range of her guns...and bait the defensive fire...

...and she is literally IMPOSSIBLE to miss.

I can get all six Lexington HE bombs to hit and penetrate...which is a massive chunk of damage with a high fire chance. Most other tier 8 battleships are small enough you only really get 4 or 5 hits...and one of those might be on a turret...and shatter.

Not so with Kansas. Full damage pens.

Their AA is strong...but not strong enough to deter me if I really want to hit her.

  • Cool 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×