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

One thing to change on new BBs

One thing to change on new BBs  

68 members have voted

  1. 1. If you could change only one thing about the new American BBs, what would it be?

    • Faster reload
      42
    • Faster speed
      5
    • Better dispersion/sigma
      17
    • More armor
      4

22 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

238
[GOCRY]
Members
635 posts

So after seeing all the posts about how bad the Kansas is, and everyone’s suggestions about how to make her better, I started to wonder what was needed most.  So if you could change just 1 thing, what would you choose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
584
Members
1,566 posts
11,037 battles

I could live with the long reload if it could actually hit anything. What the F was WG thinking making everything bad. We've got plenty of other 12 gun ships in the game so it's not like they can use the excuse of this is the first time so they didn't know what to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
353
[NBNG]
Beta Testers
1,564 posts
4,532 battles
4 hours ago, DuckyShot said:

Make them Russian, then everything else would get fixed eventually. 

pretty much. If they were Soviet, they would have 28 knot top speed because they would of had some fantasy engineering refit and 25 second reloads because of superior Soviet engineering when it came to making big naval rifles. 

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,098
[4HIM]
Members
3,238 posts
13,866 battles

I said faster reload.  But it's the combination of the long reload and the accuracy and slow speed that make them bad.  You have good range, but that doesn't matter if you can't hit anything even with 12 barrels.  If you miss, you're pretty much hosed.  And if you get an unfavorable starting spawn, you're not going to be able to get into position to make a difference in the match.  

I've played a few games in the Kansas.  I don't think it's a "bad" ship.  It's worse.  I think it's a boring ship to play.  Maybe some enjoy them.  Personally, I think the Kansas is entirely forgettable.  There's nothing so good that it stands out as a positive to offset the many negatives.  

Edited by ZARDOZ_II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
451
[WOLFG]
Members
632 posts
13,865 battles

Knock five seconds off the reload, and it'd make me happy.  Not that I am unhappy with the Kansas. I actually like it, but could use with the faster reload. I don't really have any issues other than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
753
[--V--]
Members
1,459 posts
13,765 battles
10 hours ago, SeaGladius said:

So after seeing all the posts about how bad the Kansas is, and everyone’s suggestions about how to make her better, I started to wonder what was needed most.  So if you could change just 1 thing, what would you choose?

It will take more than 1 change to make Kansas even remotely balanced.   Whats funny, I see morons trying to say she's doing fine,, look at her WR.   ROFLMAO  WR doesn't mean anything. 

She needs:

  • 33 second reload
  • Much improved sigma
  • 26kt speed

Without all of these,,,, Kansas' and the other new US BBs will be port queens.  Just like California.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23
[G-4W]
Members
152 posts
6,202 battles

Dispersion and sigma for sure. I haven’t been able to do jack with Kansas close range so far. I’m a BB main and know how to hit DDs close range. Yesterday, a DD went to cap our base, I was closest; switched to HE and went to intercept. I spotted the DD at 5km - eventually he got up to 7.5km. I took account of the higher HE velocity, fired 34 shells at him, THREE landed, and he got away. The DD wasn’t maneuvering brilliantly or anything. I was ready to slam my head on the desk. 

I also think Kansas at least should have access to ASM1. 

Edited by gebert906

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
408 posts
16,717 battles

I don’t think she needs anything? I mean, small sample size but I am averaging 90k. Despite being slow, Kansas has ridiculous range and good enough accuracy. The reload makes you pick your shots, but you should be doing that anyways.

if anything, I’d ask for a little more muzzle velocity as the guns have trouble citadelling even the squishy bbs in her mm range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23
[G-4W]
Members
152 posts
6,202 battles
3 hours ago, ZARDOZ_II said:

 

I said faster reload.  But it's the combination of the long reload and the accuracy and slow speed that make them bad

 

This. Personally, I can deal with the speed, Kansas is SoDak 20 after all. However, the dispersion/sigma or reload needs to be buffed. One of those two would make the ship much more enjoyable, imo. I’d also throw “heavier AP shell” into the mix as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,313
[0456]
Members
3,824 posts
10,091 battles

What's preventing me from playing the line, much less being interested in playing it, is the reload.

Share this post


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

Make them Russian, then everything else would get fixed eventually. 

I.E.  OP out of the gate with successive "balancing" changes two years after the fact which in effect are really thinly disguised buffs.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
61
[RSDWG]
Members
524 posts
11,607 battles

I sunk a full strength Minnesota last night in COOP at close range, around 4.3 to 3.0 kms with the Boise. He got 1 salvo on me, 7 hits, around 32,000 damage, but I healed. in the 40 seconds reload time I took him down to a few thousand points with 100 rounds from my maine AP and around 75 rounds with secondaries shooting HE and starting numerous fires. He was real low on points and I finished him off with 1 good salvo from my mains. All in around a minute. I would put up the replay track if I knew how. Oh and I think I was the only ship shooting at him!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
203
[UNC]
Members
813 posts
6,081 battles

It would take essentially a complete redesign before I would consider playing a ship like Kansas.  I have a real dislike of slow ships.  Normally, 12 guns will make up for many sins, but in this case you have a punitive reload combined with abysmal sigma and AP shells that are objectively worse than Colorado's one tier lower.  It's like a trifecta of suck slapped on top of a ludicrously slow squishy hull.  I cannot fathom anything less fun or compelling to play.  Kansas (and to a lesser extent Minnesota) feel like ships designed to bleed players of excess FXP to get to Vermont.  The cynic/tinfoil hatter in me suspects there might be a very desirable ship dropping in the near future for FXP, so WG is working hard to drain FXP ahead of the ship dropping.

Edited by Uncle_Lou

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41
[POSM]
Members
139 posts
1,952 battles

Cant speak about Minnesota or Kansas I don’t have either yet, but I am enjoying Kansas so far. If I could make any change I would give it better sigma, but I don’t think it’s necessary. If you don’t like the original standards you won’t like the new line, that should be obvious to anybody. WG finally makes a line that isn’t OP at launch and it gets called useless and a waste, do we want stupid OP ships at launch again? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
345
[XXX]
Members
595 posts
1,443 battles

The main problem is that the Kansas and the Minne get the Colorado shells not their tier equivalent AP shells.

The main buffs I would give the Kansas are:

1) Much better sigma and dispersion, 1.5 is hilariously bad for the 40 second reload, at least bump it up to 1.8 (to match the Minne) if you're going to keep the 40 second reload.

2) Give her the NorCals 406mm Shells, sure they'll be floaty AF BUT they'll have much better pen than giving her tier 7 shells at tier 8.

Minne

1) Give her the Iowa 406mm Superheavy shells AND maybe knock 2 seconds off her reload, bringing it down to 38 seconds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
858 posts
5,902 battles

They could go a few different ways to help these BBs. They don’t really fill the long range slow sniper role due to meh shells and meh dispersion. Vermont might be the only one able to actually do its job as intended with its larger shells. Minnesota is very meh. When the shells actually connect very few pen. So either boost the reload, boost the shells, or boost the accuracy. I don’t care about health on these. I do brawl with them late game if needed and health is rarely an issue. It’s hitting things and doing damage is the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,354 posts
4,615 battles

I'd say give them faster reload or better penetration. For a sniper role. 

Or for a brawling role, give all of them improved secondary batteries. All of them get 5 improved heals. Same fire resistance as Russian BBs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,900
[WOLFG]
Members
30,710 posts
9,292 battles

None of the above.

I'd play it if it had the standard upgraded Colorado shells.

The ones it has are superior in pen at short range, but appreciably worse at the ranges that its speed and range encourage.

I mean, sure, it's inaccurate, but it has 12 guns. That formula works for me in New Mex, but there, the shells typically do damage, instead of bouncing/shattering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
203
[WOLF4]
Members
895 posts
12,330 battles

Haven't had an opportunity to play one, yet - but have seen lots in randoms.

In something near 50 matches, I only remember one on my team that topped the XP board, and only a handful that cracked the top three.

I've been playing TVIII and IX cruisers, recently (Saint Louis, Brindisi, CM, Riga, Donsk and Atago) - sure do love seeing those huge, slow boats on the red side - they burn pretty well!

Edited by ddoubletapp1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×