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

Oklahoma - concept is fine, but needs work

16 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,301
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
5,202 posts
12,101 battles

So, I unlocked the ship, looked the stats over, played it a little, and ended up doing a bunch of research. Because it seems like Oklahoma is what some of us, including myself, asked for - a USN BB with a focus on secondary guns. Unfortunately - it seems like for those of us that did suggest a full line - with Oklahoma's sister Nevada as the tech tree tier 5, they stopped reading at 'USN battleship with secondary focus'. And well... Oklahoma as she is is what we get, though I will give credit where it is due - they did infact update her to have the 3"/50 AA guns she was supposed to have post refit and had on December 7th. Now, is she the worst ship I've ever played - no. But to just be a good ship ( and 'good' in this case means 'acceptably average'), she needs some work. And freebie or not - I think it's worth to do it (especially because after the fact people may end up buying it). Now bare in mind - my suggestions lean more in to keeping it more with a secondary focus then, well, just another USN standard - so I expect those who want more significant changes to the main battery will disagree with me quite heavily. 

 

Survivability -

So, I can't tell you how many hours I spent trying to find out how much steel is below the 3 1/2" teak decking because yes, I am mister 'as historically accurate as we can make it', and for whatever reason, can't find the damn answer - so purely game balance it is. If the ship is going to be a shorter range brawler - the thing needs armour protection, and not just side to side vs BB's - it can't have literally everything with 5 inch guns auto-penning it on rapid fire with HE without even need of IFHE. Now, if I had my way, I'd increase all of the 19 mm armour that covers the ship, but I see that getting a lot of push back so, given it is the first 'all or nothing' BB and that generally speaking the bow/stern didn't really get protection - lets roll with that. Either increase all the central side/deck plating to 25 mm (immune to standard 127 mm HE, better resistance vs same caliber guns) or 26 mm (Immunity to non-IFHE 127 mm and 152 mm round, better resistance to 381 mm rounds). The Bow and stern would still have the overly squishy 19 mm armour protection - but it would at least add a bot more to the central part of the ship that was actually protected. Even if it only reduces a handful of 127 mm rounds not penning, it's something.

Firepower

Main Battery - The jump from 34 to 40 I think was overkill, going down to 37 seconds and splitting the difference should be fine - especially given the various other nerfs she has over the other 2 USN tier 5 BB's in shell performance. 

Secondary Battery - Is fine other than one suggestion that if it can apply just to these guns, great, if not, well it won't make the main battery that much better - give them 1/4 pen. This would at least put it on par with the German secondary ships, a middle ground between their 10.5 and 15 cm mix.  Though slightly more uniform in caliber, even though not RoF. 

AA Defense 

Once again, thanks for adding the 3 inch guns back. Also once again, 3 inch guns should be part of the long range battery - not mid. In fact - these 3 inch guns had better range than the 5/25 you have as the long range guns, even if only slightly. Adding the 3 inch guns into the long range band will allow them on average to add another 4 seconds of DPS to panes, currently 84 more damage, though I would add 5 damage to the 5 inch guns (100 total) and 3 to the 3 inch (24 total) which would add a base total over the entire time in an attack run (AA start at 4.8 km to 0 km) of 205 damage, compared to it's current baseline average of 1444 DPS a 14% increase. I would also alter the flak bursts - reducing the damage from an explosion to 900-1000 damage, but increasing the number of burst per salvo to 5 (matching the number of guns firing flak rounds per side). Still less than the Russian bias BB and Texas (albeit more effective than Texas because of range, which would be fixed if it and New York also had their 3 inch mounts shifted back to long range AA though Texas would need some changes to DPS numbers to not make it insanely OP AA) by a fair amount, though more than New York which I'm 90% sure it already actually beats anyway. 

Mobility

The speed and turning while not great, can be easy enough to ignore. But it seriously needs better energy retention given that even NY/TX/AZ/Etc are all actually faster than it. The speed loss, while on occasion useful in torpedo dodging, is just incredibly bad for the ship overall. 

Consumable 

Reduce the Cooldown on DCP and Repair to at least 60 seconds, if not 40. Let's be real here - at under 20 knots, the only way it isn't out run by a ship is you either add Bogue back in, or it horror movie chases the opponent in to a corner where simply geometry allows it to close range if the ship won't engage and opts to flee. And it can pelt the thing indefinitely while it does and it waits forever for the main battery to reload. Battleships still take 18% fire damage baseline, and being tier 5 at most you get that down to 12.2% per fire IF you use the flag and have a captain built a bit more to survivability. Otherwise if you only have one or the other, it deals 14.4% or 15.3% damage per fire - and each repair party heals only 14% of HP, 16.8% if you have the flag - and depending on the ships armour - as is every 127 mm round will pen, and my proposals only cover the center section so hitting the bow is still pen damage for anything and if only 25 mm in the center still auto-pen by 152 mm shells, that A: only 50% of the damage can be healed back and B: adds up when you have the fires and takes away how much you can heal off the fire damage (which is why IFHE is still an issue - it's the pen/fire combo - even with the 50% nerf that still keeps the fire chance of 152 mm cruisers too high, mainly tier 8 and higher). But this will help cancel out the fact that it's slow and can be easily pelted from long range by these targets that unless they are unlucky or fools, aren't getting deleted by the big guns cause they dodge or make it the citadel is harder to hit if not impossible. Also better allows the ship to be more an outright heavy tank to say break through in to a cap and contest it if more than one ship focuses on it, especially if it's more than one high rate of fire ship spamming HE only. 

 

Overall this should keep it more of a secondary using BB, the increased armour and changes to DCP and Repair will help it actually last in a match, and free up some ability to actually opt for a secondary build a bit more than survivability seeing as they'll eat less HE pens, and be able to put out fires/repair them a bit faster. The change to 1/4 pen on at least secondary guns means they are useful against most ships it sees, and make up for the lack luster performance of the gun. The 3 seconds off the MB reload, the reduced speed loss in turns, and AA changes are really a bit more player comfort and geared toward more mid-range players and well, the fact that low tier AA around this tier is kinda screwed anyway - even with that extra 205 DPS in a pure state 1649 DPS unless you get some flak hits won't even take out 1 TB or DB in most cases against tier 6 CV's - and that's before your pelted by HE everything. But honestly - I'd be fine if only the armour, secondary pen, and consumable adjustments are made, or absolute minimum armour and consumable ones made.

The French ships rely on speed, the German's, speed and armour combined, USN BB as a simple slab of metal that has HE poured on it as it slowly roles in to secondary range towards a cap, it'd be different than those two lines, the only thing close really is Warspite, and even then that trades a bit of armour for a tad more speed. If you make these changes, I think Oklahoma would be it's own ship that people might enjoy as much as something like Warspite. 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,827
[RKLES]
[RKLES]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,440 posts
22,640 battles

Just increase the sigma by .2

Otherwise she is fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,003
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,865 posts
712 battles

Give it the shells it should be carrying and call it done.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,614
[HINON]
Members
8,633 posts
12,555 battles

all they need to do to make her ok is to undo that stupid krupp nerf to her AP, the damn thing cant hardly pen other BBs unless theyre in point blank range, but knowing WG, they wont, either out of spite or pure laziness

Edited by tcbaker777
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,373
[SALVO]
Members
26,051 posts
28,782 battles
1 hour ago, dEsTurbed1 said:

Just increase the sigma by .2

Otherwise she is fine.

The pen on its AP is terrible.

 

7 minutes ago, tcbaker777 said:

all they need to do to make her ok is to undo that stupid krupp nerf to her AP, the damn thing cant hardly pen other BBs unless they're in point blank range, but knowing WG, they wont, either out of spite or pure laziness

I think that undoing the krupp nerf would probably be going too far, but it would be nice if its pen was at least average for its tier.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,981
[SIM]
Members
5,744 posts
9,263 battles
59 minutes ago, ramp4ge said:

Give it the shells it should be carrying and call it done.

:Smile_great:

This right here. Do this and the ship goes from awful to inoffensively average.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,843
[AXANR]
Members
3,650 posts
23,348 battles

I like this proposal, but honestly, I'd be happy with *either* her original AP shells that had better pen *or* a shorter reload, especially combined with the better captain skills for low tier secondaries that are supposedly coming in the skill rework (as @Ensign_Cthulhu pointed out in another thread.)

I actually like her ok for a low-tier BB; she'll never be a go-to for me as I hate slow BBs, but I see a lot of potential for her to be better than she is now. She's  *almost* a perfect example of what a reward ship should be (event was clear and wasn't too hard or too easy for a ship of her tier, and she's both a good captain trainer but still different enough from the tech-tree line to be a change of pace. And even with the proposed changes she'd be pretty close to the tech-tree BBs as far as performance, not too OP or too underpowered. 

She *is* underpowered, to be clear. I tried her in co-op and I will never take this boat into PvP as is. The combination of weak shells and long reload is really frustrating and punitive, and would be even more so in PvP when the opposing ships don't come right at you; when you only get a salvo every forty seconds, having hilariously weak AP with terrible penetration makes her a frustrating boat. If you have a bad salvo, you have to wait 40 seconds to try again. Honestly, the first time I took Oklahoma into PvP and had a well-aimed salvo land for minimal damage because the shells didn't pen and then had to wait forty seconds to try again, I'd throw my keyboard across the room.

And that'd be OK if she had some upside elsewhere that made the long reload/poor pen combo a reasonable balance decision...I'm all for game balance choices that punish poor/mediocre play but reward players who learn how to make it work.  But she doesn't have that upside; monstrous tier 5 secondaries on a slow ship isn't going to carry any game ever, and the poor pen/long reload combo isn't something that can necessarily be mitigated by skill too much. 

TLDR: If WG gives her the original AP shells, the long reload becomes more reasonable. If WG cuts her reload down to 33-35 seconds, a bad salvo due to the poor shells won't seem nearly so punitive. As it stands, what could be a pretty fun, balanced, average but different boat is just too hamstrung by the poor reload / poor penetration combo. It's not balanced, and it's not fun, but changing that is an easy fix. 

Edited by poeticmotion
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
341
[PSP]
Members
574 posts
5,040 battles

She needs a heck of a lot more than the .1 sigma thingy for me to take her out into Randoms. I don't want to feel like I let my team down just by taking her into battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,827
[RKLES]
[RKLES]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,440 posts
22,640 battles
1 hour ago, Crucis said:

The pen on its AP is terrible.

 

I think that undoing the krupp nerf would probably be going too far, but it would be nice if its pen was at least average for its tier.

 

She has AP? lol

Cit cruisers, can overmuch most T6 & T7 bb noses....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14,929
[ARGSY]
Members
22,990 posts
17,004 battles
8 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

Now bare in mind

Better than baring on a zoom call - we've seen how that worked out for the guy who did it. :Smile_trollface:

You mean BEAR in mind. As in "carry".

8 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

it would at least add a bot more

Ooopsie, typo!

8 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

add another 4 seconds of DPS to panes,

It breaks windows quite adequately; aircraft, not so much.

8 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

as it slowly roles in to secondary range 

It accepts its true destiny as it gets closer to the enemy? 

 

Overall I think this is a reasonable summation. First thing I'd like to do is split the difference between the penetration it has now and the penetration it ought to have (with Arizona shells) and see what that does. If she can make half an effort to fight other battleships at range, she'll feel much more tolerable in any other context IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,536
[PSA]
Members
5,114 posts
3,732 battles

She's already tankier than Texas and has way better firing angles. So I'd take either the original good (Texas) shells, or a much shorter reload, but not both.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,536
[PSA]
Members
5,114 posts
3,732 battles

Uhm ... just noticed something sketchy ...

Wargaming, exactly why are the USN Tier V BBs the ONLY ones to get a 19mm deck?? I just ran through the tech trees for all other Tier V BBs, and every one of them, in part or in full, can bounce 14 inch shells off their deck. Even the supposedly thin skinned UK and FR BBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
313
[VOP]
Members
939 posts
40 minutes ago, KaptainKaybe said:

Uhm ... just noticed something sketchy ...

Wargaming, exactly why are the USN Tier V BBs the ONLY ones to get a 19mm deck?? I just ran through the tech trees for all other Tier V BBs, and every one of them, in part or in full, can bounce 14 inch shells off their deck. Even the supposedly thin skinned UK and FR BBs.

Probably the same reason she is a knot slower than she should be. I can see not wanting to power creep another line/premium. But WG, there is no excuse for gimping it. I guess the devs don't know how to make anything average, ships are either OP or they suck. Oh, and it is also American, so WG needs to err on the side of suckage. ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
661 posts
5,345 battles

as someone who enjoys playing meme secondary builds what makes or breaks a secondary build is the ships hability to close the gap to use those guns, Oklahoma secondary guns have great range and improved accuracy but it cant force a close range engagement with an enemy ship due to terrible speed and mediocre at best concealment. Long story short enemy ships will just turn around and  stay outside secondary guns range  leaving Oklahoma exposed with nothing but those painfully slow main guns. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×