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

The Kansas Factor

19 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

235
[7-TH]
Members
240 posts
16,288 battles

I finished my Kansas grind and am currently working my way through the Minnesota. During the roughly 80 battles I have played in these ships I have noticed a disturbing trend, which I have named the Kansas factor. Whenever I was on a team with more Kansas' or Minnesota's by at least a factor of 2 over the red team, we lost. I also noticed the same thing going the opposite way. If we had a single Kansas and the red team had 3, they would invariably lose. I noticed this occurring over and over since so many people got the new ships around the same time I got mine. I believe it is because the new American BB's offer nothing to the team aside from damage. They have no other utility.

They cannot-

  • kite away from a weak flank because they are too easy to hit and are too slow to maintain distance.
  • rush DD's who's torps are down or have no torps like the Friesland.
  • re-position quickly enough (even from the middle of the map -where they should be) to shore up a weak flank and their guns are not accurate or consistent/don't fire fast enough to do it from range.
  • push the far sides of the map (where they should almost never be) because they cannot get back into position in time to make an impact.
  • chase down a heavily damaged ship and finish it off.
  • stay close enough to a fleeing vessel to keep it spotted so others can kill it.
  • hold a cap by themselves like a Pommern, Georgia, Bismark, Odin against a mix of other ships.
  • farm fire damage as well as other ships like the Monarch because of their slow rate of fire.
  • defend themselves effectively against DD's like many other BB's can because of their terrible speed, slow turret traverse and slow rate of fire.
  • retire to the rear to repair unless they are already angled that way and will still take a lot of fire damage doing so.
  • quickly take out enemy BB's who push in because of poor shells for their tier most of the time.
  • defend themselves against DD's attacks because they will only get one volley off and are too large and slow to effectively dodge torpedoes.
  • cannot effective defend themselves against enemy CV's because the are too large and too slow to dodge effectively - even with their strong AA armament.
  • tank damage as well as other BB's because of their size, slow speed and rounded shape which causes them to take a lot of pens.
  • do drive-byes effectively because of their speed, slow turret traverse and guns that often don't reward you with citadels where they would with other ships.
  • go dark quickly and disengage because of their poor concealment.
  • consistently hit enemy ships from long range because of slow flight time.

It is for these reasons I believe the ships are a detriment to any team that has them. If your team has a Minnesota and a Kansas and the other team has neither of them, you will probably lose. Play them if you must but be aware other ships will do everything they do plus bring far more flexibility and increase your chances of winning.

If you don't believe me test it out for yourself. If the Kansas/Minnesota factor is +2 for one side, take note and see if my observations hold up to scrutiny.

 

Beware of the Kansas factor.

Edited by HannibalCane
  • Cool 3
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
215
[REKTD]
Members
420 posts
10,384 battles

One item missing from your analysis is that, speaking of the US server at least, a lot of bad players choose to play US battleships. That is all that they play. This has been further exasperated by “new US battleships” which means these loafers are playing more than usual. So what you are experiencing is real, but caused by the high number of terrible players choosing to use the new US battleships. Before those, I found similar steamrolls occurring if we had 3 Iowas. Back line trawlers. Perhaps trollers is more appropriate, but their bringing no skill is not an indictment on the ship, as Iowa is an excellent ship. 
 

The Kansas issues are indeed lack of speed, which prevents many from even getting into a position to be of use, and long reload. Handled correctly, they are not near as bad as people make them out to be. They actually turn quite well, and cause a lot of torpedoes to miss. Map awareness is huge because the aforementioned drawbacks mean much less room for error.

Edited by SuperComm4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
235
[7-TH]
Members
240 posts
16,288 battles

I completely agree with you about the back line trawlers, but I would still take poor players in Iowas every time over poor players in the Kansas. The issue with the ships is not their ability to put up decent numbers, I have in both the Minnesota and Kansas, it is there complete lack of utility and ability to respond to a rapidly changing environment. They are good a slinging shells, and are not even as good as other ships at their tier at doing so, and that is it. They bring nothing else to the table. Even a unicom player who can play the Kansas/Minnesota really well would be a better asset to the team in another ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
10,741 posts
18,462 battles

Too many slow BBs on a team offers not a lot of team mobility, especially when Islands are involved. I wonder if that trend would be the same on Ocean map.

Edited by Sovereigndawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
73
[QC_1_]
Beta Testers
183 posts
7,984 battles
1 hour ago, HannibalCane said:

I finished my Kansas grind and am currently working my way through the Minnesota. During the roughly 80 battles I have played in these ships I have noticed a disturbing trend, which I have named the Kansas factor. Whenever I was on a team with more Kansas' or Minnesota's by at least a factor of 2 over the red team, we lost. I also noticed the same thing going the opposite way. If we had a single Kansas and the red team had 3, they would invariably lose. I noticed this occurring over and over since so many people got the new ships around the same time I got mine. I believe it is because the new American BB's offer nothing to the team aside from damage. They have no other utility.

They cannot-

  • kite away from a weak flank because they are too easy to hit and are too slow to maintain distance.
  • rush DD's who's torps are down or have no torps like the Friesland.
  • re-position quickly enough (even from the middle of the map -where they should be) to shore up a weak flank and their guns are not accurate or consistent/don't fire fast enough to do it from range.
  • push the far sides of the map (where they should almost never be) because they cannot get back into position in time to make an impact.
  • chase down a heavily damaged ship and finish it off.
  • stay close enough to a fleeing vessel to keep it spotted so others can kill it.
  • hold a cap by themselves like a Pommern, Georgia, Bismark, Odin against a mix of other ships.
  • farm fire damage as well as other ships like the Monarch because of their slow rate of fire.
  • defend themselves effectively against DD's like many other BB's can because of their terrible speed, slow turret traverse and slow rate of fire.
  • retire to the rear to repair unless they are already angled that way and will still take a lot of fire damage doing so.
  • quickly take out enemy BB's who push in because of poor shells for their tier most of the time.
  • defend themselves against DD's attacks because they will only get one volley off and are too large and slow to effectively dodge torpedoes.
  • cannot effective defend themselves against enemy CV's because the are too large and too slow to dodge effectively - even with their strong AA armament.
  • tank damage as well as other BB's because of their size, slow speed and rounded shape which causes them to take a lot of pens.
  • do drive-byes effectively because of their speed, slow turret traverse and guns that often don't reward you with citadels where they would with other ships.
  • go dark quickly and disengage because of their poor concealment.
  • consistently hit enemy ships from long range because of slow flight time.

It is for these reasons I believe the ships are a detriment to any team that has them. If your team has a Minnesota and a Kansas and the other team has neither of them, you will probably lose. Play them if you must but be aware other ships will do everything they do plus bring far more flexibility and increase your chances of winning.

If you don't believe me test it out for yourself. If the Kansas/Minnesota factor is +2 for one side, take note and see if my observations hold up to scrutiny.

 

Beware of the Kansas factor.

Same assessment. The team with the most minnesota loses.

They are sad ship that difficultly supports its team. May be enjoyable for the player, but bad for the team.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
235
[7-TH]
Members
240 posts
16,288 battles
4 minutes ago, Sovereigndawg said:

Too many slow BBs on a team offers not a lot of team mobility, especially when Islands are involved. I wonder if that trend would be the same on Ocean map.

I can't remember if I played even one game in the ship on the ocean map, but you could be right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
319
[USCG]
Members
714 posts
21,993 battles

In five years I have NEVER FXP’d through a ship without at least trying it first. This morning I FXP’d the Minnesota and went straight to the Vermont without so much as a co-op try. 

Wasn’t a fan of the Kansas and figured the Minnesota was more of the same, slow and slower. Had no fun in my Kansas grind and didn’t want to wast the time, camos and flags.

I gave Vermont a quick try (without upgrades) in co-op. Still found her handling and reload to be frustrating. Right now she’ll come out twice a year for a super container and Santa crate. She just isn’t fun IMO...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
422
[-1]
Members
758 posts
10,602 battles
1 hour ago, HannibalCane said:

Beware of the Kansas factor.

It's actually quite good ship for bad players: you don't have speed to die too fast; everything else is irrelevant. The longer they live the more time I have to carry.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,426
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
12,321 posts
17,497 battles

Looking forward to the Minnesota factor....that thing broke me lol. Been a long time since I used Free XP to advance. Made it thru about half of the grind and threw in the towel. Kansa I can make work Vermont I actually enjoy...Minnesota.....gives me PTSD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
235
[7-TH]
Members
240 posts
16,288 battles
11 minutes ago, paradat said:

Looking forward to the Minnesota factor....that thing broke me lol. Been a long time since I used Free XP to advance. Made it thru about half of the grind and threw in the towel. Kansa I can make work Vermont I actually enjoy...Minnesota.....gives me PTSD

I think the Minnesota is a worse ship because of the tier. It has to face much tougher ships most of the time than the Kansas. So though it is a better ship, it has to face some really good ships and lots of them. JB, Georgia, Alaska, etc, and the tier 10 ships like Thunderer and Ohio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
335 posts
5,589 battles
1 hour ago, SuperComm4 said:

One item missing from your analysis is that, speaking of the US server at least, a lot of bad players choose to play US battleships. That is all that they play. This has been further exasperated by “new US battleships” which means these loafers are playing more than usual. So what you are experiencing is real, but caused by the high number of terrible players choosing to use the new US battleships. Before those, I found similar steamrolls occurring if we had 3 Iowas. Back line trawlers. Perhaps trollers is more appropriate, but their bringing no skill is not an indictment on the ship, as Iowa is an excellent ship.

This is true, but you've got to remember that these BBs hold a special place in the heart of many veterans and older sailors. Please don't call them loafers.

 

That being said, generally older ships, which tend to be some of the most iconic like Iowa and Yamato, tend to look terrible statistically as a result of their age. After all, why would a more casual player who cares about the historical aspects of the game be interested in playing ships like Kremlin or Republique? The new USN BB line presents issues considering American ships are more popular in NA, and though they have such a heavy broadside "balanced" with a longer reload, this makes these ships particularly unforgiving if your aim and timing isn't spot on.

 Perhaps this is what OP is suggesting, though I personally feel that these ships may find their way somehow into the meta in the same way that German CVs have so recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
235
[7-TH]
Members
240 posts
16,288 battles
22 minutes ago, FullMetal_Inferno said:

This is true, but you've got to remember that these BBs hold a special place in the heart of many veterans and older sailors. Please don't call them loafers.

 

That being said, generally older ships, which tend to be some of the most iconic like Iowa and Yamato, tend to look terrible statistically as a result of their age. After all, why would a more casual player who cares about the historical aspects of the game be interested in playing ships like Kremlin or Republique? The new USN BB line presents issues considering American ships are more popular in NA, and though they have such a heavy broadside "balanced" with a longer reload, this makes these ships particularly unforgiving if your aim and timing isn't spot on.

 Perhaps this is what OP is suggesting, though I personally feel that these ships may find their way somehow into the meta in the same way that German CVs have so recently.

I think they have found their way into the meta as damage dealers but I cannot think of anything else they can do well. If you can think of some utility I have missed I would be interested in hearing what it is.

Edited by HannibalCane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
215
[REKTD]
Members
420 posts
10,384 battles
22 minutes ago, FullMetal_Inferno said:

This is true, but you've got to remember that these BBs hold a special place in the heart of many veterans and older sailors. Please don't call them loafers.

This is far too often missed in game when people rant, and in fact you are absolutely correct in calling this out. It should always be remembered that many vets simply enjoy sailing what is literally their old ship in pixel form. That in itself is powerful and is good to remember when illogical play styles present themselves. I believe a 93 year old WW2 or Korean War vet is the oldest player I’ve heard of; several octogenarians too. Reminding myself of this has cured many an in game rant. Thank you!

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,426
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
12,321 posts
17,497 battles
1 hour ago, HannibalCane said:

I think the Minnesota is a worse ship because of the tier. It has to face much tougher ships most of the time than the Kansas. So though it is a better ship, it has to face some really good ships and lots of them. JB, Georgia, Alaska, etc, and the tier 10 ships like Thunderer and Ohio.

Yeah I agree. It is not that is objectively worse than Kansas it is the environment that it can not handle.... Well at least for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
75
[NET]
Beta Testers
561 posts
6,049 battles

its no suprise these ships were gonna suck. just take the colorado for instance. its a tier 7 that time has forgotten. its not very competitive at tier 7 because of the american standard BB formula just doesnt work past tier 6. the ships at tier 7 and up are just to much for these slow firing, slow moving throwbacks to deal with. i really dont understand why they were even added in the first place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
235
[7-TH]
Members
240 posts
16,288 battles
26 minutes ago, motaz87 said:

its no suprise these ships were gonna suck. just take the colorado for instance. its a tier 7 that time has forgotten. its not very competitive at tier 7 because of the american standard BB formula just doesnt work past tier 6. the ships at tier 7 and up are just to much for these slow firing, slow moving throwbacks to deal with. i really dont understand why they were even added in the first place. 

I really would have been interested in smaller, faster, BB's with lower caliber high velocity fast firing guns and decent secondaries. So a ship with 14 inch guns with super heavy shells able to pen BB's at a decent range, but also able to take some punishment. Like a faster heavy Scharnhorst with better guns, worse secondaries and better armor. I think those would be fun BB's to play. So if the US Navy built their version of the Scharnhorst, without torps and with better guns, that could do 35 knots, what would it look like? I think that would be a fun line to play, instead just bigger with lots of armor and giant guns. The Yammy, Mushashi, Ohio, Thunderer, Rep already exist, so why do a Vermont that plays basically the same way. Why not just play one of the others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
235
[7-TH]
Members
240 posts
16,288 battles
20 hours ago, HannibalCane said:

I really would have been interested in smaller, faster, BB's with lower caliber high velocity fast firing guns and decent secondaries. So a ship with 14 inch guns with super heavy shells able to pen BB's at a decent range, but also able to take some punishment. Like a faster heavy Scharnhorst with better guns, worse secondaries and better armor. I think those would be fun BB's to play. So if the US Navy built their version of the Scharnhorst, without torps and with better guns, that could do 35 knots, what would it look like? I think that would be a fun line to play, instead just bigger with lots of armor and giant guns. The Yammy, Mushashi, Ohio, Thunderer, Rep already exist, so why do a Vermont that plays basically the same way. Why not just play one of the others?

Just an update. I played 6 games in my Minnesota and won all of them and only +2 Kansas factor game was two Minnes on my team, including me. We almost lost but the red team, who had 2 caps and a 2 ship lead, yolo'd to other other side of the map, one ship at a time, until they were down by two and then lost. So while I still believe in the Kansas factor, I did not witness it in my last spate of games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×