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

Uh huh - Italian BB Tier V

24 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

4,463
[SALVO]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,598 posts
7,430 battles

So everyone gets an upgraded B hull but this boat for some odd reason gets a few AA guns, no upgraded armor...and looks straight outta 1915. 

Part of me feels like Wargaming has just given up on giving people finished products. Like...part of the draw for this game is the "what-if" factor. 

image.png.1e66bc7f22667f0114cd03be299cc956.png

image.thumb.png.c1e0c52dab1d2ff09913279ff838afff.png

Yet you couldn't use this model...?

image.thumb.png.1291e8cce69e7757e6b94fea90c4020a.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
467
[STURM]
Members
740 posts
6,913 battles
5 minutes ago, Dr_Venture said:

So everyone gets an upgraded B hull but this boat for some odd reason gets a few AA guns, no upgraded armor...and looks straight outta 1915. 

She looks straight out of 1915 because she is straight out of 1915.

Besides, we already have the most modern version of this ship class in the game, as the Giulio Cesare, and I'm sure I don't need to tell you why WG dosn't want to duplicate her performance.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,563
[EQRN]
Members
2,440 posts
25,058 battles

The T4 doesn’t get a B hull either.  Is there a tech tree that doesn’t have B hulls at 2 through 9?  Just laziness now.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
424
Members
869 posts
9,489 battles

The upgraded hull, only gives you 1700 hp more I think. It doesn't even upgrade the ship to it what it should look like, and gain health wise, the Giulio Cesare. They are the same ship class, but the Cesare with one less turret, has around 8k more health and a slightly faster reload time. It's a solid ship, I would gladly give away that center turret for more AA and a greater increase in health.  And with SAP, it would still be different than the Cesare. It doesn't have the same health pool,  they could just at least throw it a bone, and let it break 40k health.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conte_di_Cavour-class_battleship

 

 

 

Edited by Valas1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,463
[SALVO]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,598 posts
7,430 battles
2 minutes ago, Muninn77 said:

She looks straight out of 1915 because she is straight out of 1915.

Besides, we already have the most modern version of this ship class in the game, as the Giulio Cesare, and I'm sure I don't need to tell you why WG dosn't want to duplicate her performance.

You could add sap, remove HE, apply nurfs...insta tier 5 ship. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
467
[STURM]
Members
740 posts
6,913 battles
8 minutes ago, Dr_Venture said:

You could add sap, remove HE, apply nurfs...insta tier 5 ship. 

I think that you are missing that that would be one of, if not the most, dramatic changes that a single hull change would have in the game. It would basically be a different ship, with different armor, guns, gun layout, AA, maneuverability, everything. And unless they drastically nerfed it's capabilities from what it could do IRL, it really should be at tier 6.

Besides, WG isn't gonna miss a chance to sell us a 1930s version at T6 down the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,852
[WOLFC]
Members
6,096 posts
17,227 battles
40 minutes ago, Valas1 said:

The upgraded hull, only gives you 1700 hp more I think. It doesn't even upgrade the ship to it what it should look like, and gain health wise, the Giulio Cesare. They are the same ship class, but the Cesare with one less turret, has around 8k more health and a slightly faster reload time. It's a solid ship, I would gladly give away that center turret for more AA and a greater increase in health.  And with SAP, it would still be different than the Cesare. It doesn't have the same health pool,  they could just at least throw it a bone, and let it break 40k health.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conte_di_Cavour-class_battleship

40 minutes ago, Dr_Venture said:

You could add sap, remove HE, apply nurfs...insta tier 5 ship. 

Even if a rebuilt version of the class could be balanced at tier V, remember that WG for the most part likes to have a measured, consistent progression from one tier to the next. What is essentially a modern 1930s-era fast battleship (it was a very extensive rebuild, so much that initially the British thought they were entirely new ships) would be an awkward fit between Dante Alighieri and Andrea Doria, with radically different play styles when transitioning from each ship to the next. Such a change would also preclude the rebuild as a B-hull option.

27 minutes ago, Muninn77 said:

I think that you are missing that that would be one of, if not the most, dramatic changes that a single hull change would have in the game. It would basically be a different ship, with different armor, guns, gun layout, AA, maneuverability, everything. And unless they drastically nerfed it's capabilities from what it could do IRL, it really should be at tier 6.

Besides, WG isn't gonna miss a chance to sell us a 1930s version at T6 down the line.

I agree 100%, and I’m surprised we don’t already have the ship. When WG first announced the line, I expected the tier V ship to be Leonardo da Vinci (the third of the class that was sunk in 1916) and for Conte Di Cavour herself to be rolled out with the line release as a tier VI premium in her rebuilt state. As it stands, I think our best chance to see that hull at tier VI may actually be GC herself as Novorossiyisk.

Edited by Nevermore135

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,198
[PVE]
Members
12,064 posts
21,308 battles

She didn't seem to be too bad in her first Co op battle, I guess I will double my data on it next Flake Event.

image.thumb.png.d610c82f76300e50b101ec71f1c84697.png

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,270
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
38,132 posts
30,890 battles

Think of it as one of the taxes for all you guys insisting Giulio Cesare not be nerfed and remain OP in Tier V, permanently upsetting the balance there.

  • Cool 1
  • Haha 1
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,293
[SALVO]
Members
16,448 posts
10,185 battles

Why they don't have B hulls...

Because they are "free ships" that everyone and their mothers will get in their final configuration by just playing the game. Nobody will grind through them, defeating the purpose of having a B hull. They come in their final form because there's no point in wasting resources designing a feature that won't generate any revenue

  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,563
[EQRN]
Members
2,440 posts
25,058 battles
17 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

Why they don't have B hulls...

Because they are "free ships" that everyone and their mothers will get in their final configuration by just playing the game. Nobody will grind through them, defeating the purpose of having a B hull. They come in their final form because there's no point in wasting resources designing a feature that won't generate any revenue

Weak.  How hard is it to copy and paste the graphic for the hull upgrade and bump up health by a few hundred and increase rudder response?  Probably quicker than it took me to type that.  They did it for the gun range upgrade.  I get not wanting to create a new model, that is a significant investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25,004
[ARGSY]
Members
31,062 posts
29,291 battles

What's this No B Hull business?

Cavour and Doria both have B hulls. Dante is the only one that doesn't, possibly because she had no significant upgrades in her life.

image.png.3b7d6fcb7e429205288a6b984ce86b33.png 

image.png.030f3e44a699103fd2b1786f1e354d63.png 

Or are you crying because the B hull doesn't give you a significantly stronger ship?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,563
[EQRN]
Members
2,440 posts
25,058 battles
1 hour ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

What's this No B Hull business?

Cavour and Doria both have B hulls. Dante is the only one that doesn't, possibly because she had no significant upgrades in her life.

image.png.3b7d6fcb7e429205288a6b984ce86b33.png 

image.png.030f3e44a699103fd2b1786f1e354d63.png 

Or are you crying because the B hull doesn't give you a significantly stronger ship?

“No significant upgrades in her life” - in a game full of paper ships, and real ships with paper upgrades, that’s pretty weak, as well.  As for “crying”, from my point of view I could just as easily call you a WG nuthugger - do you really want to stoop to that?

  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
45 posts
16,999 battles

They could have easily gave it a hypothetical refit where the Italians didn't go all in on a complete rebuild. Keep the 120mm casemate's and add a new superstructure. Keep the 12" guns instead of re-boring them, etc.

That would have required effort though...

And we've all seen how WG treats the Italian ships in the game...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,039
Members
34,409 posts
10,768 battles
9 hours ago, ArIskandir said:

They come in their final form because there's no point in wasting resources designing a feature that won't generate any revenue

Have you played it? You could say the same thing about the ship in general lol.

I found it to be the worst T5 BB I have ever played.

I even rebought NY to see if I was only imagining it was better than Cavour. I was not....

It feels like playing a T4 ship after a round in Konig or Kongo.

Edited by Skpstr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,039
Members
34,409 posts
10,768 battles
4 hours ago, The_Communist_Tsar said:

They could have easily gave it a hypothetical refit where the Italians didn't go all in on a complete rebuild. Keep the 120mm casemate's and add a new superstructure. Keep the 12" guns instead of re-boring them, etc.

Exactly. They could have easily given it a Konig-style refit and had a decent ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
[BOTES]
Members
2,394 posts
10,558 battles

WG "giving up" is what we had for the first 2-3 years of the game where A, B and sometimes C hulls required significant grinding in order to have major advantages in both visible and hidden stats. The removal of travesties like the old Amagi A hull are a perfect example of WG's progress on the matter. With regards to upgrades, the only thing I can criticize them on at this point is that they have primarily directed their attention to new tech trees and should revisit older tech trees and reduce the disparities between A and B hulls, especially for DDs that have repair parties.

Edited by awildseaking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,039
Members
34,409 posts
10,768 battles
4 minutes ago, awildseaking said:

WG "giving up" is what we had for the first 2-3 years of the game where A, B and sometimes C hulls required significant grinding in order to have major advantages in both visible and hidden stats. The removal of travesties like the old Amagi A hull are a perfect example of WG's progress....

I must say though, I was a very passive BB player, until A hull Fuso, with its 13km range, gave me no choice but to learn to play closer in lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
694
[KAPPA]
Members
1,992 posts
10,548 battles
22 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

I must say though, I was a very passive BB player, until A hull Fuso, with its 13km range, gave me no choice but to learn to play closer in lol.

I still miss the A hulls of Fuso and Kongo, they had a nice simplistic beauty to them. The only reason I ever had to dislike them was the arbitrary range nerf they imposed, if WG had simply fixed that (as I and many others suggested), then I see no reason why they couldn't have remained in the game. At least they threw me a bone with Mutsu and Ashitaka. I also miss my USN cage masted A hulls and they weren't even as punishing to play compared to the difference between the stock IJN ships and their upgraded forms.

And yes, I am that guy that would still happily gobble them up as down-tiered premiums if given the chance, they deserve to be in the game.

Edited by CaptHarlock_222

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,964
[ARS]
Beta Testers
8,336 posts
9,613 battles
19 hours ago, Dr_Venture said:

You could add sap, remove HE, apply nurfs...insta tier 5 ship. 

Isn't that what Andria Doria is at Tier VI?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
288
[ASRN]
Beta Testers
1,063 posts
11,590 battles
2 hours ago, Skpstr said:

Have you played it? You could say the same thing about the ship in general lol.

I found it to be the worst T5 BB I have ever played.

I even rebought NY to see if I was only imagining it was better than Cavour. I was not....

It feels like playing a T4 ship after a round in Konig or Kongo.

Actually the Alighieri is better.  It at least kills stuff.   Just came back from my first game in the Cavour.  SAP barely tickles, and AP feels actually worse.  What a POS.  In the Ali I at least can damage NY's.  This thing doesn't even scratch the paint of T4's.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25,004
[ARGSY]
Members
31,062 posts
29,291 battles

I'm keeping my Cavour. I like it. Way better than any other BB at that tier except New York (which I just absolutely adored for some reason I can't define) and Kongo (because of her speed).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,039
Members
34,409 posts
10,768 battles
2 hours ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

I'm keeping my Cavour. I like it. Way better than any other BB at that tier except New York (which I just absolutely adored for some reason I can't define) and Kongo (because of her speed).

Why do you like it "way better" than Konig, Pyotr, or Iron Duke? (I only played Bretagne a couple games, so can't really comment on it)

 

Share this post


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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×