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

Because It Is Not Russian.....

48 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,680
[WHIPI]
Members
1,603 posts
18,714 battles

So WG gave the Constellation the crappy guns.....why?  WG says that this ship is best at medium and long range.  So why the short range radar and torpedoes???  And if it is designed around being a medium to long range hitter, why the crappy [edited]guns????  It is a Battlecruiser so I get the lack of armor, but why the crappy [edited]guns???  Is it because the russian powers to be can't have any other nation come close to the stupidly over powered guns they put on the russian ships cause it will hurt their russian pride?  WG logic:  lets put T7 Colorado guns on the new T8 Battlecruiser.....oh, and obsolete WW1 shells like they did to the Oklahoma.

its all about the guns, its all about the guns, its all about the guns, its all about the guns, its all about the guns, its all about the guns

BUFF THE GUNS TO THAT OF THE OTHER TIER 8 USN BBs LIKE NORTH CAROLINA, ALABAMA, AND MASSACHUSETTS AT LEAST........DAMN.

IMPRACTICLE RADAR AND TORPEDOES DON'T OFFSET THOSE [edited] [edited]GUNS THAT WG PUT ON THE CONSTELLATION......

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertest Coordinator
7,223 posts
14,436 battles

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Constellation has longer range radar than Missouri, which is the only other battleship with radar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
541
[CAZA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
587 posts
8,783 battles

Ah so you want superb speed, radar on a BB, torpedoes for CQB and on top of that excellent guns?

And you talk about russian bias? KEKW, just another example of "why MY NATION has to be better than X nation", sounds like someone's pride is badly hurt tbh

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,678
[-VT-]
[-VT-]
Members
2,260 posts
26,520 battles

It very obvious once the honeymoon is over (they have made most of the money) they will nerf the ship.

I predict:

Radar decrease to Missouri range

 

  • Cool 2
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
438
[TDR]
[TDR]
Members
1,404 posts
16,552 battles

I could be wrong but I thought I heard on a twitch stream that constellation has close to the “super cruiser” dispersion like Alaska?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,680
[WHIPI]
Members
1,603 posts
18,714 battles
9 minutes ago, Compassghost said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Constellation has longer range radar than Missouri, which is the only other battleship with radar.

what good is radar when you can't get into range to use it for contesting caps?  The radar on the Constellation is only good for situations when a stealthy DD is shadowing you.  

9 minutes ago, Torenico said:

Ah so you want superb speed, radar on a BB, torpedoes for CQB and on top of that excellent guns?

And you talk about russian bias? KEKW, just another example of "why MY NATION has to be better than X nation", sounds like someone's pride is badly hurt tbh

The guns suck.....we play battleships for the guns, not the radar/torpedo gimmicks.  And it sounds like you haven't played the Constellation.....have you?  If not.....SHUT UP

  • Meh 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,680
[WHIPI]
Members
1,603 posts
18,714 battles
1 minute ago, ditka_Fatdog said:

I could be wrong but I thought I heard on a twitch stream that constellation has close to the “super cruiser” dispersion like Alaska?

What good is accuracy with they bounce and shatter on contact???  I can get like 9-10 hits and be doing 4000 damage from those accurate hits......the guns suck and the shells they fire suck.  It is like having Oklahoma guns mounted on the Constellation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
541
[CAZA]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
587 posts
8,783 battles
12 minutes ago, db4100 said:

The guns suck.....we play battleships for the guns, not the radar/torpedo gimmicks.  And it sounds like you haven't played the Constellation.....have you?  If not.....SHUT UP

Whatever you say pal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Supertest Coordinator
7,223 posts
14,436 battles
15 minutes ago, db4100 said:

what good is radar when you can't get into range to use it for contesting caps?  The radar on the Constellation is only good for situations when a stealthy DD is shadowing you.  

The guns suck.....we play battleships for the guns, not the radar/torpedo gimmicks.  And it sounds like you haven't played the Constellation.....have you?  If not.....SHUT UP

The same purpose as Missouri, for stand-off potential and self-defense, I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
427
[SUNK-]
Members
331 posts
8,229 battles

I've got news for ya, but if you can't do damage with BB guns, then its not the guns that's the problem. I have yet to find any BB guns that can't punish broad side cruisers. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,680
[WHIPI]
Members
1,603 posts
18,714 battles
2 minutes ago, JimmyTheRealPirate said:

I've got news for ya, but if you can't do damage with BB guns, then its not the guns that's the problem. I have yet to find any BB guns that can't punish broad side cruisers. 

too vague of brag.   At what range are you talking about?  Because with some battleships the guns are sooo inaccurate you can completely miss a broadside cruiser at 4-5km away.  And nothing like getting all overpens on a broadside cruiser at 3-4 km away.  And yes, it does happen.  It is called RNG,  and you must know it because you think it is all "skill".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
427
[SUNK-]
Members
331 posts
8,229 battles
4 minutes ago, db4100 said:

too vague of brag.   At what range are you talking about?  Because with some battleships the guns are sooo inaccurate you can completely miss a broadside cruiser at 4-5km away.  And nothing like getting all overpens on a broadside cruiser at 3-4 km away.  And yes, it does happen.  It is called RNG,  and you must know it because you think it is all "skill".

 

How is that a brag? has the state of the game degraded to a point where BBs shooting broadside cruisers can be considered a brag?

 

Also, yes, knowing the effective range of your ships main guns goes a long way when figuring out how to do damage with those guns. Having issues over penning ships? move farther back. Having issues hitting ships? move closer. As far as accuracy is concerned, the constellation has fairly accurate BB guns, with decent sigma and good dispersion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,128
[NMKJT]
Members
4,280 posts
9,133 battles
1 hour ago, db4100 said:

What good is accuracy with they bounce and shatter on contact???  I can get like 9-10 hits and be doing 4000 damage from those accurate hits......the guns suck and the shells they fire suck.  It is like having Oklahoma guns mounted on the Constellation.

You don't deserve Iowa equivalent guns at T8 with supercruiser dispersion. Cause that's what the real guns would be, just heavier 1920s versions of the Iowa's guns. Btw I did fine with Colorado guns vs higher tiers.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,680
[WHIPI]
Members
1,603 posts
18,714 battles
10 minutes ago, JimmyTheRealPirate said:

How is that a brag? has the state of the game degraded to a point where BBs shooting broadside cruisers can be considered a brag?

 

Also, yes, knowing the effective range of your ships main guns goes a long way when figuring out how to do damage with those guns. Having issues over penning ships? move farther back. Having issues hitting ships? move closer. As far as accuracy is concerned, the constellation has fairly accurate BB guns, with decent sigma and good dispersion. 

it is "bragging" when you say it is not the guns and that you haven't found a BB that can't "punish" broadside cruisers or you are just doing one of those passive insults towards me?.....There are plenty of times when you CAN'T punish a broadside cruiser with BB guns just because of RNG.  

Look here....I am saying that the shell that WG gave the Constellation hit like cupcakes.  Have you played the Veribus Unitus, Oklahoma, or pre-buffed Ashitaka?  Like those soft WW1 shells.  The accuracy of the Constellation's guns is not a problem.  It's those cupcake shells.  I just ended a match where I got 3 good pens for on a broadside BB (at long range) for 4500 damage......wth is that?  4500 damage?!?!?!   Looky down there at the screen shot.....26 hits for a little over 23k damage.....those are some cupcake shells fired at a lot of "broadside" targets.    I finished strong by switching to HE and burning down that BB that is my sights....ended the match with damage output in the 80k range.   Not impressed at all with these guns.  

50233807_constellationdamage.thumb.jpg.c0bfa0a951d6b6d2b72352bea539ffbe.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,680
[WHIPI]
Members
1,603 posts
18,714 battles
9 minutes ago, MnemonScarlet said:

You don't deserve Iowa equivalent guns at T8 with supercruiser dispersion. Cause that's what the real guns would be, just heavier 1920s versions of the Iowa's guns. Btw I did fine with Colorado guns vs higher tiers.

I am not asking for Iowa guns, I am just asking for the guns that are mounted on the other USN T8 battleships.....the 16" 45cal Mk 6 found on the North Carolina, Alabama, and Massachusetts.  And it looks like the Constellation has worse shells than the Colorado......Krupps rating or a shorter fuse, not sure.  The Constellation uses a 406mm AP Mk5 mod 1.....it is the "mod 1" that is different from the Colorado.  I can't find what the "mod 1" means......WG likes to hide the details.  And I don't remember the Colorado's AP shells being this lackluster either, IIRC they hit rather hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,402
[SALVO]
Members
28,053 posts
41,651 battles
3 hours ago, db4100 said:

So WG gave the Constellation the crappy guns.....why?  WG says that this ship is best at medium and long range.  So why the short range radar and torpedoes???  And if it is designed around being a medium to long range hitter, why the crappy [edited]guns????  It is a Battlecruiser so I get the lack of armor, but why the crappy [edited]guns???  Is it because the russian powers to be can't have any other nation come close to the stupidly over powered guns they put on the russian ships cause it will hurt their russian pride?  WG logic:  lets put T7 Colorado guns on the new T8 Battlecruiser.....oh, and obsolete WW1 shells like they did to the Oklahoma.

its all about the guns, its all about the guns, its all about the guns, its all about the guns, its all about the guns, its all about the guns

BUFF THE GUNS TO THAT OF THE OTHER TIER 8 USN BBs LIKE NORTH CAROLINA, ALABAMA, AND MASSACHUSETTS AT LEAST........DAMN.

IMPRACTICLE Impractical RADAR AND TORPEDOES DON'T OFFSET THOSE [edited] [edited]GUNS THAT WG PUT ON THE CONSTELLATION......

The Constellation guns should NOT be the same as the WW2 era guns.  The 1920s South Dakota and Lexington classes were slated to mount 16"/50 Mark 2 or 3 guns, which were upgrades over the Colorado's 16"/45 Mark 1 guns.  However, the NC class, 1930's South Dakota class, etc. were slated to mount even more modern main guns than their 1920's "cousins".

And even though the Constellation as presented in the game is a fictional WW2 upgrade of the original 1920's design, the USN would NOT have replaced the older guns with newer ones.  Did they replace any of the WW1 era BBs used in WW2 with upgraded guns?  No.  They did not.  When the old barrels wore out, they simply replaced them with "new" barrels pulled from storage.

 

2 hours ago, db4100 said:

I am not asking for Iowa guns

You might as well be.

 

3 hours ago, db4100 said:

And it sounds like you haven't played the Constellation.....have you?  If not.....SHUT UP

Not cool, dude.  Not cool at all.  I've played the Constellation and have had no difficulty doing damage.

 

 

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
211
[WOLFB]
Beta Testers
1,180 posts
9,086 battles
4 hours ago, Torenico said:

Ah so you want superb speed, radar on a BB, torpedoes for CQB and on top of that excellent guns?

And you talk about russian bias? KEKW, just another example of "why MY NATION has to be better than X nation", sounds like someone's pride is badly hurt tbh

Why not that's pretty much what you get with a Stalingrad.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
70 posts
252 battles

Why is it that 99.9% of the people who complain about the non-existent "russian bias" are 1. bad at the game 2. slow in the head and 3. clueless
Just saw a dude in battle say that because of "russian bias" bismarck's turtleback got stealth removed
I guess this is what happens when you're too dumb to have an opinion and let yourself be brainwashed by a certain washed up streamer.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
259
[CHASE]
[CHASE]
Beta Testers
419 posts
12,897 battles

Honestly just get rid of the radar on this ship. We don't need more BBs with radar. Then give her the historical 16''/50 guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,680
[WHIPI]
Members
1,603 posts
18,714 battles
7 minutes ago, FinalAP_Ride said:

Why is it that 99.9% of the people who complain about the non-existent "russian bias" are 1. bad at the game 2. slow in the head and 3. clueless
Just saw a dude in battle say that because of "russian bias" bismarck's turtleback got stealth removed
I guess this is what happens when you're too dumb to have an opinion and let yourself be brainwashed by a certain washed up streamer.

I can play this game too...."na ahh, you're dumb"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,680
[WHIPI]
Members
1,603 posts
18,714 battles
1 minute ago, axyarthur said:

Honestly just get rid of the radar on this ship. We don't need more BBs with radar. Then give her the historical 16''/50 guns.

this ^^^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,680
[WHIPI]
Members
1,603 posts
18,714 battles
1 hour ago, Crucis said:

The Constellation guns should NOT be the same as the WW2 era guns.  The 1920s South Dakota and Lexington classes were slated to mount 16"/50 Mark 2 or 3 guns, which were upgrades over the Colorado's 16"/45 Mark 1 guns.  However, the NC class, 1930's South Dakota class, etc. were slated to mount even more modern main guns than their 1920's "cousins".

This is mainly what I am wanking about.....the guns on the Constellation are worse than those of the lower tiered Colorado.

Edited by db4100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,402
[SALVO]
Members
28,053 posts
41,651 battles
40 minutes ago, db4100 said:

This is mainly what I am wanking about.....the guns on the Constellation are worse than those of the lower tiered Colorado.

But they're not as good as the NC or 1930s South Dakota's guns, which you were  asking for.  Tell the whole story, rather than trying to deceive people by telling only half the story.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,402
[SALVO]
Members
28,053 posts
41,651 battles
48 minutes ago, axyarthur said:

Honestly just get rid of the radar on this ship. We don't need more BBs with radar. Then give her the historical 16''/50 guns.

There are no "historical 16"/50 guns.  The 16/50's that the Iowa and Montana have are not the same as the ones the 1920s South Dakotas and Lexingtons were supposed to have.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×