Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Dodge261

British Cruisers

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
16 posts
10,272 battles

Can someone please explain why British cruiser's are not equipped with high explosive shells it seems a bit ridiculous that the modified Leander HMAS Perth in the game has HE shells but the Leander itself doesn't and the only British cruiser that does possess HE shells is the T V ship Exeter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,527
Member
7,108 posts
11,687 battles

Gimmick, gimmick, gimmick.

 

The 152 mm short-fused AP is actually the armament I hate the most in the game.

Edited by Paladinum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
884
[AN-DO]
Beta Tester
2,095 posts
7,826 battles

Its Gimmicks fam, not a feature.

Just like the overpowered Payfast 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,527
Member
7,108 posts
11,687 battles

Next time: players complain Pasta tech tree cruisers do not have HE shells.

Stay tuned!

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
884
[AN-DO]
Beta Tester
2,095 posts
7,826 battles
19 minutes ago, Paladinum said:

Next time: players complain Pasta tech tree cruisers do not have HE shells.

Stay tuned!

 

Let me absorb their NaCL so i can make Salted Caramel for my popcorn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,527
Member
7,108 posts
11,687 battles
34 minutes ago, drakon233 said:

because the AP is better than HE at what it's supposed to do?

Starting fires?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,527
Member
7,108 posts
11,687 battles
Just now, drakon233 said:

you dont need fires with that kind of DPM

I think you missed the sarcasm but I agree.

Minotaur annoys me more than Small-length and both need to be removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,700
[FORCE]
Modder, Member
4,339 posts
19,396 battles

British cruisers actually had HE shells during testing phase. But due to how effective HE spamming from inside the smoke could be, WG removed their HE shells except on Belfast because nerfing a premium ship is a bad stunt. This is the whole video about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLK8TJ5fF0Y&t=349s

Yes we have Smolensk now. But Smolensk was released when balance does no longer exist.

Edited by Sir_Feather
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,085
[MRI]
Member
4,455 posts
22,206 battles
28 minutes ago, Sir_Feather said:

British cruisers actually had HE shells during testing phase. But due to how effective HE spamming from inside the smoke could be, WG removed their HE shells except on Belfast because nerfing a premium ship is a bad stunt. This is the whole video about it.

This. WG back then decided that smoke + CL levels of HE was just not fun to play against.

One wonders why they decided this was no longer the case with Smolensk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,739
[-JK-]
Member
6,887 posts
34,566 battles
1 minute ago, Thyaliad said:

This. WG back then decided that smoke + CL levels of HE was just not fun to play against.

One wonders why they decided this was no longer the case with Smolensk.

130mm cant penn 32mm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
93 posts

Cruisers firing HE from smoke is OP, which is why we have Smolensk.

BB's cannot have accurate guns at range for balance, which is why there is the Slava.

You cannot allow OP combinations because they are reserved for Russian paper ships.

I cannot wait for Russian CVs with radar equipped aircraft..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,231
[LBAS]
Member
4,126 posts
22,133 battles

With the coming of the new British CAs,its clearly the rest of the CL Tree will be finally turn into ashes (Except Leander until Neptune that is.) with HE and AP shells, shame they dont have HE (Perth is an Exception) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,527
Member
7,108 posts
11,687 battles

I've seen 2 people grouped Perth together with RN CLs and it bothers me.

Guys, please...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,085
[MRI]
Member
4,455 posts
22,206 battles
54 minutes ago, drakon233 said:

130mm cant penn 32mm

Neither can 152mm without IFHE. And I am pretty sure the British CL line was designed and introduced way before the IFHE skill was, so I doubt IFHE was a factor in removing HE from the Brit CLs. 

Also did you watch the video Sir_Feather linked?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,739
[-JK-]
Member
6,887 posts
34,566 battles
1 minute ago, Thyaliad said:

Neither can 152mm without IFHE. And I am pretty sure the British CL line was designed and introduced way before the IFHE skill was, so I doubt IFHE was a factor in removing HE from the Brit CLs. 

Also did you watch the video Sir_Feather linked?

i know, i was a ST back then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,700
[FORCE]
Modder, Member
4,339 posts
19,396 battles
1 hour ago, drakon233 said:

130mm cant penn 32mm

But the same 130mm can pen 19mm (literally all BB superstructures). And this is essentially one thing why Smolensk is still OP. Add the fact that most high tier BBs have large superstructures, and who would even need IFHE?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,085
[MRI]
Member
4,455 posts
22,206 battles
1 hour ago, drakon233 said:

i know, i was a ST back then

My point was what has changed in WG's mind.

Why do they consider 152mm HE + smoke not fun to be play against last time but 130mm with IFHE + smoke is considered fun now? They both have similar penetration values. 

How has the game changed such that a Smolensk is considered acceptable now but Brit CLs with HE aren't. Is it the smoke changes? It is certainly not the CV rework, that's for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,739
[-JK-]
Member
6,887 posts
34,566 battles
18 minutes ago, Sir_Feather said:

But the same 130mm can pen 19mm (literally all BB superstructures). And this is essentially one thing why Smolensk is still OP. Add the fact that most high tier BBs have large superstructures, and who would even need IFHE?

are you jokeing?

you cant even penn CAs without IFHE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,212 posts
11,077 battles
14 minutes ago, Thyaliad said:

My point was what has changed in WG's mind.

Why do they consider 152mm HE + smoke not fun to be play against last time but 130mm with IFHE + smoke is considered fun now? They both have similar penetration values. 

How has the game changed such that a Smolensk is considered acceptable now but Brit CLs with HE aren't. Is it the smoke changes? It is certainly not the CV rework, that's for sure.

Its Russian soooo, yeah, nuff said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
834
[SALT]
Member
2,213 posts
10,571 battles

 

37 minutes ago, Sir_Feather said:

But the same 130mm can pen 19mm (literally all BB superstructures). And this is essentially one thing why Smolensk is still OP. Add the fact that most high tier BBs have large superstructures, and who would even need IFHE?

You could melt other cruiser with IFHE.

infact you can out dpm and duel almost every cruiser and come out winning. except versus Supercruiser that will overmatch every part of smolensk

 

hindy is like eaten alive by Russian smol boat. its AP cant pen when angled, and hindy HE dpm is shit. while smolensk deal 3-4k every 4 seconds - and hindy shave same amount of HP every 10s lol

Edited by humusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,066
[TLS]
Member
5,849 posts
24,614 battles
6 hours ago, Paladinum said:

Gimmick, gimmick, gimmick.

The 152 mm short-fused AP loaded on a pewpewpewpew minotaur is actually the armament I hate the most in the game.

Corrected. :P

And the simple answer why HE on smelly: WG hypocrisy. It is fine so long as it is on a soviet paper ship.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
576
Member
746 posts
19,634 battles
3 minutes ago, dieselhead said:

Its Russian soooo, yeah, nuff said.

Wait a second there...

Are you implying there's some kind of.... bias?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×